¦i i >\ .tr.u'r, u\,U'h

'>t^'

..'¦¦•.¦:':¦:
m 1
^^'1: ¦ ¦.:

i.i.ij.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.Vi.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i,i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.1.i.i.i.1.'J

Library of the
pile Divinity Scbool

The Books of
IfrariK Cbamberlain porter
Winkley Professor of
Biblical Theology

FiyrrTiTrTTriTnviYiYnTnvmyiYimrnvriTmTiTnYrnyfflgffi

NOTICE TO SUBSCRIBERS.

TV /T ESSRS. CLARK have much pleasure in publishing the
First Issue of the Foreign Theological Library
for 1878, viz. : —
St. John's Gospel Described and Explained
according to its Peculiar Character. By
CH. E. LUTHARDT, Vol. III. (completion).
Gkbhardt's Doctrine of the Apocalypse.
The Second Issue for 1878 will be Philippi's Commentary on
the Romans, Vol. I., and possibly Vol. II., or Hagenbach's
History of the Reformation, Vol. I.
They have in preparation the following works : —
Hagenbach's History of Doctrines. Translated from recent
edition, and edited, with large additions from various sources, by
Rev. Prebendary Clark.
Haupt on the First Epistle of John.
Weiss' New Testament Theology.
Steinmeyer on the Passion and Resurrection of Our Lord.
New edition, prepared by the Author solely for the English trans
lation. (This may possibly be ready for Second Issue of this year.)
They beg anew to thank the Subscribers for their support, and to
respectfully request a continuance of it.
May they ask for an early remittance of the Subscription for
1878 — 21s.
Edinburgh, 38 George Street,
May 1878.

CLARK'S

FOKEIGN

THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY.

NEW SEEIES.
VOL. LVIII.

ffiE&tjatot on tfjj Hoctrine of tfje gpacalgpse.

EDINBURGH:
T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.
18 78.

PRINTED BY MURRAY AND GIBB,
FOR
T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH.
LONDON,  HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO.
DUBLIN, . . ROBERTSON AND CO.
NEW YORK, . SCRIBNER, WELFORD, AND ARMSTRONG.

\ s

THE DOCTRINE

OF

THE APOCALYPSE,

AND ITS RELATION TO THE DOCTRINE OF THE
GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN.

BY
PASTOR HERMANN GEBHARDT.

JltanBlateb from the ffierman
BY THE
REV. JOHN JEFFERSON.

EDINBURGH:
T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.

PREFACE.

I AM aware that the title of the following volume leaves the
reader to some extent in doubt whether he has to do with
a treatise on biblical theology or on biblical criticism, or with a
work of a mixed character. But instead of prefixing a tedious title,
which would still need explaining, I have expressed myself briefly,
and feel under obligation to define my meaning in a preface.
According to Keim's preface to the third volume of his
History of Jesus of Nazareth, John is " historically vanquished."
Such great words, often easily uttered, frequently fail to justify
themselves. For me there exists no historico -philosophical
necessity to reject beforehand the portrait of Christ as sketched
by John ; and the generally learned and acute attacks on its
authenticity, — far more than all modern defences, whether with or
without limitations, more even than the thorough and ingenious
researches of Weizsacker, — and, though it may seem strange, above
all, the attempt of Keim, surprising in many respects, to construct
the life of Jesus exclusively from the synoptical Gospels, have
made it to me increasingly improbable that the ecclesiastical
tradition respecting the origin of John's Gospel is untrue. But
should this avowal be understood to mean that, according to
my own statement, the difficulties of the question were gradually
overcome in this way, I must strongly protest against such an
interpretation; for, on the contrary, the more unacceptable the
negative solution became to me, the less did the various attempts
at a positive solution — Weizsacker's not excepted — succeed in
satisfying me. My own thoughts and efforts originated and
cherished the suspicion that the key to the enigma must lie
in the Apocalypse; this book — it was before the late crusade
against the residence of the Apostle John in Ephesus — was

VU1 PREFACE.
still unanimously and energetically, and, as it seemed to me, with
the fullest justice, ascribed by the Tiibingen criticism to the
beloved disciple ; and these opponents of the Gospel of John still
recognised a relation between it and the Apocalypse, even as
impartially as its apologists, though with reluctance, everywhere
felt themselves compelled to do.
Whichever of the two sides the solution might be nearest, in
order to escape the dilemma between the unsatisfactory nature of
the negative criticism and the not less imperfect character of all
positive attempts at a solution of this question, I began a com
parison between the doctrine of the Apocalypse and that of the
Gospel and Epistles of John. It was very soon clear to me, that
the individuality of the first of these three was such as to
render this comparison impossible before I had fully wrought
out for myself its doctrinal ideas ; and though at first led only
by personal interest, I did not permit myself to be intimidated
either by the entire absence of a precedent to any considerable
extent, or by the testimony of Baur and others respecting the
great and almost unconquerable difficulties presented by the style
of the Apocalypse itself. Only when, in the course of my
labours, I found that the obstacles to a doctrinal representation
of the Apocalypse, though considerable, and partly from other
causes than its symbolic character, were not in any way insur
mountable, did I decide to write with a view to publication,
and thus, according to my ability, to help to supply a want in
New Testament theology.
There should certainly be no need for the assurance, though
I may here most expressly give it, that in my examination and
representation of apocalyptic doctrine I have designedly with
drawn my attention as much as possible from the Gospel and
the Epistles of John, and with all, the means in my power have
endeavoured to make myself thoroughly at home in the apocalyptic
world of thought. That which during a series of years, in the
little time left by the ordinary duties of my office and many
additional interruptions caused by sickness, domestic occurrences,
change of place, and teaching, I have been able gradually to
examine and verify as the doctrinal contents of the Apocalypse,
. forms the chief part of the following treatise.
I am aware that the representation of apocalyptic doctrine
here given departs considerably, and in various ways, from the

PREFACE. IX
standard forms of biblico-theological monography. Some of these
departures were required by the peculiarities of the Apocalypse,
and the difficulty, partly lying therein, of its doctrinal treatment.
To this cause may be attributed the rather frequent exegesis,
which, notwithstanding modern and most recent labours, including
the solid work of Diisterdieck, was — like the polemics occurring
at almost every more important point — not to be omitted.
Mostly, however, that in which my representation differs — and
under this head will be found the close connection of the
arrangement with the material, the prominence given to the
least important doctrinal features, the avoidance, almost without
exception, not only of parallels from other New Testament
writings, but also of the usual dogmatic categories and assump
tions — is connected with my view of the task of special biblico-
theological writings as independent preparatory labours, and
not fragmentary expositions of biblical theology. May its contents
prove to be justified ! The results which I have attained in this
way differ throughout from many, and in important points from
all, previous conceptions of the Apocalypse. In case these results
should attract general attention, I expect attacks from directly
opposite sides. Against these, I may beforehand plead, and I do
it with all sincerity, that I can hardly hope that it has been
given to me to have entirely avoided or obliterated all repetition,
prolixity, insufficiency of statement, formal errors, and the like ;
and I trust, therefore, that they may be ascribed as much to the
numerous and profound questions in dispute as to my personal
treatment. On the other hand, I can the less honourably seek
shelter from opposition to my conclusions behind the difficulties
of the Apocalypse, as I am firmly convinced that in all essential
particulars I have found and presented the real sense of the book.
Strictly as I avoided, during these doctrinal researches, even a
side glance at the fourth Gospel, I could not help remembering
the original cause of my labours ; and the result was ,~-dl adapted
to tempt me to a supplementary comparison of that result with
the doctrine of the evangelist. I undertook that also, and though
conscious of the essential difference between a biblico-theological
and a critical examination, and though apprehensive, and not
without reason, that on many sides there would be seen in this
comparison " the kernel of the matter," and with it the evidence
of the " apologetic tendency" of the whole of my work, I have not

X PREFACE.
on that account been able to withhold the publication of my
comparison as an appendix. That in this appendix I have omitted
polemics and expositions of the literature almost entirely, will
hardly call forth objection, for even without such an addition it
may yet seem too dull. I do not give my comparison as final ;
still I beheve that if it be extended and deepened by others, — to
me a desirable result of my labours, — they will arrive essentially
at the same conclusion.
I send forth The Doctrine of the Apocalypse, and its Relation
to the Doctrine of the Gospel and Epistles of John with sincere
thanks to the authors of The Apocalypse and the Fourth Gospel,
which, whether I agree or differ with them, are justly due, — the
new edition of Weiss' New Testament Theology I have not been
able to use, — with the further humble hope that my labours
may be regarded both by friends and foes as not altogether
worthless; and, finally, in these times, and especially in this case,
with the very earnest wish that at least some of my readers,
instead of beginning with the sentence of condemnation, either
on account of " free " ideas respecting the Apocalypse, or of a
fixed position with respect to Johannine and other questions of
New Testament criticism, will, without prejudice, test the aim,
spirit, and results of my treatise, for it has been written in the
candid and earnest pursuit of truth. THE AUTHOR.
MOLSCHLEBEN, GOTHA,
March 9, 1873.

CONTENTS.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
INTRODUCTION.
PAGE
Preliminary Remarks, . . . . . - . . 1
1. The Author, ...... .1
John, 1 ; the attacks on the tradition respecting the apostle, 2 ;
the question of his residence in Asia Minor, 3; the supposed, internal
reasons against his authorship, from the New Testament, 5; from the
testimony of the Apocalypse itself, 6; from the character of the Apoca
lypse, 7; final opinion, 9.
2. Place and Time of Authorship, . . . . . . 10
At Patmos, 10; on the Lord's-day, 11 ; the year, 11.
3. The Origin and Meaning, . . . . . . .11
Statements of the book, 11 ; medium of the revelation , and errors
concerning it, 12 ; opinions respecting the process of origination, 14.
4. Its Form, . . . . . . . * .15
Key in the tenth chapter, 15; consequence of a possible distinction
between the form of thought and its representation in the book, 17.

REPRESENTATION OF DOCTRINE.
Preliminary Remarks, . . . . . . .18
FIRST PART.
MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS.
1. God,  19
The name of God, 19 ; idols, 19 ; the contrasts which limit the
statements concerning God, 19.

Xll CONTENTS.

SECOND PART.

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS.

PACK

(a.) The Nature of God,  20
The name of God, 21; the Lord (Ruler), 21; the Lord God, 21; He
who is, and was, and is to come, 21; the Alpha and Omega, the First
and the Last, the Beginning and the End, 22 ; the living God, 23 ;
the Almighty, 24 ; strong (might, power, strength, riches), 25; He
who sits on the throne (the God of heaven — the Ruler of the earth —
the King of nations), 25; the ethical nature of God — holy, 26; upright,
27 ; just, 27 ; true, 27 ; faithful, 28 ; wise, 29 ; disposition of
God, 29 ; anger (lore), 29 ; symbolic representation of the divine
nature, 31.
(&.) The Works of God,  32
Creation, 33 ; government, 33.
2. Angels, ......... 3.>
The holy angels, 36 ; number and orders, 37 ; their special voca
tions (angel of the churches), 37 ; angel of God or of Christ, 39;
declining worship, 40 ; meaning of angel, 41.
3. Heaven, ......... 42
The world generally (heaven, earth, abyss), 42 ; heaven, in its
sensible and religious significance, 43; the scenery of heaven, 43; the
inhabitants of heaven (the four beasts and the twenty-four elders),
46; tbe heavenly state, 50; new, 52.
4. The Devil, ......... 52
The name, 52; tbe fall, 53 ; the old serpent, 54 ; the red dragon,
54 ; devil and satan, 55 ; whether in heaven until Christ, 55 ; the
angels of the dragon, 56.
5. The Abyss, . . . : . . . . . .57
Its nature, 57 ; its inhabitants, 58; its signification, 59.
6. The Earth and its Inhabitants, . . . . . . ' 60
The earth in the proper sense and in the sense of mankind, 60 ;
men the inhabitants of tbe earth, 60 ; anthropologically, 61 ; the
earth and men in the religious sense (the fall), 62 ; the subjective
side of the actual state (sin), 63 ; images of sin, 64 ; the objective
side of the actual state (evil), 65; tbe actual state unbroken until
Christ, 66 ; contrast between tbe inhabitants of the earth , and the
servants of God (satanocracy and theocracy), 66; distinction in the
heathen world and in Israel, 67; relation of the pre-Christian to the
post-Christian world and tbe church, 68 ; the dead, 70.

1. Christ, ..... ... 72
(a.) The Evangelical History, ...... 72
History of Christ's birth and childhood, 72; of His life, 73; cruci
fixion, 73; and resurrection, 74.

CONTENTS. Xlll

• PAGE
(6.) The Person of Christ, . . . . . . .77
Name, 77 ; Jesus the Messiah; 77; nonsuper-Messianic statements,
77 ; super-Messianic statements, 77 ; like a Son of man, 78; Christ in
parallel with God, 78; predicates common to God and Christ, 78; Christ
conceived of as one with God, 79; the same attributes, activities, and
states ascribed to Christ and God, 80; Old Testament predicates origin
ally belonging to God affirmed of Christ, 85; statement and defence of
the result, 86; the question respecting the inner unity of super-Messianic
expressions (the Logos), 91 ; " The beginning of the creation of God, " 91 ;
"The Word of God," 94 ; how the seer came to the Logos doctrine, 98;
the relation of the Messianic idea and the doctrine of the Logos to each
other, 98 ; the idea of an organic representation of the doctrine of
Christ's person, 100; the position of Christ, 100; relation of pre-existent
to historical existence, 101; relation of tbe historical to the pre-existent
Christ, 102; relation of the exalted to the pre-existent and tbe historical
Christ, 104.
(c.) The Work of Christ, ....... 106
Activity in the pre-existent state, 106; activity on earth, 106; the
testimony of Jesus, 106; conflict with tbe devil, 109; victory over the
devil, 110; sacrifice, 111; the Lamb, 112; the blood, 115; redeemed
by the blood of Christ, 115 ; robes washed and made white in the
blood of the Lamb (baptism), 117 ; Rev. i. 5 (the love of Christ), 119;
Rev. xii. 11, 120; Rev. xxii. 14, etc., 120; tbe resurrection of Christ,
121; the activity of the exalted Christ, 122; propitiation, 122; revelation,
123; government of the world, 124 ; relation to the churches and to
believers (the Supper), 125; remarks on the moral character of Jesus,
127.
2. The Spirit, ......... 128
In tbe natural, subnatnral, and supernatural sense (tbe Holy Spirit),
128; the seven Spirits, 129; the Spirit of the prophets, 129; the being
in the Spirit, 130 ; the independence of tbe Spirit, 131; relation to
Christians, to Christ, and to God, 132; tbe Trinity, 133; the activity of
the Spirit in Christendom generally, 134; prophecy, 135; His operation
on the world, 137.
3. The Gospel,  138
The mystery of God and tbe everlasting gospel identical, 138; relation
of this gospel to that which is elsewhere so called in the New Testament,
139; the same gospel before and after Christ, 140 ; the word of God
and the testimony of Jesus in relation to the gospel, 141.
4. The Saints and their Works, . . . . . .14a
(a. ) The Christian life in its origin, . . . • .143
Universalism of Christianity, 143 ; hitherto only individuals from
the nations converted, and comparatively few, 143 ; the seer's expecta
tion concerning the future, 143 ; ought all men to become Christians ?
reply in view of the lost, 144 ; reply in view of the saved (called,
chosen, faithful), 144 ; reply in view of God's purpose (tbe book of
life), 145 ; the prerequisites to Christianity from the divine and
human sides, 147 ; the process of becoming a Christian (faith), 149 ;
in Old Testament form, 152 ; in the apocalyptic form, 153.

Xiv CONTENTS. • PAOK
(b.) Christian Life in its Meaning, ..... 153
General and particular designations, 153 ; names, 155 ; the saints,
155 ; the servants of God and of Jesus Christ, 156 ; tbe people of
God, 156 ; Gentile Christians wbo fear God, 156 ; the same, the
remnant of the woman's seed, 158 ; royal priesthood, 159 ; first-fruits,
161 ; fellow-servants, brethren, companions in relation to each other,
162 ; fellow-servants and brethren in relation to the inhabitants of
heaven, 163.
(c.) Christian Life in its Activity, . . . . .163
The continued saving operation of God, and the self-activity of tbe
Christian life-principle, 163 ; works, 164 ; the activity of the Christian
life-principle in general, without reference to its difficulties, 166 ; in
particulars, love, 167 ; prayer, 168 ; tbe aspect of Christian life
toward its opposites, 170 ; experiences from within and without, 170 ;
temptation and persecution, 170 ; apostasy, 173 ; victory, 174 ; its
conditions, 175.
(d.) Christian Life in Relation to .^the Promises, .... 178
Tbe promises fulfilled and being fulfilled, 178 ; tbe contents of the
promises in detail, 181 ; tbe promises not different from tbe meaning
of becoming a Christian, in tlie form of reward, 183.
5. The Churches, ........ 184
(a.) Christendom according to its Designations, . . . .184'
The people of God, 184; the twelve tribes of Israel, 184; the
woman, 185 ; the bride, 186 ; the union of these three symbols, 187 ;
the seven candlesticks, 188 ; the seven stars, 188 ; the New Jeru
salem, 189.
(b.) Christendom according to its Constituent Elements, . . . 189
Its universality, 189 ; the relation of Jewish and Gentik Christians
to each other, 190 ; the small and tbe great, 195 ; tbe prophets, 195 ;
apostles and prophets, 196 ; martyrs, 197.
(c.) Christendom in its Organization, . . . . .198
The unity of tbe various churches, 198 ; the individual churcb with
its regulations, 199.
(d.) Christianity in its History, ...... 200
Tbe first, Jewish-Christian period, 200 ; the second, Gentile-
Christian period, 203 ; persecutions, 204 ; heresies, 206 ; whether one
or several, 206 ; the nature of etbnistic error, 211.
(e.) Christianity in its existing Condition, . . . .216

THIRD PART.
PROPHECY.
1. The Beast ; the False Prophet ; Babylon, .... 218
Preliminary Remarks, ..... 218
(a.) The Beast, ...... 219
Antichrist, 219 ; a secular empire, 219 ; a single person, 220 ; the
Roman Empire, 222 ; Csesar Nero (666), 222 ; the marks of the Empire

CONTENTS. XV

PAGE

as marks of the Beast, 224 ; the marks of Imperialism as marks of the
Beast (contrast to Christ), 226 ; the marks of Nero as marks of tbe
Beast, 227.
(i.) The False Prophet, ....... 230
Meaning, 230 ; Characteristics (antipneuma), 231.
(c.) Babylon, . . . . . . .235
Meaning (contrast to tbe holy city and the church of God, 235.
2. The Seals, the Trumpets, and the Vials, . . . . .237
Sense of the individual visions, 237 ; meaning of the visions generally,
241 ; whether their contents are wholly or only partially future, 242 ;
whether John expected the contents in the order and form of bis
descriptions, 243.
3. The Angel with the Everlasting Gospel, Rev. xiv. 6, 7, . . .244
Meaning, 244.
4. The Saints in the Great.Tribulation, ..... 245
What belongs to this place, 245 ; persecution and false doctrine :
tbe great tribulation, 245 ; the relation of tbe plagues to Christians
(the sealing), 246 ; the task of Christians against Antichrist, 247 ;
negative incentive to faithfulness, 248 ; positive incentive, consola
tion, 248 ; the exaltation of Christians over Antichrist, 252 ; the
hope of Christians for the world, 255.
5. The Holy City during the Forty-two Months, . . . .256
Tbe city in chap, xi., Jerusalem, at tbe same time a representation of
the Jewish people, 256 ; the prediction concerning Jerusalem or tbe
Jewish people, 258 ; summary, 263.
6. The Impenitence of Men, ....... 263
The world sunk into antichristianity, 263 ; tbe hour of temptation,
264; tbe result, 264.
7. Fall of Babylon, ........ 266
The transition from tbe preliminary to tbe final judgment, 266 ;
Rome destroyed, 266 ; tbe manner, 267 ; how its destruction is
regarded on earth and in heaven, 268.
8. The Coming of tbe Lord, ....... 269
Generally, 269 ; the time of the advent, 270 ; the representation
of it in i. 7, 271 ; in xiv. 14-20, 272 ; the concrete form of tbe advent
in the expectation of the seer, 273.
9. The Thousand Years' Reign, ...... 276
The devil cast into the abyss, 276 ; the meaning of the thousand
years, 277 ; the judgment (tbe survivors), 278 ; the first resurrection,
279 ; the condition of the kingdom of Christ on earth, 281 ; tbe
binding of Satan, and bis banishment to tbe lake of fire and brimstone,
282 ; the position of the millennium in the thoughts of the seer, 283.
10. The Judgment of the World, ...... 285
The great day, 285; Christ and the judgment, 286 ; tbe destruction
of the world, 287 ; the resurrection of all the dead, 288 ; the judg
ment, 289.

XVI

CONTENTS.

11. The New Heaven and tbe New Earth, .
Absolute dualism of the result, 290 ; the second death, 291 ; the
new world, 292 ; the bride and the New Jerusalem, 293 ; the archi
tecture of the New Jerusalem, 294 ; conditions in the New Jerusalem,
296 ; Relation of the final state to tbe promises for preceding states,
298 ; distinction between the inhabitants of tbe New Jerusalem and
dwellers around it, 299.

TAGE 290

THE RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
AND THE DOCTRINE OF THE GOSPEL AND THE EPISTLES
OF JOHN.

Introductory Remarks,

304

The Comparison —

1. God, . . ... 310

2. Angels,

316
3. Heaven, .
317
4. The Devil,
319
5. Perdition, .
321
6. Tbe Earth and Mankind, .
322
7. Christ, .
329
8. The Spirit,
353
9. The Gospel,
358
10. Christian Life,
360
11. Christendom,
380
12. Antichrist,
387
13. The Last Time, .
390
14. The Call to the World to repent,
390
15. The Consolation of the Christian,
391
16. The Future of Israel,
394
17. The World in Wickedness,
396
18. The End of the World, .
396
19. The Coming of the Lord, .
396
20. The Resurrection of Believers,
401
21. The Judgment,
404
22. The Final State, .
406
Conclusion, .
411
THE DOCTEINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.

INTRODUCTION.
THE historico-theological treatment of any book of the New
Testament writings would be most profitable if exposition
and representation of doctrine were not carried on separately.
The same writer, after an introduction embracing only the history
and authorship of the work, might next give the exegesis, and
then on this foundation : first, the original readers in all their
relations as discoverable from the text ; secondly, the author in
his personality and motives, the time and place of authorship, so
far as the previous exposition shed any light upon it ; and thirdly,
the doctrinal contents, represented in a simple grouping of the
materials lying before him. Since the distribution of labour in this
sphere still continues, and especially, since existing expositions of
the Apocalypse, however variously we may have to object to them,
both in general and in detail, even to those coming nearest us, do
not leave any necessity for an entirely new exposition, we think it
comparatively the best to make the whole direct and indirect
statements of the book which are of any theological value, in the
widest sense of the word, the subject of our doctrinal representa
tions, and by way of introduction to precede those representations
with a discussion of the statements of the Apocalypse concerning
itself. They have to do with the author, the time and place of
composition, the origin, meaning, and form of the book. To the
consideration of these the four sections of the Introduction are
devoted. 1. The Author.
The author of the Apocalypse calls himself John, i. 1, iv. 9,
xxii. 8. He describes himself more particularly as " a servant of
A

2 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
Jesus Christ," " a brother and companion " of his readers in " the
tribulation, and kingdom, and patience of Jesus Christ," i. 9 ; an
angel said to him : " I am thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren
the prophets," xxii. 9, comp. xix. 10.
Who is this John ?' Ecclesiastical tradition replies, the Apostle
John ; and so early, so firmly, and so unanimously does this reply
come to us, that even Diisterdieck (Kritisch-exegetisches Hand-
luch uber die Offenbarung Johannes, 2d ed. p. 88) compares the
testimony to a strong bulwark. Holtzmann (Bunsen's Bibelwerk,
"VIII. p. 469) describes it as ancient and forcible ; and still more
recently (Schenkel's Bibellexikon, III. p. 337) gives prominence
at least to the antiquity of the tradition which testifies the
Johannine origin of the Apocalypse. It is indeed only an appro
priate representation of the real state of the case, when Keim
(Gesch. Jesu v. Nazara, p. 162) says that from the time of Justin
Martyr to that of Irenaeus and the great Fathers, the Apocalypse
was recognised as a production of the apostle. At the same time,
the apostolic origin of the Apocalypse has been disputed even
from the third century, and much more frequently and decidedly
in later times. With reference to this question modern criticism
has changed its position in the most remarkable manner. Until
within a few years the attacks on the genuineness of this book
proceeded almost exclusively from the moderate theology, on
account of its supposed lack of harmony with the received Gospel
of John ; Neander, Liicke, Ewald, Bleek, Diisterdieck, and others
denied it to be the work of the apostle, and ascribed it to some
prominent person of the same name in Asia Minor. By a few it
has been ascribed, after the example of Eusebius, conjecturally at
least, to the Presbyter John; and by Hitzig (Ueber Johannes
Marlcus und seine Schriften), whose opinion Weiss, and recently
Hausrath (Schenkel's BibellexiJcon, art. "Apocalypse"), have endorsed,
to John Mark On the other hand, the historico-critical school,
with Baur at its head, in unsought union with traditional theology
as here represented, especially by Hengstenberg, regarded the con
tents of ecclesiastical tradition as affording important evidence
against the genuineness of the fourth Gospel. Wholly isolated
until a short time ago, Volkmar (Kommentar zur Offenbarung
Johannis, p. 41 et seq.) declared the Apocalypse to be a forgery,
written during the life of the apostle by a learned Christian, and
as in the name, so also in the spirit — " under the shield "  of the

INTRODUCTION. 3
Apostle John, in an anti-Pauline sense, unmistakeaoly a compro
mise between the wish to deny the Christology of the Apocalypse
to one of the original apostles, and to maintain intact the evidence
of their anti-Paulinisnu Then appeared Keim's inquiry into the
authorship of the fourth Gospel (ut ante, p. 156), in which, in
connection with earlier unimportant and less noticed remarks, he
says that " the residence of the Apostle John in Asia Minor melts
away in the presence of historical evidence, and to that extent
indeed, that not only is the question decided with respect to the
Gospel, but also with respect to the Apocalypse and the supposed
apostle of the Ephesian revelation ; and so: the authorship of the
Gospel by the son of Zebedee is driven from its last refuge."
Since then, a fierce struggle has been earned on respecting the
abode of the Apostle John in Asia Minor. While Keim im
mediately found an imitator in Wittichen (der geschichtliche
Charakter des Evangeliums Johannes), an adherent in Holtzmann
(Schenkel's Bibellexikon, the article, "iiber den Apostel und
fiber den Presbyter Johannes "), and, finally, one who far ex
ceeded him in Scholten (der Apostel Johannes in Kleinasien),
Riggenbach, Ewald (Gottinger Anzeiger, 1867), Steitz (Studien
und Kritiken, 1858, p.. 468 et seq.), Krenkel (der Apostel
Johannes, p. 133 et seq.), and Hilgenfeld (Zeitschrift fiir wissen-
schaftliche Theologie, 1872, p. 373 et seq.) are opposed to him
and his companions. Probably in the transition already begun
the denial of the apostolic authorship of the Gospel will, with
growing unanimity, be extended to the Apocalypse ; it remains
to be seen whether, on the other side, with a similar evolution
even now apparent, the defence of the authenticity of the Gospel
.will, with increasing firmness, associate itself with the recognition
of the apostolic origin of the Apocalypse.
I do not consider it part of my task to treat here the question
of the residence of the Apostle John in Asia Minor in its details.
But since I cannot entirely agree with any of the defenders, and
still less with any of the opponents, of this view, I must give
expression to my judgment. To me it appears that an unpre
judiced consideration of the well-known fragment of Papias in
Eusebius would certainly lead to the conclusion that he distin
guishes a disciple of the Lord of the same name from the Apostle
John as the presbyter, and also that Papias did not know the
apostle personally. When Eusebius reports that Papias declared.

4 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
himself a hearer of the presbyter, which, though not expressly
stated in the fragment, is in evident agreement with it, and as
there is no proof of the contrary, the inference must therefore
be that the presbyter himself lived in Asia Minor. When, now,
Irenaeus., apart from the words ascribed to the Lord concerning
the millennial kingdom, — for Eusebius does not expressly say
Papias heard them from the presbyter, — makes Papias a hearer of
the apostle, it must be conceded that there is here a confusion of
the apostle with the presbyter, and it follows that the general testi
mony of Irenaeus to the residence of the apostle in Asia Minor
may possibly rest on this confusion, or be unhistorical. But the
assertion of Keim, " that through the working together of mis
understanding and the lapse of time, Irenaeus, a native of Asia
Minor, about 190 a.d., first proclaimed John the apostle of that
country," is false throughout. For the Apocalypse, as Keim him
self says, " distinctly enough points to Asia Minor and Ephesus."
In other words, no one in the second century could believe that
the Apostle John was the author of the Apocalypse, without at the
same time believing that he lived in Asia Minor ; and in like
manner, the acknowledgment of the Apocalypse as the apostle's,
from the time of Justin Martyr downward, made prominent by
Keim, is an acknowledgment of his residence in Asia Minor, and
inferentially at Ephesus. Therefore Scholten also has entirely
given up explaining the Johannine tradition by the mistake of
Irenaeus, and affirms instead that this tradition owes its existence
"solely to the apparent claim of the Apocalypse to have come
down from the Apostle John." But when he finds it evident
" that not another John, but, as already current in Justin's
time, the Apostle John, was regarded as the person who re
ceived this revelation," — when he expressly affirms that " by the
name John, Rev. i. 1, 9, xxii. 8, the apostle is meant," and not
withstanding .charges tradition with being erroneous, the question
we must next consider is whether internal evidence decides that
the revelation recorded in the Apocalypse was not received by
the apostle ? The assertion .of Scholten, that the author of the
book does not identify himself with the seer and the apostle, but
in the manner of an introduction, Rev. i. 1, gives a report of a
revelation which John had received, as an assertion already
offered by Yolkmar, and resting as it does upon the obvious con
fusion, due to prejudice, of title with introduction, is hardly worthy

INTRODUCTION. 5
of serious reply. Or we may ask, Would such a reply be thought
necessary should it occur to some one to reject the first Epistle to
the Corinthians, because from such passages as 1 Cor. i. 13 it
does not follow that the author identifies himself with Paul, but
gives, 1 Cor. i. 1, 2, after the manner of an introduction, a report
of an epistle which the apostle wrote ? That in tradition, John,
the apostolic disciple of the Lord, may have absorbed the non-
apostolic, and that in the Johannine tradition many things, apart
from exegetical and other myths, may have to be referred to the
presbyter, may be the more readily admitted, inasmuch as such
abatements can in the end only be advantageous both to the
Apocalypse and the Gospel. But seeing that the abode in Asia
Minor goes along with the apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse,
the tradition respecting it must be regarded as essentially histori
cal so long as this authorship is not disproved by internal reasons.
But even the internal reasons are led into the field with great
certainty of victory. And, in fact, " if even the Apocalypse of
John about the year 70, and the Gospels of Luke and Mark be
tween 40 and 100, believe in the death of the apostles" (Keim,
I. p. 156, note, comp. Scholten, p. 10), what further proofs are
needed against the apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse ? Sup
posing, however, that the editors of Mark's and of Luke's Gospel,
in quoting the passages referred to, had any regard to the ques
tion whether all the apostles were dead or not, Steitz is manifestly
right in his conclusion, that at the time of the editorship some of
the apostles must still have been living. The references made to
Rev. xviii. 20, xxi. 14, by Keim and Scholten, prove nothing. In
the first passage there is as little evidence of the decease of all the
apostles as there is of the death of all the saints and prophets ;
and Scholten's question to Hilgenfeld, whether from the continued
existence of prophets and saints in later times it should follow
that the seer cannot have meant those who had already died as
martyrs, may with similar justice be applied to the case of the
apostles. The inscription of their names upon the foundation
of the New Jerusalem, spoken of in the second passage, affords no
more evidence of the death of the Twelve than the picture of
the new world does of its descent from heaven.
But " in the relation of the seer to the churches to and
for which he wrote there appears no trace of apostolic autho
rity. He wrote, not from plenitude of power as an apostle,

6 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
but from a special revelation. — The apostle would hardly
need the full and express attestation which the prophet
exhibits in his special calling," Rev. i. 9 et seq. (Diisterdieck,
Commentar, p. 65 et seq.).— " Of the intimate relation which
existed between the Lord and the Apostle John there is not the
slightest trace" (Ewald, die johanneischen Schriften, b. 2, p. 57 ;
comp. Hoekstra, " die Christologie der Apokalypse," in Theologisch
Tiidschrift, III. 4, p. 366). " When the seer places the names
of the twelve apostles upon the foundations which bear the walls
of the New Jerusalem, xxi. 14, comp. iv. 4, 10, what is to be
observed is less the fact that such a mode of view was lacking
in modesty (Ewald), than the perfect objectivity with which
the number twelve as a designation of the apostles presented
itself to the seer." Comp. xviii. 20 (Diisterdieck, p. 66 ; comp.
Ewald, p. 56 ; Hoekstra, p. 366 ; Weizsacker, Untersuchungen tiber
die evangelische Geschichte, p. 238 ; Hausrath, Neutestamentliche
Zeitgeschichte, II. p. 654; Scholten, pp. 10, 129). — "The Revela
tion of John is the work of the prophet ; at all points it affirms
that it is not the work of the apostle ; " and to this Bleek, Liicke,
Ewald have given their assent. The author calls himself only a
servant, i. 1, xxii. 6 ; a companion, i. 9 ; a prophet of the church
with the spirit of the prophets, xxii. 6, ix. 10. He speaks
objectively of the apostles, indeed of the holy apostles, and
though not directly of Peter and Paul, of those who were put to
death by Rome, xviii. 20, xxi. 14 (Keim, I. p. 159 et seq., note).
Thus the tradition is contradicted by the manner in which the seer
speaks of himself and of the apostles ! But if we miss every trace
of apostolic authority in the Apocalypse, it must still be granted
that for the first circle of readers the description of himself given
by the author must have been sufficient; indeed, it must be
admitted also that among Christians of Asia Minor the author
must have possessed considerable authority ; and if we begin with
the assumption that the author was the Apostle John, does he not
speak to his first readers with that authority throughout the
entire book ? Moreover, Scholten, p. 6, like Volkmar before
him, finds that when the writer distinguishes himself from other
servants as " the servant of Christ " honoured of the Lord by a
special revelation, and commissioned to be the bearer of letters
to the churches, dictated to him by Christ Himself, and then
emphatically speaks of himself as " I, John," it is hardly like the

INTRODUCTION. 7
language of one who was not an apostle ; and, indeed, as the
same writer justly remarks, it could scarcely be doubted by any
one that the receiver of the Revelation was the apostle, did not
a prepossession in favour of the fourth Gospel lead to that result.
Certainly the author expressly calls- attention to his apostleship
as little as he does to his earlier confidential relation to the Lord,
and he speaks of the apostles entirely in an objective sense ; but
has he written the book as an apostle ? No ; he wrote it as a
prophet ; and if we should not have the slightest objection to a
prince who wrote as a poet if he were to lay aside court, or
government, or military language, and speak simply as a poet,
and if he were to make no reference to his rank, and speak
objectively of princes, need we object to the apostolic authorship
of the Apocalypse because as a prophet he speaks in prophetic
language ? The Apocalypse declares itself not to be the work of
an apostle, in the same sense as Schiller's poetry declares itself
not to be the work of a professor of Jena. I doubt whether a
historian of literature, without theological prejudice, would reply
to the objections against the genuineness of the Apocalypse,
above quoted, otherwise than with ridicule.
The objections urged by Volkmar, Hoekstra, and Scholten, from,
the character of the Apocalypse, are more important. The first
mentioned says {Commentar zur Offenbarung Johannis, p. 42) :
" The rabbinical learning and art which predominate throughout
the book can scarcely be referred to an apostolic fisherman " (comp.
Holtzmann in Schenkel's Bibellexikon, III. p. 3 3 7). Scholten, p. 8
et seq. : " The picture of Christ which here comes before us seems
to presuppose a conception so perfectly free, that it can only
belong to a later Christianity." Comp. Scholten, p. 9 : " The
apotheosis of Christ is too strong to be ascribed to a contemporary
and disciple of Jesus." "The fire of enthusiasm, the youthful
power of imagination, which inspire a book written a.d. 68, are
scarcely natural for a contemporary of Jesus surviving until then."
Hoekstra (p. 367 et seq.) remarks, that "the whole spirit and
learned contents of the book speak against the authorship of the
beloved disciple ; not only because, according to this book, Jesus,
compelled by the circumstances of the times, unwillingly refrained
from laying upon His followers, so far as they had escaped it, the
burden of the Mosaic law, ii. 24, but because it expresses not a
single thought which elevates Christianity , in principle above the

8 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
dispensation of Moses. And then, too, as far as the spirit and
character of the historical Christ— as John had personally learned
to know Him — were the foundation upon which he based his
representation of the heavenly Christ, there is scarcely anything
left of the picture of the loving and amiable Son of man as
sketched by the Synoptics" (comp. Scholten, pp. 9, 130). To all
this Scholten has added (p. 10) the charge, that the author of the
Apocalypse represents himself as at enmity with the Gentile
Christians, while the Apostle John recognised the propriety of the
mission to the Gentiles, and gave to Paul the right hand of fellow
ship. We find, however, that powers of production, as they are
shown in the Apocalypse, have been possessed and exercised by a
few favoured spirits even in modern times at even a more advanced
age. What is called the rabbinical learning and art of the book has
more than one analogy in the history of the church, — for example,
the writings of the tinker Bunyan. If the portrait of the historical
Christ proposed by certain critics is not to us certainly supposi
tion, so also may the wholly independent opposite of such portrait,
the strong intuition of the Apocalypse concerning Christ, be no
evidence against its apostolic origin ; moreover, the Christ of the
Apocalypse must be regarded in His relation to the apocalyptic
Christ of the synoptical Gospels and of Paul, and then it may be
asked whether He still appears a perfectly independent conception
of the seer? The objection drawn from ii. 24, as well as those
found in the supposed absence of specific Christian thought, and
the difference between the writer as opposed to the Gentile
Christians and the friendly apostle, can be considered only when
we come to an examination of the doctrine of the Apocalypse.
With respect to Hoekstra's " loving and amiable Son of man," if
I am not wholly mistaken, He is found as little in the eschato
logical portions of the synoptical Gospels as in the Apocalypse.
Holtzmann, to whom we can hardly ascribe a prepossession in
favour of the apostolic origin of the Apocalypse, says, ut ante,
p. 337 : "It cannot be denied that much of what we know of the
character and history of this disciple — the Apostle John — is in
harmony with the spirit, contents, language, and style of this
book" (comp. Mark iii. 17, Luke ix. 49, with Rev. ii. 2, 9, iii: 9 ;
Luke ix. 54 with Rev. xv. 7 ; Luke ix. 50 with Rev. ii. 6 ; Matt.
xx. 21 with Rev. xx. 4 et seq. Comp. Krenkel, p. 10, note 1,
p. 121). The objection of Weizsacker (p. 235 et seq.), that while

INTRODUCTION. 9
in the circle of the apostles the prediction of Jesus respecting the
destruction of Jerusalem was held with remarkable definiteness
and precision, the author of the Apocalypse departs from it, can
be best considered when we come to the exposition of the state
ments of the book with respect to that subject.
Those who, on the one hand, have no desire to maintain the
genuineness of the fourth Gospel, or, on the other, to deprive the
apostolic origin of that Gospel of its last refuge, as well as no
desire to retain an original apostolic anti-Pauline author, or to
be rid of an original apostolic Christologist, will probably agree
with us when we give our final judgment respecting the
authorship of the Apocalypse. The contents and style of the
book, especially the introduction, the letters, and the conclusion,
undoubtedly show that the John who wrote it must have
been a man of very high authority in the Christian circles of
Asia Minor. The memory of such a man could not possibly
vanish without leaving some trace behind it. Now there comes
down to us no information of any other John who, at the required
time and place, held a more important position, besides the
apostle and — though only indirectly and scantily — the Presbyter
John ; and we must, in case the tradition of the residence of the
apostle in Asia Minor is proved to be false, ascribe the Apocalypse
entirely to the presbyter of Papias, who is perhaps to be identified
with John Mark. But the tradition of the residence of the Apostle
John in Asia Minor is not contradicted either on external or
internal grounds, so that we have our choice between the apostle
and the presbyter. From internal grounds a prophetic book does
not enable us, with entire certainty, to decide between an apos
tolic and a non-apostolic disciple of the Lord, though the style,
especially at the beginning, tells more in favour of an apostolic
authorship than it does on behalf of the authorship of one who
was simply an " elder." Since the presbyter has not the slightest
advantage over the apostle, — passing over the words ascribed
to the Lord Jesus respecting the vine and the ears of corn, so
little in harmony with the Apocalypse, — we need only appro
priately and provisionally avoid all reference to the result as it
affects the fourth Gospel, and we cannot then hesitate to give the
preference to the apostolic authorship, attested as it is by a com
paratively ancient, entirely unanimous, and remarkably decided
tradition (comp. Krenkel, pp. 144-165), rather than to the

10 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
authorship of the presbyter, suggested for the first time centuries
after the origination of the Apocalypse by a notoriously biassed
criticism, and even by that only conjecturaUy, and acknowledge
the Apostle John as the writer of the Apocalypse.
2. Place and Time of Authorship.
According to Rev. i. 9, the author " was in the isle that is
called Patmos, for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus
Christ." He was there " in the spirit on the Lord's day," i. 1 0
(comp. iv. 2, xvii. 3, xxi. 10). Those expositors who, as Zullig,
and more recently Volkmar, regard the ecstasy in which the reve
lation was received as nothing more than a literary form, after
the example of Dan. viii. 2, x. 4, naturally consider the residence
of the author on the isle of Patmos merely as part of the drapery.
From the account he gives of himself as a man well known to
his readers, as well as from the accompanying matter of course
assumption that he was really in an ecstasy, we conclude
that his sojourn on Patmos was an actual event. That which he
refers to as the occasion of his being there, — "for the word of
God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ," — as we shall have
opportunity of pointing out in the section on the "Work of
Christ," may in itself equally well mean that he was at Patmos
to preach the gospel, or to reeeive the revelation contained in
our book, or, finally, that he was there as a martyr, either as
banished or as a fugitive. The insignificance of the island is
against the supposition that he was there to preach the gospel.
That the reference is to the reception of the revelation, is certainly
favoured by the fact that not long before, i. 2, similar expres
sions are used which undoubtedly describe it Since, however,
his actual residence there being taken for granted, it is im
possible to understand how he found himself there, or rather
how he came thither (iyevop,yv) in order to receive the revelation,
unless we suppose that, unlike Paul, he may, in a spirit of
dislike, opposition, or even defiance, have taken up a position
of antagonism to the prevailing heathen tendency at Ephesus,
and "have had to retire to the quiet Patmos if the Spirit
of the Lord was to speak to him," — I decide for the interpre
tation justified by Rev. xx. 4, that the author came to Patmos
as a martyr. Whether as a captive, or more probably as one

INTRODUCTION. li
banished, which was in accordance with the practice of Rome in
Domitian's time, and which also agrees with one form of tradition,
or whether as a fugitive, which another tradition asserts (Eusebius
according to Diisterdieck, p. 93), cannot with certainty be decided
from the " tribulation " of i. 9, and the " leading into captivity "
of xiii. 10, or from the general contents of the book.
As to the day when he received the revelation, he speaks of
it as " the Lord's day" which, on account of its connection with
i. 17, 1 8, is the festival of the resurrection of Christ, and certainly
not the annual one or Easter, but that which the name usually
meant with the Fathers of the Church — the weekly or Sunday
celebration. Evidently John did not wish by the isle of Patmos and the
Lord's day to direct his readers merely to locality or time, but
to a definite locality, — it was the place of banishment or refuge,
— and to historical circumstances, — it was on that day of the
week on which the resurrection of the Lord, in its meaning, was
vividly present to his mind, and on which, in the spirit, he
communed with the risen Saviour (comp. i. 17, 18) — in which
the revelation came to him, and by which it was externally con
ditioned, and from which it proceeded. We need therefore expect
no express information respecting the year in which this book
was produced; it was written "in this year," as it sometimes
stands on the title-page of pamphlets written at the period of the
Reformation. But this year is so clearly indicated by the descrip
tion of the Beast, in complete agreement with everything else in
the book, that, as we shall show in the sections on nearer doctrines,
the choice can only be, whether it was written under the govern
ment of Galba, between August 68 and January 69, or in the time
from the accession of Vespasian to the destruction of Jerusalem,
between the end of December 69 and the spring of the year 70.
And as in the same sections we find nothing in favour of
Vespasian, but on the contrary very important considerations in
favour of the time of Galba, we conclude, with Volkmar and
others, that the Apocalypse was written in his reign, toward the
end of the year 68, or early in the year following.
3. Its Origin and Meaning.
The author was in the spirit, or became in the spirit (iyevo-
fiev), i. 10, comp. iv. 2, xvii. 3, xxi 10. "The Lord God of the

12 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
holy prophets sent His angel to show unto His servants the things
which must shortly be done," xxii. 6. Jesus sent His angel to
bear witness to the readers of the book respecting the things
therein written concerning the churches, xxii. 16. John received
a revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave unto Him to show
His servants things which must shortly come to pass, i. 1. What
Jesus Christ showed to His servant John, i. 1, he has seen, i. 2,
seen in a vision, ix. 17, heard and seen, xxii. 8. Suddenly, at
the beginning, he heard " a great voice as of a trumpet, saying
unto him, What thou seest write in a book, and send it unto the
seven churches which are in Asia," i. 11. The Lord said to
him again, " Write the things which thou hast seen, and the
things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter," i. 19.
When the seven thunders had spoken, the author was about to
write, but he heard a voice from heaven which said, " Seal up
those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them
not ! " x. 4. After he had eaten the little book, the voice said
to him, "Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and
nations, and tongues, and kings," x. 11. He heard a voice from
heaven saying unto him, "Write ! " xiv. 13 ; and at last the angel
said to him, " Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book,
for the time is at hand," xxii. 1 0. The author " bare record of
the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus, and of all things
that he saw," i. 2. He counts him blessed who reads and hears
the words of this prophecy, and keeps those things which are
written therein, for the time is at hand, i. 3, xxii. 7. The angel
said to him, " I am thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren the
prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book,"
xxii. 9. The author testifies, to every one who hears the words of
the prophecy of this book, that if " any man shall add unto those
things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in
this book ; and if any man shall take away from the words of the
book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the
Book of Life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which
are written in this book," xxii. 18, 19. Once more the angel
said, " These are the true sayings of God," xix. 9. God Himself
said to him, " Write, for these words are true and faithful," xxi. 5.
And lastly, the angel said to him, " These sayings are faithful
and true," xxii. 6.
There can be no doubt that the author declares the contents of

INTRODUCTION. 13
the book to be a revelation received from God through Christ ; and
since the assertion that this is only a literary form falls to tlie
ground with the untenable hypothesis of a pseudo-John, that
he himself so regarded it. But, on the other hand, the author
must have erred when he expected that in a short time Nero, as
the antichrist, would return from Hades, and that his appear
ance would bring the end. Instead of, as is most commonly done,
denj'ing either side of this contradiction, the only just course
seems to me to be to endeavour to reconcile both sides. Refer
ring at the same time to the section on the " Spirit," I
here observe the following : — The spirit of prophecy is the
Christian vital principle on the side of knowledge, and of know
ledge as far as it is new (mysterium), and equally, whether it
belongs to the present or the future, to things internal or external.
Such new knowledge completed itself in apostolic times, like all
other manifestations or operations of the Christian life-principle,
in the way of sudden illumination, consequently in a miraculous
manner. The subjects of it were, with good reason, conscious
that it did not proceed from themselves, that they had not them
selves produced and given it, but rather that they had received it.
Objectively it came to them as vision and revelation ; they saw
and perceived in a state of inspiration and ecstasy. That at the
same time their subjectivity and individuality took part, they
themselves understood, or at least others did. Hence the words
of the apostle, " Prove all things ; hold fast that which is good,"
1 Thess. v. 2 1 ; hence also the gift of " discerning spirits," 1 Cor.
xii. 1 0. Especially does it appear, and I find it very conceivable,
that this fellowship of the subjectivity is acknowledged in pro
phecy where it has to do with the future, the time or the hour,
or with the signs of the times. Comp. Matt. xxiv. 32-36 ;
1 Thess. v. 1-3 ; 2 Thess. ii. 1-3. Comp. 1 Pet. i. 10-12. It
was manifestly not injurious to the standing of a prophet when he
miscalculated with reference tb the future; comp. 1 Thess. iv.
13-15; 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52. It need not therefore surprise us
when the author of this book speaks indiscriminately of its con
tents as prophecy, seen and heard in the spirit, received from God
or Christ, while, according to the manner of apostolic times,
he still assumes as self-evident that his interpretation of the
signs of the times, and his estimate of the future, require to be
justified by the result. Moreover, the seer himself sometimes

14 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
clearly gives us to understand that he wishes to see a distinction
made in the contents of his "book, a difference of which he is of
course conscious himself; and he gives this intimation, not as
Volkmar, speaking of xix. 9, thinks, through a distinction between
the spirit and the word ; nor can I, with others, prefer a distinc
tion between the general outline and the individual features. It
is not to be denied, indeed, that the author clearly distinguishes
between the" predictions peculiar to himself and to the Old Testa
ment prophetic word, — it may be the word of a Daniel, or a
proverbial eschatological sentence, — nor that he really derives the
contents of his book generally from God, though he speaks, xix. 9,
xxi. 5, xxii. 6, of the faithful and true words of God, which gives
a good meaning only when referred to what immediately precedes,
but which, by implication, modifies the certainty and real divinity
of the remaining portions. I may venture on the whole, I think,
to affirm that precisely this peculiarity of the seer, namely, the
way in which he interprets " the signs of the times and points to
the landmarks within his historical horizon, by which we may
count the steps to be made by the developments of the last time
until the final catastrophe " (Weiss, Lehrbuch der biblisclun Theo-
logie des Neuen Testaments, p. 5 1 5), was not to him really the
absolute; and. all the expressions which describe the contents of
his book as absolute spring essentially, first, from eschatological
truths come down to him as such, and then from their application
or realization through the Apocalypse before us.
But should I say how I represent the circumstances of the origin
of the book, my opinion is, and I do not give it for more, that,
in view of the persecution of Nero, the surging waves of which
reached as far as Asia; in view also of the state of the
Christian churches, and of his flight or banishment to Patmos ;
being on the Lord's day absorbed in devotion to the exalted and,
notwithstanding the ardent longing of the earlier, and the palsying,
cooling doubt of the later Christian generation, still only comino-
Lord ; thinking of the enigma of the course of this world, and
carried away by various powerful emotions, he passed into a state of
ecstasy, and the Roman empire in general, and the hateful Nero
in particular, appeared to him as the fulfilment of the predicted
Antichrist, as the Beast of Daniel ; and from this central point
he saw present, past, and future grouping themselves around it
in a series of eschatological scenes. Christendom and its accom-

INTRODUCTION. 1 5
panying circumstances were the foreground, and became the
preliminary picture; and, on the other hand, the whole vast
eschatological background became the principal view. Thus the
author actually saw and heard in ecstasy the entire essential
contents -of his book ; he received it as a " revelation of God or
of Christ," the same was shown to him, and he has borne witness
to the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ (comp.
Weiss, "Apocalyptische Studien," in Theologische Studien und
Kritiken, 1869, vol. i. p. 1 et seq.).
4. The Form.
In chap. x. an angel appears with a little open book. At his
cry, seven thunders utter their voices. When the seer was about
to write, a voice from heaven said to him : " Seal up those things
which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not ! " The
angel swore by Him that liveth for ever and ever that time
should be no longer, but in the days of the seventh trumpet the
mystery of God should be finished, as He had declared to His
servants the prophets. A voice from heaven bade him take the
open book from the hand of the angel ; and as he did so, the
angel said : " Take it and eat it up, and it shall make thy belly
bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey." He did so,
and found it as the angel had said ; he was then assured that he
" must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and
tongues, and kings."
Various as have been the expositions of this scene, I cannot
adopt any of them; but I submit an original one, which I
confidently hope will prove itself to be true. The author has
begun, vi. 1, in mediam rem, in the style of a genuine epic, and
introduced the visions of the seals, after the sixth of which
comes the episode of the seventh chapter. Out of the seventh
seal he unfolds the visions of the seven trumpets in chap, viii.,
ix. ; and then, standing before the sounding of the seventh
trumpet, another episode interposes as in the former case.
At this point he becomes conscious that, to continue the method
of representation hitherto pursued, he must sketch in too broad
a manner the judgment being prepared and foreshadowed.
He resolves, therefore, to strike into another path, and to refrain
from a further exposition of the judgment scenes, and instead

16 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
of bringing on the winding up of the past, or the begin
ning of the end, by individual episodes, to do it rather by a
connected representation, that is, by the contents of chap. xii.
and xiii., and then to pass on to the final catastrophe. Of this
change, or rather this modification of his original plan, the author,
in apocalyptic style, gives us notice in chap. x. The seven
thunders, that is, the divine voice, the revelation of God in the
thunder (comp. Ps. xxix., 1. 6), can only mean the publication of
judgment as the burden of the seal and trumpet visions. The
seer is commanded to seal up and not to write what is spoken
(comp. Dan. viii. 26, xii. 4, 9). But when he then enters upon
another course, will not the reader be deceived in his expectation
that the catastrophe is near ? It is for this reason that the angel
(comp. Dan. xii. 7) swears that with the sounding of the seventh
trumpet the end shall certainly come. But the seer may have
received a special direction (Ezek. ii. 8) for this modified course ;
he ate the little book, — reminding us of the book in chap, v., yet
still somewhat different, perhaps a part of it, but in a special
form, — which was sweet in his mouth — that is, the reception of
the revelation — but bitter in his belly, — that is, the perception
and examination of the revelation received, — and was thus com
missioned to continue his prophesying, but in a different manner.
He does it, however, not by an abrupt departure from his preced
ing course, but by bringing next the prediction concerning Jeru
salem, xi. 1-14, or the Jewish people, which on one side by the
apocalyptic time-space of three and a half years, xi. 2, 9, 11, and
the mention of the beast from the bottomless pit, xi. 7, shows
itself to be homogeneous with the prediction in chap. xii. ; while
on the other, by the declaration, " The second woe is past, and
behold the third woe cometh quickly," xi. 14 (comp. ix. 12), it
formally attaches itself to the earlier prophecy. True, in
xi. 15-19, he records the sounding of the seventh trumpet, and
celebrates in anticipation the fulfilment of the divine mystery;
but in chap. xii. he entirely forsakes, even in form, his earlier
course, only in the vision of the vials to return to it. The con
struction of the Apocalypse, then, presents itself thus : chap. i. 1
to iii. 32, and chap. xxii. 6-21, need no exposition of their
connection. In the great principal vision, extending from
chap. iv. 1 to xxii. 5, only chap, vi., viii., ix., to some extent
also chap, xi., xv., xvi., xviii., xix. 11, etc., and the chapters

INTRODUCTION. 17
following, are connected in time; on the other hand, with
the exception of the introductory chapters iv. and v., and
also the tenth, chap, vii., xii., xiii., xiv., xvii., xix. 1-10 are,
chronologically, not to be limited more definitely than by the
apocalyptic conception of the last times. Ewald's distribution
into seven — three seven-membered sections (iv— vii., viii— xi. 14,
xi. 15-xxii. 5), the third again divided into three (xi. 15-xiv.
20, xv.-xviii., xix.-xxii. 5) ; the preface and dedication in seven
members (ii.-iii.) ; the introduction of four, and the conclusion of
three parts — betrays less the art of the seer than the refinement
of the expositor, and' in any case is for us unimportant.
But if our interpretation of chap, x: be correct, even in general
only, there follows a result which reaches far beyond the mere
architecture of the book. Decidedly as we have declared our
selves against the- origin of the Apocalypse from reflection, to say
nothing of an artistic purpose, and in favour of the full subjec
tive truth of its revelation, with equal decision we must declare
against the view that it is du- dictation or protocol written in the
ecstasy itself, or that it is only a direct reproduction of what was
seen or heard "in the spirit." Much rather, as it seems from
chap, x., has the- author treated the whole contents of the revela
tion given to him in an artistic and independent manner. And
here he was bound — which for the most part is. not recognised —
even more strictly than the poets of ancient or modern times, by
the laws of the kind of literature he employed.. As a seer, he
had to observe the rules of apocalyptic authorship or art, and to
clothe his ideas in apocalyptic language, — that is, in Old Testa
ment rabbinical forms of representation. If, now, the language
of the book is almost throughout composed of Old Testament
and Old Testament rabbinical expressions and images, and so far
forms a kind of cento, we are not obliged- beforehand to find in
it the subjectively corresponding expressions for the views of the
author, and with this the proof of his- Old Testament theocratic
standpoint, as in the crudest manner is done by the Tubingen
school ; on the contrary, we are justified, having regard to the
words and symbols of the book, in inquiring whether as a seer the
author, according to the laws of apocalyptic art, has clothed his
thoughts in the variously limiting but reverential and only suitable
drapery of ancient sacred language and symbolism, in the conviction
that the reader would penetrate the veil and reach the sense.
B

REPRESENTATION OF DOCTRINE.

AFTER having discussed in the Introduction the statements of
the Apocalypse concerning itself, its so to speak subjec
tive contents, we now proceed to consider its objective contents —
its doctrines, its direct and indirect statements — in their theolo
gical significance. To examine these in their full extent we must
not limit ourselves to that which is peculiarly apocalyptic or pro
phetic, but must take into consideration its nearer and more remote
presuppositions; and if we desire to represent these contents
organically, we must not exhibit them in categories brought
from without, but must group them according to the ideas of the
author himself. We have therefore, in the first part, to con
sider the more remote presuppositions : on the one side, God,
angels, and heaven ; and on the other, the devil and hell ; and
then the middle sphere, the earth and its inhabitants. In the
second part we shall review the nearer presuppositions : Christ,
the Spirit, the gospel, the saints and their works (Christian life),
the churches (Christendom). In a third part, the prophecy of the
book, including the beast, the false prophet, Babylon (Antichrist),
the seals, the trumpets, the vials (the preliminary judgments), the
saints in the great tribulation (Christians in the last time), the
Holy City during the forty-two months (the Jewish nation in the
last time), the impenitence of men (the heathen in the last time),
the fall of Babylon, the coming of the Lord, the millennial king
dom, the judgment, and the new heaven and the new earth (the
final issue of all things).

18

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 19

FIEST PAET.
MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS.
1. God.
THE name of Him who is feared by the devout, xi. 18, etc.,
blasphemed by the beast, xiii. 6, as well as by men when
they suffer from the plagues, xvi. 9, is simply God ; or rather, it is
the name of the nature of God as made known by Him to men,
and understood by them in His word. The name of God, which
Christ will write upon those who overcome, iii 12, and which
the 144,000 who are with the Lamb, xiv. 1, and which the ser
vants of God bear upon their foreheads, xxii. 4, whether we
understand it to be the sacred name of Jehovah or not, is of little
importance so far as the doctrine of God is concerned.
The so-called gods of the heathen are to the seer, in their
external manifestations, the work of men's hands, idols (et'SoXa)
of gold and silver and iron and stone and wood, which neither
see nor hear nor walk ; but in their nature they are demons
(haip.6via), i.e. supernatural evil beings, ix. 20 (comp. ii. 14, 20,
xvi. 14, xviii. 2 ; see section on the devil). It is evident that, to
the author, the true or real God, a Being as much opposed to an
idol as to a demon, is in His physical nature eternal and almighty,
and in His moral nature holy. But frequently and impressively
as he brings forward these two sides of the divine nature, it so
happens that, comparatively, he seldom brings them into contrast
with false gods ; and Kostlin is mistaken when he affirms (Lehr-
legriff des Evangeliums und der Brief e Johannis, p. 482) that, in
the doctrine of the Apocalypse concerning God, it is especially
prominent that He is the fiovm ocno<; whom all must fear and adore ;
that He created the whole world by His will ; and that He is called
the God of heaven, in opposition to idol gods. Certainly, when the
angel with the everlasting gospel says to those who dwell on the
earth, " Fear God, and give glory to Him ; for the hour of His
judgment is come : and worship Him that made heaven and

20 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters," xiv. 7, the
Creator of the world is, according to the sense afterwards to be
explained, as well as, according to the analogy of the Old Testa
ment (Jer. x. 11 et seq., et passim), placed in contrast with power
less idols. In like manner, God, as the " only holy " (oW),
xv. 4, is placed in contrast with demons and heathen gods, their
immorality and untruthfulness, and with the lies and frauds of
witchcraft, as much by the " only " as by the connection. Almost
immediately before, xv. 3, God is called, after Jer. x. 7, " King of
nations." While the nations serve false gods, He is the only true
God whom justly they must solely worship. But here all the
places are quoted where He is contrasted with idols. Baur,
indeed, affirms (Verlesungen iiber neutestamentliche Theologie, p. 227)
that He is spoken of as the God of heaven, in xvi. 11, in opposi
tion to heathen gods ; but He is designated in a similar manner
in xi 1 3, where it is impossible to conceive a contrast between
Him and the gods of the heathen.
There is another contrast which determines the utterances of
this book concerning God. While the course of this world
contradicts ever more sharply and fiercely the Christian idea,
John has to testify, x. 7, for the comfort and admonition of
Christ's disciples, that the mystery of God shall speedily be
finished, and how. May we not, then, expect beforehand that
he will give prominence to that chiefly, if not exclusively, in the
nature and operations of God, wherein lies the pledge of the
truth of the prophecy given by him against the existing position
and course of the world as it lies before men's eyes ? We find,
in fact, that the general statements of the Apocalypse concerning
~God are easily explained from this standpoint. Another question
is, whether it will particularly appear to us, as it does to Baur,
p. 226 (comp. Kostlin, p. 482 et seq.), from the idea of God as
, the highest theological idea, how greatly the Apocalypse rests on
the standpoint of Old Testament Monotheism and Theocracy, of
/which naturally it is no proof in an apocalypse that almost
exclusively Old Testament predicates are made of God.
(a.) The Nature of God.
He is called simply God (o 0eo?), in i. 1 for example ; in the
mouth of Christ, " my God," ii. 7 (n.r.L), iii. 12. On the lips of the

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 21
inhabitants of heaven He is "our God," iv. 11, vii. 10, 12, xii. 10,
xix. 1,5; and speaking of the inhabitants of the New Jerusalem,
He is said to be " their God," xxi. 3 (comp. Ex. xxix. 45 ; Lev.
xxvi. 12 ; Ezek. xxxvii. 27). He stands also in a special relation
to Christ, to the inhabitants of heaven, and to Christians.
He is called " the Lord " (o Kvpiot). The victors sing, " Who
shall not fear Thee, 0 Lord ! " xv. 4 ; the elders cry, " Thou art
worthy, 0 Lord ! " iv. 11 ; and the great voices in heaven say, "The
kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord,"
xi. 15. He who is thus revered is God; and for worshippers in
.heaven and on earth, He is the Lord, or their Lord. Not of equal
importance, but convenient to mention here, is the fact that the
martyrs, vi. 10, cry to God, "How long, 0 Lord, holy and true,
dost Thou not judge and avenge our blood ? " They recognise
Him as their Master or Lord (Seo-7roT^?), because, in His accept
ance of them as His possession, His servants (see fellow-servants,
vi. 11), is their security that He will not permit them to be
slaughtered unavenged.
He is also called " the Lord God " (icvpios 6 Geo?). This name
is synonymous with the Old Testament Adonai Jehovah (com
pare, for example, Isa. xl. 10), or Jehovah Elohim, and in like
manner denotes the God of Israel and of Christians, though it is
not brought into conscious and prominent contrast with heathen
gods, but is more solemn and emphatic than the simple term
" God." To some extent, the terms " Lord God " meet us as a
proper name in connection with the words, "which is, and which
was, and which is to come, the Almighty," i. 8 (n.r.L), iv. 8, xi. 1 7,
xxi. 22. Also in the words, "for strong is the Lord God who
judgeth her," xviii. 8, the " Lord God " is only a more full proper
name of God. In the passage, " The Lord God of the holy pro
phets sent His angel to show unto His servants the things which
must shortly be done," xxii. 6, there is evidently a union of the
terms " the Lord God " and " the God of the spirits of the pro
phets." Comp. Num. xvi 22.
Sometimes independently, i 4, xvi. 5, and sometimes preceding
or following " the Almighty," as an attribute of the Lord God,
i. 8, iv. 8, xi. 1 7, the description of God appears as He who is, and
was, and is to come. The passage in i. 4, where the author wishes
for his readers grace and peace " from Him which is, and which
was, and which is to come," in its designed method of construction

22 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
(airb 6 &V k.tX), admits of no doubt that John intended by this
rabbinically developed paraphrase and interpretation of Ex. iii.
13-15 to represent synonymously the sacred incommunicable
name of Jehovah, who in the past, present, and future equally,
therefore eternally exists ; and just as little, in view of the two
passages, "We give Thee thanks, 0 Lord God- Almighty, which
art,- and wast, and art to come, because Thou hast taken to Thy
self Thy great power, and hast reigned," xi. 17, and "Thou art
righteous, 0 Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because
Thou hast judged thus," xvi. 5, can it be affirmed— as Ewald
does, p. 108 — that John has merely appropriated the rabbinical
formula. The omission in these two places of " who art to come "
can have no other ground than that the completion of the divine
kingdom is celebrated proleptically. It must be remembered,
too, that John does not use ep^o^ei/os as synonymous with
io-6/ievo<}, but in the sense of coming to judgment for the final
completion of the eternal world-plan. In the rabbinical formula
for expressing the eternal existence of God, he has found a formula
jbr His living or energetic eternity. He who was, and is, and is
to come, is the God who, as He has revealed Himself in the past
in the creation of the world and in the leadership of His people
Israel, as also in the present, to the eye of faith, He is active in
the government of the world, so in the future He will manifest
iHis power in the decision of all conflicts, the solution of all con
tradictions and strifes, in the complete establishment in the world
Jof a state of things in harmony with His nature, His purpose,
and His promise. He will appear for the judgment of the world
and the completion of His kingdom.
Nearly related to the rabbinical name Jehovah in the concep
tions of the seer, only of more special application, .is the designa
tion of God as " the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the
leginning and the end." Of these expressions, which all affirm
the same thing, — though the first is symbolic, the second Old
Testament, and the third more philosophic, — the middle one gives
us the key by which we may understand the whole three. It is
taken from Isa. xii. 4, xliv. 6, xlviii. 12 (comp. xliii. 10), where
God calls Himself the first and the last, that He may encourage
firm confidence in the promise given through the prophets. The
seer represents God as using in the same sense the above words
concerning Himself, "I am the Alpha and the Ome4 the

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 23
First and the Last, the Beginning and the End," — that is, " I
am He from whom all being proceeds, and to whom it will
return ; who, as the source of all history, am also the end ; who,
having called the world into existence, will also terminate it ; —
I therefore know equally what has happened and what will
happen; both are my act and deed, and on what I publish
through the prophets as being yet to take place, you may rely
with perfect confidence ! " It is the Lord God of the spirits of
the prophets who thus speaks of Himself, and the predictions of
this book are faithful and true, xxii. 6. It is remarkable that we
find this self-expression on the part of God only at the beginning
and the end of the Apocalypse. It occurs at the beginning, where
the Lord God, " which is, and which was, and which is to come,
the Almighty," i 8, confirms the theme-like contents of the pre
ceding verse by the words, " Even so, Amen. I am Alpha and
Omega." At the close we find it, xxi. 6, where the prophecy has
terminated, and God, repeating His early assurance, says, " I am
Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end." In chap. xxii. 13,
where the summary repetition of the prophecy in the verse before is
followed by the assurance, " I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning
and the end, the first and the last," it is usually supposed that Christ
is speaking, but, as we shall see later on, without foundation.
With the two last-mentioned names of God is connected that
designation which speaks of Him as the living God (Z&v), as the
God who liveth for ever and ever. The foundation of this is the
Old Testament expression, the living God (comp. Deut. xxxii. 40 ;
2 Kings xix. 16) ; but the antithesis to lifeless idols, into which
it is almost everywhere brougnt m the Old Testament, is nowhere
to_beJfound in the Apocalypse. The living, or living for ever,
here rather represents God as the personal absolute life, in dis
tinction from created, impotent, and temporary life. The living
creatures, the representatives of the animated creation, bring to
Him who sits on the throne, and who lives for ever and ever,
glory, and honour, and thanks, iv. 9 ; and then, at the same time,
the four and twenty elders, the representatives of the first-fruits
of all animated creation, worship Him who liveth for ever and
ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, and say, " Thou art
worthy, 0 Lord, to receive glory, and honour, and power ; for
Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure they are and
were created," iv. 10. Here God is spoken of as living for ever

24 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
and ever, because all created, subordinate relative life comes from
Him. When the angel, x. 6, swears by Him that liveth for ever,
who created heaven and the things that therein are, and the earth
and the things that therein are, and the sea and the things which
are therein, that there should be time no longer, He is described,
as He is ^also in xv. 7, — where one of the living creatures gives to
the seven angels the seven vials full of the wrath of God, of Him
who liveth for ever and ever, — as the eternally-living God, because
as such He has created all things, and does not stand before the
world He has made dead and powerless, or passive, but is angry
with the evil which opposes Him, and in His own time must
affirm Himself in an active and vigorous manner. Finally, the
designation " living God," whose seal the angel has, vii. 2, to seal
His servants, — the -only place in which the "for ever and ever" is
omitted, — can only be based -on the principle that He, as the living
God, gives such life to His servants as will survive all suffering, :
and even death itself. The twenty-four elders in their songs of
praise, and the servants of God in their being sealed, unquestionably
understood Him to be the living, or the eternally-livmg God, the
possessor and giver .of eternal life, in the highest sense of these
words. In addition to what has already been mentioned, there appears,
often parallel with the predicate, " which is, and which was, and
which is to come," and with special emphasis, the designation
of God as "the Almighty" (comp. i 8, iv. 8, xi. 17) : "I am the
Alpha and the Omega," says God, "which is, and which was,
and which is to come, the Almighty," i 8. The living creatures
say, "Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is,
and is to come," iv. 8 ; the elders cry, " We give Thee thanks,
0 Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come,"
xir'f7.~' The victors sing, " Great and marvellous are Thy works,
Lord God Almighty," xv. 3. From the altar there comes forth
a voice, saying, "Even so, Lord God Almighty," xvi. 7. The
kings of the whole earth are gathered for " the battle of that great
day of God Almighty," xvi. 14. The multitude cries, "Alleluia,
for the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth," xix. 6. Christ " treads
the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God,"
xix. 15. John sees no templein the New Jerusalem, for "the
Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it," xxi. 22.
The designation " Lord God Almighty " represents the Old Testa-

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 25
ment " Lord God of Hosts," after the example of the LXX. (comp.
Amos iv. 1 3) ; and that this omnipotence, or absolute power of
God, is placed by the seer frequently and emphatically m^xpress
contrast with the seemingly unconquerable power of the wicked
rh~Ehe"world, hardly needs pomtifigfbTlt: '
In a similar position to that of " the first and the last," in its
relation to " which is, and which was, and which is to come," there
stands, according to the sense, but with a more special applica
tion, the designation of God as " the Strong One " (comp. LXX.
Deut. x. 1 7), with reference to that which describes Him as " the
Almighty." " Strong is the Lord God who judgeth her," xviii. 8.
Connected with this is the might (Svva/us), the power (icpaTot;),
and the strength (mt^vs) of God. He has this power even now ;
it is manifestly so in heaven, — the temple is filled with smoke
from the glory of God and from His power, xv. 8, — but He has
it not yet for the world; therefore we read, iv. 11, "Thou art
worthy, 0 Lord, to receive — or to take — power," v. 13; " Power
for ever and ever is ascribed to Him who sitteth upon the throne,
and unto the Lamb," vii. 12;" We give Thee thanks, because
Thou hast taken to Thyself Thy great power," xi. 17; " now is
come the strength of our God," xii. 10 ; "power unto the Lord
our God," xix. 1. We may also mention here the power (igouo-id)
ascribed unto Him where men under judgment " blaspheme the
name of God, who hath power over these plagues," xvi. 9. Riches
(ttXouto?) are only in one instance ascribed, to God, v. 12, in
connection with His power.
Again, in a similar manner as the phrase " who liveth for ever "
is associated with the words " who was, and is, and is to come,"
as the more common with the more solemn designation, so " who
sits upon the throne " is connected with the predicate " Almighty : "
"Behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne,"
iv. 2. Immediately after, God is described as He " who sits on
the throne," iv. 9 ; and this predicate, with the addition of God in
vii. 10, xix. 4, is constantly repeated in the course of the visions,
and evidently describes Him, in opposition to the visible ungodly
course of this world, as the true Lord and Ruler, Judge and
King, who, as such, must and will assert Himself. We may here
add a few of those predicates of God which are related in meaning.
He is several times called the God of heaven. By this rendering
of the DWn ^k, found in the later writings of the Old Testa-

26 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
ment, Ezra i 2, God, in His exaltation above the earth, is repre
sented as manifesting Himself through His powerful magisterial
judgments upon it. It is by this exposition at least, and not by
that of Baur (ut ante, p. 227),— that He is so called in opposition
to the heathen gods, — that we get an acceptable sense of xi. 13,
" the remnant" of the holy city " were affrighted, and gave glory to
the God of heaven " after the occurrence of a great earthquake in
which the tenth part of the city fell, and 7000 men were slain;
or of xvi. 11, where "men," evidently the heathen, blasphemed
"the God of heaved because of their pains and their sores;"
just as, immediately before, xvi 9, they had blasphemed the name
of God, who had power over these plagues. Once He is called
" the God of the earth." According to xi. 4, the two witnesses of
Christ are " the two olive trees and the two candlesticks standing
before the God of the earth." He is so spoken of in this rendering
of Zech. iv. 14, because in the name applied to Him lies the truth
taught in what immediately follows, — that God can and will, even
on earth, arm the two witnesses, as His servants, with miraculous
powers, and there protect them from their foes. In like manner,
only once, in harmony with Jer. x. 7, is God described as "King of
nations" Those who have " gotten the victory " sing, " Just and
true are Thy ways, Thou King of nations," xv. 3. While the
nations wonder after the beast and worship the dragon that gives
him power, xiii. 3, 4, while all the inhabitants unite in paying
him homage, xiii. 8, God is still really the King, the righteous Lord,
the actual Ruler even of the nations ; and when He begins to
give proofs of His supremacy through the last plagues, the victors
recognise His ways as just and true.
Hitherto we have, so to speak, represented the divine nature
according to the statements of this book ; we turn now to a
consideration of His_etMcal_cAamcfer, and in the first place
there comes prominently before us the holiness of God. By this
the writer understands not merely the opposition of the Divine
Being to all evil as that which is against Himself, nor merely
His exaltation above all creaturely impurity (Weiss, bibl. Theol.
p. 616, note), but also the essential difference between Him
and all created, imperfect ethical being ; therefore His ethical
perfection and absolute goodness. " Holy, holy, holy, Lord God,
which was, and is, and is to come," iv. 8, exclaim the living
creatures (comp. Isa. vi. 3), the representatives of creature life

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 2 7
generally, in recognition of the truth that God is for ever exalted
over all created and mortal beings ; that He is perfect, and as
such continually reveals Himself to His creatures. " How long,
0 Lord,, holy and true," say the martyrs, "dost Thou not judge
and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth ! " vi. 10;
because, being opposed to evil and against the supremacy of the
wicked, He could not regard the oppression of the good with
indifference. It is not the same thing, as Weiss (bibl. Theol. p. 616, note), with
an entirely unjustifiable appeal to the phraseology of the Apoca
lypse, against Hahn, p. 102, affirms, though it always expresses
some relation to the holiness of God, when He is called the
" only holy " (oa-ios) ; for this expression, which represents the
Old Testament TDn or "1K/J, and signifies among men conscious
reverence for God and the relations ordained by Him, and refers
to religiositas and pietas, can affirm nothing of Him beyond regard
for His own sacred ordinances, faithfulness to His own holy laws.
This regard or faithfulness — this, so to speak, holy reverence
on the part of God — appears once distinctly in contrast with the
violation of moral order by demons, when it is said, " Who shall
not fear Thee, 0 Lord, and glorify Thy name ? for Thou alone art
holy (oaio<s, fromm) : for all nations shall come and worship before
Thee ; for Thy judgments are made manifest," xv. 4. On the
other hand, when the angel of the waters says, " Thou art
righteous, 0 Lord, which art, and wast («al 6 oo-lo$), because Thou
hast judged thus," xvi. 5, the holiness of God approaches nearer to '
a definition and affirmation of His justice as manifesting itself,
against existing pretensions, through His righteous judgments.
As just, God is spoken of only in the passage above quoted,
xvi. 5. His ways are said to be " just and true," xv. 3 ; His
judgments are " true and righteous," xvi. 7, xix. 2. What the
writer understands by God's justice we learn from xiii. 10, xiv.
9-11, xviii. 6-8, xxii 12. It is retribution strictly and accu-s
rately corresponding to desert ; and the individual acts in which
He exercises His justice are called His judgments (StKauopaTa),
xv. 4.
By the martyrs God is called the " Lord, holy and true "
(akrjOivo?), vi. 10. The victors cry, "Just and true are Thy
ways," xv. 3. The angel of the waters says to Him, " True and
righteous are Thy judgments," xvi. 7; and after the fall of

28 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
Babylon, xix. 2, it is said of Him, " True and righteous are His
judgments." To the seer it is said, " These are the true sayings
of God," xix. 9 ; and God says to him, " These words are true
and faithful," xxi. 5 ; and once more, in xxii. 6, we find the same
affirmation. If we add that Christ is called " the holy and the
true," iii. 7, — not the truly holy, — " the Amen, the faithful and
true witness," iii. 14, " faithful and true," xix. 11, we have all the
places in which " true " occurs. Diisterdieck on iii. 7, appealing
to Meyer on John vii. 28, remarks that all interpretations of
aXrjdivo? are false which rest on the supposition that it means
as much as ayjrev8tf<; or a\ri0rj<; ; — " real, corresponding with its
idea, its name." But he contradicts himself when he affirms
that such passages as xxi. 5, xxii. 6, xv. 3, are to be explained
according to this representation, for which he quotes the LXX.
Isa. Ixv. 16 ; on the other hand, he refers to xv. 3, also to the
LXX. on Deut. xxxii. 4. It hardly needs to be shown how,
according to his view, the " true " in vi. 1 0 gives a weak, in xv.
3, xvi 7, xix. 2 a scarcely tolerable, and in xxi. 5, xxii. 6 no
sense at all ; nor especially how the writer, with the single
exception of xvi. 7, subjects the " true " to the co-ordinate predi
cate, while in the sense of " real " it should precede it. For this
reason I understand "Jjue " in_the_ ethical sense, in opposition
tojhe morally false, not giving place to the deceptive, word-
breaking, traitorous, but applied to the true. Lord as to one who
falfikJIi*promkes^jTiJhreatenings; to the true ways and judg
ments of God as such, in whicnHboth promises and threats have
accomplished themselves ; to the true words of God as such, whose
| contents of promises and threats will be fulfilled; and it is
| applied in a similar sense to Christ as it is to God Himself. If we
thus understand the " true," we get a good sense in all the places
where it is found ; we see how the author everywhere, excepting
xvi. 7, makes it a subordinate predicate, and also how he can
in a single instance make it the predominant one ; even when
this solitary exception comes before us in the Old Testament in
Diisterdieck',s sense,— as, for example, in Jer. ii. 21, Zech. viii. 3,
—it is still undeniably the moral import that is prominent them
and, as by our author, is equally presupposed (comp. Deut. xxv. cal
xxxii. 4 ; Isa. xxv. 1, xxxviii 3, Ixv. 16 ; Job ii. 3, viii 6).':k>d,
God Himself is never called faithful (reliable, sure, celving
(tkoto?) in the Apocalypse, but it is said, xxi. 5, that the i life

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 29
spoken immediately before by Him who sits on the throne, and
which include the contents of the prophecy, are " faithful and
true;" the same assurance is given, xxii. 6, by the angel con
cerning what has preceded, which, according to i. 1, is a revelation
from God.
The wisdom of God is twice mentioned in doxologies, v. 12,
vii. 12.
Of the emotional characteristics, states, dispositions, and excite
ments in God there is hardly anything mentioned in the Apoca
lypse, except wrath (opyr), trpoaoyirov), indignation (0vp,6s), fierce
anger; and certainly these are mentioned very frequently and
emphatically, vi. 16, 17 (comp. Ps. ii. 5, xxxiv. 17), xi. 18, xiv. 10
(comp. Ps. Ix. 5, lxxv. 9 ; Isa. li 17-22 ; Jer. xxv. 15, xlix. 12),
xiv. 19 (comp. Joel iii. 18 ; Isa. lxiii. 1-6 ; Jer. xxv. 30-33),
xv. 1, 7, xvi. 1, 19, xix. 15, xx. 11 (comp. xviii. 3, 6). Baur
(p. 227), with some plausibility, affirms that the most_m^omment
attribute in the Apocalypse is the avenging justice or wrath of
God (comp. Kbstlin, p. 483) ; for where can we find mention of"
His love, grace, compassion, long-suffering, etc. ? But has the
seer really omitted all reference to these features of the divine
character ? The face, the anger, the wrath, the fierce indignation
of God is directed against the godless world, and therefore cannot
but be regarded as love, grace, and mercy toward His servants.
Indeed it is the holy God, their Lord and Ruler, who is angry,
and whose anger burns against His enemies, who are their
persecutors and oppressors. If He were not angry, they might
doubt His love ; and the more displeased He is, the more
heartily do they rejoice in Him as their God. Comp. vi. 9-11,
xix. 1-5. When we think of this, we find that the ApocalypseT"
from beginning to end, is really full of indirect assurances and
proofs of the love of God, and that it is so even in the repeated
publication of terrible judgments. At the same time, much as
the direct mention of God's love is suppressed, and great as the
necessity was, from the nature of the book, that it should be,
^ip is not entirely wanting, if we keep in mind God's relation
^ His people in the past, the present, or the future. He had
mmunicated to His servants the prophets His secret, His
("Aligns with respect to the world and mankind, as a joy-inspiring
^avssage, x. 7. After the child, a symbol of Christ, had been
nghte-i Up to God and His throne, the woman, the church, fled

30 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
into the wilderness, where she had a place prepared by God,
that she should be nourished there 1260 days, xii. 6. There
were given unto her two wings of a great eagle, that she might
fly to her place in the wilderness, that she might be nourished a
time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent,
xii. 14. The serpent cast out of its mouth water as a flood after
the woman, that it might carry her away ; but the earth helped
the woman, and opened its mouth, and swallowed up the flood,
xii. 1 6. The author wishes " grace and peace " to his readers
" from Him which is, and which was, and which is to come," i 4.
An angel comes from the east with the seal of the living God,
and says to the four angels to whom it was given to hurt the
earth and the sea, " Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the
trees, until we have sealed the servants of our God in their fore
heads," vii. 2, 3. Those who overcome are in heaven, clothed
in white before the throne of God, and serve Him day and night
in His temple : and He that sits on the throne shall dwell among
them. They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more ;
neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat. For the
Lamb, which is in the midst of the throne, shall feed them,
and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters ; and God
shall wipe away all tears from their eyes, vii. 15-17. It is
said of the heavenly state, " Behold, the tabernacle of God is with
men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people,
and God Himself shall be with them, and be their God. And
God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes ; and there shall be
no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be
any more pain," xxi. 3, 4. He who sits on the throne says, " I
will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of
life freely. He that overcometh shall inherit all things ; and I
will be his God, and he shall be my son," xxi. 6, 7. With all
this we may compare the promises at the close of the book, and
observe how the seer conceives of the relation of Christ and of
God, and speaks of the connection of the former with His people,
and it will be with difficulty that- any- one will say that John
knew nothing of a God of love ; or affirm, with Baur, p. 229, that
the Christian idea of the Fatherhood of God, much as it goes
against the Old Testament doctrine of His sovereign power,
may still have come into his consciousness through His being
called the Father of the Messiah. Certainly God bears the name

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 31
JlLEather ^orilyJn^J\£esaiariic_5ense, but He cherishes the fatherly
disposition to all who belong to Him through Christ. (See also
what follows.)
There only remain for consideration the symbolic representa
tions of the divine nature. It is said, " Behold, a throne was
set in heaven, and one sat on the throne. And he that sat was
to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone : and there was a
rainbow (i!/w) round about the throne, in sight like unto an
emerald," iv. 2, 3. For this representation the author is depen
dent mainly upon Ezek. i 26-28 (comp. viii. 2, x. 1 ; Dan. vii.
9, 10) ; but for the bow, upon Gen. ix. 12, 13. That the colours
should not merely represent the glory of God in general, but should
each have a special signification, is clearly in harmony with the
manner of the book. Expositors agree, and with tolerable una
nimity, that the author means by a sardine stone, a precious stone
of a red colour ; by a jasper (comp. xxi. 11, 18, 19), a transparent
and brilliant crystal, probably our diamond ; and that by the
emerald a green stone is meant. The appearance as of jasper is
designed to represent the holiness ; that of a sardine stone, the
anger or avenging justice ; and that of the bow, like an emerald, the
grace of God. Diisterdieck has unquestionably given the meaning
of the whole when he says, p. 219, " Here, where the eternal and
personal cause of what follows is represented, the glorious holiness
and justice of God appear in the closest connection with His
unchangeable grace, so that the entire approaching development
of the kingdom of God and the world until the end of time, as
decided by the wonderful, unique nature of the holy, just, and
gracious One, as well in its course as in its end, must correspond
to this threefold glory of the living God." With iv. 2, 3 we
associate xv. 8 ; after one of the living creatures had given to
the seven angels the seven vials full of the wrath of God, who
liveth for ever and ever, it is said the temple was filled with
smoke from the glory of the Lord, and from His power ; so that
no man was able to enter the temple until the seven plagues of
the seven angels were fulfilled. Here such passages as Ex. xl.
34, 35 (comp. Ex. xix. 18, 19, xx. 18 ; Num. xiv. 10, xvi. 19 ;
1 Kings viii. 10, 11 ; Isa. vi. 3, 4) must have been present to
the mind of the writer. The smoke with which the temple was
filled proceeds from the presence of God in His glory and power ;
and since He cannot be approached, no one can enter the temple

32 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
while He is there, which will be until the seven last plagues are
fulfilled. Thus the author clothes the thought that the prayers
of Christians (comp. vi. 9, 10, viii. 3, 4, xv. 2, 3) are heard, and
that now the last and most terrible judgments of God will
certainly come, and, as Ewald says, all prayer and labour and
effort end. Naturally, in distinction from iv. 2, the grace of God
becomes subordinate. His glory (Sofa) is here the appearance
of God as a consuming fire, and with fierce anger, of one power
fully executing His displeasure, and therefore with the glory there
is expressly mentioned the power of God. Again, we connect with
iv. 2, 3 and xv. 8 a few passages in chap. xxi. and xxii. In the
description of the New Jerusalem, it is said, xxi. 11, to have " the
glory of God ; " its light — rather its light-giver or illuminator
(qbcoaTijp, comp. the LXX. Gen. i 14, 16; Wisd. xiii. 2 ; Sir. xliii 7)
— was like the most precious stone, the brightness of crystal or
crystalline jasper. " The city had no need of the sun, neither of
the moon, to shine in it ; for the glory of God did lighten it, and
the Lamb is the light thereof," xxi. 23. " There shall be no night
there ; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun ; for the
Lord God giveth them light," xxii. 5. Very naturally, again, the
red sardine stone of iv. 3, or the glory and power from which the
smoke goes forth, xv. 8, as well as the bow, like a green emerald,
iv. 3, disappear, and only the jasper of crystal clearness remains as
an image of God ; for, with the end of the old world and its sins,
the nature of God can no longer manifest itself either as wrath or
-as grace, but as holiness. We see from this threefold representa
tion of the divine glory — for the Boga is also represented in iv.
2, 3 — that to the seer, as indeed the thrice holy of the four
living creatures distinctly says, holiness is the ethical basis of
_the divine nature. But, generally, holiness — symbolized by the
crystal jasper, the rainbow, the smoke, and the luminary of the
New Jerusalem — is with him in meaning similar to light, or
the nature of light. But of the ethical nature of God, sun and
moon and the light of the candle are only transient and insufficient
images, and in the final state fall away. .^GojIJsJigh^light
which to evil is like a consuming fire, toVsinful world like a
rainbow of mercy after the "storm of avenging justice, bringing
consolation and peace, and which, in the consummation of all
things, will stream forth still more brightly, inspiring with life
and happiness.

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 33
(6.) The Works of God.
God created the world. The elders say, " Thou hast created all
things (tu iravTa), and for Thy pleasure (6eKr]p,a) they are and
were created," iv. 11. The angel swears "by Him that liveth
for ever and ever, who created heaven and the things that therein
are, and the sea and things which are therein," x. 6. "Worship
Him," said the angel, " that made heaven and earth, and the sea,
and the fountains of waters," xiv. 7. Twice we find the words,
" since the foundation (/caTafioXfj) of the world," xiii. 8, xvii. 8.
God governs the world. As already observed, Christ speaks of
the throne of His Father, iii. 21 ; and John, iv. 2, sees a throne
standing in heaven, and one sitting upon it ; so almost throughout
our book God is called " He who sits on the throne." He is King,
in all. the ancient meaning of the word, over all things which He
has made. Therefore all that transpires in the world is willed
of God, and a necessity ; hence the oft-recurring expression Bel
(comp. i. 1, iv. 1, xi. 5, xiii. 10, xvii. 10, xx. 3, xxii. 6), and
especially the interchange of p,i\Xei and Set, i. 19 and i. 1,
xvii. 8 and xvii. 10 (comp. xx. 7 and xx. 3), and iSodrj or Sutra)
(comp. vi. 4, 8, vii. 2, ix. 1, 5, xi. 3, xii. 14, xiii. 5, 7, 14,
xvii. 17). Here also may belong that which was said to the
martyrs, namely, that they should " rest for a little season, until
their fellow-servants and their brethren that should be killed, as
they were, should be fulfilled " (full numbered, ifK^pmQmo-iv; comp.
Rom. xi 25). It is a fixed number who, according to the
divine will, will suffer martyrdom. But certain as it is that God
is truly King of all the earth, still He is not so in manifest
reality, neither in the existing condition of the world nor in the
acknowledgment of men. The cause of this is in the devil, who
deceives the whole world, xii. 9, as will be more fully shown in
the sections on the devil, and on the earth and its inhabitants.
The aim of the divine government is therefore opposed to him,
bringing to men deliverance or salvation (a-aTrjpla), and to God
Himself the sovereignty, or the kingdom, the real kingship over
the world (fiaatXela). Both, in their full significance and perfection,
form the contents or subject of the mystery, the mystery of God
(juHrvqputv), which, as glad tidings, He has communicated (evay-
yekure), x. 7, to His servants the prophets, and since the birth of
the predicted child, chap, xii., gradually more fully unfolded until

34 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
it is complete (eVeXe^, x. 7; comp. xv. 8, xvii. 17 ; yiyovav,
xxi. 6). At every stage of its development this completion is,
by anticipation, celebrated in heaven. After the casting out of
the dragon, a loud voice says in heaven, " Now is come salvation,
and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His
Christ," xii. 10. At the sounding of the seventh trumpet there
are voices in heaven saying, "The kingdoms of this world are
become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He
shall reign for ever and ever," xi 15; and the elders also say,
" We give Thee thanks, 0 Lord God Almighty, which art, and
wast, and art to come, because Thou hast taken (e'&^as : re
ceived and taken) to Thyself Thy great power, and reigned,"
xi. 17 (efiatriXevtras : become and made Himself King). After
the fall of Babylon, the seer heard much people in heaven saying,
" Alleluia ; Salvation, and glory, and honour, and power, unto
the Lord our God," xix. 1 ; and " Alleluia : for the Lord God
omnipotent reigneth," xix. 6. But as, at every stage of the
development of the whole, the- inhabitants of heaven thus express
themselves, so also departed Christians, as they enter heaven,
anticipate the completion of the divine purposes, and exclaim,
" Salvation unto our God, which sitteth upon the throne, and
unto the Lamb," vii. 10 ; and the angels joyfully unite in their
song of praise, vii. 11, 12. But by what means does God work
out this salvation and the establishment of His supremacy ?
By His "just and true ways" xv. 3 (comp. Ps. cxlv. 17; Deut.
xxxii. 4). His " true and righteous judgments," xvi. 7, xix. 2
(comp. xviii. 20). His "judgments," xv. 4 (comp. Ex. ix. 16,
xiv. 17, 18 ; Ps. cxxvi. 2 ; Mic. vii. 16-18). This is symboli-
• cally represented to us when John sees going out from the throne
lightnings, and thunderings, and voices ; and seven lamps burn
ing before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God : and a
sea spreading out before it as clear as crystal, iv. 5, 6. The
lightnings, and thunderings, and voices represent God's avenging
justice or manifestations of wrath in the world (comp. Ex. xix. 16 ;
Ps. xviii. 8-10, xxix. 3, 4, 1. 3, xcvii. 1, 2), and correspond to
the red sardine stone in the picture of the divine majesty. The
seven lamps John himself interprets ; he tells us they are the
seven Spirits which, according to v. 6, are sent into all the world
through the mediation of Christ, and correspond to the green
emerald, iv. 3, the image of grace in the representation of God ;

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 35
and finally, the sea of glass, clear as crystal, which appears in
xv. 2 mingled with fire, is a representation which originated in a
combination of Ezek. i 22-28 with Ex. xxiv. 10, perhaps also
with the narrative of the passage of the Israelites through the
Red Sea and the destruction of the Egyptians ; and as a sea
represents immeasurableness and profundity, comp. Ps. xxxvi. 6,
as a sea of glass, the holiness of God (comp. xxi. 11) ; as mingled
with fire, holiness manifesting itself in wrath, but as a whole remind
ing us of the righteous deeds of God resulting on the one hand
from the avenging judgments of God, and on the other from the
Spirit's work, and so corresponds to the crystal sea of the former
representation, iv. 6. Just as the description of God directly
represents the personal author, so the symbolism of the lightnings,
the voices and thunders, the lamps and the sea of glass, pictorially
represents the real contents of what follows. According to another
view, namely, that of a secret purpose of God, which is revealed
by Him to Christ, and through Christ to His prophets, these con
tents appear under the image of a book. This book the seer,
being in the spirit, sees in the right hand of Him who sits on
the throne, and finds it written within and without, that is, on
both sides, or full of writing, and sealed with seven seals — that is,
securely sealed or perfectly secret, v. 1 ; but the Lamb receives
or takes the book from the hand of God, v. 7, and one after the
other opens the seals, vi. 1. This sealed book relates to the
mystery of God, which He made known to the prophets of the
Old Testament, x. 7, in a similar manner as the little open book
which the seer afterwards took from the hand of the angel and
'ate, x. 8-1 0 ; it interprets the counsel of God in a special reve
lation. The "mystery" is the contents of all Old Testament
prophecies ; the " book " contains the entire predictions of the
Apocalypse ; " the little book," the predictions concerning the
antichristian powers, as they appear onward from the twelfth
chapter. As the contents of " the book " unfold themselves in
the several visions of the Apocalypse, so our representation will
introduce them in the course of its various sections ; we need
not, however, expect to hear of the work of God in sending
Christ, which is certainly presupposed by the Apocalypse, and
is, as it were, recalled only in one aspect in chap, xii, and that
merely from the point of eschatology at which the seer, chap. iv.
and v., placed himself.

36 the doctrine of the apocalypse.
2. Angels.
To the dragon and his angels, xii. 7-9, the seer opposes
Michael and his angels, which he calls the holy angels, xiv. 10,
" the armies of heaven " following Christ at His coming,
and elsewhere simply " the angels." Expositors are not agreed
whether the four angels which stand at the four corners of the
earth, and which hold the four winds, and to whom it is given
to hurt the earth and the sea, vii. 1, 2 ; further, whether the star
which falls from heaven, and to whom is given the key of the
bottomless pit, ix. 1, — where, as in xii. 4, Diisterdieck in loco
correctly observes there is a union of the symbol of a star
with that of an angel, as in the Old Testament conception of
the heavenly hosts, Ps. ciii 21, Jer. xxxiii. 22, Job xxxviii. 7
(comp. Ewald, p. 202); and further, whether the angel of the
bottomless pit, the leader of the locusts, called Abaddon and
Apollyon, ix. 11, — not to be confounded with the fallen star,
ix. 1 ; — and lastly, whether the four angels bound in the great
river Euphrates, who, on their liberation, lead an army of horse
men, ix. 14, — are to be understood as good or evil, the angels
of God or of Satan. Individual expressions may be quoted
in favour of the latter idea ; — it was given to them to be in
jurious (comp. ix. 10, 19, and xiii. 5); a star fell from heaven
(comp. xii. 4, 9). On the other hand, see xx. 1, Apollyon
'comp. xvii. 8, 11) bound and loosed (comp. xx. 2, 3). At the
same time, these angels do not evidently belong to the angels of
Satan, xii. 7-9, nor to the demons, ix. 20, for they are not in the
service of the dragon, but in the service of God. I think the
seer himself would have been perplexed had the alternative been
placed before him : good or evil ? angels of God or of Satan ?
Decidedly, as with him God and the devil, the kingdom of God
and the kingdom of the world, stand over against each other, he
has still not carried out this dualism to its ultimate results. In
the sphere of evil there is rather a certain indefiniteness ; while
it originates in departure from God, it must still serve His sacred
purposes. Thus the angels of the destructive winds, the fallen star,
the angels of the Euphrates, are not the holy angels of God, but
fallen angels, to whom the liberty is given to bring upon men the
plagues decreed of God. They have the same significance as in
the Old Testament, for example, the Destroyer in 2 Sam. xxiv. 16.

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 37
The multitude of the angels serving Gcrd seems to the seer
innumerable. He writes, v. 11: "And I beheld, and I heard
the voice of many angels round , about the throne, and the beasts,
and the elders ; and the number of them was ten thousand times
ten thousand, and thousands of thousands " (comp. Dan. vii. 1 0).
He represents them as differing from each other : he sees " a
strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice," v. 2. "Another
mighty angel comes down from heaven, clothed with a cloud, and
a rainbow upon his head, and his face as it were the sun, and his
feet as pillars of fire," x. 1 (comp. i 14, 15). In xviii. 1 he
says : " I saw another angel come down from heaven, having
great power ; and the earth was lightened with his glory ; " and
in ver. 2 1 of the same chapter we read that " a mighty- angel
took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea."
That these " strong angels," as Hoekstra, p. 373, note, finds
probable, are the seven archangels who stand in the presence of
God, does not follow from the term " strong ;" rather, as Weiss
(bibl. Theol. p. 618) thinks, and especially from the fact that
their features are suggestive of the divine glory, x. 1, xvii. 1,
they belong to higher orders generally. The acquaintance of the
seer with the Jewish angelology is shown in viii. 2 : " And I
saw the seven angels which stood before God ; and to them
were given seven trumpets" (comp. ver. 6, xvii. 1, xxi. 9), for
by these can be understood only the seven angel princes or
archangels (comp. Dan. x. 13; Tob. xii. 15; 1 Thess. iv. 16).
When Hoekstra (p. 370, note), after the example of others, de
clares that the seven angels are doubtless identical with the seven
Spirits of God, i 4, iv. 5, v. 6, his conclusion is based upon a
common misconception of the " Spirits " in the Apocalypse ; where
these are accepted in their true meaning, no refutation is needed.
But while the same angel is evidently charged by God, now
with one mission and now with another, — to this class certainly
belong the angels who showed visions to the seer, xvii. 1 (comp.
xxi. 9), interpreted, xvii. 7, symbolically represented the future,
x. 1-11, xviii. 21, or made announcements, xiv. 8-10, 15, 16,
xv. 1-3 ; further, the angel with the seal of God, vii. 2, the
angel with the key of the bottomless pit, xx. 1 (against Hoek-
stra's Seal and Key Angel, p. 373), is evidently also the angel
who presents the prayers of saints before God, viii. 3, 4, —
other angels have undeniably their distinct office, their fixed

38 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
position and special calling. Such we have already found in the
four angels who stand at the four corners of the earth and hold
back the four winds, vii. 2, and the angel of the bottomless pit,
ix. 11, and the angels bound on the river Euphrates, ix. 14, also
the angel who comes out from the altar and had power over fire,
xiv. 18, — not merely the fire of the altar, viii. 5, which is not
here in question, but fire in general, in its judicial signification as
the image and means of the divine displeasure. In addition to
these, there is the angel of the waters, xvi. 5. The Rabbis speak
of angels placed over earth, sea, fire, and other departments of
nature ; indeed, they know their very names. Not only have
the various elements and kingdoms of nature their own angels in
the Apocalypse, but so also have the various spheres in the world
of men. Michael appears, xii. 7 (comp. Dan. x. 13, xii 1), as the
guardian angel of God's people, or the church ; and then, again,
each individual church has its own angel, for, according to i 16,
Christ holds in His right hand the seven stars ; and we find in
i. 20 that these stars are angels of the seven churches;' and
to these angels the seer writes seven letters, each of which
begins, " To the angel of the church at  , write ! " These
angels of the churches are personified representations of the
spirit of the churches. It is common to give other interpreta
tions. Bunsen (Ignatius, p. 8 5) sees in them monarchical bishops ;
Rothe (Anf&nge der Kirche, p. 423) finds them to be the expres
sion of the idea of a monarchical episcopate. Ritschl (Entstehung
der Altkatholischen Kirche, p. 409) conceives of them as super
intending colleges.' Ewald, ut ante, p. 115, takes angel in the
sense of mediator or messenger, as in Hagg. i. 13, Mai. ii. 7,
Eccles. v. 5, and considers the angels of the churches to be their
representatives (comp. Kbstlin, ut ante,?. 487). Ritschl grants,
however, that the relation of the superscriptions, and the conclu
sions of the letters, favours the idea that the angel may be re
garded only as a symbolic representation of the church, after the
analogy of the guardian angel. Each of these views fails when
it comes to be considered in detail ; and the only thing that can
be said against the interpretation I have offered is, that both
churches and angels have already their symbols, — one the candle
stick, the other the star, — and that a symbol cannot again be
symbolized ; but this difficulty disappears when we consider that
the angel of the church is not the symbol of the church, but is

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 39
the church itself in one of its two aspects. While " the church " is
an assembly in one place of individual Christians of every variety,
and who are therefore variously regarded and treated by Christ,
" the angel of the church " represents it as a unity, an organiza
tion, as a moral person, a living whole, in which one member
depends upon and affects the others, and where all are mutually
responsible for each other, in which a definite spirit reigns, and
by which one church is distinguished from another. The angel
of the church is the general spirit of the church personified. A
leaning to the rabbinical doctrine of the ayyeXo? e<popo<; is not
to be mistaken (comp. Diisterdieck's full and striking exposition
of i. 20, p. 132, etc.).
According to i 1, Jesus Christ sent and signified by His angel
to His servant John what should shortly come to pass. In
xxii. 16 it is said: "I, Jesus, have sent mine angel to testify
unto you these things in the churches ; " and in xxii 6 we read
that " the Lord God of the holy prophets sent His angel to show
unto His servants things which must shortly be done." It has
been perplexing to expositors that the angelus interpres supposed
to be mentioned in these places does not appear everywhere in
the book ; it is also disputed whether he may be regarded as the
conductor of John in all the visions where he is not mentioned,
or where another appears ; or whether he had nothing more to
do than to place John in the ecstasy ; or whether he is to be
taken generically, and is intended to include all the angels which
' in the various visions discharge the duty of interpreting signs ; or
whether we are only to think of him as the angel who in chap, xvii
expounds to John the chief subject of the whole revelation, speaks
with him in xix. 9, shows him the bride, the Lamb's wife, and the
last great feature of the book, xxi. 9, the river of the water of
life, xxii. 1, also announces himself as an angel sent of God, xxii. 6,
and who is mostly intended where the heavenly voice speaks with
the prophet, as in i. 10-12, iv. 1, x. 4-8, xiv. 3, xxi. 3, or where
the speaker is not definitely distinguished, xix. 9 (?). Recently
Hoekstra has endeavoured to prove, pp. 373, etc., 397, etc.,
that the angel who appears in x. 1 represents Christ, and is His
angel in a special sense, as it were, a second self (comp. xiv.
14, 17), and therefore after the Old Testament manner speaks as
Christ Himself (comp. xi. 3). So far as I can see, an angelic
representative of Christ never comes into the book; even the

40 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
angel of the tenth chapter is not shown to be a representative of
Christ either through his symbols — the rainbow (comp. iv. 3),
the cloud (comp. i. 7, xiv. 14), his appearance as the sun (comp.
i. 16), his feet as pillars of fire (comp. i 15)— or by his deeds
—he holds in his hand the little book (comp. v. 6), gives command
ment to prophesy, swears that there should be delay no longer,—
but appears as a messenger of God who discharges his com
mission with corresponding glory. There are no internal grounds
for thinking of the angel of Christ as interpreter only from
chap. xvii. onward; and the idea is utterly destroyed when
we remember that one of the vial-angels cannot at the same
time be a specific angel of God or Christ. The mere translat
ing into ecstasy cannot be regarded as showing the future. Nor
is it possible, moreover, in those visions where another speaks,
to think of the angel of Christ, in addition, as the companion of
the prophet. The generic conception of the angel of God or of
Christ avoids these difficulties, but leaves it unexplained how this
angel can show all, and even speak to the seer in voices and
persons which do not belong to angels (see especially xi. 3).
There seems to be no alternative but to regard xxii. 8 as not
referring to the angel of the Lord and the general contents of the
revelation, but only to the last mentioned vial-angel and his
interpretations, — which, by the way, sheds an important light upon
the different position of the seer with relation to his own and to
ancient predictions, — and by the angel of Christ or of God to under
stand the personification so far as it respects the seer of tlie whole
revealing activity of God or Christ. With this idea alone can we
reconcile the fact that now this angel and now that, sometimes
indeed a voice, the voice of God or Christ Himself, speaks to the
seer ; and it is only on this principle that we can explain the
manner in which, xxii. 6, the angel speaks of the angel- of God
being sent; and finally, this alone gives a representation in
harmony with itself.
Twice John falls at the feet of the angel who had spoken to
him, to worship him, xix. 10, xxii. 9 ; and at the first time the
angel said to him : " See thou do it not : I am thy fellow-servant,
and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus : worship
God ! " The second time he said : " See thou do it not : for I am
thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them
which keep the sayings of this book : worship God ! " Kbstlin,

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 41
p. 483, finds in these places a protest against angel-worship, for
which there may have been frequent occasion, Col. ii. 1 8 (comp.
Baur, p. 227, also Ewald, p. 330, who applies here the words:
" the measure of a man, that is, of the angel ") ; but if we notice the
two passages immediately preceding those quoted, xix. 9, xxii. 7,
and consider that the angel does not found his objection upon the
circumstance that the offered worship would affect the honour of
God, but rather that of the seer, and if we remember that the
latter makes the angels speak, of their God; and also that he thinks
of them as in a specially near and intimate relation to Him,
— indeed, Hoekstra, p. 373, on account of v. 11, vii. 11, would
place them among the redeemed, since they stand nearer the
throne ; but this reason, founded upon local symbolism, would
also place them amongst the four living creatures, — it appears
simpler to abstain from side blows or innuendos, for which there
is no reason in the connection, and to seek the cause of the seer's
falling down in the supposition that, overcome and carried away
by a sense of the importance of the message, he testified his
reverence for the messenger, and to find therein, as well as in the
refusal of the angel, the reply to the question : Is it possible that
a man should know the true word and counsel of God ? Answer :
Yes, wonderful as it is, the prophets, and through them, Christians
generally, become acquainted even with the mysteries of God. It
is not against the worship of angels that the seer protests ; but
he thus symbolizes the glory of the Christian, and especially of
those among them who are the instruments of the Holy Spirit.
Should any man, from the nearness of the numberless angels
to the elders and the living creatures, v. 11, which, at all events,
we must recognise as real symbols, draw the conclusion that
the author regarded the angels as nothing different, he would
shoot far beyond the mark. John decidedly believed in the
existence of angels in the sense of supernatural personal beings,
concrete spirits, engaged in the service of God ; and not merely
in angels generally, but in angelic orders, angels of the waters and
of fire. But, on the other hand, he who, every time an angel
comes on the scene, assumes an angelic appearance to the seer, or
at the word " angel " thinks of a concrete personality, has certainly
not formed a correct, idea of the matter. These representations
rather move to and fro in easy transition between the vision of
an operative idea and that of an instrumental personality. What

42 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
Baur says, p. 228, is certainly true, though in a different sense than
be intended, that " angels play a leading part in the Apocalypse."
And when Liicke ( Versuch einer vollst Einleit. in die Offenbarung des
Johannes, p. 740) finds serious difficulty in the fact that in this
book angels are the bearers of revelation, it is important to
observe that the angel of the Lord is not the bearer of revelation,
but the personally represented revelation itself, so to say, the
spirit of revelation ; while all the rest, without prejudice to the
question of the existence of angels, in the view of the writer, are
here, as in so many Christian poems since, used as poetic methods
of representation.
3. Heaven.
The creation, as a consistent whole, is described by the seer in
the following expressions as the world: "the kingdoms of this
world," xi. 15; "the foundation of the world," xiii. 8, xvii 18.
Speaking of its various parts collectively, he designates it " all
things," iv. 11. In frequent descriptions of the same, according
to its principal divisions, there are at the bottom two different
conceptions, which to some extent remind us of Paul's dichotomy
and trichotomy of man, which stand side by side with each other
(comp. 1 Cor. vii. 34 ; 1 Thess. v. 23). According to the ancient
popular conception, all created things are divided into heaven and
earth, Gen. i 1. From this originates the apocalyptic idea of
earth and heaven fleeing before the face of Him who sits on the
throne, xx. 11 ; and the appearance of a new heaven and a new
earth, xxi. 1. It is not an essentially different idea, but only a
poetical modification, when the seer represents the angel as swearing
" by Him that liveth for ever, who created heaven and the things
that are therein, and the earth and the things that therein are,
and the sea and things which are therein," x. 6 ; also when he
writes, xxi. 1, " The first heaven and the first earth were passed
away, and there was no more sea;" and when he represents the
angel as demanding homage for Him who " made heaven, and
earth, and the sea, and the fountains of water," xiv. 7. With
these passages we may compare the subjects of the four first
trumpet and vial plagues, viii. 7-12, xvi. 2-9. On the other hand,
when the seer writes: "No man in heaven, nor in earth, neither
under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 43
thereon," v. 3, he expresses, even if his tripartite division flows
from Ex. xx. 4 (comp. Ewald, ut ante, p. 165), a later and more
learned conception, which divides the universe into heaven, earth,
and the lower world. Again, it is not an essentially different, but
the same idea poetically modified, when he says, v. 13 : " every
creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the
earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them," etc.
Far more seldom do the names of the various spheres of crea
tion serve our author to distinguish all sensible things in their
principal divisions, than to symbolize locally the different depart
ments of being. In this sense he generally makes only a two
fold division, heaven and earth ; but here and there he adds to
these two a third, not, however, under the name of the under
world, — we use the term only in its natural sense, — but under
that of the " abyss " or pit. According to this, all existence
appears -to the seer to be divided generally into heaven, or the
superearthly, divine, and ideal sphere of existence ; earth, or the
earthly, human, middle sphere ; and the abyss, or the subearthly
(infernal), diabolical, anti-ideal sphere: the earth is the theatre
and subject of the history, of the unfolding and development of
the struggle between heaven and hell, God and the devil, the
ideal and the anti-ideal. For the present we have to do with
heaven, the first or highest of these spheres.
By heaven with its sun and moon, vi. 12, and stars, viii. 13,
its "midst" or zenith, viii. 13, xiv. 6, xix. 17, and birds xix. 17,
under the heaven, the stars of which fall to the earth, and which
departs "as a scroll when it is rolled together," vi. 13, 14, is
unquestionably to be understood the heaven perceptible to the
senses; and with this signification it is often mentioned. But
more frequently, where the seer speaks of heaven poetically (comp.
Isa. xliv. 23, xlix. 13), not dogmatically (comp. 2 Cor. xii. 2 ;
Eph. iv. 10), — Ewald finds, p. 217, a distinct reference to the seven
heavens in x. 2-4, — he means heaven in the peculiar, tropical,
higher, and spiritual sense of the word, the one and indeed the
highest and chief region of all existence.
How does this heaven appear? It is the tabernacle or
dwelling, or, according to the Mosaic designation, the sanctuary
of God, xiii 6, xxi. 3, xv. 5 (comp. vii 15, xii. 12 ; comp. Ex.
xxvi 1-3, xxxiii. 7—9 et passim). It has a door which is opened,
and by which the seer being in the spirit enters, and becomes

44 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
acquainted with the things to be seen there, iv. 1. In it there
stands a throne, a semicircular divan (comp. iv. 6, vii. 1 7), upon
which God is seated, iv. 2 ; around this throne are twenty-four
thrones, upon which sit the twenty-four elders, iv. 4. From the
throne proceed lightnings, and thunderings, and voices, iv. 5, and
before it are seven lamps of fire, iv. 5, and also a sea of glass
like unto crystal, iv. 6. In the midst, before the throne, and
around the throne, are four living creatures, iv. 6. In the midst
of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst
of the elders, is a Lamb, v. 6, vii. 1 7, and around them John
heard the voice of many angels, v. 11. We read also that the
temple of God, iii. 12, vii. 15, xi. 19, xiv. 15, 17, xv. 5, 6, 8,
xvi. 1, 17, — comp. xi. 1, the temple of the tabernacle of the testi
mony, that is, the temple pertaining to and having within it the
Holy of Holies, — is in heaven, xv. 5. We hear more particularly
of the ark of testimony, xi. 19; of the altar of burnt-offerings, vi. 9,
viii. 3, 5, xiv. 18, xvi. 7, comp. xi. 1 ; and of an altar of incense,
distinguished from the other as " the golden altar," viii. 3, xix. 13.
Many expositors suppose that these altars are the same, corre
sponding completely neither to the altar of incense nor to the
altar of burnt-offering in the earthly temple. But we cannot
understand why the seer should speak of the same altar sometimes
with the adjective " golden" and sometimes without; and still less
why he should confound the two well-known altars in the earthly
sanctuary, when he intends by the altar only that which belongs to
the altar of burnt-offering, and by the golden altar what belongs to
the altar of incense (comp. Winer, s.v.). Most expositors under
stand Mount Sion, xiv. 1, upon which John saw the Lamb and
the 144,000, in a literal sense. But the passages vi. 14, xiii. 1,
1 1, xii. 1, 7, quoted by Diisterdieck, p. 46 2 ut ante, are inconclusive.
That the seer heard a voice from heaven, xiv. 2, does not compel
us to suppose an earthly locality when he deals so freely with the
heavenly topography ; and there is nothing in the contents of
ver. 3 which suits the hill of Sion. All that is said by expositors
in explanation presupposes an ideal region. The choice can
only be between De Wette's idea, according to which Mount Sion
is the earthly mountain of that name, not, however, in reality,
but in apocalyptic vision ; or, more correctly, and according to the
analogy of the holy city and the temple in chap, xi., the ideal
locality of the church of God on earth, and the conception

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 45
according to which we have to look for Mount Sion, analogous to
the New Jerusalem, in heaven. The striking parallel in Heb.
xii. 22 decides in favour of the second; the undoubted contrast
to the sea, xiii. 1, and to the earth, xiii. 11, prepares the mind
to expect a heavenly locality; and the harpers and singers of
ver. 2 certainly do not differ from the 144,000 who alone (comp.
ii. 17, xix. 12) could learn the new song; consequently the
144,000 are conceived of as in heaven, with which alone the
aorists " defiled," " redeemed," and " found," in vers. 4, 5 agree ;
so I decide for Mount Sion as a region in heaven. From this
heaven and from God John saw the New Jerusalem descend in
the final state, xxi. 2 (comp. ver. 10, iii. 12; comp. Heb. xi. 10, 16,
xii 22, 28, xiii. 14 ; Gal. iv. 26). Certainly, in view of all these
particulars, there is strong temptation to construct a topography
of heaven, as the Rabbis did for themselves on the basis of such
passages as Ex. xxv. 9, 40 ; Isa. ii. 2 ; Mic. iv. 1 ; Joel iii. 5 ;
Zech. i 8-10 : heaven the archetype of Jerusalem, the hill of Zion,
the city of the King, the sanctuary with all its parts. The fact
cannot be denied, that this rabbinical topography of heaven, every
thing that is holy, sublime, and beautiful on earth, a copy of
things in heaven, the embodiment of an idea, the representation
of an ideal, has been recognised and used by the seer. But when
we notice how, in ii. 7, he speaks of the tree of life in the paradise
of God, and, vii. 17, of the living fountains of waters, which
involve a wholly different representation than the usual one ;
how he places, viii. 3, the altar of incense before the throne ; and
how he, xvi. 1 7, hears a great voice out of the temple of heaven
from the throne, and combines the representation of a temple and a
royal city ; how he almost always, without any hint of a change of
place, gives those local representations which best suit the events
then transpiring ; how he says expressly that in the New Jerusalem
he saw no temple, xxi. 22 ; and, indeed, how, according to xxi. 9,
he will not have us by the New Jerusalem to understand any
thing local ; — when we observe these things, we should do him
decided injustice should we ascribe to him the doctrine that
heaven, archetypally, has the same local forms as the earthly seat
of the kingdom of God. Rather must we say, that as for the
vision itself, so also for its representation, John needed local images
of heaven, and in this sense he has made the most abundant and
at the same time the freest use of traditional material. But he

46 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
desires, for example, that we should understand the temple in
heaven as a concrete image of the sacred presence of God, the
throne as an image of the authority of God, Mount Zion as an
image of the exaltation of Christ and of the elevation of His
people above the world with its temptations ; in a word, he will
have us regard every locality of heaven as a symbol of the
idea shadowed forth by corresponding localities on earth. On
the other hand, he has never given us any right, but rather
endeavours, as far as possible, to guard us against ascribing to
him an actual knowledge of heaven as a substantial part of his
doctrine. As it is with the scenery of heaven, so it is with its inhabitants.
After the seer has beheld in heaven the throne of God and the
glory of Him who sits upon it, iv. 2, 3, he sees immediately around
the throne the twenty-four elders, then the seven burning lamps,
which are the seven Spirits of God, and lastly the four living
creatures. We shall speak of the seven Spirits of God in the
chapter on the Spirit. Here we are concerned to know what is
meant by the elders and the living creatures. Let us begin with the
latter. — " In the midst of the throne, and round about the throne,"
— the throne is represented as a half circle; one in the midst before
the open side, the other three around it, — John saw " four living
creatures full of eyes before and behind." The first was like a
lion, the second was like a calf, the third had a face as a man,
and the fourth was like a flying eagle. Each had six wings, and
they were full of eyes within, — that is, not merely on the surface
of the body, but also under the wings, — and they ceased not day
and night crying : " Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty,
who was, and is, and is to come," iv. 6-8. It is evident that in
these four living creatures the seer has combined the cherubim of
Ezek. i 5-14, x. 12-14, from which he has taken the name, the
fourfold faces, — only not united as in Ezekiel, — as well as the whole
body full of eyes, and the seraphim of Isa. vi., from which come
the six wings and the song of praise. If now we consider that
man, the eagle, the calf, and the lion are the heads of four classes
of the animated creation representing intelligent existence, birds,
tame and wild animals (comp. Diisterdieck, p. 228), there can be
no doubt that John intended by the four living creatures an ideal
representation of living beings in general. It is in striking
agreement with this, that when the plagues are descending upon

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 47
the animated creation, vi. 1, one of the four living creatures always
invites the seer to " come and see ;" "and that, xv. 7, one of them
hands to the seven angels the " golden vials full of the wrath of
God," which were to be poured upon the living creation. There
being four, represents the totality of created life. The six wings
which, Isa. vi., they use for covering their faces and their feet, and
for flying, indicate the reverence by which creatures, according to
their idea, are led not to venture to look up to the holy God,
the humility with which they cover themselves in the presence
of His glory, and the obedience they render to His commands ;
the eyes covering the whole body may be most simply referred to
the ever restless activity of organic life, or the vivacity of the
organic creation (comp. the eyes in v. 6) ; the praise of God
ceasing not day or night, is emblematic of the fact that He is,
according to the idea, acknowledged and honoured by His
creatures as their Lord (comp. Ps. ciii. 22). Should we conceive
of the living creatures as concrete realities, we should entirely
mistake the intention of the author ; we should rather think of
them as representing animated nature collectively in its idea., as,
indeed, is abundantly shown in the fact that on the arrival of
these blessed times in which the idea of the creation becomes a
visible reality, the living creatures disappear from the book. — Our
understanding the meaning of the twenty-four elders is dependent
upon a correct interpretation of the living creatures. Before
John perceived the latter, he saw around the throne twenty-four
thrones, upon which sat twenty-four elders clothed in white — that
is, shining garments, and wearing golden crowns, iv. 4 ; and as
often as the living creatures gave glory, and honour, and thanks
to Him who sat on the throne, the twenty-four elders fell down
before Him, and cast their crowns at His feet, and said : " Thou
art worthy, 0 Lord, to receive glory, and honour, and power ; for
Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure they are and
were created," iv. 9-11. Later on, one of the elders says to the
thrones : " Weep not," v. 5. When the Lamb had taken the book,
the twenty-four elders fell down with the living creatures before
Him, having every one of them harps and golden vials full of
odours, which are the prayers of saints, and they sung a new
song in His praise, v. 8-10. After the seventh angel had
sounded, " the twenty-four elders which sat before God on their
seats fell upon their faces and worshipped God," xi. 16, 17. In

48 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
like manner, after the fall of Babylon, " the four and twenty elders
and the four living creatures fell down and worshipped God that
sat on the throne, saying, Amen, Alleluia," xix. 4. In explanation
of the four and twenty elders, most expositors start from the
number twelve, and interpret the doubling of that number either
so as to represent the Old and New Testament church, more
definitely the patriarchs and the apostles, or so that they find in
them the representatives of the Christian church gathered from
Jews and Gentiles. Against the former of these two expositions
is the fact that on the gates of the New Jerusalem the names of
the twelve tribes, the names of the patriarchs, are written, and
on its foundations the names of the twelve apostles, xxi. 12,
14; but neither on the gates nor on the foundations do we
find the two associated. It is entirely foreign to the thoughts
of the seer to conceive of the two side by side with each other.
They are the same, but one as the type, the other the fulfilment.
The song of Moses and the Lamb, xv. 3, which is quoted in
favour of this interpretation, is neither a double song, nor is
it sung by Old and New Testament believers; it is one, and
ascends from the lips of conquerors in the Christian life.
Against the second view is the consideration that, with the
writer, believers from the Gentiles never, not even in chap, vii,
as will be shown in the section on Christendom, constitute a
second Israel by the side of believers from the seed of Abraham ;
there is only one Israel which continues itself in the Christian
church, into which the believing Gentiles are adopted (comp.
Hengstenberg, I. p. 269). Baur, p. 227, regards the elders as
Christian martyrs, according to Matt. xix. 28, Rev. iii. 21 ; but
the martyrs are often expressly mentioned, and, vii 13, are
distinguished from the elders in the most decided manner. We
notice also that in the millennial state the elders are as little
mentioned as the living creatures, we therefore do not regard the
former as concrete realities any more than the latter ; but as the
living creatures are a symbolical representation of the animated
creation of God in general according to its ideal, so are the elders
a symbolical representation of the people of God according to
their ideal, or, in other words, of redeemed humanity. They are
clothed in white raiment; but, as Hengstenberg shows, I. p. 271,
white in the Apocalypse is not simply white, but radiance, the
whiteness of the light or of snow, the colour of pure brilliance,

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 49
the symbolic adumbration of their glory, especially the glory
of manifesting or manifest holiness (comp. i 14, iii. 4, 5, 18,
vi. 2, vii. 9-14, xiv. 14, xix. 11, 14, xx. 11, xv. 6, xix. 8). The
elders are also holy, glorious ; they sit on thrones, and have
golden crowns on their heads ; thus they are kings, for on account
of their connection with thrones their crowns cannot be merely
garlands of victory, as in iii. 11, but kingly crowns, as in Matt.
xxvii. 29 ; John xix. 2, 5. They worship God, and cast their
crowns before His throne ; they have harps and golden vials full
of odours, and sing a new song to the Lamb ; they are also
priests to Him and to God. We shall find later on, in the
section on Christian life, that the holy, priestly kingdom of God
and Christ is peculiarly the seer's representation of the character
and dignity of Christians. That the representatives of this priestly
kingdom are twenty-four, is very simply explained from the priestly
classes or courses of Israel, 1 Chron. xxiv.. (comp. Luke i 8, 23),
probably in union with 1 Chron. xxv. When the seer permits
the elders to stand beside the conquerors in heaven until the mil
lennium, it is not without good reason. They represent the people
of God in their ideal completeness ; the victors in heaven are
only actual, individual members of the same. It tends only to
confirm our view, that, according to iii. 5, vii. 9, the victors also
are clothed with white garments ; that, according to iii 21, they are
received to sit with Christ on His throne ; and, according to vii. 15,
they are before the throne of God, and serve Him day and night
in His temple ; and in xiv. 2, 3, xv. 3, they are said to have
harps like the elders. In the millennium, or, more correctly, at
the beginning of the thousand years' reign, the elders disappear,
evidently because the church of God is then in reality what
before it had been only ideally as symbolized by the elders
(comp. xx. 4-6, xxii. 3-5). — As the elders and the living
creatures stand around the throne of God, so again the angels, of
which we have already spoken, stand around them. — Of the
victors in heaven, and of the saints in the great tribulation, we
shall find occasion to discourse in the section on the Christian
life. — But who are those to whom it is said, " Rejoice, ye heavens,
and ye that dwell in them," xii 12, and of whom is it said, " He
opened his mouth in blasphemy against God to blaspheme His
name, and His tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven " ?
xiii. 6. In the former of these two places the heavens and their
D

5 0 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
inhabitants stand in express contrast to the earth and the sea,
and these are undoubtedly realities of the earth, the sphere of the
struggle, the scene of coming events and historical developments;
the latter places the habitation of God and those who dwell
therein in still more striking antithesis with the earth and its
inhabitants as estranged from God, with the fallen world and
that which belongs to it.- We may therefore think of the in
habitants of heaven as consisting not only of the holy angels, and
the elders, representatives of the ideal church, and of Christians
who stand before the throne, but, with Hengstenberg, perhaps even
of Christians below, inasmuch as they are essentially separated from
the world; according to a few places, at least xii. 10 (comp. ver.
12), xviii. 20, it almost seems as if the seer considered Christians
even here as in one sense the ideal, as belonging to heaven, or as
heavenly inhabitants.
There remains for us to consider the heavenly state, and what
happens there. God is seated on His throne, iv. 2-6 ; the four
living creatures incessantly adore Him, iv. 8 ; the elders, without
ceasing, worship Him, iv. 9-11 ; and both celebrate the praises
of the Lamb, v. 9, 10 ; the angels also swell the song, v. 12 ; and
the whole creation brings its homage to God and the Lamb,
v. 13. On the contrary, Satan rages on the earth, xii. 13-15 ;
he deceives the whole world, xii. 9 ; he gives his power to the
beast, xiii. 2, who blasphemes God, xiii. 6, makes war against the
saints, and overcomes them ; and all the inhabitants of the earth
worship him, xiii. 7, 8. Men blaspheme God on account of His
plagues, xvi. 9. We see that it is in heaven as it should be on
earth. — But it is also in heaven as it will be on earth. From
heaven and for heaven Satan has already been cast down, xii. 9,
and he rages the more terribly on the earth until he is bound,
xx. 3, and cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, xx. 10. In
heaven it is already said : " Now is come salvation, and strength,
and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ," xii 10;
and on earth the judgments of God, whereby He will establish His
authority, are gradually unfolded (xi. 17, 18, xiv. 7, 8, 14-20,
xv. 3, 4, xvii. 1, xix. 6-9). In heaven there is the crystal
sea, iv. 6, xv. 2, an image of the righteousness of God which'
shall be fulfilled upon the earth. Heaven is generally regarded
as the region of being beyond time and space, the region of the
supersensuous, super-historical, eternal, absolute existence. Hence

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 51.
the writer, as we shall subsequently find, sees the travail of the
woman, the birth and taking away of the child, Michael's struggle
with and conquest over the dragon, — events which, for the earth
and history, have passed away, — as present in heaven ; and
therefore also all that is to happen, or must shortly come to
pass, as transpiring there. — Further, heaven is the sphere of
existence which limits and controls the visible reality. There
the book with seven seals is opened, vi. 1 ; the seven trumpets
are sounded, viii. 2-7 ; the vials are poured out, xvi. 1 ; the
temple of God is opened, and the ark of the testament is seen,
xi. 19; by His glory the temple is filled with smoke, so that, no
man can enter, xv. 5, 8 ; and after each event the judgments
of God descend upon the earth (comp. viii 5, xi. 19, xv. 5-8).
— Further, heaven is also the region of real being, in contrast
with that which is apparent ; thus John saw under the altar of
burnt-offering, vi. 9-11, the souls of those who were slain for the
word of God and the testimony they held ; the blood of the
sacrifices was poured at the foot of the earthly altar (comp. Lev.
iv. 7, v. 9) ; thus — for it is not of the spirits of the slain nor of
their place of sojourn that the seer speaks (comp. xx. 4) — the
entire representation is a dramatizing of the idea of Gen. iv. 1 0
(comp. Heb. xii. 24) ; Christians slain on earth are slain for God,
or are, in reality, a sacrifice, and their blood cries to Him for ven
geance. The representation in viii. 3-5 signifies that the prayers
of saints on earth, the sum of which is, " Come, Lord Jesus ! "
(comp. xxii. 1 7, 2 0), are valued in heaven as incense (comp. v. 8),
are acceptable to God and heard by Him, and, though powerless in
the eye of the world, are really efficacious (comp. ix. 13, 14, xiv. 18,
xvi. 7). — Again, heaven is the place for that which earth has lost,
as well as for all future ideals : the paradise of God, with the tree
of life, ii. 7 ; the living fountains of waters, vii. 1 7, once on earth,
are now in heaven. So it is with the hidden manna, ii. 1 7. We
may understand the term " hidden " simply of existence in heaven,
in distinction from the common visible reality, or as a change of
the Jewish legend of the concealment of the ark of the covenant
and its sacred contents by Jeremiah or Isaiah, until the times of
the Messiah, into a representation of the removal of the manna
to heaven. In the latter case the ark of the covenant also would
probably be included here, though still more probably both it
and the temple and the altars owe their place in heaven to the

52 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
above-mentioned use of Ex. xxv. 9, 40, and the rabbinical theory
of an original pattern, founded on these passages. On the other
hand, the New Jerusalem, iii. 12, which one day is to descend
from heaven, xxi. 2, is even now there, and generally all that
millennial times are to reveal ; for example, the exaltation and
honour of Christ's disciples is considered as being already realized
there. — If, now, we take the heavenly topography of the book in
its true meaning, namely, that heaven is the region of the original
types of all that is beautiful, and great, and holy upon earth, the
issue shortly conceived is this, that the apocalyptic doctrine of
heaven is, that it is in the widest sense the idea or the ideal
world — not, indeed, as conceived of in distinction from the real
world, but as real though invisible or hidden, in contrast to the
actual or visible world of sin and sorrow, in distinction from the real
but visible world of perfection, the new heavens and the new earth.
At this point, as being the most convenient, we may consider
the use made in this book of the word " new!' Christ promises
to those who overcome that He will give to them " a white stone,
and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth
save he that receiveth it," ii. 1 7 ; that He will write upon him
the name of His God, and the name of the city of His God, New
Jerusalem, which comes down from heaven from His God, and
to write upon him His new name, iii. 12. The twenty-four
elders sing a " new song," v. 9. John heard a " new song "
before the throne, xiv. 3 ; he saw a " new heaven and a new
earth," xxi. 1 ; and " the New Jerusalem coming down from God
out of heaven," xxi. 2. God says to the seer, " Behold, I make
all things new," xxi. 5. The Old Testament also has this ex
pression (comp. Isa. xlii. 9, 10, xliii. 18, 19 ; Ps. xxxiii. 3,xl. 3,
xcvi. 1, xcviii. 1). According to xxi 1, 4, 5, the new contrasts with
the former; but the former signifies the present evil visible
reality, with all that belongs to it ; the new therefore means the
future perfect visible reality and all that belongs to it, which
is even now in heaven, only hidden, together with everything
heavenly or ideal. 4. The Devil.
The Apocalypse names the personal principle of evil, the Devil,
ii. 10, xii. 9, 12, xx. 2, 10 ; Satan, ii. 9, 13, 24, iii. 9, xii. 9,

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 53
xx. 2, 7; the Serpent, xii 14, 15; the Old (ap^aio?) Serpent,
Xii. 9, xx. 2; the Dragon, xii. 4, 7, xiii. 16, 17; the great
'Dragon, xii 9 ; the great red (irvpfios!) Dragon, xii. 3.
The form of the vision recorded in xii. 7-9 was, according to
Diisterdieck, moulded in the mind of the seer by his recollection
of the biblically-revealed fact of the overthrow of the apostate
angels : " Certainly," he says, " this fact in itself, and as such, has
nothing to do with the connection before us. The special repre
sentation to which he gives expression here, clothes itself in his
mind in the same form, but does not concern itself with doctrinal
definition, only with a deeply-penetrating intuition of the wrath
of the arch-fiend against the faithful." In Weiss, bibl. Theol. p.
619, we read : " He, the devil, was, according to xii. 9, one of the
heavenly inhabitants ; and when, as xii. 4 says, ' his tail drew the
third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth,'
it can only mean that he led away from God part of the angels,
which in i 20 are symbolized by stars, so that now they are de
scribed as his angels," xii. 9. We shall afterward show that the
paragraph in question does concern itself with doctrinal definition,
and that the doctrine is something entirely different from the pro
position that Satan was originally one of the heavenly inhabitants.
It is true, however, that the seer would not have chosen the form
of xii. 7—9 (comp. xii. 4) for the fact represented, nor would it
have presented itself to him in this form, if, on the one side, the
standing of Satan before God, in the Old Testament, and on the
other the fall and expulsion, as well as the leading away of part of
the angels, according to Jewish representations, had not lain in his
memory. Little as xii. 4 and 7-9 are supposed to teach or even
to express the doctrine, it is still certain that in them as well as
in ix. 1 it is witnessed that the seer received it : originally, the
devil belonged to the inhabitants of heaven, but fell, and in his
fall carried with him a part of the angels. Certainly this does
not stand in the foreground of his Satanology ; not only accord
ing to individual predicates, such as " seat " (dpovos), " might,"
"power," ii: 13, xiii. 2, "wrath," "worship," xiii. 15, "syna
gogue," ii. 9, iii. 9, and to his relation to Antichrist, which
runs remarkably parallel with that of God to Christ, but,
according to the entire dualistic conception of the book, Satan
has far less of the fallen angel and angelic prince than of the
Antitheos.

54 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
The consideration of the characteristics and activities of the
Evil Principle may be best carried on in connection with the
various symbols and names under which the same appears in our
book. The devil is called the Old primeval Serpent, or, more
briefly, the Serpent, — a name which refers us to Gen. iii, and
which corresponds to the rabbinical '^iD'ipn wnm or ii^'ann, accord
ing to the manifestation which he has given of himself in the
history of the fall as the tempter of man. This aspect of his
character is often emphatically brought forward : " The great
dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan,
which deceived the whole world," xii. 9. The angel " cast him
into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon
him, that he should deceive the nations no more, until the thou
sand years should be fulfilled," xx. 3. " He shall go out to
deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth,"
xx. 8. " The devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of
fire and brimstone," xx. 10. How and to what the devil tempts
men we shall learn later on, especially in the sections on the
earth and its inhabitants, the churches, and the false prophet.
Another principal feature of the devil is brought before us by
the name "great red dragon" LXX. Isa. xxvii. 1, Ezek. xxix. 3,
and often appears as the equivalent of the leviathan, or as the
image of a conquering world-power. When we read in the
Apocalypse : " There appeared another wonder in heaven ; and
behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns,
and seven, crowns upon his heads," xii. 3, the reference to the
beast with seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten
crowns, xiii. 1, and to the " scarlet-coloured beast full of names
of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns," xvii. 3, 7-9, is
anmistakeable. , This beast, as we shall afterwards see, signifies
the Roman Empire. When the seer clothes the dragon with the
emblems of that power, he gives us to understand that the devil
is the principle of all world-power, the real world-ruler. In
what way the dragon works will come under notice in the sec
tions on " the earth and its inhabitants," "the churches," and " the
beast." For the present we have only to notice that he is called
" great " on account of his power, that he is said to be red — fire-
red (ttv/5/30?) ; — this epithet may possibly refer to desolation and
destruction (comp. ix. 17, 18), but more probably to rage and
murder (comp. vi 4, xii. 4, 12, 13, 17, xiii. 7, 11, 18, according

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 55
to the LXX. 2 Kings iii 22),— in order, as also by the drawing
away of a third part of the stars of heaven, xii. 4 (comp. Dan.
viii. 10), to characterize him according to his raging and mur
derous or persecuting disposition.
Amongst those above mentioned, the names Devil and Satan,
preceded by the words " called," xii. 9, " which is," xx. 2, are
clearly distinguished as proper names. To distinguish these,
again, and to find in Satan the antagonistic, and in the Devil the
slanderous, as Ziillig (Johannes des Gott besprachten apokalypt.
Geschichte), Hengstenberg, and Ewald do, is forbidden by the com
parison of ii.,9, xiii. 3, 9, with ii. 10, and xx. 7 with xx. 10.
The term " devil " is the same from the Greek as " Satan " is from
the Hebrew. The above places show, however, that by these
proper names of the evil principle the seer wished sometimes to
present one particular feature, — namely, the blasphemer, calumni
ator, and instigator. But this feature, as the passages quoted also
show, is very closely concerned with temptation, and not less so
with accusation. When cast out of heaven, a loud voice is heard
saying, " The accuser of the brethren is cast down, which accused
them before God day and night," xii. 10. At the foundation of
this there is doubtless the representation of Job i 6-11, ii. 1-5,
Zech. iii 1, 2, in its rabbinical form : — Satan, KaTrjyoop, ille semper
stat tanquam delator coram rege Israelis ; Michael, avvrjycop, the
agent of the pious (Diisterdieck). Instead of objecting to this
representation borrowed from the Old Testament, or, in its concrete
form, from the Jewish theology, and which appears to us, from
what immediately follows, very harmless, we rather draw from it
the doctrine that, until the overthrow of the devil through Christ's
saving work, even the brethren in heaven, true members of Christ's
church, though in a manner different from that of the inhabitants
of the earth, were before God in a state continually open to accu
sation, — in other words, they were in the state of the unatoned,
and as such chargeable with sin.
The 'last -mentioned work of Satan naturally leads us to a
consideration of his position in heaven. After the taking away
of the child to God and to His throne, there occur? a conflict
in heaven. " Michael and his angels fought against the dragon ;
and the dragon fought, and his angels, and prevailed not ; neither
was their place found any more in heaven. And the great
dragon was cast out, and his angels were cast out with him,"

56 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
xii 7-9. In these words, as in vers. 10-12, many expositors
find that the devil and his angels were first driven out after
Christ's birth or ascension, and that until then he had a place
or standing in heaven (comp., for example, Baur, p. 228 ; Keim,
III. pp. 12, 14). Without doubt, such expositors have the sound
of words in their favour ; but it is equally certain that by such
a representation of Satan's presence in heaven the seer would
have placed himself in hopeless contradiction to all his other
representations of the same place : — or has he really thought of
the devil as an inhabitant of heaven before Christ ? (comp. xii. 12,
xiii. 6). The enigma may be solved in the following manner:
in the passage quoted, he desires in the form of a vision to re
present the significance of Christ's saving work, or the complete
subjugation of the evil principle in the ideal reality, the
heaven of his doctrine. For this representation there offered
itself, first, the Jewish idea of the struggle between Michael
and the devil (comp. Dan. x. 13, 21, xii. 1; Jude 9); then
the kindred representation of the fall of Satan from heaven,
Luke x. 1 8 ; and finally, as an image of the meaning of this
overthrow, Job's picture of the devil as an accuser of the pious
before God, ii. 1 ; Zech. iii. That the heaven from which the devil
was expelled at the exaltation of Christ was the sphere of power,
but not the ideal reality, and that the accuser of the brethren
before God is not his, but the Old Testament devil, the seer has
not noticed, and thus the overthrow of Satan in the ideal reahty
has come to have the false appearance of an expulsion from
it. We may therefore with justice ascribe to the seer, at this
point, incongruity in the choice of the means of presenting an
apocalyptic vision-scene ; but we may not burden him with the
impossible representation of a pre-Christian residence of the evil
principle in heaven.
In xii. 7-9, in addition to the dragon, there are also his angels.
There can be no doubt they are beings who in other parts of the
book are called demons (Saipovia), ix. 20 (comp. LXX. Deut.
xxxii 17; 1 Cor. x. 20 ; Rev. xvi. 14, xviii 2), and unclean
spirits, xvi. 13, 14, xviii. 2. The seer conceives of the devil as
surrounded by fallen angels (comp. xii. 4), who execute his com
mands, as holy angels discharge commissions received from God.
They are called demons on account of their supernatural character,
as in xvi. 13, 14 it is said, "I saw three unclean spirits like

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 57
frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and but of the mouth
of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For
they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth."
The seer seems also to regard the devil himself as a demon, but
the chief of all. The unclean spirits in the passage just quoted are
distinguished from the demons, and probably as potencies or powers
of those beings, in a similar manner as we shall find it in the rela
tion of the Spirit to God and to Christ. On the other hand, when
he writes, xviii 2 : " Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is
become the habitation of demons, and the hold of every foul spirit,"
unclean spirits and demons are with him identical, or demons are
a particular class of unclean spirits. According to this passage,
as already with the LXX. Isa. xiii. 21, xxxiv. 14, Bar. iv. 35,
and the synoptical Gospels, their dwelling and operations are
preferably in waste, desolate regions and places ; probably also in
idolatrous images, ix. 20. Their activity consists in helping the
devil in his struggle against God and His kingdom, and especially
in tempting men to worship them as idols, instead of the true
God, ix. 2 0 ; for while the images of idols are with our author
the work of men's hands, the worship of them has always a
demoniacal background (comp. xiii. 15). They are in possession
of powers for carrying on this and other temptations (comp.
xvi. 13, 14), and the seer also gives them credit for working real
wonders (frqpuela), xvi. 13, 14 (comp. Matt. xxiv. 24). Why
the unclean spirits are said here to go forth as frogs, whether in
allusion to Ex. viii. 1-5, or more probably with reference to the
signification of frogs and toads, in magic, cannot with certainty
be decided. We have spoken of the fallen angels, who have to
execute the judgments of God. in the section on angels.
5. The Abyss.
The seer beheld a star fall from heaven unto the earth, and to
him was given the key of the abyss (a/Swro-o?) or the bottomless pit.
He opened it, and " there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke
of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened,"
ix. 1, 2. According to ix. 11, the locusts which issued from the
smoke had over them as king the angel of the bottomless pit,
whose name is " in the: Hebrew tongue Abaddon, but in the Greek
tongue hath his name Apollyon." " The beast that ascendeth out

58 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
of the bottomless pit " appears in xi. 7. It is said of him, " he shall
ascend out of the bottomless pit," xvii. 8. An angel comes down
from heaven having the key of the bottomless pit, and he casts the
dragon into it, and shuts him up, and sets a seal upon him, xx. 1-3.
" The lake (\Lp,vq) which burneth with fire and brimstone " is a
designation which occurs not less frequently ; and into it are cast
the beast and the false prophet, xix. 20, the devil, xx. 10, and those
whose names are not found written in the book of life, xx. 15.
Those who worship the beast and his image " shall be tormented
with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in
the presence of the Lamb : and the smoke of their torment ascendeth
up for ever and ever," xiv. 9—11. "The fearful and unbelieving
have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brim
stone," xxi. 8 (comp. xix. 3, ix. 17). All these expressions are
based upon rabbinical representations, originating from such Old
Testament statements as Ps. lxxi. 20, cvii 26, Isa. xiv. 15
(comp. Isa. v. 14, xxx. 33), according to which there is under the
earth an abyss or bottomless pit, with a lake or sea in which
brimstone and fire seethe together. From this abyss goes a
channel with a mouth, after the manner of a cistern, a narrow
passage as from a scarcely visible spring, to the surface of the
earth. This pit, like an ordinary cistern, can be opened and
closed, or sealed. From the mouth, when opened, the smoke,
which continually rises from the fire and brimstone, and fills the
abyss, ascends, after the example of Gen. xix. 28, to the surface.
But when the seer expressly says, " This — the lake of fire — is
the second death," xx. 14, and " the lake which burneth with fire
and brimstone : which is the second death," xxi. 8, he shows his
relation to the rabbinical topography of the abyss not less clearly
than in its place his familiar knowledge of heaven may be traced
to the same source.
As an inhabitant of the abyss, one expects first of all to find
the devil; and Diisterdieck, p. 319, regards it simply as the
present abode (comp. on the contrary, xx. 10) of the devil
and his angels; while Weiss, bibl. Theol. pp. 619, 620, note,
after xii. 9, 12 on the one hand, and ix. 1, 2, xi. 7, xvii. 8,
xx. 1-3 on the other, supposes a twofold view, according to one
side of which, Satan, cast upon the earth, has power there for
a season ; but, according to the other, his proper seat is the
abyss, with temporary power to work from it on the earth. But

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 59
manifestly, according to John, the devil is thrown into the abyss,
xx. 3, after he has hitherto been cast down to the earth only,
and has been raging there, xii. 12. He does not appear at all as
the leader of the infernal plagues ; and the ascent of the beast
from the abyss only shows that the devil is operative there. Cer
tainly, according to his nature, he belongs to the abyss, and it is
his true home ;- but as Christ during His sojourn on earth was at
home only in heaven, though He had not His residence there, so
the devil abides until the end not in his own place, but on the
earth among men ; indeed, we may say, that according to the
doctrine of the Apocalypse the whole course of the history turns
upon the fact that he is not where he belongs, but at length must
be banished thither. But he is, as we may sum up the sense of
the Apocalypse, from the beginning of human history until its
close, active on earth ; and thus the various productions of hell —
all the supernatural, or rather the unnatural, horrible, and destruc
tive appearances — come from the abyss : the locusts which come
from the smoke of the opened pit, and torment men for five
months, ix. 1—7 ; " the horsemen with their breastplates of fire,
and of jacinth and brimstone ; " the horses with heads of lions,
out of whose mouths proceed " fire, and smoke, and brimstone,"
ix. 13-18, all point to an origin from the abyss. Thence ascends
the beast which was and is not, xi. 7, xvii. 8, 11 ; and as Christ
since His departure to heaven still lives and will reappear, so
Antichrist after his banishment to the abyss still lives and will
come some day to the earth, and then go into destruction.
The abyss in its signification is a perfect antithesis to heaven, i
The latter is an invisible but real ideal world, which one day with I
the new heaven and earth, and the New Jerusalem, will become!
a visible reality. So also the former is the invisible but realj
world of the anti-ideal and the ungodly, which also will become-
a visible (comp. " in the presence of the holy angels and in the
presence of the Lamb," xiv. 10) reality in the lake of fire and
brimstone, with its torment and its smoke which ascends for ever
and ever ; just as the New Jerusalem is now in heaven, so the
lake of fire and brimstone is now in the abyss. Heaven, accord
ing to the statements of the seer, may be expressed in one word —
life, eternal life, relatively — salvation ; so he says that the angel
of the bottomless pit hath his name in the Hebrew tongue
Abaddon, — which in Job xxvi. 6, xxviii 22, is translated by the

60 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
LXX. avcoXeia, the region or kingdom of destruction, described by '
the Rabbis as the lowest sphere of the under-world, — but in the
Greek Apollyon, ix. 11. He also says of the beast, that he goeth
into perdition, xvii. 8, 11, and that with the false prophet he is
cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone, xix. 20 ; and
that being cast into this lake is the second death, xx. 14, 21.
Death and the kingdom of the dead, nearly as they are con
nected with the subject just considered, we must, according to the
idea of the book, leave to the next chapter.
6. The Earth and its Inhabitants.
The word " earth," like the word " heaven," often occurs in the
Apocalypse in its proper sense ; sometimes in the wider significa
tion, which embraces the general surface of the earth, as in vii. 1,
vi. 4, 8, 1 3 ; at other times in the narrower one, of land in dis
tinction from water, vii. 2, x. 6, xii. 12, xvi. 2 (comp. ver. 3) ; and
again in the still narrower meaning of land in distinction from
water, as well as from what grows upon it, vii 1-3, viii. 7 (comp.
x. 6). Instead of an enumeration of individual parts, the surface
of the earth is described as " the whole earth," v. 6, xiii. 3, or
" the whole world " (ol/covfievri, orbis terrarum, the whole known
world, the Roman Empire and what belongs to it), iii. 10, xvi. 14.
Still these expressions have a meaning corresponding to our
" world ; " " all the world " — the population of the world, or
mankind ; " all the world " has this meaning, indeed, continually
(comp. v. 6, xiii. 3), and " the whole world " is used in the same
sense at least in xii. 9. The seer very often calls its individual
members " men," ix. 2 0, xxi. 3 ; and not much less frequently,
after the manner of the Old Testament, they are " those who dwell
upon the earth," iii. 10, vi. 10, viii 13, xi. 10, xiii. 8, 12, 14, xiv. 6,
xvii. 2, 8 (comp. Jer. x. 1 8 ; Ps. xxxiii. 8 ; Isa. xviii. 3). They
are also collectively represented by an enumeration of the various
sorts of men ; at one time they are grouped according to their
national varieties, — " tribe (clan or horde), and tongue, and people
(Xaot), and nation " (eOvv, the non-Jewish peoples, the Gentile
nations), v. 9, vii. 9, x. 11, xi. 9, xiii. 7, xiv. 6, xvii. 15, — the
fourfold signature for the whole earth. At other times they are
described by varieties in the relations of life — " the kings of the
earth, and the great men (the bearers of honours, courtiers, and

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 61
the like), and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty
men (warriors, comp. 1 Kings xi. 28 ; 1 Sam. xxxi. 12), and every
bondman and every freeman," vi 15. "The small and great,
rich and poor, free and bond," xiii. 16 (comp. xix. 18).
The anthropological wealth of the Apocalypse is small. When
the two witnesses are slain by the beast, their bodies (¦n-T&p.a) lie
on the street, xi. 8, 9. But " after three days and a half the
spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon
their feet," xi. 11. The false prophet gave life (irvevpa) to the
image of the beast, that it should speak, xiii. 15. An angel
called the fowls of heaven together that they might eat the flesh
(a-dp/cas) of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of
mighty men, and the flesh of horses and of them that sit on them,
and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great,
xix. 18 ; and all the fowls were filled with their flesh, xix. 21.
The ten kings and the beast will hate the whore, Babylon, and
will make her desolate and naked, and will eat her flesh, and
burn her with fire, xvii. 16. At the sounding of the second
trumpet the third part of the creatures in the sea which had life
(i/rv%a?) died, viii. 9. At the pouring out of the second vial the
sea became as the blood of a dead man, and every living soul
died in the sea, xvi. 3. At the fall of Babylon the merchants of
the earth shall weep and mourn over her, that no man buyeth any
more, horses, and chariots, and slaves (bodies, acop,dTcov), and souls
of men, xviii 13. The brethren of the heavenly state have not
loved their lives — souls — unto the death, xii. 11. With the fall
of Babylon " the fruits that thy soul lusted after are departed,"
xviii. 14. After the opening of the fifth seal John saw " under
the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God,
and for the testimony which they held," vi. 9. At the coming,
of Christ he " saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the
witness of Jesus," etc., and they were living ; but the rest of the
dead were not yet living, xx. 4, 5. According to ii. 23, all the
churches should know that Christ is " He who searches the reins
and hearts," ii. 23. God put it into the hearts of the ten kings
to fulfil the will of the beast, xvii. 17. The whore says "in her
heart, I sit as a queen," xviii. 7. Who hath understanding (vovv)
is to count the number of the beast, xiii. 1 8. " Here is the mind
(vovs) which hath wisdom," xvii. 9. — We see that men have flesh
in common with animals, xix. 18, 21 which at death becomes

62 THE doctrine of the apocalypse.
corpse or carcase (irTtapa), xi. 8, 9 (also trapices in the plural,
xvii. 16, xix. 18, 21). But in distinction from animals man is a
body or corpus, a person or personality, xviii. 13. How ? While
in animals there is a living soul, xvi. 3, viii. 9, there is in man a
living spirit from God, xi. 11, xiii. 15. The soul is therefore, first,
the principle of the animal life; the spirit is the principle of
the human, super-animal life as it manifests itself, for example,
through the power of speech, xiii. 15. Certainly in xii. 11 the
soul expresses only the sentient life principle, or life in man.
In xviii. 1 3, " souls of men," in the sense of living men, the
significant Hebrew expression for slaves (comp. Ezek. xxvii. 13 ;
1 Chron. v. 21), as an epexegesis of bodies, the significant Greek
designation of slaves, may, however, possibly be also the "immortal "
souls as intensive of the " personal " bodies. In one of the re
maining passages, xviii. 14, the " soul " means the principle of the
sentient perceiving life, the life susceptible to pleasure and pain, to
aversion and desire. Finally, in vi. 9, xx. 4, the soul is used in
contrast with the flesh, which perishes in death, and is the prin
ciple of the super-fleshly life in man, which is imperishable and
does not pass away in death, but, according to its condition, enters
into the death state of the grave until the general resurrection,
or into heaven until the first resurrection. The heart once
describes, in contrast with that which is visible, ii. 23, the inner
sphere, xviii. 7, as it were the region of the emotions, desires,
resolutions, and intentions, xvii. 17. The understanding is the
intellectual sense by which men acquire wisdom, xvii. 9, and
which enables them to solve difficulties ; for example, the enigmas
of prophetical representations, xiii. 8.
By the words earth, xii. 9, 13, earth and sea, xii. 12, earth and
heaven, xx. 11, the first heaven and the first earth, and the sea,
xxi. 1, the seer also describes the sphere of existence lying be
tween the ideal and the anti-ideal — this world ; and the whole
earth, xiii. 3, the whole inhabited earth, xii. 9, men, for example,
xvi. 9, the inhabitants of the earth, iii. 10, designate those belong
ing to this sphere as its occupants collectively and individually —
the " world " in the personal sense of the term. This middle sphere
of existence, the visible reality, is in its entirety created by God,
iv. 11, x. 6 ; and all things were created for His good pleasure,
iv. 11, and therefore originally without sin, and without suffering
and death. But by reference to Gen. i, to the tree of life in the

more remote presuppositions. 63
midst of the paradise of God, ii. 7 (comp. xxii. 2), to the living
fountains of waters, vii 1 7 (comp. xxii. 1), to the Old Serpent,
xii. 9, etc., we learn that by the influence of Satan through his
temptations, xii. 9, man, and with him the whole middle sphere of
being, has been changed and brought into its present state. Every
where in this book where the above quoted expressions have a
religious' rather than their proper natural sense, we have in them
to think of the visible reality and that which belongs to it, not in
its original state, but in that subjectively and objectively altered
condition to which it has been brought by the fall.
In what, more closely considered, does this consist ? Accord
ing to its subjective side, described generally, in the injustice of
men, xxii. 11. Its individual features are " unrighteous deeds,"
xviii. 5, " sins," i. 5, xviii. 5 ; — and according to the latter passage,
ver. 4, a man may be a partaker of the sins of others — " works "
in an evil sense, xviii. 6, and these again are variously particu
larized ; thus it is said, ix. 20, 21, "the rest of the men which
were not killed by these plagues yet repented not of the works of
their hands," — that is, idolatrous images (comp. Deut. iv. 28 ; Ps.
cxxxv. 15-18 ; Isa. ii. 20, xvii. 8), — that they should not worship
devils, and idols of gold and silver and brass, and of stone, and of
wood, which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk (comp. Ps. cxv.
4-8 ; Dan. v. 23 et passim); "neither repented they of their
murders, nor of their sorceries (mingling of poisons), nor of their
fornications, nor of their thefts." — God says that " the fearful and
the unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whore
mongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have
their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone,"
xxi. 8. Into the New Jerusalem there shall not enter "anything
that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination or maketh
a lie," xxi. 27. It is written, "without are dogs" (comp. Prov.
xxvi. 1 1 ; Matt. vii. 6 ; Phil. iii. 2 ; Deut. xxiii. 1 8), " and sor
cerers, and whoremongers, and idolaters, and whatsoever loveth
and maketh a lie," xxii. 15. We see from the first of these
passages that sins against the frequently mentioned command
ments of God, for example in xii. 17, xiv. 12, xxii. 14, are in the
view of our author prominent features of the world : as breaches
of the first table, various forms of idolatry ; and as breaches of the
second, murder, whoredom, sorcery, and theft. The other pas
sages show us that he was disposed to distinguish in the nature

64 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
of the world the inward and the outward, or thought and deed,
and to conceive of the former as falsehood, and the latter as
abomination, xxi. 27; or of the former as the love of falsehood,
and of the latter as its practice, xxii. 15 (comp. xxi. 8). Accord
ing to the position of " lying " in xxi. 8, 21, 27, after idol-worship,
and its being coupled with the universal expressions occurring
there, we may indeed perceive that falsehood is the general
counterpart of true religion, or of truth in theory and practice
(comp. xiv. 5), inwardly and outwardly ; it serves, however, to
describe only the first. As for our author, the devil is a deceiver
and a murderer, or persecutor, though in several places (comp.
xii. 9, xx. 2, 3) the persecutor is conceived of in the deceiver ; so
he considers wickedness and sin as lying and abomination, or as
the opposite of truth and holiness; still with him the inward
contains the outward, the disposition involves the action, and
falsehood is abomination in itself.
The image by which the Apocalypse most commonly represents
sin is that of uncleanness in the Levitical sense of the word.
" Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled'
their garments," iii. 4 (a statement with which we may compare
what is said, vii. 14, of the white garments washed in the blood
of the Lamb). " These are they which were not denied with
women," xiv. 14. The filthy continue their uncleanness, but on
the contrary the holy remain pure, xxii. 11. The dogs are with
out, xxii. 15. Into the New Jerusalem there shall in "nowise
enter anything that defileth," xxi. 27. Essentially the same
image meets us in " the abominable," xxi. 8, in that which
"worketh abomination," xxi 27, and when, xxii. 3, it is said,
after Zech. xiv. 11, " there shall be no more curse." — Very closely
associated with the image of uncleanness in its various forms is
that of whoredom, as appears from " the filthiness of her " —
Babylon's — " fornications," xvii. 4. Still, the fornication of Jeze
bel, ii. 2 1, adultery with her, ii. 22, the fornication of Babylon, and
the leading away of kings, cities, and nations by her, xiv. 18,
xvii. 2, 4, xviii. 3, 9, xix. 2, must, after the manner of the Old
Testament, be regarded as descriptive of sin, as apostasy from
God, and unfaithfulness to Him. It is also in rather close con
nection with this image of impurity that it is said of the Laodiceans,
iii. 1 7, " Thou sayest I am rich, and increased with goods, and
have need of nothing ; and knowest not that thou art wretched,

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 65
and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked." Their sin is
represented as wretchedness, the pitiful condition of poverty, blind
ness, and nakedness (comp. ii. 18). Sin is represented under the
figure of nakedness or shame also in xvi. 15, "Blessed is he
that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and
they see his shame." To the image of wretchedness is related
that of death, or the state of death, as it meets us in the letter to
the church at Sardis, iii. 1, 2, " Thou hast a name that thou
livest, and art dead : be watchful, and strengthen the things which
remain, that are ready to die." — Another principal image, though
not occurring so often, is that of bondage. Apart from i. 5, which,
according to one reading, says of Christ that He hath delivered us
(Xva-avri) from our sins, He is often praised as having redeemed
us with His own blood, v. 9. According to the ancient repre
sentation of the relation of subjects as one of servitude, the doc
trine of the book respecting Satan and his kingdom leads to the
same image of sin. The Egyptian bondage, which in many places
lies unmistakeably at the bottom of the figure, shows how the
author came to think of sin in this aspect.
How the author has regarded the actual state of the world on
its objective side, the two passages, xxi. 3, 4, and xxii. 1-5, though
e contrario, very fully show us. In each of these places two pro
minent features present themselves : in the first, principally, and
in more literal language, the habitation of God with men ; in the
second, subordinately, and more in symbol, the throne of God :
in the first, consequently and negatively, " God will wipe away all
tears, etc., for the former things are passed away ; " in the second,
principally and positively, " a pure river of water of life." The
first thing which will pass away in the final consummation, is
the present objective state of the world ; and its main features are,
first, that God does not dwell with men — His throne is not in
their midst ; He has withdrawn from them, and they are under
His displeasure (comp. above on God) : the second is, that the
water of life and the tree of life are absent ; tears, death, sorrow,
crying, and pain are prevalent, and the trials of the present
find their climax in the grave. Evidently these two chief
features in the objective state of the present world are not treated
in an abstract manner, nor according to their ordinary appear
ance, but in the concrete, and in that order in which the last
times will bring them. In the descriptions of the plagues there
E

66 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
will meet us the climax of the objective state of the world, corre
sponding to the climax of the subjective state.
This state, entering with the fall and the loss of paradise, has
prevailed not only continuously (comp. xii 1-6), but universally.
According to xii. 9, the devil has deceived the whole world ; and
when the author, in Christian times, often speaks of mankind in
contrast with God and the people of God and His kingdom or
heaven, simply as the earth, the whole earth, the whole world,
xii. 9, xiii 3 (see also i. 5, 7, v. 10, vi. 15 ; comp. Ps. ii. 2), and
of the ungodly simply as men, ix. 20, xvi. 8-11, or as "inhabit
ants of the earth," vi. 10, viii. 13, xi. 10-12, xiii. 8, 12, 14,
xiv. 6, xvii. 2, 8, and since men in general, mankind in the gross,
appeared to him to be ungodly, — we may certainly, without hesita
tion, apply the same principle to pre-Christian mankind.
But what the writer says of the condition of pre-Christian
humanity generally, cannot be understood of all men without excep
tion. Can he have reckoned among the inhabitants of the earth
in this sense* — we take these only as types — a Moses, whose
song the victors sing, xv. 3 ; the prophets, the servants of God to
whom He has communicated the joyful message of His merciful
purposes, x. 7 ; the children of Israel, eomp. vii. 4, xxi. 12; the
worshippers in the temple, xi. 1 ; or the citizens of the Holy City,
xi. 2 ? No ; for the same distinction which now exists between
. the saints and the " inhabitants of the earth " existed from the
beginning ; Christendom and Christianity on the one hand,
heathendom and heathenism on the other, as now in mutual
opposition, and coming into more direct conflict, are only the
consummation of the antagonism running through all history
— derived by Baur from a view of the world analogous to
the Manichaean dualism (ut ante, p. 229) — between the huge
multitude of devil-tempted men, the inhabitants of the earth,
and the servants of God. This antagonism appears to the
seer in the concrete, in the great world-empires as Daniel de
scribed them, and as they formed in his conceptions a series of
Satanocracies in opposition to that the aim of which was gradually
developed in the Theocracy among the people of Israel. This
view meets us in the most striking manner in chap, xii, where
a woman appears clothed with the sun, and having the moon
under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars : and,
being with child, travails in birth, — an evident symbol of the

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 67
Old Testament church ; and a great red dragon, with seven heads
and ten horns, and upon his head seven crowns, who draws away
a third part of the stars of heaven, and casts them to the earth,
and stands before the woman ready to devour her child as soon as
it is born. The dragon may be differently interpreted ; but in any
case it is clear how for the seer the antagonism between the king
doms of the world and the kingdom of God runs through the
whole, and is the primary moving power of everything, as well as
the true meaning of the history.
But does the seer class the heathen world in pre-Christian
times with the kingdom of the devil, and the Jewish people with the
kingdom of God, in a merely outward and mechanieal manner ?
After all the kings of the earth and their armies have been
destroyed, xix. 19-21, he represents the nations from the four
corners of the earth as deceived by Satan at the close of the
millennial reign, and gathering together for battle against the
saints, xx. 6-9 ; from which it follows that by " the world " and
" the inhabitants of the earth " he had immediately in view only
the Roman empire, if extending by its influence beyond the
political borders, still only the known race of mankind, almost
covered by the extent of the imperial power ; on the other hand,
he thinks of the nations at the four corners of the earth as behind
or outside the Satanocracy properly so called. Still further, our
author manifestly makes distinctions within the heathen world of
the Roman empire. Not only does he represent those who over
come as singing : " all nations shall come and worship before Thee,"
xv. 4, but the saints who have their part in the first resurrection
live and reign with Cnrist on earth a thousand years, xx. 6.
Thus in the heathen peoples of the Roman empire, beside a
multitude of the incorrigible servants of the devil, the enemies
of God and Christ, the writer sees a great number of men, the
nations proper, from which individuals and individual circles
have been won for God and Christ (comp. v. 9, vii. 9, xiv. 3) ; but
the masses of the same are as nations converted only in the accom
plishment of the earthly history, or in the thousand years' reign.
But must not the seer, in harmony with such conceptions of the
present and the future, have distinguished different classes of the
heathen existing before Christ ? for the individual conversions of
the Old Testament, as well as the expectations of the heathen
nations, must have been known to him. When Baur writes, p. 2 1 3,

68 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
that according to the view of the seer the heathen are without a
receptive faculty for the divine, and form in the universal contrast
of principles an established antagonism to the people of God, it is
indeed true of heathenism as a principle, but not, as he takes
for granted, of heathendom in its totality, or of the heathen nations.
As for Kbstlin's assertion, p. 490, that in places where the book
of life is mentioned, xiii. 8, xvii. 8, the worshippers of Antichrist,
and therefore the heathen, are represented as not written in the
book, or as reprobate, we miss the proof that, according to the
apocalyptic conception, not merely heathendom in the gross, but
heathens individually and collectively, were involved in this guilt.
As the heathen world, in the view of the writer, was not an indis
tinguishable mass, so the theocracy and the Jewish people were
not regarded by him as a perfect unity. The twelve tribes cer
tainly represented in general the children of Israel, the people or
church of God, in contrast with the heathen in generaL But as
among the heathen there were those who were not really heathen,
and as in the future their number would increase ; so among the
Jews there were those who were falsely so called, who, while
regarded as the church of God, belonged to the congregation of
the devil, and were his servants, ii. 9, iii. 9. Indeed, as a tem
porary condition, and until the great final catastrophe, the heathen
nations in general are unbelieving, so also is Israel until xi. 13.
Hitherto Christendom, the true Israel, consists of individual Jews
and Gentiles, and only in the future there lies, on this side of the
final catastrophe, the conversion of Israel, and on the other the
conversion of the nations. Is it possible, then, that in the Jewish
people before Christ — certainly regarded by the writer as being
in general the people of God — he can have mistaken the differ
ence between the true Israel and the congregation of Satan, or
Sodom and Egypt (comp. xi. 8), the Israel according to the flesh,
which the Old Testament, and especially the history of the prophets,
brings so prominently forward ?
Having found that the Apocalypse teaches that the present
contrast between Christianity and Christians on one side, and the
world and its inhabitants on the other, is only the consummation
of an antagonism existing from the beginning of human history
between the people or servants of God, essentially the people of
Israel, and the earth, or the world led astray by the devil, sub
stantially the heathen nations, there arises the question, how the

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 69
two sides of this contrast, in its pre-Christian form, relate to their
fulfilment ? — in other words, how the pre-Christian world and
the pre-Christian church of God differ from the world and the
church since Christ ? While the woman, who symbolizes the
Old Testament church, is in travail, the dragon stands before her
ready to devour her child as soon as it is born, xii. 4 ; there
arises a struggle in heaven between Michael and the dragon, and
the dragon is cast out, xii. 7-9 ; he then comes down to the
earth in great wrath, knowing that his time is short, xii. 12,
and persecutes the woman, xii. 13, and goes to make war with
the rest of her seed, xii. 1 7, an account of which is given in the
following chapter. Thus, with the appearance of Christ, the
crisis comes. As since Christ the world has, through unbelief,
become decidedly hostile to Him, so it is a state of things of which
the condition of the world before His coming was but the prelude.
The Old Serpent has indeed always seduced the whole world ; the
dragon has always been red, and has ever stood in a threatening
attitude in the presence of the woman ; but the obduracy into
which the world has now fallen, and into which it continues to
fall irretrievably, notwithstanding mercy and judgment, and the
rage with which it persecutes the people of God, was earlier not
so, — it was then typical, after the manner of prophetic facts. On
the other hand, the position of the pre-Christian church was also
only a symbol of its state after the introduction of Christianity.
That which Christendom really has, and for which it jubilantly
^joffers praise to God, for example, in chap. iv. and v., and in v.
7, 10, — salvation realized in principle, — the Old Testament
ehurch painfully waited and hoped for; but what Christendom
has really to suffer from persecution, only threatened the Old
Testament church. We must not, however, allow it to mis
lead us that our author speaks of Christianity, and individual
Christians, and the church, almost entirely in Old Testament
phraseology; the distinction between the pre-Christian and the
Christian church is not, therefore, less important to him. For
Christians only the devil was cast out, xii. 9, 10, and it is by
them that he is overcome, xii. 11. The devout men of pre-
Christian times, little as they served the devil, feared him who
accused them day and night before God, xii. 10, and were un
able to overcome him, xii. 11. Instead of being reconciled, they
were guilty before God, and could not cleanse themselves from

70 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
sin, and could only long for deliverance; trusting in the pro
mises of God, they had to content themselves with type, and
symbol, and preparation. Thus those who come out of the
great tribulation, and have washed their garments in the blood
of the Lamb, vii. 14, and those who rise for the thousand
years' reign, xx. 4, are not the souls of Old Testament saints, but
of Christians. The former will certainly rise at the judgment,
xx. 12, will be found written in the book of life, xx. 15, and will
be citizens of the New Jerusalem, chap, xxi.; but they neither go
at death into heaven, nor will they share with Christians in the
first resurrection, xx. 5, — to both classes of which belongs real, in
distinction from the typical Christianity of Old Testament saints;
and, so to speak, from the non-personal Christianity of the con
verted heathen nations, — but, like the inhabitants of the earth, they
are dead from the moment of death until the general resurrection.
What representation has our book to give of death ? Accord
ing to i. 18, the risen Christ has the keys of death and hades,
or the kingdom of the dead. At the opening of the fourth seal
John sees a pale horse, vi. 8, and the name of him who sits
upon it is Death ; and Hades follows him, and power is given
them over a fourth part of the earth to kill with sword, and with
hunger, and with death (OdvaToi), and with the beasts of the
earth. In xx. 13 the sea gives up the dead which are in it, and
death and hades deliver up the dead which are in them ; and in xx.
14 they are cast into the lake of fire. According to this, as death
is distinguished from the second death, eternal damnation or de
struction (comp. on the abyss), so also it is distinguished from
death, dying, and plagues, vi. 8 (comp. ii 23, xviii. 8). On the
other hand, death and hades are not wholly separated from each
other; for while, vi. 8, xx. 14, hades seems to be as personal as
Death, his companion and helper, in i. 18, xx. 13, death has
evidently the same local signification as hades ; still in the Old
Testament we read not only of the gates of hades, for example, in
Isa. xxxviii. 10, but also of the gates of death, Ps. ix. 14, Job
xxxviii. 17 ; and there is also the same personification of hades
as of death, Hos. xiii. 14 (comp. 1 Cor. xv. 54-56). More
important, however, than the relation between death and the
kingdom of death, is the relation of both to the devil and the
abyss. Their appearance in vi. 8 forcibly reminds us of the
powers of the devil and of the products of the abyss ; and their

MORE REMOTE PRESUPPOSITIONS. 71
being cast into the lake of fire, xx. 14, shows distinctly that the
seer, where he personifies them, had in his mind what we call
death, and regarded it as a demon, a power of the evil principle,
belonging to the anti-ideal sphere of existence. Not less im
portant is the relation ,of death and hades to the sea. It does
not follow from xx. 1 3 that the author expresses the view that
the souls of those who had perished in the sea never reached
hades, but wandered about in their grave of water ; still it is
significant, that with death and hades he classes the sea as an
abode of the dead. We may compare with this v. 3, "no man
in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to
open the book," also v. 1 3, " every creature which is in heaven,
and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the
sea, and all that are in them," and must then conclude that where
the seer speaks of death and hades in a local sense, of that which
we call the " realm of death," the under-world, or, according to
the Lutheran form of expression, " hell," hades was for him the
grave, or rather the grave-world, the graves conceived of as one.
It lies under the surface of the earth ; the sea, in which there are
so many dead, he regards as another place of the dead in addition
to hades ; and — which is the principal thing — he conceives of
those who died before and without Christ, " the rest of the dead,"
xx. 5, as in their graves, or in the world of the dead, until the
judgment ; while, at the same time, as we shall afterwards show,
he regards " the souls " of Christians as in heaven from the time
of their departure, vi. 9-11, and Christians as living at the
beginning of the thousand years, when the spirit of life comes
into their dead bodies, xi. 8-11, and body and soul are reunited.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.

SECOND PAET.
NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 1. Christ.
(a.) The Evangelical History.
IF those expositors are right, who, with Hengstenberg, pp. 595,
599, 607, Ewald, p. 240, note, Diisterdieck, p. 401, etc.,
believe that the seer, in xii. 1—6, had before him in some form
or other Christ's birth of the Virgin Mary, the intrigue of Herod,
and the Bethlehemitish child-murders, we possess in this passage,
though indirectly, a confirmation of several important particulars of
the birth- and childhood of Jesus, recorded in the histories of the
evangelists Matthew and Luke. Without, however, reversing the
relation, as Volkmar does (pp. 186, 188, note), and finding in the
Virgin birth, Herod the Great, and the flight into Egypt, a narra
tion of the images of Rev. xii. 1-6, I am unable to recognise in
this place a reference to the birth and childhood of Jesus. The
seer does not desire — and here expositors are unanimous — to give
the history itself; and for the explanation of that which he does
desire to give, it is sufficient to refer to the Old Testament repre
sentation of the church as the spouse of God, and to the rabbinical
figure of the travail of the Messiah. Certainly, according to this,
the entire historic product of xii. 1-6, with respect to the child
hood of Jesus, consists in the fact that He came from the church
of the Old Testament, and appeared on earth as an Israelite.
Still more strictly is the origin of Jesus defined when one of the
elders says : " Weep not : behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah,
the Root of David," v. 5 ; and when Christ Himself says: " I am the
root and the offspring of David," xxii. 16. These two passages,
the former resting on Gen. xlix. 9, the latter on Isa. xi. 1-10,
describe Jesus directly only as He in whom the Messianic predic
tions of those Old, Testament words are fulfilled ; but it is evident
that the writer could see those predictions fulfilled only when of

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 73
his own knowledge Jesus had really sprung from the tribe of
Judah, and more particularly from the royal family of David.
According to this book, Jesus was an Israelite, of the tribe of
Judah, of the family of David.
Not only is the Apocalypse silent respecting the birth and
childhood of Jesus, but it has generally very little to say respecting
His life. The expressions, " the Amen, the faithful and true
witness," iii. 14; " the word of God and the testimony of Jesus,"
i. 2, 9 ; " the word of my patience," iii. 1 0, — a more careful con
sideration of which will follow, — show that, according to the
representations of our author, Christ during His earthly life was
active as a teacher, and that among His words there were such as
exhorted to patience. We may infer the miracles which Christ
wrought, as well as His predictions, from the imitation sketch of
the two witnesses, xi.3— 7..., On the foundations of the walls of
the New Jerusalem are written the names of the twelve apostles
of the Lamb, xxi. 14 ; whether also in the other places where the
apostles are mentioned we are to understand the Twelve, will be
seen in a later section. When the dragon stands before the woman
to devour her child, xii. 4 ; when it is caught up to God, xii. 5 ;
when it is said, " the Lion of the tribe of Judah hath prevailed,"
v. 5 ; and when Christ Himself says, " as I also overcame," iii. 21,
— we learn that from the beginning to the end of His earthly
course He had to contend with evil, and also to suffer on account
of it. In these few particulars, almost everything recorded in
the Apocalypse concerning the life of Jesus may be included.
There are only two events in the evangelic history which the
Apocalypse brings forward jyppat.pdjy__£."d most impressively,
namely, Christ's death on the cross, and His subsequent resurrect
tion. The living creatures and the elders praise the Lamb, and
"say, " Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals
thereof ; for Thou wast slain (i<r(pdyT)<;), and hast redeemed us to
God by Thy blood," v. 9 ; John sees standing, " a Lamb as it had
been slain," v. 6. The angels say, " Worthy is the Lamb that was
slain " (e<rtpayp.evo<}), v. 12. The blood of Christ is mentioned
also in i 5, vii. 14. It is said of the two witnesses, that " their
dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spirit
ually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was cruci
fied," xi. 8. " Behold, He cometh with clouds ; and every eye
shall see Him, and they also which pierced Him," i 7. That

74 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
Christ was slain, or, more correctly, allowed Himself to be slain,
like the "blood" of Christ, historically considered, tells us
nothing further than that He voluntarily surrendered Himself to
a violent death. Both expressions receive a narrower limitation
only when it is said that Christ was crucified, and in that way met
the termination of His life. When we find later that the seer
perceived in the slain Lamb chiefly the fulfilment of the passover-
type, or the complement of the paschal sacrifice, the supposition
lies very near, that he had seen this type fulfilled in Christ with
respect to the time of its being offered ; in other words, that,
according to his representation, he died on the day, and at the
hour, when the paschal lamb was slain. When He is said to
have, been crucified in the great city, spiritually called Sodom and
Egypt, it is evident that the reference is not purely local, nor a
declaration that Christ was crucified by the Jews, but is, as a
comparison of xi. 7 with 8 shows, a hint that the degenerate Jews
stood in the same relation to the actual murderers of Jesus as they
will stand to the beast, the actual murderer of the two witnesses,
namely, that of spiritual originators and authors of the murder.
The piercing of the body of Jesus, i. 7, resting directly upon
Zech. xii. 10, is, on account of John xix. 37, in a very conceiv
able manner, to many expositors, a great difficulty, which they
endeavour to remove, especially by the supposition that the seer
does not refer to the particular fact of His being pierced by the
spear of the soldier, but to His death generally, as the final result
of unbelief ; and on behalf of this view they refer to the use
of eKicevTelv in Num. xxii. 29 ; Judg. ix. 54; 2 Mace. xii. 6
(comp. Diisterdieck, p. 117 ; Ewald, p. 112), But these passages
by no means prove that eKicevTelv points to death indefinitely ; the
idea expressed is always death by piercing. The words of the
Apocalypse do not, however, enable us to say decidedly whether
the writer had in his mind the piercing of the hands and the feet
of Jesus, or the wound in His side, or whether he intended both.
When these expositors refer the words : " they also which pierced
Him," to the Jews, they are mistaken ; and we shall show in the
section on the coming of Christ, that they refer to the Gentiles.
But He who died on the cross rose from the dead, and is said
to be " the first-begotten of the dead," i 5. He Himself says, " I
am He that liveth and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for ever
more," i. 18. It is said of Him, " These things saith the first and

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 75
the last, which was dead, and is alive " (e^ae), ii. 8. According
to this, it was for the seer as really a historic fact that Christ
was dead, as that- He rose to a new life which would not again be
subjected to death. Those passages here come into prominence
which speak expressly of the resurrection of Christ, and chiefly
of the meaning of the fact : they and others permit a conclusion
as to the way in which the resurrection was conceived by the seer.
We are instructed, at least by one of the passages quoted, which
describes Christ as the " first-begotten of the dead," especially when
it is taken in connection with the saying that He was dead and -
now lives for evermore, that the author conceived of the resur
rection of Christ as he did of the resurrection of the dead gene
rally, after the analogy of birth in the > earthly life, not as a return
to life merely, but as an entrance into a higher condition of exist
ence. Of the highest importance in relation to the representations I
of the Apocalypse respecting Christ's resurrection, is the passage in(
chap. xi_3^12^._Everything which is to happen to the two wit
nesses, as predicted in this chapter, is, according to the correct
interpretation of most expositors (comp. Volkmar, die Religion
Jesu, p. 79, etc.), but an intensifiedjrji£tnj^o^JheJnstory of Christ.
In addition to the unmisliaTieable parallelism in the series and
character of the facts, the express remark, " where also our Lord
was crucified," is in favour of this view. Though, according to
the manner of the seer, there are undoubtedly and . repeatedly
evident combinations of various types, we shall still, as in their
prophesying, miracles, and violent death, vers. 3-7, so also in the
latter part of the narrative, vers. 8-12, recognise the type of Christ
as being most prominent. The first feature which strikes us is,
that the bodies of the two witnesses slain by the beast lie like
carrion on the street of the great city, and that the people see
them for three days and a half, and will not suffer them to be
buried. We are not permitted to infer from this that Christ, after
His death on the. cross, remained unburied, for in that case the
exposure of the witnesses on the street would no longer be an inten
sified picture ; but we may conclude that the writer saw something
special in the manner of Christ's burial, something disgraceful,
unseemly, and humiliating, — at least, something unsuitable. The
three and a half days between the death and resurrection of the
witnesses point, both by their number and their meaning, — a
limited season of misfortune, — so distinctly to the three days

76 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
intervening between the death and resurrection of Christ, that not
withstanding objections from several quarters (comp. Diisterdieck,
Hoekstra, p. 386), this sentence needs neither proof of its relation,
nor, as intensive, any exposition of its sense. Not less certainly,
from a consideration of the bodies and their non-burial, as well as
from the joy and gift-sending of those " that dwell upon the earth "
after the death of the witnesses, may we conclude that the seer
refers to the unsubdued rage and triumph of the world after the
crucifixion of Christ. The entrance after three days and a half of
the Spirit of Life from God into the dead bodies of the witnesses,
and their standing upon their feet, reminds us of Ezek. xxxvii.;
but still more forcibly does the number of the days direct our
thoughts to the resurrection of Christ on the third day. The
great fear which fell upon those who saw them belongs to the
entire connection, and is added to strengthen the picture. Finally,
the ascent of the witnesses to heaven contains a reference to
the translation of Elijah; but the expression " in a cloud " (comp.
Acts i. 9), though originating from Dan. vii. 13, can scarcely he
applied to the two witnesses otherwise than through Christ, and
does not admit of a doubt that the seer had in mind his ascen
sion, supplemented by the " great voice from heaven," saying,
" Come up hither," as well as by the ascent in the sight of their
enemies. But the ascension of the two witnesses, though in time
most decidedly distinct from their resurrection, follows it, judging
from the " and " five or six times repeated without more definite
limitation, and from the words, " and the same hour," also from the
general impression of the whole, rather directly. Precisely because
there is no " immediately," a climax cannot here bave been
intended, and consequently the seer does not regard the ascension
of Christ as divided from His resurrection by a Jong space of time,
but conceives of it as only a continued manifestation of the same.
We have next in chap. xi. 3-12, and especially in xx. 4, a dis
closure of the author's conception of the resurrection of Christ:
for when he sees in the first resurrection "the souls of them that
were beheaded for the witness of "Jesus" and the word of God, and
which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither
had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands, and
jthey lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years," similar
expressions concerning Christ, namely, that " He is alive," ii. 8, the
I description of Him as " the first-begotten of the dead," i. 5, and the

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 77
sense of the first resurrection, justify us in reasoning back from
it to the resurrection of Christ. According to this, the seer thinks
of Christ, from His death to His resurrection, as being, with
respect to His body, in the grave, but with respect to His soul,
as in heaven (eomp. vi. 9-11). He must have considered His
resurrection body as beyond the possibility of suffering, — " blessed
is he that hath part in the first resurrection," xx. 6, — still by no
means inaccessible to the perceptions of the senses, for the
millennial kingdom is on earth. Of some value for our inquiry is
v. 6. The writer saw standing " a Lamb as it had been slain."
Its standing, as Diisterdieck remarks, shows that it was living ;
its standing as slain, as having been once led to the slaughter and
put to death, — in other words, the Lamb standing there as slain,
means that Christ lives ; but the marks of His wounds show that
He has been crucified. Let. us, in conclusion, gather up the
results, and we have the following representation of the resur
rection of Christ : — -After His crucifixion at Jerusalem, He was
for a short but important period in the embrace of death ; His
body was disposed of in an ignominious manner, and His enemies
triumphed over His fall. While His body was in the grave, His
soul, free from all suffering, rested in heaven. After the appointed
time the Divine Spirit of Life entered into His body. He lives,
and has been born to a new life, exalted, it is true, above the
earthly, but still not inaccessible to the perceptions of the senses ;
bearing upon Him corporally the marks of the death of the cross.
His ascension followed without further delay, after the manifesta
tion of His resurrection. (6.) The Person of Christ.
He is called Jesus, i. 9, xii. 17, xiv. 12, xvii. 6, xix. 10, xx.
4, xxii. 16; the Lord Jesus, xxii. 21 (comp. ver. 20); Jesus Christ,
i. 1, ii. 5 ; the Christ, xx. 4, 6 ; the Christ of God, xi. 15, xii. 10.
He is the Messiah in the Old Testament rabbinical sense. He
is described as such, partly by express statements, and partly by
tacit but easily recognisable leanings to Old Testament or rab
binical representations, and by most of the names, attributes, and
activities which in this book are ascribed to Him. To quote
these in detail would hardly be possible, without destroying their
connection with several later sections. Having, therefore, gene-

78 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
rally recognised the statements belonging to this part of the
subject, we must limit ourselves to a confirmation of the Messianic
sense of those passages to which a different sense has been erroneously
assigned. When Christ calls Himself " the bright and morning
star," xxii. 16 (comp. ii. 28), the title has no reference to xxi. 23,
but either distinguishes Him as the Messiah who precedes the
great day of God (comp. 2 Pet. i 19), or, as is more probable
from ii. 28, it refers to Him as the bearer or possessor of the
Messianic kingly glory, and is to be regarded as a rabbinical
Messianic expression borrowed from Num. xxiv. 17 and Isa.
xiv. 12. "The Prince of the kings of the earth," i 5; "The
Lord of lords, and King of kings," xvii. 14, xix. 16, is a title
applied in the Old Testament to God Himself, Deut. x. 17, Ps.
cxxxvi. 2, 3 (comp. 1 Tim. vi. 1 5) ; but it is affirmed also of
earthly rulers, Ps. lxxxix. 28 ; Ezek. xxvi. 7; Dan. ii. 37; Ezra
vii. 12. Thence comes also " the golden crown," xiv. 14, and
"the many diadems," xix. 12 (comp. also 2 Sam. xii. 30;
1 Mace, xi 1 3). Christ has the key of David ; He opens and
no man shuts, He shuts and no man opens, iii 7, which is obvi
ously a play upon Isa. xxii. 22, but containing also an evident
departure from the original idea, inasmuch as Christ has not, like
Eliakim, the key to the house of David, but the key of David,
involving personal rights in the whole Davidic kingdom. From
Christ's mouth there goes " a sharp two-edged sword," i 16, ii. 12,
xix. 15, 21 ; but God's magisterial power is also described by
this symbol, Wisd. xviii. 15, 16 ; still Isa. xi. 4 (comp. xlix. 2)
uses the same with reference to the Messiah.
But throughout the Apocalypse, in constant interchange with
many direct and indirect Messianic expressions, we find not a few
predicates of Christ which cannot be referred to rabbinical Messianic
representations of the Old Testament. We shall arrange them in
different classes.
We begin with i 13 and xiv. 14. John sees in " the midst of
the seven candlesticks one like (op,oiov) a Son of man " — " upon
the cloud one sat like unto a Son of man." There can be no
doubt that Christ is intended in both places, and that in each
there is a reference to Dan. vii. 1 3 (comp. x. 16,1 8). De Wette
and Hengstenberg find in the expression, the superhuman glory
of Christ ; for, as. De Wette remarks, to affirm of a man that he
is like a man, is to say nothing ; or, as Hengstenberg expresses

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 79
it, if Christ only resembles a Son of man, there must be another
side of His nature which surpasses the human ; Diisterdieck
thinks that this dogmatic thought is not in the expression, but
acknowledges that op,otov does not correspond with the simple
&>s of the Septuagint in Daniel ; and that if, for its explanation,
John must write 6p,oiov, so far the typical nature of the form of
the Son of man is recognised in the divine majesty of the appear
ance (comp. xiii. 2), and there follows what the connection of
both passages demands, that John expressly and designedly repre
sents Christ not as a Son of man, but like a Son of man, that is,
as a divine person in human form.
We may take at this point those texts in which Christ is spoken
of in parallel with God, or in which something is affirmed of God ;
and Christ in common, or where both are spoken of as one. Men *¦'
are represented as saying, to the mountains and rocks, "Fall onus,
and hide us from the face of Him that sitteth on the throne, and
from the wrath of the Lamb," vi 16 ; and we read, "Now is come
salvation and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the
power of His Christ," xii. 1 0. The whole creation ascribes " bless
ing, and honour, and glory, and power unto Him that sitteth upon
the throne, and unto the Lamb, for ever and ever," v. 13. The
great multitude before the throne cry, " Salvation to our God
which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb," vii. 10.
Great voices are heard in heaven, saying, " the kingdoms of this
world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of His Christ."
According to xiv. 4, the 144,000 "redeemed from among men"
are " the first-fruits unto God and to the Lamb." The temple
of the New Jerusalem is "the Lord God Almighty and the
Lamb," xxi. 22 (comp. xxiii). The river of the water of life
proceeds out of the " throne of God and of the Lamb," xxii. 1.
In the New Jerusalem is " the throne of God and of the Lamb,"
xxii. 3 (comp. i 4-8, iii. 12, xiv. 1). In vi. 17 we read of "the
great day of His wrath," and the verse preceding tells us it is
the wrath of God and the Lamb. He shall reign, that is, our
Lord and His Christ, xi. 1 5. He who hath part in the first
resurrection " shall reign with Him," namely, with God and
Christ, xx. 6. " The throne of God and of the Lamb shall be
in it, and His servants shall serve Him," xxii. 3. — When Hoekstra
remarks, p. 373, that several times the angels are mentioned in
the same breath with God and the Lamb, iii. 5, xiv. 1 0 ; and

80 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
p. 380, that the 144,000 sing a new song "before the throne,
and before the four beasts and the elders," xiv. 3, — we willingly
yield to him all those passages where something is said to be done
" before Him who sits upon the throne, and before the Lamb," also
those symbols or affirmations common to angels, elders, saints, and
Christ ; but, on the other hand, we ask him to produce predicates
of angels and men parallel with those we have quoted respecting
Christ. He constantly endeavours to show, p. 378, etc., that
Christ is not the <rvvdpovo<s of God in relation to His throne, as
the throne of the King of heaven and earth, but only in relation
to it as that of the King of the theocratic people of Israel, — a
relation continued in the Christian church, or kingdom of God
(comp. Jer. iii. 16, 17 ; Rev. xxi. 22) ; that the theocratic kings,
from the standpoint of their office, are, in a certain sense, placed
on a level with Jehovah (comp. Zech. xiii. 7 ; 1 Chron. xxviii. 5,
xxix. 23; 2 Chron. ix. 8; Ps. xiv. 1 7) ; that the Lamb is not
literally seated on the throne, v. 6 ; and that only in the New
Jerusalem is the throne of the Lambdas the rex vicarius Dei,
naturally identified with that of Jehovah. But, in fact, it is not
the throne of Christ, as Hoekstra insinuates, but Christ Himself,
who appears as mediator between the throne and the living
creatures and the elders, v. 6, as also in vii. 1 7, " in the midst
of — before — the throne." He meets us in other situations, each
time with a significance corresponding with the connection; for
example, i 13—16, xix. 11—13 (comp. i. 7, xx. 4, 6). But,
according to xii. 15, the child is "caught up unto God and to
His throne;" and in iii. 21, Christ is set down with His Father
on His- throne ; and that this throne is the throne of God as the
Ruler of the world, and not merely as the King of His church, is
satisfactorily proved by the homage of the four living creatures
(comp. iv. 6-9, v. 14) ; nor is the throne of the Lamb, as that of
the vicarius rex Dei, " naturally " identical in the New Jerusalem
with the throne of God, much rather, according to Hoekstra,
must God alone sit on the throne there. Sharing the throne of
God in the New Jerusalem manifestly dis^ngmshes the_A$oca-
lyptic frojn^t^JE^ujme^Christ (comp. 1 Cor. xv. 28), and an
expression which so clearly and forcibly testifies to the super-
humanity of Christ, as hardly any other in the New Testament
( does, cannot be set aside by merely saying that it is " natural."
A further departure beyond the Messianic, appears in the fact

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 81
that frequently the same attributes, actions, and conditions are
ascribed to Christ as to God Himself. Not to mention such pre
dicates as " master," " lord," which have nothing in them specifi
cally divine, Christ is certainly never described as " the Lord God
Almighty," never as " He who sits on the throne," never as " He
who is, and was, and is to come ; " in other words, He is to the
seer not the absolute God. It is also to be observed that the
phrase, " which is to come," is not of equal import with the words,
" I am," and that Christ in the Apocalypse is strictly " the coming
one," or " He which is to come" (comp. for example, i 7, xvi. 15,
xxii. 12, 17, 20). The " new name," known only to Himself, is
not the inexpressible name of Jehovah, as assumed by Baur,
p. 215 ; nor does it in itself affirm of Christ an ontological divine
nature, as Beyschlag finds, p. 123 ; but it is the expression, else
where receiving its supernatural contents, for the ideal meaning
of the person of Christ, yet unknown in the manifest reahty^but
revealed in the final stata This is taughlT'by'ircomparison of
El 12, xix. 12, with ii7~l 7 (comp. also the " new " in the section
on heaven). When God calls Himself " the Alpha and Omega,
the beginning and the end, the first and the last," i. 8, xxi. 6,
xxii. 1 3, we do not find that Christ applies literally the same terms
to Himself. Not to mention xxi. 6, which Kbstlin, p. 483, refers
to Christ, but which, according to the connection, can be under
stood only of God, it is tolerably common to ascribe xxii. 13 to
Him; but Diisterdieck justly observes that the words of ver. 12
come from Christ's own mouth, while those of the following verse
(comp. xxi. 5, vi. 1, 8) read like the words of God Himself; that
neither of these two passages is to be ascribed to the angel, nor
are we to think of Christ or God as speaking directly, but that
John, in the old prophetic manner, having at the beginning, i 8,
struck the keynote, in God's words here at the close adheres to
the essential thought of his prophecy in two summary quotations
of the divine apothegm (comp. Hoekstra, pp. 373, 396, note).
But Christ distinctly speaks of Himself as " the first and the last,"
i 17, ii. 8. God is He "who liveth for ever and ever," iv. 9,
1 0, x. 6, xv. 7 ; and Christ says, " I am the first and the last. I
am He that liveth and was dead ; and, behold, I am alive for ever
more," i 17, 18. When the living creatures " rest not day and
night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty," iv. 8 ;
when the martyrs say to God, " 0 Lord, holy and true ! " vi. 10;
v

82 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
when, according to xv. 3, xvi. 7, xix. 2, God's ways " and judg
ments are true and righteous ; " and, according to xix. 9, xxi. 5,
xxii. 6, " these words," the words of God, " are true ; " and when
it is also said that Christ is " holy and true," iii. 7 ; " the Amen,
the faithful and true witness," iii. 14; "behold a white horse,
and He that sat upon him was called Faithful and True,"
xix. 11, — in the "holy" of iii. 7 we do not see "the Holy
One of God," Luke iv. 34, nor " the Holy One and the Just,"
Acts iii. 14 (comp. ver. 13), nor "God's "Holy One," Acts
xiii. 35 ; and, with Diisterdieck in loco (comp. Hoekstra, p. 371,
note), understand the " holy " as opposed to the slander of the
Jews (comp. iii. 9), and as simply affirming that Christ is abso
lutely holy, and what is involved therein, that He is the " true,"
the real and genuine Messiah, the heir and Lord of the real
and abiding theocracy ; but as certainly as " the holy and the
true" was not for John the slain criminal and deceiver of
Jewish calumnies, but the genuine Messiah, so certainly would
he describe Him as " the holy and the true," just as " the holy "
describes God in His ethical nature, and as " the true " describes
Him in the affirmation of this ethical nature through the fulfilment
of His promises and threatenings. We mistake the meaning of
the predicates, which in the introductory letters Christ ascribes to
Himself, if we suppose that they are covered by the contents of
those letters; for, as Diisterdieck himself remarks, p. 178, they
contain only special applications of universal predicates. God
is often mentioned as judging, vi. 10, xix. 2. He is righteous,
xvi. 5 ; His ways are just and true, xv. 3, xvi 7, xix. 2 ;
and apart from individual magisterial acts, especially as ascribed
to Christ in the letters, it is said of Him, " that in righteous
ness He doth judge and make war," xix. 11. According to
xxii. 6, " the Lord God of the holy prophets sent His angel to
show unto His servants the things which must shortly be done;"
and, according to i 1, " Jesus Christ has sent, and signified by His
angel unto His servant John," " things which must shortly come
to pass" (comp. xxii 16). — The same acts and states are often
ascribed to God and Christ, and at other times only to God:
" The city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine
in it ; for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the
light thereof," xxi. 23 ; but we also read, xxii. 5, that they " need
no candle, neither the light of the sun ; for the Lord God giveth

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 83
them light " (compare, for instance,' the exercise of authority in
xi. 15, xii. 10 ; the redemption of Christians in xiv. 4, 3 ; their
priesthood, xx. 6, i 6, v. 9). The saying in xxii. 13 we have
regarded as God's, and without doubt the preceding verse contains
the words of Christ ; and if the connection is also a summary
repetition and injunction, it is significant that the words of Christ
and the claims of God are side by side, without any indication
of a change of subject. Christ is the object of the ascription,
" to Him be glory and dominion for ever and ever," i 6. When
the Lamb took the book, " the four living creatures and the four
and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one
of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the
prayers of saints : and they sung a new song, saying, ' Thou art
worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof,' " v. 8, 9.
With a loud voice, numberless angels say, " Worthy is the Lamb
that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and
strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing," v. 12. With
these passages we may compare iv. 8-11, vii. 11-17, xi. 16, 17,
xv. 2-4, xix. 1—7, where similar homage is presented to God.
The_seer hears the whole creation say : " Blessing, and honour,
and glory, and power be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne,
and unto the Lamb, for ever and ever. And the four beasts said,
Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped
Him that liveth for ever and ever," v. 13, 14. The multitude,
whom no man could number, stood before the throne and before
the Lamb, and cried with a loud voice, Salvation to our God
which sitteth upon the throne, and to the Lamb ! vii. 9, 10. In
the New Jerusalem is the throne of God, and the Lamb and His
servants shall serve Him, xxii. 3. Finally, we may compare the
manner in which Christians are described as servants of Christ
in i 1, ii. 20, with the description of them in other places, vii 3,
xi. 18, xix. 2. Hoekstra, p. 380, is exceedingly angry with
Diisterdieck's exposition of i. 18, and finds that all the emphasis
is placed upon " I am alive " (comp. ii. 8), and affirms that %r)v
does not distinguish Christ essentially from others, and that He is
o £wz/ only as " the first-begotten of the dead," i 5 (comp. Hoekstra,
p. 384, etc.). But in his zeal he seems to have entirely over
looked the fact that Christ calls Himself the first and the last,
and the living, and declares that He lives for evermore ; surely
this is not merely as the first who rose from the dead ! The

84 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYrSE.
same expositor says that God is the only otrios, xv. 4, xvi 5 ; but,
on the other hand, the predicate ayto<s is applied to Christ, and
angels, and believers. But otno<i is evidently nothing less than
a specific divine epithet, and the juwo? unmistakeably expresses
a contrast with heathen gods; if Christ were distinguished as
ocno<;, we -should have quoted it above under non-super-Messianic
expressions. With respect to the "holy" angels, xiv. 10, and
the '* holy " of xxii. 11, for example, the seer does not thus name
the individuals; and the "holy" of xxii. 11 is, through the
parallelism and the predicate, distinctly shown to be " the sanc
tified." Can Christ have spoken of Himself in iii. 7 in the same
sense ? — How the expositor can attach importance to the circum
stance that once God, and several times His ways and judgments,
are called righteous, I cannot understand, in the presence of " in
righteousness He " — Christ — " doth judge and make war," xix. 11.
On the contrary, it is not difficult to understand when the same
expositor, p. 379, emphasizes the proof that God is the proper
object of worship. Certainly neither the prostration of John at
the feet of Christ as if dead, i 17 (comp., for example, Dan.
viii. 17, 18, x. 8, 9), nor the expression irpoaicvvelv (comp. iii. 9),
can be made available for the divine reverence of Christ ; and it
is also true that the angel said to the seer, xix. 10, xxii. 8, 9,
" worship God, not God and the Lamb," and that everywhere we
read only of the fear of God (comp. xiv. 7, xv. 4, xi. 13-
18, xix. 5). But this does not set aside the fact that the
glorification of Christ, above referred to, is not shared in by
angels, nor elders, nor saints, but by these, in union with the
whole creation, glory is , given to Him, nor that it is remarkably
like that given to God, and, indeed, is sometimes expressly
ascribed in common to both. The angel said to the seer, who
fell down to worship him, " See thou do it not ; " but from the
mouth of the Lamb, before whom the elders fall down to worship,
we hear no such injunction ; and the golden vials full of odours,
signifying the prayers of saints, can be presented to Christ only
in the sense of divine homage ; — or, according to biblical religion,
is prayer offered to man ? That the seer does not wish to give
the divine glory to another is evident ; whether by individual
differences in the representation, such as casting the crowns before
the throne, he has indicated a distinction between the homage
paid to God and Christ, seems to me doubtful. Throughout the

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 85
book the reverence paid to Christ appears to be divine, that is,
such as is suitable only to be rendered to God or His other self.
Especially is this the case in tyi'i. 3 (comp. vii 15). Hoekstra
has taken all possible pains to show that, since divine predicates
are several times affirmed of angels, the church, elders and
saints, the same, when applied to Christ, cannot imply a meta
physically divine nature ; and that, on the other hand, there is
a great difference between God and Christ, especially that God
alone, without the interposition of a middle person, is the Creator,
sole King and Judge, and the sole object of proper worship. To
the objection, that divine predicates are affirmed of angels and
men, we have already replied, and have nothing further to say
respecting Hoekstra's remark, that the Apocalypse never repre-i
sents Christ as the absolute God, — a statement neither difficult to f
establish nor of much importance, inasmuch as we are not aware
that John's monotheism has ever been disputed. When he says
that specific divine predicates are not generally affirmed of Christ,
and often not even verbally, no admission so difficult, and yet
so worthy, could give us more surprise, except its opposite. It
comes therefore, in truth, to this, that qualities, actions, and con
ditions which belong specifically to God, are also ascribed to
Christ, and to Him only ; and Hoekstra has not been able to prove
it otherwise. After what has been said, it will not surprise us if we find
that in Old Testament expressions things which otherwise belong to
God are frequently affirmed of Christ. It is said of Christ that
" His head and His hairs were white like wool," i 14; and in
Dan. vii 9, God is so represented. The eyes of Christ are as a
flame of fire, i 14, ii. 18, xix. 12 ; and in the same words God's
omniscience is symbolized as directed with holy indignation
against all unrighteousness, Dan. x. 6. The feet of Christ are
" like unto fine brass, as if they burned in an oven," i. 15, ii. 18;
the same image represents God's power in treading down the
wicked, Dan. x. 6 ; Ezek. i. 7. The voice of Christ is as the
voice of many waters, i 15 ; and we find a similar representation
of God's power against His enemies, Dan. x. 6 ; Ezek. i 24,
xliii. 2 ; Ps. xciii. 3. Christ's countenance is as the sun shining
in his strength, i. 16 ; and so it is said of God, Dan. x. 6
(comp. Judg. v. 21). The seer fell down before Christ as if dead,
i 17 ; a similar effect was wrought by the appearance of God,

86 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
Ex. xxxiii 20; Isa. vi. 5; Ezek. i 28; Dan. viii. 17, 18, x. 7-9.
Christ says, " I am He that searcheth the reins and hearts, and
will give unto every one of you according to your works," ii. 23;
and we read that " the righteous God trieth the hearts and reins,"
Ps. vii 9, and that He " renders to every man according to his
work," Ps. lxii. 12. Christ says, " As many as I love I rebuke
and chasten," iii. 19 ; and in Prov. iii. 12 we read, " whom the
Lord loveth He correcteth." Christ calls Himself " the Amen,"
iii. 14; and the same expression is used of God, Isa. Ixv. 16.
The Lamb has " seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven
Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth," v. 6 ; and in Zech.
iv. 10 we read of "the eyes of the Lord, which run to and fro
through the whole earth." According to vii. 17, the Lamb will
feed His people, and lead them to living fountains of waters ; and
the same thing is said of Jehovah in Isa. xlix. 10. What is said
of the anger of Christ, xix. 15 (comp. xiv. 10, 14-16), is drawn
from a similar passage respecting God in Isa. lxiii. 1-6. The
"vesture dipped in blood," worn by Christ, xix. 12, is said to
have been worn by God, Isa. lxiii. 1, 2. Hoekstra affirms, p. 400,
that the application of the picture of the seven Spirits and of the
seven eyes of the Lamb, borrowed from Zech. iii. 9, iv. 10, may
have been directed by Isa. xi. 2. We admit that this may have
been the medium, but do not see that the significance of the
image for our purpose, namely, the ascription to Christ, in Old
Testament expressions and symbols, of those predicates which
otherwise belong to God is in the least prejudiced. The remaining
passages of this class, which to us appear in the highest degree
worthy of consideration, Hoekstra has not noticed.
On the ground of a greater or less proportion of the passages
hitherto quoted, and, indeed, on the ground of others also which,
being less conclusive, we have not mentioned, several expositors
admit that the Christology of the Apocalypse far transcends the
Messianic representations. Reuss (Histoire de la Thdologie Chri-
tienne, I. p. 346) writes : " II faut reconnaitre sans heater, que
Christ, dans l'Apocalypse, est eleve" au niveau de Dieu." Ritschl, m£_
ante, p. 120, etc., says : " Like Paul and James, the seer recognises
the CaLdiXJartLof the exalted Christ, to which idea the Jewish-
Christian representation of the pre-existence and higher nature
of Jesus as the original man and archangel does not reach."
Weiss (bibl. Theologie, p. 623) says: "Of the process by which

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 87
Paul and the Epistle to the Hebrews were led to the conclu
sion of the divine glory of Christ, to the idea of His original
divine nature, there is no trace in the Apocalypse ; still Jlie fact
that the Messiah was originally divine stands firm from the
"Beginning." It is otherwise, however, with the Tubingen school.
Baur, ut ante, 244 et seq., grants that in the Apocalypse Christ has
ascribed to Him titles which differ from those of Jehovah only as
the derived differs from the original ; indeed, in view of xxii 13,
he regards it as undoubted that the Apocalypse gives names of
Jehovah to Christ. But he labours all the more dihgently to
weaken the force of the dangerous instances, and comes to the
conclusion that, " taking all this together, the Christology of the
Apocalypse has the peculiarity of ascribing to Jesus as the Mes
siah the highest predicates, but they are only names borne out
wardly by Him, and are not associated with His person in any
inner unity of nature ; there is still wanting the inner connection
between the divine predicates and the historical individual who is
the bearer of the same. Hence it is remarkable how the Christian
consciousness at this point feels the impulse to place the person of
Christ so high as it does ; and yet at the same time it cannot fail to
be seen how the entire conception of these predicates is a transcen
dental form which, in the concrete, the personality of Jesus Him-
self,lacks established contents. They are not immanent definitions
springing originally from the substantial nature of his person ; they
are only the great eschatological hopes for the sake of which the
Messiah, as their chief object, must have an adequate position.
All metaphysics are outside the circle of the seer's vision ; he
takes his standpoint entirely from below, in order to carry over
to the Messiah, after his death, what His divine dignity gives
him," etc. (comp. Kbstlin, p. 483 et seq.). A refutation of Baur
would be an anachronism after Hoekstra has recently again
adopted his view, not merely freeing it from several unnecessary
admissions, but also placing it upon a broader, and, at first sight,
upon a more solid basis, and consistently carrying it out. I fully
admit the diligence and acuteness with which, in the interests of
his school, or tendency of thought, he has endeavoured to evade
the fatal objection which can be offered to a denial by the
hyper-Tubingen Christology of the apostolic origin of the Apoca
lypse, a book coming into existence before the destruction of
Jerusalem, namely, " that at this time many of the first Christian

88 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
generation must have been living, certainly also apostles and other
witnesses of Christ's person and life, even if the writer of the
Apocalypse himself belonged to the second generation ; that he
wrote not for Pauline or Hellenistic, but. for the circle of Judaizing
Christians ; and that the imagination could only have free course
in the glorification of a man were he the most extraordinary conceiv
able, if it had not seen him at all otherwise than from a distance.
In other words, that in a man ajdivme-43eiBg--could be recognised
and honoured only when alTconcrete and obvious proof showing
him to be similar in origin to ourselves had entirely disappeared
from the representation" (comp. p. 368). I cannot find that this
objection, so destructive to a certain school of theology, has been
successfully met by Hoekstra's labours. What he offers, after a
depreciatory remark respecting the proof for the metaphysical
divine nature of Christ built up by the earlier theologians from
the names, works, attributes, and honours ascribed to him, p. 370,
in favour of his opposite view, namely, that we have to do in
the book before us with an Apocalypse, and not with a dogmatic
handbook, and that the difference between apocalyptic word-
painting and doctrinal definition must not be forgotten, is an
undoubted truth recognised and acted upon by all scientific
expositors. But from this there follows nothing further than
that the symbols in which the book abounds must be interpreted
in such a way that those, the meaning of which is still seriously
disputed, should provisionally not be applied in the representa
tion of doctrine. But it by no means follows that in the pre
sence of those plain expressions of the book, which differ from
the theological intuitions brought to it from without, we should
fall back upon its symbolic character. That we have to do, as
Hoekstra further observes, with a description of the glory of the
exalted Christ, is also perfectly true ; but that this must there
fore assume a metaphysical character because all in heaven
is conceived of in that character ; that distinct as the idea of
the "superhuman" and the, "divine " may be, the representation
of the superhuman is at best separated by the uncertain limits
of the representation of the divine , that the picture of a person
who stands higher than those men who have reached the highest
glory possible for them, will necessarily appropriate those pre
dicates which, strictly understood, belong only to God, — all
this bears simply no relation to a notorious and manifest con-

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 89
sciousness and representation growing out of the Old Testament
and the Jewish theology. In the next part of this section we
shall review in detail those expositions of Hoekstra's which
relate to the work of Christ. To the objection that angels and
men are classed with Christ in the predicates above referred to,
and that a very great difference is made between God and Christ,
we have already in the earlier portion done ample justice. Un-
mistakeably Hoekstra himself has not been able to suppress a
feeling of the weakness of his position ; for, after apparently
concluding, he has said: "The martyrs are placed more or
less on a level with Christ, though the distance between the
Messiah-king and His subjects, who receive their rank from Him,
remains great," p. 395 ; he nevertheless starts the question whether
the names given to Christ imply His metaphysical divinity, and
whether it results from what He testifies of Himself in the seven
letters to the churches. He finds a partial reply to this inquiry
only in the discovery of Baur, that, according to a Talmudic
tradition, three things, the righteous, the Messiah, and Jerusalem,
are called by the names of God ; and he supplements this with
the remark, that in the Scriptures persons who represent God
(or Christ) really appear in the person of God (or Christ), and
speak as if God Himself were the speaker ; often, however, with
a certain abrupt change of the subject, so that here and there
in the same discourse " I " indicates God Himself and His almighty
power (comp. Gen. xviii. 13 ; Ex. iii. 1, 4 ; Gen. xxxi 11, 13 ; Ex.
xiv. 16 (19?), 24; Gen. xviii 13-33; Ex. iii. 6, xxiii. 20;
Josh. v. 13, vi. 2; Isa. lxiii. 9, 10). In proof that this method
is followed by the seer, he appeals to x. 1, xi. 3, where, accord
ing to his exposition, in the first case, the angel is Christ and not
Christ, and in the second, God and not God ; we thus have to do
with the representing angel. He then finds it easily explicable
that Christ, who, according to His office, or in relation to the
church, represents God Himself, also speaks words which pro
perly can be . uttered by God only, and therefore that He speaks
in the person of God without its proving anything respecting
His divinity. This result of Hoekstra's statement of proof is
really so brilliant that one cannot but wonder why he gave him
self further trouble, and did not confine himself to this decisive
argument, if it is as forcible as he represents it to be. Hardly
any one will dispute — the question of the relevancy of the pas-

90 TH.E DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
sages quoted being left in abeyance — that the Old Testament
angel of the Lord and the super-Messianic Christ stand in a
certain relation to each other. But, as we have found in the
section on angels, the angel of the eleventh chapter does not
show that the seer has generally followed the method according
to which those who represent God or Christ really appear in the
person of God or Christ. We may remark further, that on the
supposition that the seer has applied this method to Christ, it
would be as unaccountable on the one side that he should have
made a " very great " difference between God and Christ, as it
is on the other that he has almost throughout placed God and the
Lamb beside each other, and made Christ, where He stands alone,
speak so often of God as His God and Father. When the eleventh
chapter, as the middle term of the argument, fails, Hoekstra may
furnish the proof that the angel of Jehovah in the Old Testa
ment stands in the same relation to God as Christ does in the
Apocalypse ; until then, we must maintain that when Christ
utters words which properly can be spoken " by God only," that
it proves something in favour of His divine nature. Hoekstra
gives the result of his researches, p. 399 et seq., in the words:
" between Christ and His followers there exists essentially only
a difference in degree. The glory of Christ is essentially only
Messianic ; it consists in the kingly office which He holds in the
kingdom of God. To Him will be committed by God the execu
tion of the Messianic judgments upon the enemies of the people
of God, and royal authority in the Messianic kingdom itself, as
now over the decisions relating to it" (comp. 395 et seq.). "The
martyrs are more or less placed on a level with Christ ; still the
difference is great, because Jesus as the Messianic king is naturally
high above His subjects, who receive their rank from Him." On
the contrary, we have found that the glory of Christ is in no way
merely Messianic, but, according to our idea, super-Messianic,
because divine. We have no difficulty in denying, and, indeed,
do so emphatically, that on one side Christ in Himself is not
God, and that Christians may and will be through Christ like
Christ, and that, not merely in a Messianic, but also in a super-
Messianic sense, as we shall show in the next and later sections.
But we believe that in what has been said we have unanswerably
shown that on the other side Christ has in the Apocalypse a great
number of predicates, which differ not merely in degree, but

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 91
specifically from those ascribed to believers and martyrs, — in a
word, from those ascribed to man, — and are specifically divine.
Whether, according to the categories of the new theology and
philosophy, upon whose Procrustean bed the self-styled historical
criticism lays the New Testament writers, there is a discrepancy
between the two sides of the apocalyptic Christology, does not
trouble us ; we have to do with the historical, — that is, in the case
lying before us, with the categories in the thoughts of the seer.
We now proceed to the question, What constitutes the inner '
unity of the various super-Messianic expressions of the Apocalypse
concerning Christ ? We\ss,bibl. Theol. p. 623, justly remarks that
Baur's idea of these expressions as merely titular for a conscious
ness of God springing from the Old Testament, is noTadnrresible ;
and TwlthTeirtrai" justice, as.it seems to us, notwithstanding constantly
renewed antagonism, that Old Testament presuppositions, and
the impression of the historical Christ, in no way suffice for the
explanation of these expressions, and that there is lying beneath,
some substratum which must be accepted as a link in the thoughts
of the seer between these expressions and the Old Testament idea
of God. If we notice in Matt. xxii. 41-46 a hint respecting the
position of the prevalent Jewish theology with regard to this ques
tion, and consult; wholly without prejudice, the history of the
philosophy of religion in those times, and finally, the above quoted
group of super-Messianic expressions both individually and as a
whole, the LogosJdea forces itself upon us as the required sub
stratum, and the only reconciling medium. Here we find against
us not only our old enemies, but not less decidedly, though from
different motives, almost all those upon whose friendship we have
been hitherto accustomed to lean. Let us consider the two
passages with which this question is concerned.
In iii. 14 Christ is called "the beginning of the creation of
God." Baur, p. 217 et seq., grants that if Jesus, as "the
beginning of the creation of God," was only the first created, the
expression still appears to involve clearly enough the idea of pre-
existence, but says that it is not very evident whether the Apoca
lypse describes the Messiah Himself, or only His name, as having
been prepared before the foundation of the world. He finds it
to be very probable that this description contains no dogmatic
definition, but is merely a title of honour in the sense of the
highest creature to which by "the beginning of the creation"

92 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
reference is made ; moreover, immediately before (iii. 1 2) the
heavenly name of the Messiah is called a " new name," and
nowhere else in the book is His pre-existence clearly expressed ;
it is further sustained by the fact that the expression in Prov.
viii. 22, which the seer doubtless had in his thought, is figura
tive, and that the rabbinical theology is very liberal with the
predicate : " before the foundation of the world." Hoekstra, p.
376 et seq., adopts Baur's view, and strengthens it by two
reasons : first, that Christ is expressly called " the beginning of
the creation of God" from which no one can infer anything but
that the creation was the work of God, and that Christ was the
beginning of that work, and in any case the creature of God;
second, that if in these words the pre-existence of Christ were
expressed, it would not prove His metaphysical divine nature,
since the question would still remain whether we must under
stand an ideal or a real pre-existence, for the former is not
foreign to the Apocalypse, xiii. 8 ; and with respect to the latter,
according to Baur's remark, Jewish theology is liberal with the
expression: "before the foundation of the world," and speaks
of seven things created with the world, among which are the
names of the Messiah. Kbstlin, p. 484, finds a great difference
between the expression in iii. 14, "the beginning of the crea
tion," and " Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the founda
tion of the earth," in Heb. i. 10, and thinks it most probable that
only the first should be referred to rank (comp. Ewald, p. 151,
note). According to Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 623, the expression
does not describe Christ as the principle of the creation, which
appears here to be God's, but as one who existed, according to
the Book of Proverbs, earlier than the whole creation, without
being placed on a level with it. Ritschl, p. 120, note, finds that
since the passage has to do with Christ's appearance as a judge,
the predicate dpxv Tr)<; KTlaem tov 6eov refers to Christ's magis
terial function. It would carry us too far should we follow in
succession these widely differing explanations, and we must
satisfy ourselves with simply asking the question, What exposi
tion is demanded by the laws of language? Without further
delay I reply, that had the seer written " the beginning of the
creatures (ktio-pmtu) of God," or had he written "the first, or
the first-born, or the first-fruit (ttjowto?, irprnTOToicos, dirapyfj) of
the creation of God," then the expression might be understood to

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 93 ,
denote the first created, or that which precedes all things, the first
creature in time and rank. But the seer has written r) dpyrj t^s
KTt<7e»? tov deov, which can mean nothing else than principium
creationis, thev principle, the iv a>, Si ov, ei'9 o,_of the creation of
God. After this affirmation of the literal sensed I may remark-
that it finds confirmation in i 17, 18, ii. 8, the first of which
Hoekstra must wholly have forgotten, or he would not so
readily have written, p. 400, " nowhere is this — the glory of the
exalted Christ — brought into connection with His original meta
physical nature." Must we then understand "the last" to
signify the last creature in time and rank ? Much rather, has
not the first, in connection with the last, undeniably the sense of
" the beginner of the world development " ? When Hoekstra, p.
377, finds in Dusterdieck's confirmatory exposition of xxii. 13
as many errors as words, — first, because the passage contains
God's own words ; second, because, according to the Apocalypse,
not Christ, but God, terminates the old creation, and calls the
new into being (comp. xx. 11, xxi. 1, 2-5); and thirdly,
because Christ is expressly called " the dpxv of the creation of
God," — it was certainly an oversight of Diisterdieck that he has
appealed to xxii. 13 rather than to i 17, 18, ii. 8 ; but does
the "creation of God" exclude a divine creation-principle dis
tinct from the originator or founder? or does "the creation of
God" demand that the dp^xfi, the principle of the same, must be a
creature ? But why give prominence to detail ? Are not all
the expressions concerning Christ, quoted above, so many proofs
that John, by "the beginning of the creation of God," cannot
have meant the earliest and greatest of creaturesJbut a Being
above_creation ? We need only add, that while we have said above
that the contents of the apocalyptic letters do not exhaust the
contents of the predicates of Christ which precede them, so on
the other side it is evident that the contents of the letters must
harmonize with these predicates. But if " the beginning of the
creation of God" is conceived of after the manner of our oppo
nents, it will not permit a relation to be shown, to say nothing of
an inner correspoudence, between this predicate and the succeed
ing letter. To a church in which Christ not only discovers self-
blindness, but which He threatens to spue out of His mouth,
which He counsels to seek help from Himself for its disease, to
which He says that He rebukes and chastises those whom He

94 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
loves, — in a word, to a church to which He reveals Himself as
to no other in His fullest and highest significance, and we must
remember that we have to do with the last of the seven letters,
" the first creature " has not in any of its possible meanings a
really satisfactory sense, and we find that sense only when we
understand it to mean the principle of the creation of God, that
is, the personal, mediatorial essential ground and end of the
creation. Thus simply explained, according to the laws of language, the
passage iii. 14, taken in connection with those quoted before,
furnishes us with a very remarkable result, namely, that the seer
has expressed the Logos idea itself in its highest meaning, —
pre-existence and jggal^e actiyjtyJ— only not by name. Has
"lie done the latter also! In xix.^13, describing the advent of
Christ, he writes, '\^AJ!?JlJlliJIl^_^_S^£^ ^ Wnr^ °f God"
6 X070S t. Q. While Hoekstra gives to this passage no thorough
consideration, but regards it, p. 401, as a description of the moral
character of the apocalyptic Christ, he finally says, " His vesture
is stained with blood, and He is called the Word of God, the
Judgment of God, the Word which, as a sword, goes out of His
mouth to smite the nations," xix. 15. Baur and Kbstlin labour
hard to paralyse the meaning of xix. 13. With both, the treat
ment of this one passage takes an equally disproportionate space
in the representation of apocalyptic doctrine. According to
Kbstlin, ut ante, 484 et seq., the expression " Word of God " has
here much more resemblance to the iravToSvvap,o<; X070? of the
Book of Wisdom than to that of Philo and John ; Christ is here
the Word of God, as He who efficiently administers the divine
will on earth, — or, in other words, He is the bearer or holder of
the Divine power. Baur, ut ante, 215 et seq., affirms that we
must take the predicate " Word of God " as the well-known
paraphrase of the name of Jehovah often occurring in the Targums,
and the Messiah will then be called 6 X070? tov deov only in the
sense in which the Jehovah name is given to Him, iii. 1 2, xix.
12, even as the same name is given in an old Talmudic tradition
to the righteous, and to the city of Jerusalem. This interpretation
does not appear to have been entirely satisfactory to Baur him
self, for he immediately proceeds to a second, according to which
the seer saw from the point of view of the X070? tov deov the
whole manifestation of Jesus, so far as the Word of God was

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 95
revealed as well as fulfilled through Him, and according to
which Jesus, as revealing and fulfilling the purpose of God,
may be called "the Word of God." Other expositors also
wholly fail to recognise the Logos in xix. 13. Hofmann (Schrift-
beweis, I. p. 106) refers the name "Word of God" to ver. 9,
and explains it as "the contents of the divine promises."
Ritschl (die Entstehung der altkatholischen Kirche, 2 Auflage,
p. 120, note) understands by "the Word of God" the name by
which Ghrist will be known at His second coming, and remarks
that it refers to His magisterial functions (ver. 11), which He
exercises not merely instead of God, but which God Himself
carries on through Him. Diisterdieck, p. 542, ut ante, says the
name " Word of God " corresponds to the mediatorial position of
the Lord, as described in i 1—3, comp. xix. 10, iii. 11. Accord
ing to Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 623 (note), the name which Christ
oears as He goes out to the last conflict has no reference to His
\re-existence, nor to the Alexandrine doctrine of the Logos, but
¦^e\ther to Him in relation to the function by virtue of which He
b.ars it as the minister of the divine — magisterial — will, so far
as, according to the Old Testament doctrine (Heb. iv. 19), the
Word of God, as a living word, directly fulfils what it predicts.
But it would lead us too far to quote all the expositions of xix.
1 3, and, apart from the portions of truth they contain, individually
to confute them. To some extent they are mutually destructive,
and their variety is a strong reason for suspicion that there is an
attempt to escape from a too obvious fact. We content ourselves
with the question, Why this passage in particular should not
be understood of the Logos ? Kbstlin, p. 484, replies that
o X070? tov deov being written, and not 6 X070?, shows that we
have here no independent hypostasis distinct from God (comp.
Baur, p. 217, ut ante) ; and similarly Diisterdieck says, p. 5 7,
" The limiting genitive, tov deov, differs somewhat from the
manner of the Apostle John ; but it is wholly inconceivable that
the Apostle who wrote John i 1-5 could represent the Logos
under any form." But we have to do with a writer who was led
by the laws of the literature upon which he was engaged to speak
of the Logos after the manner of the Old Testament, and therefore
as X0705 t. d., and directed by his art, to give form to the in
visible, as he has also done to the Holy Ghost, and to a certain
extent even to God Himself. Moreover, I think the genitive case

96 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
might in Philo be against the independent hypostasis, but not
so in an original Christian writer who could not conceive of
Christ in His pre-existence otherwise than as an independent
hypostasis distinct from God. Another objection Kbstlin formu
lates ¦ thus : " The name ' Word of God ' is directly ascribed to
Christ only in His state of exaltation, and when, and only in so
far as He comes down to the earth as an avenging judge"
(comp. Baur, p. 217, ut ante). But does the seer at any time
speak at all of Christ in His humiliation except in the begin
ning of the twelfth chapter, where for the sake ¦ of consistency
it was impossible to describe Him as the Word of God ? I And
though this name is first ascribed to Christ when He come*. as
judge, it is nowhere said that it is so ascribed to Him only iii
that character. According to this principle of interpretation!
most of the predicates of Christ in the introductions of the"
letters must have attributed to them a narrower meaning thanJ
they have, either according to the literal sense, or according t/
the view of the expositor himself; the analogy of these intrra
ductions compels us much rather to understand the name " Wo/it
of God" in such a sense that the judicial function in whicfT

Christ appears is included in it, but it does jiot compel us to
regard that function as the only one, or as being in the" thoughts
of the seer the' full "contents of that name, when the word sense
or other circumstances are against such an interpretation. As
Diisterdieck, in loco, correctly remarks, the idea of the formula
Kal KeKXijTai shows that a definite name (comp. ver. 12) current
with believers, which the Lord had received and continually
bears as a significant name (comp., on the other hand, the more
appellative designations in vers. 11, 16), is here pointed out.
Further, the connection of xix. 11-16 generally, and especially
the name of Christ, which "no man can know but He Himself"
(comp. Beyschlag, Christologie des N. T. p. 132), shows that the
author desires not merely to represent Christ as appearing in His
judicial capacity, but briefly and forcibly, in all those attributes
which give real and full significance to His final appearance as
judge ; and lastly, from xix. 1, the seer unmistakeably sketches the
single aim of all His predictions, the great world catastrophe
through which all discrepancy between the reality and the
ideal, or all conflict on the part of the world against God and
His purposes, will be destroyed. On one side this catastrophe is

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 97
regardefcd as the coming of Christ, and on the other as the coming of
God. 1jW"e may compare what we have already recognised as the
sense of i> " which is to come," for example in i 4, and in so doing
must acknowledge that it was precisely where His coming, who
comes a as God, should be placed as such in the fullest light that
it was i impossible to ascribe to Him the name "the Word of
God"/ with such evident emphasis and with such manifest
kzerAty, in a different sense from that of the personal principle of
the self-revelation of God, the Mediator in an absolute sense, in
whom God appears, and through whom God works as in and
through His other self. If in my conception of " the Word of
God" I stood entirely alone, I should still be disposed to main
tain it against all the subtilties of exposition. It has, however,
been to me a source of satisfaction to find myself. in agreement
with at least a few expositors. To say nothing of Neander, who
(ut ante, p. 481, note) speaks of the harmony of the Apocalypse
with the doctrine of the Logos, 'which cannot by any ingenuity
be explained away, Ritschl, ut ante, p. 120, note, on xix. 13 and
iii. 14, recognises "the Word of God" as the starting-point of
the Johannineconeeption^ of Christ. Hase (die f^Rngln~Sfjkuie—
p. 29) writes:. "The substance of the Logos doctrine is not
wanting, nor the verbal element and harmony." Schmid (bibl.
Theol. II. p. 362) says: "The idea of the Logos is found in the
Apocalypse, but it is applied only in special relations." Lechler
(das Apostolische und Nachapostolische Zeitalter, 2 Auflage, p.
200) finds that, according to xix. 13, Christ Himself is the
"Word, the personal bearer of the divine wisdom and power,
the medium of the divine self-revelation." Beyschlag, ut ante,
p. 133, recognises a relation of reciprocal complement between
" the Word of God " and " the beginning of the creation of God,"
and remarks " that only a world-creative Word of God, and not
a mere world-judging Word, can be called the beginning of the
creation." Understand " the beginning " as we please, it is evi
dent that a mere world-judging Word might be a reXo?, but in
no sense an dpyf). Further, the name " Word of God " confirms
our decision with respect to " the beginning of the creation," that
it does not mean the first creature, but can mean only " the
principle of the creation," for the latter only, according to Gen. i
. 3, and according to self-evident conceptions, can be called X070?
tov deov. Both names are essentially congruent, only that in
G

98 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE. /
"the beginning of the creation of God" the relation expressed is
to the world, but in " the Word of God " it is to God.
We also, without restriction or hesitation, trace to the doctrine
of the Logos, as their inner unity, their substratum, their connec
tion with the idea of God, all those expressions of the Apocalypse
which go beyond Messianic representations. But how did the seer
-arrive at that doctrine ? The book itself gives us no reply to the
question. Almost in every word it shows us that its author must
have sprung from Palestinian Judaism, and the inquiry then arises
which of the two ChristolojmaljEases? the Messjmicorthat of
_theXogos, wasjEhe eariierTand, as it were, originallyTamiliar, "and
which was subsequently appropriated as supplementary. Further,
the Apocalypse does not contain anything which might be regarded
as the starting-point for the formation of the doctrine, it gives us
simply the doctrine itself ; and thus all such expositions as those of
Baur, and especially of Kbstlin, which tell us that, for the sake
of the great eschatological expectations, the Messiah, as the chief
subject of the same, must have an adequate position, fall away of
themselves (comp. Baur, p. 219 ; Kbstlin, p. 485). But we could'
as easily believe that the doctrine of the Logos came to the author
in its original Alexandrian form, as that it was for him already
associated with the Messianic idea, or that he met with it already
applied to Jesus. In like manner, the Apocalypse leaves us in
doubt how its author may have been prepared for the independent
application, or for the acceptance of the Logos doctrine when it
had already been applied, whether through acquaintance with a
Palestinian Christology, surpassing the popular Messianic repre
sentation and its reference to Jesus, or through the contents of
his faith in Jesus having passed the limits of the popular Pales
tinian theology. When he applies so many Old Testament
descriptions both of Jehovah and the Covenant, or presence angel,
to Christ, it may as easily be that the Christological significance
of the Logos doctrine may have come to him first from the related
passages, as that they had the same for him before his becoming
acquainted with that doctrine.
On the other hand, the Apocalypse does not leave us entirely
in the dark respecting the relation in the mind of the seer
of the Messianic idea and the doctrine of the Logos to each other,
especially if we consider the pervading peculiarity noticed
above, according to which, with well-sustained art, he clothes

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 99
Christianity, in its facts, ideas, and circumstances, in Old Testa
ment forms, though not with artistic licence ; for Christianity, IrT
all seriousness, was for him the fulfilment or the full truth of
Old Testament types. We shall not be tempted, by the mul
titude and preponderance of Messianic predicates, to conceive of
the Apocalypse as if it contained, besides the Messianic idea,
only a few isolated traces, or germs, or starting-points of the
doctrine of the Logos. And just as little shall we think, with
Beyschlag, tit ante, p. 138, that, with the seer, the Logos was
that which pre-existed in heaven ; but, on the other hand, that
which existed on earth, in Israel, was the parallel maturing
manifestation, each only a factor in the future! Messianic per
sonality, the former the ideal, the latter the historic ; and by the
union of both factors the personality, as such, comes into existence;
in other words, the paternal share in this Son of the Eternal God
and the Old Testament church is the Eternal Word, the divine
self-revelation, personally realizing itself in history ; the maternal
share is the Israelitish recognition of God and the Messianic idea.
Much rather, according to the analogy of the book, we should

represent the relation to ourselves thus : the seer perceived m
the doctrine of the Logos the realization or full truth of the
Messianic idea, and in the Messianic idea the doctrine of the
Logos in its holy and typical form ; Jesus is for him the Messiah ;
but the Messiah, in the full sense of that sacred name, is no other
than the Logos. I confidently affirm that had the writer not
thus regarded the relation between the idea of the Messiah and
the doctrine of the Logos, he could not have appropriated the
latter in its entire individuality. But from the way in which
alone he could appropriate it, and really has done, namely, through
its identification with the Messianic idea, we have a solution of
that which has been an enigma to many expositors, namely, how
the Messiah has ascribed to Him the very highest, even Logos-
predicates. Not less simply is it thereby explained why the
Logos is only once mentioned by name, and even then, in Old
Testament phrase, " the Word of God ; " also how, only once, and
again in a quotation from the Old Testament, " the beginning of
the creation of God," the Logos is characterized according to His
peculiar nature. He ventures to describe Him only in sacred
language, therefore, with such predicates as are applied to the
Messiah, the angel of God, the angel of the presence.

100 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
By the last circumstance, and still more by the purely presup-
positional and occasional character of the Christological statements
of our book, an organic representation of the apocalyptic doctrine of
the person of Christ is clearly rendered impossible. We venture,
therefore, to sketch it according to its peculiar nature, or accord
ing to its idea. The Logos is the real self-revealing principle of
the absolute God; He mediates God with that which is not God;
in other words, He is both for the world to be created and for the
created world of the last times — the real personal medium of
God. The Messiah is the restorer of thg-kingdeaa of Gotr-prST
mised to Israel and expected by Israel,, in other words, the
mediator, the salvation as well as the perfection of man fallen
from God. Through the identification of the Messiah and the
Logos, the former becomes to the seer the creating, governing,
and perfecting principle of God to the universe ; the latter, the
saving, judging, and perfecting mediator to fallen humanity.
Jesus is the Messkh-Logos. To Him as such, not to Him merely
as" the TEle^sia^T'belongsall that we have quoted above as the
Messianic expressions of our book; to Him as such, and not
merely as the Logos, are ascribed all the expressions to which we
have referred as super-Messianic. According to xxii. 6, " the
Lord God of the holy prophets sent His angel to show unto His
servants the things which must shortly be done." In xxii. 16
Christ says of the same thing, " I Jesus have sent mine angel to
testify unto you these things in the churches ; " and it is still of
the same that in i 1 we read, " The revelation of Jesus Christ,
which God gave unto Him, to show unto His servants things
which must shortly come to pass ; and He sent and signified it by
His angel unto His servant John." It was to the author perfectly
valid whether he said that God had given him the revelation, or
that Jesus had given it him; but when he wishes to express
himself with complete accuracy, he says that God gave the reve
lation to Jesus, and that Jesus gave it to him. We may there
fore, reasoning from the particular to the general, describe the
nature of Jesus as that of the Messiah-Logos. He is as really
one with God as He is distinct from God ; as really related to
God as to the world. He is, has, and does all that God is, has,
and does ; but what God is in Himself, that is He as having
become ; what God has from Himself, that has He as received ;
what God does independently, that He does according to the will

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 101
of God. There is little difficulty in showing this from a series
of examples. We may compare xv. 3, 4 with xii. 5, and ii. 2 7
and x. 2 with xix. 1 1 and xix. 1 5 ; also i 4 with xvi. 1 5 and
xiv. 14-16 ; and further, iv. 8-11 with v. 12 and v. 13, especially
xxi. 23 with xxii. 5. Though, on the other hand, while it is
explained how many things are affirmed, sometimes of God and
at other times of Christ, or of God and Christ at the same time,
we remain in the dark as to the different relations of both to the
common predicates, — we may compare the above quoted Messianic
expressions, — it can hardly be a difficulty to the unprejudiced,
for they will naturally not expect that the seer would furnish a
dogmatic theology, but that he would present now one and now
the other of various sides of the relation of the Messiah-Logos to
God — resemblance, difference, and transferred possession — as he
really does. ~~  — —  —  —
We shall now be able to judge correctly how our author has
conceived of the pre-existence, the earthly history, and the exalta
tion of Christ, or in other words, the various positions of Christ in
their contrasting relations. Beyschlag, with whom alone we have
here anything to do, says, p. 137, ut ante : " The difference between
the pre-existence and the historical existence must be sought in some
thing else than, with the orthodox, in the human nature, namely,
in the relation of reality and ideality. What the author, by his
direct application of predicates of pre-existence to the historical
Christ, has left out of consideration is the difference between that
which is still to be realized and that which is already so his
torically; the eternal idea, the pre-existent principle which has
unfolded itself in this historical person, he has, without hesitation,
made the name of the same." At this point we see how difficult
it sometimes is to get a correct understanding of individual parti
culars apart from their connection with the complete doctrine,
and at other times how the application of modern dogmatic
categories to New Testament doctrine avenges itself. Beyschlag,
with his distinction between ideality and reality, is near the truth,
but has not succeeded in grasping it, because neither has he dis
engaged himself from the modern doctrine of personality, nor does
he understand ideality and reality otherwise than in the modern
sense. Then certainly must the seer have left the difference
between that which is not yet realized and that which is, without
notice, and overlooked the manifest difference between historical

102 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
and pre-historical being — between ideal and real existence. But
first, our notion of personality was evidently unknown to him, or one
might still attempt to bring his statements and representations with
respect to angels under the categories " personal " or " impersonal,"
or into both. Secondly, as we have seen in the section on heaven,
ideality and reality are with the seer not opposites ; rather does
he distinguish between ideal and historical reality. He has
therefore not overlooked anything when he calls the exalted
Christ, with whom only he everywhere has to do, " the Word of
God," " the beginning of the creation of God," and speaks of those
who, since the foundation of the world, are written in the Lamb's
rbook of life, xiii. 8. Ideally, the Messiah-Logos was realized in
Jesus from eternity, as in the fulness of time He was historically
I realized in Jesus ; not in historical, but in ideal reality is Jesus
rthe Word of God and the Principle of the Creation from eternity.;
and the Messiah-personality has not two factors, one ideal and the
other historical, but before its entrance into the historical it had
real actuality ; before the child was born of the woman, He existed
in heaven in ideal real actuality, and prepared for His appearance
to Israel by prophecy in word and deed as through preliminary
manifestations (comp. Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 623). It is with the
relation of the pre-existent and the historical Christ as with the
state of the perfected in heaven and in the New Jerusalem, where
also the distinction is not between realized and to be realized,
but between the ideally real and the historically real perfection.
Instead, therefore, of speaking here, with Beyschlag, of biblical
modes of thought and speech being distinguished not so well
dialectically as understood mystically, I submit whether we have
not probably something to learn from the seer's distinction of
ideal and historical reality in Christology. ; .
But how has the seer conceived of the relation of the historical
to the pre-existent Christ ? Beyschlag, ut ante, -p. 129, formally
protests against the idea that anywhere in the Apocalypse the God
like glory of Christ is described as a pre-existent and voluntarily
sin-rendered possession. In the only place which speaks of the
coming of the Messiah into the world, xii. 1, 2, the seer says
nothing of such a surrender. Indeed, the thought of such a
thing seems to be at variance with the fundamental representa
tion of the author, that the historical Christ showed Himself to be
the Messiah-Logos. Yet such a surrender is distinctly expressed

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 103
in i 17, 18, where He says, " I am the first and the last : I am
He that liveth, and was dead (iyevop,rjv, became) ; and, behold, I
am alive for evermore." As the first and the last, as the living,
He died not according to human lot, but voluntarily; He did
not therefore lose His life, but gave it : in His death the writer
undoubtedly sees a surrender on the part of Christ. But how
explain the contradiction ? Simply by the consideration that the
Logos-Messiah has not entered into the future complete, but into
the present imperfect historical reality, and that therefore He
has shown His Messiah-Logos nature in the voluntary surrender
of His glory. According to the representation of the seer, there
must have been in the life of Jesus harmonious parallel revela
tions of His" Messiah-Logos nature in manifestations of glory,
for example, as " the living one ; " and in self-humiliation and
self-surrender, for example, as " the Lamb," who permits Himself
to be slain ; in other words, the historical^Christ has both mani
fested His pre-existent Godlike glory^ and_ voluntarily- surrendered
it, and has inbo^n~~equally_"shbwn Himself to be the Messiah-
Logos, so that even the self-surrender is regarded as a manifesta
tion of his glory.-; — Was Christ to the seer a real man ? We look
at such expressions as, " where also our Lord was crucified," xi. 8 ;
" as I also overcame," iii. 21, and are inclined to reply in the
affirmative. On the other hand, we remember the evident design —
discussed above — with which the author, in his use of the passage
in Daniel respecting the Son of man, instead of a><?, corresponding
to the Hebrew and to his own frequent practice, twice writes op,oio<;,
which differs from the former in that m<s implies a similarity of
appearance without reference to a similarity of nature ; it describes,
indeed, a similarity of appearance with a difference of nature, and
so we feel inclined to reply in the negative. It appears to me
that in o/joto? there is the thought that_CJuisi_according to His
appearance and demeanour, ^was_thrim^hmT^_a_jnari, tmt_that
according to His nature He was not a man ; and thus that docetic
views'" of ChrisTiranbr~all views of human development, unique
ness in the midst of the whole race, and the final deification
of Jesus, were entirely foreign to the seer. When Beyschlag,
p. 130, ut ante, says that Christ was far from regarding His
heavenly glory as an exclusive privilege of His person, and
that He promised to communicate it to His disciples, and has in
principle already done so ; that He treats Himself in everything,

104 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
even in things the loftiest and most sublime, not as an original,
divine I, but as the head of humanity, the Son of man, who has
attained what He possesses, and as having attained it not for Him
self only, but for all,— he again applies modern categories which
are not adapted to the author of the Apocalypse. While we now
regard '' human " and " divine " as excluding each other, the seer
knew nothing of such exclusive contrast ; indeed, the " real " men,
the inhabitants of the earth, humanity fallen from God, the king
dom of Satan on the one side, and on the other the dwellers in
heaven, to whom Christians even here essentially belong, stand
opposite each other in the very rudest manner (comp. sections on
heaven, and on the earth and its inhabitants). Can Jesus then
have been to the writer a man in his sense of the 'word ? No.
Did he therefore conceive of Him in the manner of the doceti ?
Also, no. The Messiah-Logos was like a Son of man, that is to
say with Paul, He appeared " in ~th~e likeness of sinful flesh,"
became flesh that He might change the earthly into the heavenly,
or make it like Himself. It is worthy of remark, that while Paul
says, " when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the
Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under
him, that God may be all in all," 1 Cor. xv. 28, the seer, accord
ing to xxi. 23, xxii. 1, 3, thinks of Christ in an entirely different
relation to God, and knows nothing of Beyschlag's idea of a head
of the human race.
Neither am I able to regard the seer's conception of the relation
of the exalted to the pre-existent and historical Christ, as Beyschlag
does when he says, p. 129, " The divine glory of Christ is never
described as possessed before time, and as being taken again
after a voluntary surrender, but is everywhere considered as
having been acquired on earth and given by God, and therefore,
instead of excluding dependence on God and subjection to Him,
implies it." Baur also says, p. 200 : "For Christ, death was the
way in which He acquired the highest divine power and glory "
(comp. Kbstlin, p. 487) ; and according to Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 621,
Jesus, who rose through His resurrection to the throne of God,
was exalted to a Godlike authority, and so has become a Godlike
being. But of the passages quoted in proof of this, such as " Thou
art worthy to take the book," v. 9, and " Worthy is the Lamb
that was slain to receive power," etc., v. 12, prove nothing, for
in iv. 1 1 we read, " Thou art worthy, 0 Lord (God), to receive

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 105
glory," etc. It is different, however, with the words, " even as I
received (el'X??$a) of my Father," ii. 27; " even as I also over
came, and am set (i/cddia-a) down with my Father on His throne,"
iii 21; " Behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of
David, hath prevailed to open the book," v. 5. In all these
places the divine glory of Christ appears to have been acquired
on earth, and to be described as given' to Him by God. In the
meantime, however, we notice that it is said in xi. 15 that " the
kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord,
and of His Christ ; and He shall reign for ever and ever ; " in
xi. 17, "We give Thee thanks, 0 Lord God Almighty, which
art, and wast, and art to come ; because Thou hast taken (el'Xi/^a?)
to Thee Thy great power, and hast reigned (ifiao-lXeva-as)," comp.
xii. 10, xix. 6. Such expressions cannot be understood as if
God had not been Lord and ruler before, or as if He had not
till then possessed His great power ; but rather, that now in his
toric reality He will gradually become and take to Himself that
which in ideal reality he is and possesses eternally. We notice
further, that as we shall find below the " reward " of the Christian
finally consists in nothing else than the perfection of his Chris
tian character, so without further evidence we shall not be able
to assign to the seer in the above words concerning Christ
the meaning that what he then received he had not earlier
possessed, and that he had not been earlier what he then
became. How little the modern antithesis in this matter agrees
with the views of the author may be learned, for example, from
xii. 5, ii. 26, 27, xix. 15. According to the analogy of the
passages respecting God, we cannot place similar expressions
concerning Christ, such as " received " or " given," in antithesis
with " possess." — The Messiah-Logos has all that God has, but
He has all as received ; He is all that God is, but God has
given it Him — rather, we must regard the representation of
the seer as being that — all that Christ in His exalted state
properly is, and has, and does, that has He also been, and has
had as received and given, and done in His pre-existence, and
during His earthly course; but while to these states in ideal
reality, He has come historically, only in His exaltation, and
only then received and taken, it is still not in such a way as
if the historical reality were already perfected, but it completes
itself gradually, so that according to the idea the completion is

106 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
involved in the beginning, but the same must and will come to
pass only historically. (c.) The Work of Christ.
Instead of exhausting the contents of the name of Christ,
"the Word of God," xix. 18, and the self-designation, " the
beginning of the creation of God," iii. 14, and thus construing the
author's representations of Christ's pre-existent activity, we shall
for the present only show that according to these names the
Christ of the Apocalypse, as the real divine or God-principle
of all revelation of God generally, and especially of the creation
and government of the world from the beginning, has been
mediatorially active. We turn at once to the works of Christ in
a narrower sense, namely, to those of His earthly life.
Here we have first to explain a number of statements connected
with this part of the subject, and then to estimate their value.
Christ is called "the faithful Witness," i 5; " the Amen, the faithful
and true Witness," iii. 14 (comp. xxii. 16, 20). John says that
he " bare record of the word of God, and the testimony of Jesus
Christ, and of all things that he saw," i 2. He also says that
he " was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God,
and for the testimony of Jesus Christ," i 9. He " saw under the
altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for
the testimony they held," vi. 9. The dragon went to make war
with the remnant of the woman's seed which keep the command
ments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus," xii. 1 7. In xiv.
1 2 we read : " Here is the patience of the saints : here are they
that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus ; "
in xvii. 17, "until the words of God shall be fulfilled." The
angel says to the seer, "These are the true sayings of God,"
xix. 19; "I am thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren that
have the testimony of Jesus," xix. 10. John saw alive the souls
of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the
word of God," xx. 4. " He who testifieth these things saith,
Surely I come quickly." And according to one reading, John
writes, " Blessed are they that do His commandments," xxii. 14.
Christ says to the church in Philadelphia, " Thou hast kept my
word," iii. 8 ; "thou hast kept the word of my patience," iii. 10.
First of all, the question arises, What is the meaning of " the

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 107
word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ " ? It is said of
the two witnesses, " when they shall have finished their testi
mony," xi 7 ; and of the brethren in heaven, that " they over
came him — the dragon — by the blood of the Lamb, and by the
word of their testimony," xii. 11 ; and in both places we are
no doubt to understand their testimony : in the first, that of the
witnesses ; in the second, that given by the brethren (comp. i 2,
xxii. 18). In like manner must we understand the testimony of
Jesus as that given by Him, and not, as many expositors under
stand it, as the testimony concerning Him. It is evident, there
fore, that by " the word of God and the testimony of Jesus," there
are not meant two different things, but the same in different
relations. The word of God is the testimony of Jesus as far as
it is expressed by Jesus : the testimony of Jesus is the word of
God as far as it is given by God. " The word of God and the
testimony of Jesus " are thus related to each other as God and
Jesus are related ; what God says, that Jesus says, as spoken by
God to Him, i 1. Thus there is no essential difference between
the expressions, the testimony of Jesus, and the word of Jesus,
and " the word of my patience," iii. 8, 1 0, only there is the absence
of express reference to God as the giver of the same, as occurs
also in a similar case, xxii. 16, i 1. .Again, "the word of my
patience " is the word of Jesus, with the special intimation that
it demanded constant patience in the midst of all opposition
(comp. Matt. x. 22, xxiv. 13 ; Luke xxi. 19). On the other side,
we have in the " commandments of God," xii. 17, xiv. 12, xxii.
14, and "the words of God," xvii. 17, nothing different from
the word of God — by " the commandments of God," some, with
Hoekstra, p. 389, understand the law of God in the Old Testa
ment in distinction from the New, — except that, perhaps, in
" the commandments of God " there is prominence given to God's
word on its preceptive side, and in " the words of God " we have
reference to the same word in its prophetic aspect ; and instead
of saying, with Baur, ut ante, p. 223, that our book regards the
essence of religion on its subjective side, as keeping the com
mandments of God, and the true worshippers of God as those
who keep His commandments, to which, if they are at the
same time to be described as Christians, there must be added the
testimony of Jesus, or faithfulness to Jesus, we much prefer to
find in the commandments and in the words of God the Old

108 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
Testament form for the word of God. But what is that which,
only according to its various relations, is called " the word of God
and the testimony of Jesus " ? In i 2 the seer can have meant
nothing else than the revelation given to himself, and in xix.
10, only that given to the prophets. On the other hand, i 9,
vi. 9, xx. 4, xii. 17, iii. 8,-10, give a good sense only when we
understand the expression to refer to the teaching of Jesus, or
the gospel in the usual sense of the word, and not, as Baur,
p. 207, and even Weiss himself, bibl. Theol. p. 627, note, to pro
phecy, the prediction of the advent. But must not the seer, when
he thus uses the same expression to describe the word which
Jesus spoke on earth, and that which He uttered after His exalta
tion, have considered both as essentially one ? How he comes
to regard Christian prophecy in its origin, like the historical
words of Jesus, as the word of God and the testimony of Christ,
will be explained in the section on the Spirit; at present we
are content with the fact that he does so regard it. After
having learned the meaning of " the word of God and the testi
mony of Jesus," we can be no longer in doubt why the seer
speaks of Jesus as " the Amen, the faithful and true Witness,"
iii. 15. Neither i 5 nor iii. 14 is exhausted by the reference
of these names to the revelation contained in the Apocalypse,
and certainly just as little by the teaching of Jesus contained in
the Gospel. On the contrary, with respect to both passages, all
is clear as soon as we associate them with the correspondence
found above; they unite, and say, Christ is the faithful or
genuine and true Witness, or the Witness whose word perfectly
agrees with the fact (comp. Isa. Iv. 4 ; Jer. xlii. 5). He is Amen,
or True (comp. Isa. Ixv. 16), as far as His testimonyreaches, Avhether
He speaks in the flesh, or in His exaltation through His prophets
(comp. xix. 11, xxi. 5, xxii. 6). But does not the "faithful and
true Witness " forcibly remind us of the doctrine of the Logos ?
The name "faithful Witness," both in i 5 and iii. 14, is intro
ductory to the highest predicates of Christ ; and as " the word of
God and the testimony of Jesus " so fully represent the relation
of the Logos to God, we cannot doubt that in both expressions
the seer had in his mind the Logos nature of Christ. The
question now arises, are we to limit " the word of God and the
testimony of Jesus " to the words of Jesus in the Gospels and
the Apocalypse ? Must we not rather extend the meaning of

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 109
these phrases to the law and the prophets, and say that the seer
held that the same Messiah-Logos-Jesus, who during His earthly
life testified the word of God, did the same before through the
Old Testament prophets, and still did it through the Christian
prophets ? It is in favour of this that by the words of God,
xvii. 17 (comp. x. 7, xix. 9, xxi. 5, xxii. 6), the writer had un
doubtedly chiefly in mind the prophecies of the Old Testament,
and by the commandments of God, xii. 17, xiv. 12, xxii. 14, it
is in the highest degree probable he meant the Old Testament
commandments ; that, as we shall find in the section on the
Gospel, Old and New Testament prophecy was for him one
complete whole ; and, as we have already seen, and shall see
still more clearly, that, according to its all-penetrating intuition,
Christianity is simply the Old Covenant in its fulfilment, and
the Old Covenant was simply Christianity in type, in preparatory
predictions, in antecedent germ and principle. Must, then, the
testimony of the historical and the exalted Jesus not have been
to him Old Testament prophecy in its fulfilment ? And on the
contrary, must not Old Testament prophecy have been to him the
testimony of Jesus respecting the future ? — As the point to which
we now come, we affirm from our discussion, that according to the
doctrine of this book the work of Christ consisted prominently
in His testifying the word of God; He was the faithful and
true Witness. But we must not omit calling attention to the
remarkable circumstance, that, as the expressions " witness " and
" testimony," used equally of Christ and His disciples, i. 5, iii.
14, ii. 13 (comp.1 xvii. 6, xi. 3), i 2, xii 17 (comp. xi. 7, xii. 11),
show, like those works of Jesus which point so clearly to His
Logos nature, besides the divine there is also a human side,
according to which the Logos-Christ is as it were the first-born,
the beginner and founder of the testimony which, as received
from Him, His followers, His witnesses continue after His example
and in His strength.
Certainly not in express words, but not the less plainly, the
seer gives us to understand that another prominent feature in the
life of Christ was His conflict with the devil. According to xii.
3-9, the dragon, whose tail draws away the third part of heaven
and casts them to the earth, — symbol of his rage and zeal, —
stands before the wonian to devour her child as soon as it is born.
It is said, xi. 8, of Jerusalem, " where also their — the two wit-

110 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
nesses — Lord was crucified." The Lion of the tribe of Juda
overcame, v. 5 ; Christ says, " To him who overcometh will I
grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and
am set down with my Father on His throne," iii. 21. Thus even
before the Messiah-Logos-Jesus had come forth from the bosom of
the Old Testament church, the devil, threatened in his empire,
as may be seen in xii. 3 et seq., made ready to destroy him.
That he really attacked Him, and that Jesus really entered into
conflict with him, is expressed in the statement that Jesus over
came, v. 5, iii. 21. According to outward appearances, Christ was
overthrown by the devil in this struggle, for He was crucified,
xi. 8 ; and of this crucifixion the devil is said to be the author,
xi. 7. But the overthrow of Christ was only in appearance,
really he had overcome — we may notice how the slain Lamb
appears immediately, v. 6, after the mention of the victory of the
Lion of the tribe of Juda — he was caught up to God and His
throne, that is, in Old Testament phrase (comp. Isa. liii. 3), not
merely to the delivering God and to His throne, as the safest and
most sublime refuge, but to a condition which, while it was com
pletely and for ever withdrawn from all suffering, is, at the same
time, one of divine honour and power, xi. 8, iii. 21.
This victory of Christ over the devil is differently represented in
the scene sketched in xii. 7-12. Its form we have already
explained in the section on the devil, and in the same connection
we have stated the meaning of the whole, namely, that the result
of Christ's conflict with the devil is the expulsion of the dragon
from heaven, or the conquest of the evil principle. But what
sort of a conquest ? After the devil and his angels are cast out, a
loud voice is heard in heaven, saying, " Now is come salvation,
and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His
Christ : for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused
them before our God day and night. And they overcame him by
the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony ; and
they loved not their lives unto death. Therefore rejoice, ye heavens,
and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth
and of the sea ! for the devil is come down unto you, having great
wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time," xii.
10-12. By this victory of Christ the devil is not yet '" cast into
the lake of fire and brimstone," as in xx. 10 ; he is not yet im
prisoned for a thousand years in the bottomless pit, as in xx. 3.

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. Ill
The devil is indeed expelled from heaven, and thereby for the
inhabitants of heaven the kingdom of God is already in its glory,
and the subject of pure joy ; and also, indeed, for the brethren of
the heavenly inhabitants, Christians on earth as related to the
ideal world, the conquest of the devil, ideally considered, has
become an objective, — the accuser is cast down,— and in so far
as they have by faith appropriated the work of Christ, the ideal
has also become a subjective accomplished fact, they have over
come him " by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their
testimony ; and they loved not their lives unto the death." But
the earth and the sea, as the sphere of the historical reality, are
called to woe, because the dragon has come to them with fierce
anger. In other words, in the invisible ideal reality, and for the
same, the power of the evil one is entirely and for ever broken
by the conflict of Christ ; but in the historical reality his activity
in temptation and persecution is only gone with the victory of
Christ, and the nearer it comes to an end, — the Lord is at hand,
— the more fiercely his power rages in a last despairing effort, the
more frightfully he pours out, as if for a final display, the evil
that is in him. In this lies the explanation why and how the
seer presents in the conflict of Jesus, as he does also in His testi
mony, a human as well as a divine side. Christ's conquest of the
devil does not relieve, and in its nature cannot relieve, His fol
lowers from the burden of the same conquest, which, for such an
expositor as Hoekstra, is to say that the victory of Christ was
only typical, and as such had an encouraging power for His
followers. An unprejudiced reader will acknowledge that it is
perfectly consistent, if we suppose that the seer regarded the con
flict with the devil, on one side as a specific saving work of
Christ, and on the other as a work in which His followers imitate
His example.
We must, by the testimony of Jesus, which we have represented
as the first prominent feature in His work, think more of what
precedes that part of the evangelic history, which is a history of
suffering ; the conflict and the victory have led us from His birth
to His death on the cross and His exaltation to heaven ; thus the
third principal feature in His work, His sacrifice or self-sacrifice,
most directly relates to His sufferings and death. Hoekstra, mf
his examination of the doctrine of the Apocalypse respecting the
death of Jesus, p. 387, affirms that, according to the Old Testa-

112 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
ment, the place of the sacrifice will be taken by prayer, especially
where opportunity for a proper sacrifice might fail, and that the
Apocalypse knows no other sacrifice than that which consists in
the worship of God, v. 8, viii. 3, 4. But besides the altar of
incense, there was in heaven the altar of burnt-offerings (compare
the section on heaven), and below it John saw the souls of those
vvho had been slain for the word of God and the testimony of
Jesus, vi. 9 ; here the expression used for " slain " is confessedly
not that used for mere death, but that which expresses sacrifice.
Instead, therefore, of taking away from the death of Jesus its
sacrificial character, we should be disposed to say rather, that in
the eye of the seer the martyr death of the Christians was a
sacrifice also ; not implying, however, that the death of Christ
was only a martyr's death, but that on the human side He is a
["sacrifice, that is, He has not loved His life unto death, but per-
\ mitted Himself to be slain by the world for God, as His followers
[thave not loved their lives unto death, but have allowed themselves
jto be slain for God. But this is only one side of the sacrificial
meaning of Christ's death ; the other is peculiar to Himself, and
Christians are not in any way its imitators, but its objects. In rela
tion to this side, we have to consider the sufferings and death of
Christ, first in symbolical representation and description of Christ,
then in a few figurative expressions representing the significance
of the blood of Christ.
John saw, v. 6, in the midst of the throne and the four living
creatures, and in the midst of the elders, a Lamb as if it had been
slain, which had seven horns and seven eyes. This Lamb is Christ;
and under this image and name He henceforth appears — with the
addition of " slain," v. 6, also v. 12, xiii. 8 (comp. v. 9, vii. 14) —
very often, and almost exclusively (comp. v. 8, 12, 13, vi. 1,
xvi. 7, 9, 10, xiv. 17, xii. 11, xiii. 8, 11, xiv. 1, 4, 10, xv. 3,
xvii. 14, xix. 7, 9, xxi. 14, 22, 23, 27, xxii. 1, 3). The use of the
less common diminutive dpvlov instead of dp.vos is simply explained
in v. 6, from the design to sharpen the contrast between the
announced Lion of the tribe of Juda, and the actual appearance
of Christ Himself. Possibly because the writer had once intro
duced Christ by it, for reasons of authorship he continues its use.
It may be also that he preferred it because he desired continually
to bring into prominence the contrast between the appearance of
Christ and His real importance, therefore between the idea and

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 113
the visible reality of Christianity, through the contrast between
the glory and activity of Christ and His standing symbol. It
appears to me, with Hoekstra, p. 388, most likely, only not solely
on account of the " wrath of the Lamb," vi. 16, but on account of
the rather frequent incongruity of the symbol and the activities
of Christ, that we must accept the word " Lamb " as being to the
seer almost a name of Christ, and therefore as furnishing a proof
that he ascribed the very highest significance to Christ's death.
It is almost universally admitted that the name and symbol of
the lamb here, as well as in 1 Pet. i 19 (comp. Acts viii. 32, 33),
may be traced to Isa. liii. 7. Ritschl, p. 12 1 (comp. Reuss, p. 477),
grants that in the above passages of the New Testament the ex
pression of Isaiah is applied to Christ, but considers it more than
improbable that the prophet's passing use of the image of the
gentle lamb called forth John's description ; his representation of
the " wrath of the Lamb " is out of harmony with it ; in that
case, the common apostolic representation that Christ has died
as the true paschal Lamb (comp. 1 Cor. v. 7; 1 Pet. i 19 ;
comp. Ex. xii. 5 ; John xix. 36 ; comp. Ex. xii. 46), decides that
this type rules- in the Apocalypse also ; further, ancient Christian
literature generally attests its value to the extent that the
image of Isaiah was first applied to Christ through the medium of
the paschal lamb ; finally, if all these New Testament passages
refer to the type of Isaiah, it would be natural to expect that
Isaiah's word TvpofBaTov would be used, and not dp,vo<; and dpviov,
which belong to the language of sacrificial ritual. From the
circumstance that the standing form under which Jesus appears
is that of a lamb, and of a lamb that has been slain, it is indeed
by no means certain, as Weiss has recently observed, bibl.. Theol.
p. 621, that we are not to think of the paschal lamb, but
of the Messiah, who, according to Isaiah, goes quietly and patiently
to the slaughter. Baur, p. 223, in direct opposition to Ritschl,
affirms that " the wrath of the Lamb " is not inconsistent with
the reference of the term to Isa. liii. ; for if there be in this
wrath nothing un-Messianic, it may be ascribed even to the meek
and gentle lamb of the prophet ; that nowhere in the Apocalypse
is there any allusion to the paschal lamb, unless the expression
" slain lamb " can be referred to it, an expression which may be
just as easily referred to Isaiah ; and finally, that the passage in
Isaiah is often referred in other relations to Jesus ; and even
H

114 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
where He is called the paschal Lamb, it describes Him not as the
slain paschal lamb, but as the Lamb of the prophet led to the
slaughter. Without entering into a lengthy discussion of all the
reasons for and against, I remark that the seer in the course of
his representation unquestionably often uses the expression, " the
lamb," .without any special signification, but only as a standing
designation of Christ (comp. xvii. 14);; the decisionTluereTore,
lies solely in the place where the lamb first appears, v. 6-14
But not a single word or feature reminds us of the lamb-like
patience of Isaiah ; on the contrary, the expressions used, such as,
" in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and
in the midst of the elders " — " as it had been slain " — " Thou
hast redeemed us to God by Thy blood " — " kings and priests " —
" we shall reign on the earth," give a good and consistent sense
only when we think of the paschal lamb. And to me it appears
very significant, that in the only other place where " the Lamb "
is expressly mentioned as having been " slain," it seems to lie far
from the type of Isaiah ; while, on the other hand, the thought of
the deliverance of Israel and the paschal sacrifice, finds spontaneous
expression. Egypt, the Egyptian plagues, the salvation of Israel^
the foundation of the Old Testament church, the sojourn of the
people of God in the wilderness, and other things in the same
connection, lie as types at the bottom of many of the representa
tions of the Apocalypse. Can it be that the passover alone has
presented no type to the writer ? These reasons, apart from sub
ordinate ones, such as, for example, the undeniable prominence of
the temple service in the symbolism of the book, and the com
paratively few references to Isaiah, are to me decisive in favour
of the view that the ground-type for the name and symbol of the
Lamb was the paschal_ojfering. But it is also certain, and that not
merely on the ground of the~iew undoubted references to Isaiah,
as in xii. 5, xiv. 5, but more on account of the author's habit of
combination, that in his representation of the lamb led to the
slaughter, the figure of the prophet has a share (comp. i 9, iii. 10 ;
comp. Beyschlag, p. 126). Such passages as vii. 14 (comp.
1 Pet. ii. 22-25) make it probable that the lambs offered at the
cleansing of the leper (comp. Lev. xiv. 10-13) form an integral part
in the lamb-symbols of the Apocalypse (comp. Lechler, p. 200) ;
and, indeed, when Hoekstra, p. 388, on account of the word
dpviov, thinks it not impossible that Jer. xi. 19 (iyw 8e a>$ dpviov

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 115
aicaKov dyoptevov tov dveadai) was in the thoughts of the seer, I
cannot but agree with him. But the statement of Baur, p. 233,
that the lamb, in the symbolic language of the Old Testament, is
the most pregnant expression for the idea of sacrifice and atone
ment, as based upon the historical fact of Christ's death, ought
not to have been called in question by the writer above mentioned,
as it is when he says, " it would have been so if the Apocalypse
had, like Paul, regarded the death of Christ as our propitiation,"
for the question here is neither anything about the Pauline expres
sions, — " propitiation, forgiveness, non-imputation of sin, justifica
tion by grace," — nor about the Pauline view of the meaning of the
death of Christ with reference to sin, and the relation thereby
disturbed between God and men ; but whether His death was in
the esteem of the seer, as Hoekstra affirms, p. 394, only the
highest and most perfect martyrdom, and at the same time the
necessary fact for our deliverance from Satan's most trying weapon,
the fear of death, and was thus merely symbolic and subjective
in its significance ; little as there may be available for the ex
planation of the lamb-symbol in detail, in any case it exalts the
doctrine of the author respecting the death of Jesus above the
purely typical and subjective.
Interpretation in detail finds a place only in the figurative
expressions of the book concerning the blood of Christ. In our
judgment, Hoekstra, p. 389, would take us captive a priori when
he affirms that, if the seer teaches the atonement of our sins
through the blood of the cross, and therefore, though not in the
same words, justification by grace, this doctrine not only does not
stand in connection with any of the other representations of the
writer, but it would be with him a decided nonsequitur, since his
doctrine of the way of salvation — he distinctly takes the stand
point of works — entirely excludes such a theory of the atonement.
In the section on the saints and their works, we shall show that
the " works " of the Apocalypse do not exclude the sacrificial
significance of the death of Christ, but rather presuppose it.
Moreover, such men as Baur, who regard " the works " in the same
light as Hoekstra, find nothing illogical in the fact that the seer
ascribes to the . death of Christ an objective and sin - atoning
power. Let us, however, hear and endeavour to understand the
author himself.
We read in v. 9, " Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God

116 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
by TJiy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and
nation ; and hast made us unto our God kings and priests : and we
shall reign on the earth." It is said of the 144,000 on Mount
Zion, " These were redeemed from among men, being the first-
fruits unto God and to the Lamb." In that they are redeemed
to God, or God and the Lamb, they become His possession, His
servants, His people; from their previous slavery they are re
deemed by a price. Therefore they were before not His posses
sion : they belonged to the earth, to men, to the world, which did
not give glory to Him as their Lord, but served the devil ; they
were previously in a condition of slavery, because deceived by the
devil (comp. xii. 9), to whose kingdom, subjects, and servants they
were attached ; or — and this representation is interwoven with
the other- — because (comp. xii. 10), on account of their sins, they
are accused by him whose bond-slaves and prisoners they are.
But Christ, with His blood, that is, by the surrender and sacrifice
of His life, has paid the price or ransom, the penalty or debt. He
has — for this is implied — put Satan's accusation to silence, and
discharged his claim on the sinner; He has thus delivered all
whom He has made free and acquired, from subjection to the
devil ; or freed them from his claims, separated them from the
earth, and made them God's, not merely as subjects or servants,
but as kings and priests, first-fruits unto Him. The entire repre
sentation reminds us of such places as Matt. xx. 28 ; 1 Pet. xviii.
19, ii. 9, 10 ; Acts xx. 28, xxvi. 18 ; Rom. vi. 17-19 ; Gal. iii.
13, iv. 5 ; 1 Cor. vi. 20, vii 23 ; Col. i 13 ; Tit. ii. 14; 2 Pet.
ii. 1 ; it comes, indeed, from a combination of the Old Testament
idea of the sin or expiatory-offering, which, as payment, penalty,
or ransom, redeemed from indebtedness to God, with that of the
peculiar or acquired people which He had taken from amongst
the nations, Ex. xix. 5; Deut. vii 6, xiv. 2, xxvi. 18; Isa. xliii.
21 ; Mai. iii. 17 ; ideas, though incongruous in themselves, recon
ciled by the later idea of the kingdom and rights of the devil.
The type with respect to deliverance from sin may be Isa. Iii.
4, 5, 7-1 2 ; but the type of the passover, which not only atoned
for the people, but also delivered them from servitude and separated
them from the world for the service of God, .is pre-eminent.
When Hoekstra says, p. 394, from the standpoint which he
assigns to the seer, that the death of Christ may be represented
as a price which He has paid to redeem a divinely-consecrated

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 117
church for Himself and for God, the divines and preachers of our
day furnish striking proof that, while they regard the death of
Christ' as a martyrdom and as an event delivering from the fear
of death, they can also speak of redemption through the blood of
Christ.X The seer was not a speculative Rationalist ; and when.
he regafrds and represents the blood of Christ as the purchase-price
or ransojm, His death cannot have been to him anything else than
a sacrifiqial death.
We imeet with another representation in vii. 14, where it is
said, "theW have washed (eirXvvav) their robes, and have made
(ekevKavam them white (bright) in the blood of the Lamb." While
Hengstenberg distinguishes the washing from the making white,
and refers jthe former to the forgiveness of sins and the latter to
sanctificaticp, Diisterdieck declares it to be against the nature of
the image, ^hich he regards as describing a washing by which the
garments are made white'; and he sees in it a fine trait of genuine
ethics, namely, that they who, in their earthly life, have washed
their garments white in the blood of the Lamb, shall in the future
life appear felothed in white raiment (comp. iii. 4, xix. 8). But
the passages1, quoted do not refer to that life at all ; and the
" white " of the Apocalypse, as Hengstenberg justly remarks, is not
simply white, synonymous with icadapos, but the brilliant, shining
white of the light, synonymous with ~kapnrpo<; (comp. xv. 6, xix. 8).
Consequently, in the idea of the seer it cannot be the result of
washing. To wash makes clean ; to make white, is to make bright
or shining. What, then, is the representation involved in wash
ing and making garments white in the blood of the Lamb ? Im
purity, defilement, uncleanness, are in this book the most frequent
designations of sin (comp. iii. 4, xiv. 4, 5, xvii. 4, xxii. 11—15) ;
and when Christians are said to have washed their garments in
the blood of the Lamb, it is meant that they have appropriated
the death of Christ to themselves, and that His death has cleansed
them from their sins — taken their sins away from them, or brought
to them deliverance from them. When Christians are said to
have made their garments white in or with the blood of the
Lamb, it is intended to say that, having appropriated the death
of Christ, the same has sanctified them, that the white garments
are the symbols of holiness, and making them white, of the process
of purification, as we shall show in the next section, pointing ouf^
at the same time, the close connection of these symbols with the

118 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
idea of the priestly and kingly office of Christian men. M Purifi
tion from sin, expressed by washing the garments, the^
which is frequently mentioned both in the Old TestaraA nit and
the New under the images of forgiveness, atonement, dpliyl erance,
and justification, springing from the sphere of law ancY so» -Ml life,
and under others arising from the natural bodily life, m nust be
distinguished from that occurring in Jas. iv. 8, 2 Cor', vii m 1, which
comes to the same thing as the legal and social imasr es, as far
as on both sides the negative phase of becoming a Cjr aristian is
made prominent. In the one case it is evjdent thaf t, through
grace, sin is put away on the part of God, and on the I other that
it is put away on the part of man : in the former easel the result
is happiness ; and in the latter, holiness. Making thf e garments
white in the blood of the Lamb relates to washing/ , not as the
positive to the negative aspect of becoming a Chri* itian, but it
describes positively the practical realization of the/ same in the
principle of life given by the death of Christ, the essf ential appro
priation of which the washing negatively symbolizes.^ The whole
representation reminds us of Acts xv. 9, xxii. 16, L- _„ 0«r. vi. 11,
2 Pet. i. 9, and has doubtless originated in a combination^-^
the Old Testament ideas of the sin-offering (comp. Lev. xii. 8,
xvi 30-34) and the washings, especially of the priests (comp.
Ex. xix. 1 0, xxix. 4 ; Ps. li. 4-9). Isa. liii. is not to be accepted
as the type ; much rather, as shown by the white garments, the
clothing of priestly kings, the passover in its meaning as a sin-
offering, together with the lamb as an offering of purification,
and the washings, have led to the representation of washing the
garments in the blood of the Lamb. Moreover, there hardly needs
any statement of proof that the seer, in this washing, thought of
baptism, or rather, by this biblical expression desired to represent
in its signification baptism itself. According to Hoekstra, p. 394,
there was in the mind of the seer the idea that the blood of
Christ is the power which prepared the martyrs for martyrdom —
the self-washing of their garments. What he adduces in support
of this, namely, that in the words, " these are they which came out
of great tribulation," vii. 14, the persons mentioned are designated
as martyrs, and that the white robes decidedly permit us to think
of them as such (comp. vi. 1 1), fails in presence of the fact that
martyrs are not the only persons who come out of the great
tribulation, xx. 4, and that white raiment is worn by non-martyrs

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 119
| also (comp. iii. 4, 5). It would have been different if John had
done certain expositors the favour of writing, " they have washed
their robes, and made them white in or with their blood ; " but he
has written, " in or with the blood of the Lamb ; " so that it is
always partially right, that from a Pauline standpoint it cannot
be said, " We have delivered ourselves from our sins through the
blood of Christ, or have reconciled ourselves to God, or cleansed
ourselves from evil ; " but this does not hinder that, according to
the view of the seer, the death of Christ has power to deliver
and sanctify those who avail themselves of it.
In i. 5, two readings, each with strong claims, stand opposed
to each other : XovaavTi diro and XvaavTi i/c. If we read, " who
loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own blood," it
reminds us forcibly of vii. 14 ; only XovaavTi does not refer to the
robes, but to the wearers, and the washing is ascribed to Christ,
and not, as in vii. 14, to Christians. In the latter difference I
cannot, with Hoekstra, p. 394, find a reason against the reading
which gives Xovo-avTi, and the less so, as the washing of the body
is a different image from the washing of garments. If, on the
contrary, we read, " who has loved us, and redeemed us from our
sins by His own blood," we are led to v. 9, xiv. 3, 4 ; only I
would not say, with Kbstlin, p. 486, that " dyopatjziv adds to
\veiv the positive idea that the redeemed belong to God and His
Son." But while dyopd^eiv expresses the negative and the positive
side, freedom from the power of the devil, and subjection to God
as His, \veiv expresses the negative side. Better still, if we say
that the phrases, " redeemed from the earth " unto God, and " re
deemed us from our sins," are different images. In the latter, sins
are conceived of as bonds which hold men under debt and slavery,
from which Christ, through His death, as that which removes
the debt, or propitiates, or delivers from servitude, saves them.
And though part of the reading in i 5 may be disputed, this is
certain, that it emphatically expresses what similar passages
tacitly imply, namely, that the motive by which Christ was_ led
to give His life was His love for HJTp~eople. How TKeTstra" caii
sayTpr394, that the breaking of the power oTtemptation, through
the martyr-death of Christ, is, in fact, a deliverance of believers
from the bond which binds them to sin, can be explained only on
the assumption that he supposed the seer to regard sin, and slavery
to sin, as destroyed by good example, or, more strictly, by en-

120 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
lightening instruction, — a view so utterly foreign to a conscious
ness springing from the Old Testament and Judaism, that the
unprejudiced reader will require no special proof.
It is said in xii. 11, "they overcame him by the blood of the
Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not then-
lives unto the death." To give the final blow, Hoekstra, p. 395,
has reserved this passage until the last, and he triumphantly
assures us that his interpretation is the only one it will bear.
Why ? Because it is said of " our brethren " that they themselves
overcame Satan their accuser before God, and not that Christ has
done it for them. They are also said to have overcome him, —
not through, which Sid, c. accus., does not signify, but on account
of, or in virtue of the blood of the Lamb and the word of their
testimony ; and it is expressly stated that the conquest consists
in their not having loved their lives unto the death, so surrender
ing themselves as martyrs. But it seems to me that his triumph
is premature. The sense of the passage is not that they- over
came him in that they did not love their lives, but died a martyr's
death, for which the bloo'd of the Lamb gave them strength, and
of which the word of their testimony was the cause. If it were^
the passage would certainly sustain Hoekstra's position. But the
words affirm that they overcame him on the ground of three
things : the first of which is, the blood of the Lamb ; the second,
the word of their testimony ; the third, the sacrifice of their
lives : for it is as certain that Sid in both cases belongs to iviKntrav,
as that ovk riydirriaav ttjv °tyvyf\v implies a third, only in a some
what looser connection. The blood of the Lamb is not, therefore,
the motive to martyrdom, but the first causal power of their con
quest over Satan, upon which the other two are based. The_
words, "by the blood of the Lamb," have no special importance
in relation to the doctrine of our book concerning the death of
Christ. Neither in themselves nor in their reference to the con
quest of Satan, nor in their connection with the testimony and
the martyrdom, do they tell us whether the writer had in his
mind the representation of v. 9 or that of i 5 or vii 14, or some
other. If, in xxii. 14, we should read Tr\vvovTe<s to,? o-roXd? ai/Twv
instead of m-oiovvTes t«? evToKa,'; avTov, we then have only a parallel
with the first half of vii. 14, though conceivably containing within
it the second.

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 121
The words, " whose names are not written in the book of Hfe
of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world," xiii. 8, as
Hengstenberg remarks, ascribe the book of life directly to the!
slain Lamb, and thus make all salvation, even that of the devout\
men of the Old Covenant, dependent upon the sacrifice of Christ.
Beyond this, the passage does not give any information respecting
the connection between the death of Christ and eternal life.
Schmid, bibl. Theol. II. p. 361, thinks that, with the predicate of
Christ, " the Word of God," a statement is associated which points
to the atonement, "He was clothed with a vesture dipped in
blood," xix. 13. We may notice, however, an unmistakeable
reference to Isa. lxiii. 1-4, and the impossibility of finding the
atonement in the latter leads us to regard Schmid's supposition
as untenable. The seer, says Kbstlin, p. 483, agreeing with Baur, p. 220,
belongs to those who attach great importance to the fact of the
resurrection. And, indeed, the resurrection of Christ undeniably
stands with Him in the same rarrk"as""His death on the cross.
Christ says : "I am the first and the last : I am He that liveth
and was dead ; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen ; and
have the keys of hell and of death," i 17, 18. In ii. 8 we read :
" These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is
alive ; " and Christ is also called " the first-begotten of the dead,"
i. 5. Hoekstra has endeavoured to show, pp. 380-382, that,
though it fell to Christ's lot to rise soon after His death, His
resurrection in the idea of the writer did not differ from that of
believers. It is true that the word %r)v is used of the resurrec
tion of others as well as of that of Christ (comp. xx. 4) ; in the
account of the two witnesses, xi. 7-1 2, it is in the highest degree
probable that we have indirect evidence of the views of the seer
concerning Christ's resurrection. Christ does not appear in either
of the resurrection scenes described in xx. 4, 5, xx. 11-15 ; this,
however, does not exclude the possibility that for the seer His
resurrection might have a different meaning than that which is
common to the resurrection of others ; and that it really had a
higher meaning, he has distinctly shown. According to i 17, 18
(comp. ii. 8), Christ is the first and the last, that is, the self-
eternal beginner and finisher of all created being. He is " He
that liveth," the eternal and absolute Life, from which all created
life proceeds, and in which it consists, and to which it tends.

122 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
He was dead, or became dead (eyev6p,r)v veicpos), but the historical
fact of His death is followed by the historical fact of His resurrec
tion ; He is alive again (e&<re), and lives for evermore, that is,
having regard to the " behold ! " He is revealed as the eternally
living One. This fact has for Christians the signification that
Christ as the risen " first and last," as He who liveth for ever,
has the keys of hell and death ; that is, He possesses power over
both, and can deliver from them, and can subject to them (comp.
ii. 10, 11, xxii. 3-5, xiv. 13). When Christ is described as
" the first-begotten of the dead," i 5, it cannot be intended merely
that He was the first to rise, but that He was the first-fruits, , the
beginner and forerunner, the Head and Lord of all who are dead,
or will die, and rise again to eternal life. Thus, though Hoekstra
entirely ignores the ownership of the keys of death and hell, and
declares it to be at least doubtful whether by " the first-begotten
of the dead" we are to understand anything more than that
Christ was the first to rise ; or whether the writer intended to
represent His resurrection as nativitas quaedam, and so arrives at
the conclusion that Christ rose first of all, and immediately after
His death, but that there is no essential difference between His
resurrection and that of others, — we have found that He, as raised
from the dead, and thereby declared to be alive for evermore, is,
on one side, the possessor of the keys, and has power to punish
men with death and to deliver them from death, to kill and to
make alive — undoubtedly a divine prerogative ; and on the
^other side, as "the first-begotten of the dead," He is made
known as sharing in that eternal life which, like Him and
through Him, His followers shall ultimately enjoy. Here,
again, we evidently meet with that quality in Christ which to
modern critics appears to be a contradiction, but which does not
seem to have presented the slightest difficulty to the seer,
namely, that in Him there is a revelation of the absolute divine
nature as well as of the absolute human nature, or of what
human nature may and will become, wholly corresponding to the
Logos nature of Christ in His twofold or mediatorial capacity.
In what does the activity of the exalted Christ consist ? That,
according to v. 8, thT^er7as~T)e Wettethmks, appears tb^-know
nothing of an interceding Christ, hardly needs to be expressly
questioned. It is certainly not without meaning that the Lamb,
v. 6, stands " in the midst (iv p.eatp) of the throne and of the

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 123
four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders ; " and that
it is said, vii. 17, " the Lamb which is in the midst of the
throne" (dva. p,eo-ov, the throne, an open half-circle). In the
former passage John does not intend merely to define the limits
within which the Lamb stands, namely, the space whose centre is
the throne and the four living creatures, and which is surrounded
by the elders (comp. Diisterdieck in loco) ; nor could his design
be only to present the Lamb in the highest place, which the
Messiah, standing next to God, and exalted far above the elders,
could take (comp. Ewald in loco), but, as Diisterdieck himself, p.
297, observes, whether the Lamb is seen in the midst before the
throne of God, or (?) whether in the midst of the representatives
of believers who surround the throne, He has always the same
position between Him who sits on the throne and the living
creatures and the elders who stand around ; that is, His appear
ance as a Lamb, as well as the position in which He stands,
indicates His atoning, mediatorial character ; or we may rather
say, with special reference to His state of exaltation, that the
position of the Lamb, v. 6, vii. 1 7, teaches that as Christ from
eternity has been the mediator between the Creator and the
creation, and as in time He sustained the same office, so He does
also in His exaltation, and thus continues in its propitiatory^
aspect His Logos-Messianic activity. "
But this meo5atoriaT~orKce has two other sides, one of which is
the revelation of God to the world. John sees " in the right hand
of Him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the
back side, sealed with seven seals," v. 1—3. It is the book of the
future and of destiny, the secret purpose of God concerning the
world. A strong angel cries with a loud voice, " Who is worthy
to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof ? And no man in
heaven, nor in earth, nor under the earth, was able to open the.
book, neither to look thereon." At this John wept ; but one of
the elders said to him, " Weep not : behold, the Lion of the tribe
of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book,
and to loose the seven seals thereof ; " and John saw that " in the
midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the
midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having
seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God
sent forth into all the earth ; and He came, and took the book out
of the right hand of Him that sat upon the throne," and one after

124 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
another opened the seals. The sense is, that the Messiah, who
is completing His saving work, has looked into the secrets of the
divine counsels (Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 629), or that God reveals
to Christ alone His hidden purposes, and that Christ makes them
known to men through the prophets (comp. i 1, xix. 10, xxii. 16).
So in His exaltation Christ is called " the faithful Witness," i 5 ;
"the Amen, the faithful and true Witness," iii. 14. The two
prophets in chap. xi. are witnesses of Christ ; and when He is said
to have the seven Spirits of God, who are sent forth into all the
earth, iii. 1, v. 6, what can it mean, if not that Christ is the
medium through whom the Holy Spirit is sent, and, as the
possessor of all communications of life from God to the world, as
the personal principle of all revelation of God, is continually
active ?
The third side of this mediatorial activity is the government of
the world. Christ has sat down with His Father on Jlis throne^

iii 21; He is " the Prince of the kings of the earth," i. 5 ; He
is "Lord of lords and King of kings," xvii. 14; "He hath on
His vesture and on His thigh a name written, King of kings
and Lord of lords," xix. 16. The Lamb has seven horns, the
symbol of divine .po""  -, 6. Christ has received from His
Father autho— ^ to rule' the nations with a rod of iron, and to
break them in pieces like a potter's vessel, ii. 27; and He is a
sharer of the divine throne, not merely, as Hoekstra says (comp.
" The Person of Christ "), in a i;mited Messianic sense, but in
a universal sense; as the Lrr ^-Messiah He takes part in the
divine government of the world ; He rules or governs the world
with omnipotent power, in that God rules or governs it through
Him. But what is true of God's government of the world,
namely, that it is perfected in the ideal reality, and in the
historical reality is still struggling and future, is naturally
entirely so with the mediatorial world-government of Christ ; for
even in the places where the heavenly inhabitants rejoice that
the kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of God,
the same is also said of the Lamb, xi. 15, xii. 10, though at the
same time the book predicts that in the future Christ is to be
the ruler of the whole world ; once it is said that it has been
given Him to rule the nations, ii. 27; and at other times it is
affirmed that He must or will exercise this authority, xii. 5,
xix. 15.

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 125
The same duality in the relation between Christ and Christians,
— I do not say men, but Christians, — according to which He is
as well the author of salvation as He is the head and type of the
saved, while His followers are both its subjects or receivers, and
followers or imitators, of the works of Christ, — the same duality,
which in so many particulars I have pointed out, reaches even to
the exalted state of Christ. It is symbolized by the position in
which He is placed, v. 6, vii. 17, as the reconciler and mediator
in the narrower sense of the word. We need only compare the
position of the elders, v. 11, vii. 11, and their insignia, iv. 4,
with the priesthood of Christians, i 6, v. 10, and it will be with
difficulty that we can avoid the conclusion that, in the repre
sentations of the seer, Christians have, through Christ, received a
mediatorial standing. Christ appears especially, v. 1-7, as the
personal principle of all self-revelation of God; so in view of
chap, x., and the expressions concerning Christian prophecy, it
must be that the possessors of the Spirit also bear witness as
Christ does (comp. xix. 10). Christ sits with His Father on His
throne, but those who overcome shall sit with Christ on His
throne (comp. iii. 21, ii. 26, also i 5, xvii. 14, with i 6, v. 10).
Does this mean that between Christ and His people there exists
only a difference in degree ?
Christ's activity in the already existing kingdom of God, or
His relation to Christianity, is a separate and narrower sphere
within that of His general operations as world-reconciler, revealer
of God, and mediatorial ruler of the world. In it we find three
distinct features, that of the prophet, the hitjhvnest. and the king,
which, according to the manner of our air^erT^re^irequeTrtly-
combined. It may therefore be wiser, instead of classifying
them, to consider them genetically. We read, "These things
saith He that is holy, He that is true, He that hath the key of
David, He that openeth, and no man shutteth ; and shutteth, and
no man openeth," iii. 7 (comp. Isa. xxii 22). The house of
David is a symbol for the kingdom of David (comp. Ps. ci), and
David and his kingdom are actual predictions of Christ and the
kingdom of God. Christ " is the root and offspring of David,"
v. 5, xxii. 16 ; He possesses and exercises in the kingdom of
God the power of David in his house ; He is Lord of the king
dom of God ; irrevocably receives men into it, and irrevocably
excludes them ; and that, not with the distinction of the earthly

126 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
kingdom, either in one case or the other, but without distinction
both here and hereafter. Christ makes the Christian; makes
blessed, and takes away both Christianity and blessedness. The
Lamb, as slain, stands " in the midst of the throne and of the
four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders," v. 6. When
we rightly understand the meaning of the elders, it is evident
that here is meant the efficacy of Christ's sacrificial death, and
His priestly intercession for His people. But as the priesthood
of Christ is thus described on its atoning side with reference to
God, so the same appears, i. 12-16, more from its kingly govern
ing side with reference to Christians. John sees one like a Son
of man, i. 12,1 3, in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks.
He describes Himself as He " who walketh in the midst of the
seven golden candlesticks," ii. 1 ; and the seven candlesticks are
explained to mean the seven churches, i. 20. Christ has in His
right hand seven stars, i. 16, and He speaks of Himself as
" holding the seven stars in His right hand," ii. 1 ; and the seven
stars represent the angels of the seven churches. He is also
ever present with the churches, and always active among them
(irepnraTei) ; they are in His power, and no man can deliver
them out of His hand when He is disposed to rebuke and
chasten ; nor, when He resolves to protect, can any one rend them
from Him. He also searches the reins and hearts, and gives to
every man according to His works, ii. 23. He knows the
works of Christians, ii. 2, etc., and sometimes finds them not per
fect before God, iii. 2. He hates the works of the Nicolaitanes,
ii. 6 ; and where their doctrines are professed among Christians,
ii. 14, where they are quietly endured, ii. 20, where Christians
have left their first love, ii. 4, there He has somewhat against
them. He, however, gives time for repentance, ii. 21, exhorts to
reformation, ii. 5, and return, iii 2 ; but if they will not repent,
ii. 5, xvi. 22, and watch, iii. 3, then He will come upon them as
a thief, at a moment of which they know not, iii. 3, xvi. 15.
He then removes the candlestick of one of the churches out of its
place, — that is, He rejects it, and takes the gospel from it, ii. 5.
He fights with the sword of His mouth against the adherents of
error, — that is, in judgment He turns His omnipotent word
destructively against them, ii. 1 6 (comp. Isa. xi 4 ; Wisd. xviii.
15,1 6). He casts the false prophetess into a bed, and them that
commit adultery with her into great tribulation, and destroys her

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 127
children with death, ii. 22, 23 (comp. Lev. xx. 10, 11). He
spues the lukewarm out of His mouth, iii. 16. On the other
hand, the church is His bride, xxii. 1 7 ; He loves those who
belong to Him, i. 5, iii. 9 ; He rebukes and chastens them, iii.
19 ; He gives them counsel, iii. 18 ; He stands at their door and
knocks, and goes into those who hear His voice and open the
door (the thought of the Supper lies very near to this), and eats
with them and they with Him, iii. 20. Those who have not
denied their garments shall walk with Him in white, iii. 4
(comp. the section on the saints and their works). Before the
church, which has a little power, and has kept His word, and not
denied His name, He sets an open door, which no man can shut.
He gives to the synagogue of Satan those who say they are Jews
and are not, and makes them come and worship and acknowledge
that He has loved His people ; that is, they will humbly acknow
ledge that they are the true Israel, amongst whom salvation
must be sought, iii. 8, 9 (comp. Isa. ii. 3, xliii. 3-7, xiv. 14,
xlix. 23-26, lx. 14; Ps. xviii. 45, lxxii. 9; Zech. viii. 20-23).
Because one of the churches has kept the word of His patience,
He will keep it in the hour of temptation, iii 10. Upon the
faithful He will put no further burden, ii. 24. To those who
are faithful unto death He wiH give a crown of life, ii. 1 0 (comp.
the closing passage of the seventh letter, also vii. 17, xiv. 1-5).
How Christ knows the works of Christians, how He regards
them, and how He does and will stand in relation to them, He
testifies through His prophets (comp. i 11, xix. 20, xix. 10,
xxii 16).
It will be evident that, in what has been said above, our aim
has not been to exhaust, but merely to sketch a subject which
must find its completion in the following sections. I will only
add a word here respecting Hoekstra's judgment of the moral
character of Christ as represented in the Apocalypse. With
reference to De Wette's utterances, in the introduction to his
Commentary, p. 5, Hoekstra says, p. 401: "The moral dispositions
of God and Christ toward men are sharply divided between love
and wrath, but of a sympathizing, forbearing, forgiving disposi
tion toward the erring and the sinful ; of the disposition of
Jesus, who wept over the blindness and misery of His stiff-
necked kinsmen, we do not find much in the book. The basis of
Christ's character is the theocratic King; He is much less the

128 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
Saviour, who does not break the bruised reed, the spiritual
deliverer, who was kind to His enemies that He might win them
for the kingdom of God, than the powerful prince and warrior,
the victorious general, who crushes his foes." Very justly
Hoekstra has drawn a parallel between the disposition of God
and Christ. What we have said in the section on God, respect
ing His love as represented in this book, is essentially applicable
to Christ also. The seer has, in no sense of the word, aimed to
give a picture of the character of Jesus, for in the Apocalypse
He is no longer the evangelist; and in our opinion the impression
of sentimental tolerant modern liberalism is not left by the Christ
of the synoptical eschatology. If the statements of our book re
specting the disposition of Christ are sharply divided between
anger and love, historical criticism will perhaps find a similar
division in the Christ of history when it no longer pleases it
to indemnify to its utmost Him whom it represents as a man,
" though an exceptional one," by assimilation with a free-thought
theologian of the latest date.
But how can we contend with those who at one time pro
ceed upon the " settled fact " that we have no historical sources
concerning Christ, and know as good as nothing about Him
certainly, but at another time, with virtuous indignation, oppose
to the revengeful seer the Christ of the Gospels praying for His
enemies ? 2. The Spirit.
In the use of the word " spirit," the trilogy of our book is to
a certain extent repeated: God, the devil, man; heaven, the
abyss, the earth. The " spirit of life," which after three days and
a half came from God and entered into the two witnesses, so that
the dead stood upon their feet, xi. 11 (comp. vers. 8, 9), as well
as the " spirit " which the second beast gave to the image of the
first, so that it spoke, is nothing more than life, or the breath of
life,— in the first passage, described after the manner of the Old
Testament (comp., for example, Gen. ii. 7),— by which the flesh is
animated ; in a neutral sense, the natural, human, earthly life-
principle, but which appears in the words " from God " as super
natural, and by its relation to the false prophet as subnatural.
Everywhere else in the Apocalypse the spirit is the principle of

nearer presuppositions. 129
that which influences the natural, human, and earthly, affirming
itself therein, potentializing the same, and not the natural life.
But this separates again, on the one hand, into the supernatural,
the holy, and the divine ; and on the other, into the subnatural,
the unholy, and the devilish. " Spirit," as the principle of the
latter, certainly occurs only once in the Apocalypse, and then only
in a peculiar case, where the writer sees three unclean spirits
like frogs go out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the
mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet ;
and says, " they are the spirits of devils working miracles,"
xvi. 13, 14.
In all other places of the Apocalypse the term " Spirit " is used
of the Holy Spirit or tlie Spirit of God, the principle of super
natural life. It is certainly not generally granted, that in all
passages not quoted which speak of the Spirit, the Holy Spirit or
the Spirit of God, in an ethical sense, is meant. Yet Diisterdieck's
explanation of the Spirit in i 10, as meaning the higher spiritual
nature of man, stands alone, as also the exposition which makes
the spirits of the prophets to mean their own human spirits, xxii. 6.
De Wette, on iv. 5, finds in the seven lamps an image of the con
tinuous, calm revelation of God, in distinction from the thunders
and lightnings as symbols of the critical, powerful manifestations
of Himself, and affirms, therefore, that the Spirit is to the seer the
principle of physical and mental life through which the inner
influence of God comes into contact with the world of nature and
men. But the thunder and the lamps do not describe different
aspects of the Spirit : the first is rather a symbol of works of
power; and the second, of the Spirit of God (comp. v. 6). Hoekstra
says, p. 370, note, " the Spirit of God (or the seven Spirits) is in
this book not conceived of ethically, but physically, as a revela
tion of the power of God, as in the Old Testament, while His
purely spiritual operations consist in the communication of the
gift of prophecy;" and Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 629, writes: "The
sevenfold Spirit which Christ also has, appears to be conceived of
after Zechariah, as the world-pervading power of God ; but in the
sphere of salvation it has its peculiar significance as the medium
of revelation, and appears in men exclusively as the principle of
prophecy." But as the seer distinguishes tlie Spirit as clearly
as possible from the revelation of power, by the contrasting images
of thunder and lamps, he has also done the same by the distinc-
I

130 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
tion of the horns and eyes, v. 6 ; and we shall soon learn why
it is that, amongst all the activities of the Spirit, prophecy
appears so prominently in the foreground of this book. Still less
than the ethical signification of " the Spirit," is its nature acknow
ledged as the principle of supernatural life; on the contrary,
almost all expositors (comp. Kbstlin, p. 488) regard it as the
principle of revelation. And yet, I think, against such a concep
tion of the Spirit, which beforehand makes it impossible to under
stand the doctrine of the Spirit, it is sufficient to mention that
the Logos is the_revealing principle, and is yet not identipaLwith
the Spirit. It is almost superfluous to remarT£''fiow74oElexaB^i^-"
in iii. 1-3, it cannot, on the supposition that the Spirit is the
principle of revelation, be explained why Christ is introduced as
" He that hath the seven Spirits of God ; " but if we regard the
Spirit as the principle of divine life, it is clear enough, for then
we find a reference to the condition of sleep and death which
prevailed at Sardis.
But the seer at one time speaks of " the seven Spirits of God,"
iii. 1, iv. 5, v. 6 (comp. i 4) ; at another, of " the Spirit" ii. 7,
etc. ; and then again, of " the Spirit of prophecy" xix. 10 ; of "th
spirits of the prophets" xxii. 6, and of being "in the Spirit," i 10.
The question arises, How are these various expressions related to
each other ? According to De Wette on i 4, the sacred, perfect
number describes the manifoldness of the Spirit in His relation to
the world, inasmuch as the same one Spirit is everywhere present,
and penetrates all things (comp. v. 6 ; Wisd. vii. 22). Diister
dieck on the same passage says, " John's example is Zech. iii. 9,
iv. 6, 10. The Spirit cannot be perceived in His essential unity,
as He is before the throne of God, or as sent into all the earth ;
for that, there needs the concrete form (comp. Matt. iii. 16 ; Acts
ii. 2-4), associated with the sacred number, which symbolizes the
fulness of the divine perfection ; and thus the one Spirit, which,
as with Zechariah, is the safety of the church, appears as ' seven
eyes,' ' seven lamps,' or even as ' seven Spirits.' " Weiss (bibl.
Theol. p. 629, comp. p. 616) thinks that the "seven Spirits," like
" the spirits of the prophets," may be regarded as the one Spirit
of prophecy in His various manifestations. Ziillig's exposition
appears to me the simplest (I. p. 255) ; going back to Isa. xi. 2,
he points out how the later Jewish theology, in its efforts to pro
duce a complete list of the prophetically-revealed perfections of

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 131
God, attaches great importance to this passage, and partly from a
predilection in favour of the number seven, and partly from the
fact that, for example, in Num. xi. 25-29, Isa. xliv. 3 (?), and
Joel ii. 28, 29, the Spirit of the Lord has the more special
meaning of the Spirit of prophetic gifts, or the Spirit of prophecy,
has conceived of the Spirit of the Lord, so prominent in that
passage, in the sense of this more special signification, and has
brought out of it seven perfections of the Spirit of God, or the
seven Spirits of God, and so laid the foundation for rabbinical
speculation. This doctrine they found confirmed by such passages
as Zech. iv. 10, where it is said of " those seven," that " they are
the eyes of the Lord, which run to and fro through the whole
earth" (comp. Rev. v. 6) ; and Ex. xxv. 37, Zech. iv. 2, where
the seven lamps are mentioned (comp. Rev. iv. 5). The seer has
everywhere used this figure when he wishes to represent the
Spirit of God in the whole fulness of His nature ; and it is equally
the case when he speaks of Him independently of God or Christ,
i. 4, iv. 5, and also when he considers Him as the Spirit which
Christ has, iii 1, v. 6. He speaks solely of the Spirit, for example,
in ii. 7, xiv. 1 3, and understands thereby what he expressly says in
xix. 10, and unmistakeably points out by the association of the
Spirit and the bride in xxii. 1 7, namely, the Spirit of prophecy,
the prophetic Spirit, the Spirit of God, so far as, in distinction
from other manifestations of the Spirit, He reveals Himself to and
through the prophets. The Spirit of prophecy also affirms itself
in manifold variety in the individual prophets, hence " the spirits
of the prophets," xxii. 6. Finally, the condition which the Spirit
of God, especially the Spirit of Prophecy, renders prominent in
various individuals is evidently Spirit, the condition of the Spirit,
the being " in the Spirit," i. 1 0.
Kbstlin (ut ante, p. 488) acknowledges that the exalted Christ
has a specially close relation to the Spirit, and that an important
position is given to the latter in this book, as he also acknowledges
that the Spirit is there threefold : first, with God and Christ, but
in an impersonal form ; then in Christ ; and finally, in the whole
earth, that is; in believers and people of every tongue, and espe
cially in the prophets ; but he thinks the Spirit is not distinguished
from the Son, not, indeed, as a separate personality, and admits
only a somewhat independent definition of the same. We will
pass over the expression " personality," and — which will lead us to

132 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
a similar result — ask whether the seer decidedly distinguishes
the Spirit, as a Being distinct from God, from Christ, and from
Christians ? When he, i 5, speaks of " the seven Spirits which
are before the throne " (comp. iv. 5), the Spirit is represented
clearly enough as distinct from God. When, in xxii. 1 7, the Spirit
and the bride say to Christ, " Come ! " does there need any proof '
that, for the writer, the Spirit is independent of the Son and of
the church ? Could it be said of the Spirit conceived of as an
actual principle, " he that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit
saith unto the churches " ? ii. 7 ; or, " yea, saith the Spirit, that
they may rest from their labours " ? xiv 1 3. If we may not
desire from the seer that he should have expressed his views in
doctrinal rather than in symbolical language, I do not see what
more he could have done to cause the supposed somewhat
independent definition to appear perfect and complete.
But what is_ the relation of the Spirit to God, to Christ, and to
...ChxistiaiisJ Let us begin with theTasE The Spirit is expressly"
distinguished from the bride, the church, xxii. 1 7 ; the Spirit speaks
to the churches, ii. 7, etc. But the Spirit does not, therefore,
stand outside the Christian, for the testimony of Jesus is the Spirit
of prophecy; and that testimony, and thus the Spirit of prophecy,
is possessed by the brethren of the seer, xix. 1 0 ; and the spirits
of the prophets, xxii. 6, are the witnessing acts of the Spirit to
the individual prophets. In like manner, the Spirit's independence
in relation to Christ is clearly expressed in xxii. 17. But the
Spirit does not stand outside, and with Christ, but He has the
seven Spirits of God, iii. 1 ; the Lamb has the seven eyes, which
are the seven Spirits of God, v. 6, and the testimony of Jesus is
the Spirit of prophecy. We find, too, that while the prophet
always has only a spirit, an individual feature of the Spirit, Christ
has the Spirit in His entire fulness. The prophet only comes into
Spirit eyevopnv iv irvevpaTi, i. 9. Christ has the Spirit already ;
it belongs to His nature, and is, as it were, born with Him, as the
eyes with the body, v. 6. The prophet is the instrument of the
Spirit, or the Spirit speaks, witnesses through him (comp. i. 19,
x. 9-11, xxii. 18) ; Christ speaks, or testifies continually through
the Spirit, xix. 10. Evidently Christian prophecy has, for the
seer, fully the same significance as the testimony borne by Christ
during His earthly life. But why are the two perfectly equal ?
Because prophecy is nothing but the continued testimony of Jesus

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 133
Himself, xix. 10. Therefore, at tne commencement of the letters,
it is said that Christ speaks ; and for the same reason, it is said,
at the close of each, that it contains " what the Spirit saith to the
churches." The seer symbolically represents the relation of Christ
to the Spirit, when, in v. 6, the Lamb has seven eyes, which " are
the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth." I have
nothing to add when Kbstlin, p. 488, says of this passage — "The
exalted Christ constantly sends forth from Himself the Spirit ;
the presence of the Spirit on the earth is, as it were, an effective
looking down upon it on the part of Christ, a streaming forth of
His light ; " but when he continues, " The Spirit, the principle of
revelation, is the self-opening, and the being open, of the heavenly
to the earthly, through which the human perceives the divine, as
through the eye of a man, we believe ourselves to be able to per
ceive his inward thoughts," he rests on the false conception of
the Spirit as the revealing principle; but the apparent support
which this idea finds in the " eyes " and the " lamps," fails when
we consider that light in this book appears not as revelation, but
as the nature of God ; and the Spirit is light, not as the revelation,
but as the life-principle of God. In like manner, when Kbstlin
remarks, p. 485, that, " according to iii. 1, v. 6, the Spirit of God
is in the Lamb, the Spirit is the divinity which Christ possesses
in addition to His humanity," it is hardly necessary to point out,
after what has been said, that, v. 6, the Lamb has seven horns as
well as seven eyes. The correct interpretation is rather that Christ
has received the Spirit as well as the power from God ; while
God has both, not as received, but in Himself. But because
the Spirit is the Spirit of God, it does not the less take an inde
pendent position in relation to Him ; much more does the Spirit
in Christ, in this respect, hold a similar relation as it does to God,
and as in the prophets it does also to Christ. Chap. iv. 5 is
symbolic, and is anticipated in i 4, and states, that before the
throne of God seven lamps burn, which are the seven Spirits of
God, and that they are sent into all the earth.
Keeping in mind this relation of the Spirit to God and to
Christ, it will not surprise us when John, i 4, 5, wishes for the
seven churches in Asia " grace and peace from Him which is, and
which was, and which is to come, and from the seven Spirits
which are before His throne, and from Jesus Christ." The prin
ciple of grace and pf peace, as generally of all " spiritual," holy,

134 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
supernatural, divine life for Christians, has for the writer also a
threefold distinction — God, who has the same absolutely ; Christ,
who has received it mediatorially, but in its entire fulness ; the
Spirit, who has also received it for its realization among men, for
individual Christians as well as for universal Christendom ; but,
again, according to its nature, not three but one, namely, the
spiritual life-principle which is absolute in God, mediatorially in
Christ, derived in the Christian. That the author, in i 4, 5, has
not indulged in pleonasm, nor mentioned the Spirit with God
merely as a more strict definition, but that he thought and spoke
really in a Trinitarian sense, in the wider acceptation of the term,
need not, after all that has been said, be specifically proved. But
when he, very remarkably, at the first glance, mentions the Spirit
in the second place and Christ in the third, the tacit reason may
certainly be, that he intended a varied testimony of Christ ; hut
more probably we may find the ground of this in the consideration
that the seer passed in thought from the absolute to the present
active principle, and then returned to that which is mediatorial.
But wherein consists the activity of the Spirit ? It would be
decidedly too narrow a conception of v. 6, if, with Diisterdieck, we ¦
should think of the Spirit principally according to the measure
of the eye-symbol, as the all-seeing, and say, " since Christ has
the Spirit He knows all things, even things on the earth, whither
the Spirit is sent, — the movements of His enemies, the condition
of His friends," etc. It has the much deeper sense already
given above, and which Kbstlin has clearly seen, namely, that
of representing generally Christ's relation to the Spirit. But
the words, " sent forth into all the earth," mean that the Spirit,
having gone out from Christ, and continuing to go out, is opera
tive in all the earth, or in every land. The seer, according
to his manner (comp. ii. 6, 15), here indicates beforehand what
he afterwards, v. 9, expressly states when he says, " Thou hast
redeemed us to God by Thy blood out of every kindred, and
tongue, and people, and nation." During His earthly life Christ's
activity was limited to Israel ; but in His exaltation He sends the
Spirit into all the earth, — in other words, since His exaltation the
principle of the divine or spiritual life has become active in the
widest circles. But if the relation of v. 9 to v. 6, according to
the manner of the writer elsewhere, is unquestionable, so also
the words, v. 1 0, " and hast made us unto our God kings and

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 135
priests : and we shall reign on the earth," will not be without
connection with sending the Spirit into all the earth ; it is, how
ever, only an Old Testament conception when the seer regards the
communication of the Spirit as an anointing, and those who
receive it as priestly kings. Accordingly the writer traces the
sublime position of Christians in relation to God and men, their
priestly kingdom, to the Spirit which is sent to them ; so, on the
other hand, he sees in the Spirit the source of all Christian
salvation and happiness, and wishes grace and peace, Christian
salvation and happiness, as given and experienced, i 4, for the
seven churches from the seven Spirits which are before the
throne of God. But as this wish respects churches rather than
individuals, so by his description of Christ as He who has the
seven Spirits and the seven stars, iii. 1 (comp. i 16-20), he ex
pressly gives us to understand that the stars, the Christian
churches, are such through the work of the Spirit, or as holders
or possessors of the Spirit ; that the Spirit and the church, as a
living whole, stand in the closest relation to each other. Thus the
whole Christian, spiritual hfe in individuals, as well as in the
church, and not, as Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 629, repeatedly assumes,
prophecy merely, is to the seer the result of the Spirit's work, or,
rather, of the self-affirmation of the Spirit. But the Spirit is to him
sevenfold; he recognises, therefore, in Christendom a manifold variety
of powers or existence-forms, gifts, or modes of manifestation of
the one Spirit, which in their union express His entire fulness.
From the manifoldly various gifts of the Spirit, from the uni
versal activity of the Spirit in Christians and Christendom, from
the individual peculiarities of the Christian life in their relation
to the divine principle, or, as the seer himself would express it,
from the number of the seven Spirits, the Spirit comes before him
especially and almost exclusively as the Spirit of prophecy, xix.
1 0. As the prophetic Spirit is a special Spirit by the side of the
other, so that again has many distinctions, and every prophet
has his individual Spirit, xxii. 6. Those who have the Spirit
of prophecy, xix. 10, xxii. 9, x. 7, enter into the Spirit, or a
state of inspiration (yiyvecrdai iv ttv.), i. 10, iv. 2 (comp. xxi. 10).
As long as the prophet is in this condition he does everything, and
everything happens to him in the Spirit, — that is, not being subject
to the senses, but in an ideal manner corresponding to the nature
of the Spirit; thus John is carried away by the angel in the

136 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
Spirit into the wilderness, xvii. 3 ; and to a great and high
mountain, xxi. 10. He sees and hears, i. 2, 10, etc. ; but he sees
in a vision (iv Ty opdcrei, Ptns), ix. 1 7. But what does he see
and hear ? " The things which are, and the things which shall
be hereafter," i 19, iv. 1 ; "things which must shortly come to
pass," i. 1 ; not things existing and present to the senses, but the
things, persons, and conditions of the present and the future in
their ideal meaning ; or the hindrances and state of development
of the kingdom of God in the present, the completion of the
same in the future, or the present in the future, and the future
in the present, as it appeared to him in signs (o-r/pielov), that is,
in significant pictures, xii. 1, 3, xv. 1. According to a some
what different conception, God gives to Jesus Christ a revelation
to show (generally BeiKvveiv, comp. iv. 1, xvii. 1, xxi. 9, xxii. 1)
what must shortly come to pass, and Christ sends by His angel
and shows it (cnjp,aiveiv, specially through significant signs and
words, comp. i. 1) to His servants the prophets. The subject-
matter of the revelation is the mystery (pvo-Tijpiov) ; either the
mystery of God as He has shown it (evrjyyeXia-e) to His servants
the prophets, x. 7, — that is, the purpose of God respecting the com
pletion of His kingdom ; or the mystery of the seven stars and of
the seven golden candlesticks, i. 20, — that is, the condition and
prospects of Christendom ; or the mystery of the woman and the
beast which carried her, of which the angel spoke to the seer, xvii. 7
(comp. ver. 5), — in other words, the meaning of Rome and the
Roman empire in its relation to the kingdom of God. Instead of
the detailed statement that God gave the revelation to Christ that
He might show His servants what must shortly come to pass, and
that He made it known to John by an angel, it is said more
briefly, either that " the Lord God of the Spirits of the prophets
hath sent His angel to show unto His servants the things which
must shortly be done," xxii. 6 (comp. x. 1-7) ; or, " I, Jesus, have
sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches,"
xxii. 16. But as ''mystery" corresponds as a name, so also the
book sealed with seven seals, held in the right hand of God, and
opened by the Lamb, and from which successive figures go forth,
corresponds as a symbol to what has already taken place, and to
that which is still future, v. 1-5. But what is so communicated
to the prophet he receives that he may make it known, and he
does this when he prophesies, x. 11. It is pointed out to him

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 137
that a part of what he sees and hears is to be sealed, — that is, not
to be made known or written, x. 4. But he is also told that
the rest is not to be sealed, but written, xxii. 10, i 11, 19
(comp. ii. 1, xiv. 13). Thus originates a book of prophecy, xxii.
1 9 ; its contents are words of prophecy, i 3, xxii. 7, x. 1 8. That
which stands in such a book, and generally that which is spoken
by a prophet, is spoken by the Spirit, ii. 7 and xiv. 13, as being
really spiritual, — that is, things are named not according to their
empirical nature, but according to their signification, xi. 8.
According to another idea, Christ speaks of the same things.
The seven letters which close with the words, " He that hath an
ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches," are
introduced by the formula, "These things saith He," — Christ, — or
elsewhere, "testifies" (comp. xxii. 16, 20). The same things,
only differently conceived, are spoken by God. He has " sent
His angel to show unto His servants the things which must
shortly be done," xxii. 6. " These are the true sayings of God,"
xix. 9 (comp. xxi. .5, xxii. 6). We may also remember what was
said in the section on the works of Christ respecting " the word
of God and the testimony of Jesus ; " in a few places, such as i 2,
xix. 10, these terms can mean nothing else than recent revela
tion given by God, mediatorially through Christ, to the Christian
prophets. Predictions will be fulfilled as the words of God,
xvii. 1 7 (comp. x. 7) ; therefore the angel declines the homage
of the prophet, saying, "I am thy fellow-servant, and of thy
brethren that have the testimony of Jesus : worship God," xix.
1 0 ; and in xxii. 9, " Do it not : for I am thy fellow-servant, and
of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings
of this book : worship God ; " therefore is it said, " Blessed is he
that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and
keep those things which are written therein," i 3 ; therefore
the prophet " testifies unto every man that heareth the words of
the prophecy of this book," xxii. 18, 19, concerning what is
written therein (comp. Deut. iv. 2, xii 32). Certainly there are
not only true prophets, but those who, like Jezebel in Thyatira,
say they are prophets, and seduce the servants of Christ ; indeed,
there is a false prophecy which seduces the whole earth (comp.
section on the false prophet).
The seven Spirits of God are sent into all the earth, v. 6, and
are operative even among and upon non-Christians, the unbelievers,

138 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
the inhabitants of the earth. But how ? Expositors contend over
iv. 5, " there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne,
which are the seven Spirits of God;" and the question is, whether,
on account of the expression " lamps," and the parallel with
v. 6, we are to understand the all-enlightening, all-seeing, all-
searching Spirit, and therefore His universal (comp. Ps. cxxxix.
7), holy, and efficacious jurisdiction ; or whether, on account of
what precedes, and the expression "fire" (comp. Isa. iv. 4), those
operations of the Spirit are meant which bring into the world
punishment and destruction. From the position of the seven
lamps of fire between the lightnings, and voices, and thunders,
and the sea of glass, as well as from the evident relation of the
whole passage to the ways or judgments of God, it seems to me
certain that the seer intended the Spirit, in His inward convict
ing and condemning work, adapted for the conversion of the
world; that as in the lightnings, and voices, and thunders, he
represents the contents of the following seal, trumpet and vial
visions ; so in the lamps he thought of the accompanying ever
lasting gospel, with its repentance-call to the world, xiv. 6. By
the sea of glass the writer represents the result of both classes of
works, the justification of God, xv. 4 (comp. vers. 2, 3).
3. The Gospel.
An angel swears by the living God, x. 7, that in the days of
the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the
mystery of God shall be finished, as He hath declared (eiriyyeXio-e)
to His servants the prophets. According to the connection, the
mystery of God can mean nothing else than His glorious purpose
concerning the completion of His kingdom, which, after the
seventh angel has sounded, is, xi. 15-18, celebrated in anticipa
tion by the heavenly inhabitants, and described in detail from
xix. 11 to xxii. 5. This purpose God has also communicated to
the prophets — here can be understood only Old Testament
prophets — as a joyful message. It is also said: "And I saw
another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting
gospel to preach (evayyeXto-ai) unto them that dwell on the earth,
and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying
with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to Him ; for the hour
of His judgment is come : and worship Him that made heaven,

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 139
and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters," xiv. 6, 7.
This gospel cannot be called everlasting, as assumed by ex
positors, with reference to the eternal purpose of God respecting
what is made known therein, but only on account of its having
always existed, or on account of its continuance for ever ; but
since the latter has no sense, it must be only because it has
existed, and proceeds and is published from eternity.
With reference to that which the angel utters in a loud voice,
it cannot be, as, for example, Dusterdieck says, that the result of
the message, which is to the faithful a real gospel, is intended
to be for the ungodly inhabitants of the earth something different
from its contents ; the angel publishes the gospel itself afccording
to the word-sense, its real contents, though only in its substance
or in a single aspect. The question now arises, whether by the
gospel in the two places quoted, and by the gospel of God to
the prophets, and the gospel of the angel to the inhabitants of
the earth, we are to understand the same thing. The same
name, the related contents, — comp. xiv. 7, "the hour of His
judgment is come," with xi. 18 in connection with x. 7, — and
the expression everlasting, which evidently points to the Old
Testament prophets, decide for their identity.
Another question is, how this gospel is related to that which is
designated by the same name in other parts of the New Testament ?
It is surprising how, almost without exception, expositors have
failed to perceive that the seer, xiv. 6, desires to represent neither
a mere formally significant fancy picture, nor an isolated event of
the future, — according to Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 628, the announce
ment of the judgment of Babylon, necessary for the bringing in of
the final consummation, is an everlasting gospel, — and that he has
rather represented apocalyptically, on one side the entire principal
feature of the eschatological process, and on the other the entire
apocalyptic plagues ; in other words, he has considered in a plastic
manner, and has described what the Gospel of Matthew, xxiv. 14,
predicts in the words, " This gospel of the kingdom shall be
preached in all the world, for a witness unto all nations ; and then
shall the end come." The absence of the article before evayyeXiov
altoviov is no objection to this view ; for, on account of the visionary
nature of the representation, it was not necessary, and then it
was only by the omission of the article that the term gospel
could be used, for the seer must use it as an Old Testament ex-

140 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
pression. And just as little does that which appears as the
contents of the gospel in x. 7 ' and xiv. 7 militate against this
interpretation. It certainly consists in the mystery of God, that
is, in the purpose of God in relation to the completion of His
kingdom, and is therefore of an eschatological nature ; but if we
compare the statements of the Acts of the Apostles, such as ii.
14-21, especially vers. 17, 21, 34, etc., ver. 40, iii 19-23, x. 42,
43, xiv. 15, xv. 15-18, xvii. 30, 31, as well as of the earliest
Epistles of Paul, for example, 1 Thess. i. 9, 10 (comp. ii. 5), the
resemblance to Rev. xiv. 7 cannot be doubted, and we must con
clude that the seer in this place has briefly but fully characterized
the gospel in its original and apostolic nature. If it should be
objected that the other New Testament writers expressly state
the contents of the gospel to be the requirement of faith in
Jesus, it may be replied that the single passage, xi. 13, "and
the remnant — the Jews — were affrighted, and gave glory to the
God of heaven," satisfactorily shows that the seer intentionally
avoided faith in Jesus, as a New Testament expression, while he
clothed it in the Old Testament forms, fearing God and giving
glory to Him.
What now, after this, appears to be the general idea of the gospel
as expressed by the author of the Apocalypse ? He understands
by the gospel the announcement of the purpose of God concerning
the completion of His kingdom, though, from its various aspects,
he at one time presents to believers the consolatory, x. 7, and at
another time to unbelievers the admonitory side (comp. the
sweet and the bitter, x. 9, 10) ; but in both respects it is to him
the gospel, the good news. As this good news, since Christ's
appearance, has gone forth to Jews and Gentiles ; so, before His
appearance, it was made known to the prophets of the Old Testa
ment. It is an everlasting gospel; it began with the protevangelium
after the fall. This application of everlasting lies near, on account
of the position occupied in the doctrine of the author by primitive
history, and especially by the fall. The distinction between the
publication of the gospel in the New and in the Old Testament,
that in the latter it was the announcement of a gospel still future,
and in the former of a gospel which had already appeared, as well
as of a Christ yet to come, the seer has certainly passed over, as
sufficiently shown in the doctrine of Christ's work, — not, however,
because the appearance of Christ already realized, in comparison

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 141
with that still expected, had no great importance, but for a three
fold reason : first, because for him, as a seer, the publication of
the future, and thus the aspect of the gospel common to both
Testaments, stands in the foreground ; secondly, because, and again
as a seer, he had an interest in conceiving the New Testament
gospel as identical with that of the Old ; and thirdly, since, from
his doctrine of the Logos, he could and must teach that Christ as
really appeared to the prophets of the Old Testament as He had done *
since His exaltation, both to himself and other New Testament
prophets, the distinction of New and Old . Testament gospel must
have been for him a vanishing one. One difference he certainly
recognises, and brings it prominently forward, namely, that the
gospel, which had proceeded from eternity, and which God had
made known to the prophets in Israel, was now, by an angel
flying in the midst of heaven, over all the inhabitants of the
earth, preached, in ever-widening circles, to the whole world.
After what has been said, there needs no circumstantial refutation
of Kbstlin, who (p. 491), with reference to the doctrine of the
Apocalypse respecting Christian life, says that in this " everlast
ing" gospel, above all, is its hold on Monotheism, xiv. 6, 7. The
question here is not at all respecting its hold upon anything;
still we may, with the same justice, claim Monotheism as the
content or the meaning of the everlasting gospel, as we can claim
it to be the meaning of Paul's preaching among the Gentiles. It
is said of the jailor at Philippi : " He rejoiced, believing in God,
with all his house" (comp. Acts xvi. 31, 32). In preaching the
gospel, there would naturally be involved the worship of God, who
created the heavens and the earth, the judgment, and obviously
faith in the only true God, who, through the Christ predicted in
the Old Testament, manifested in the last time, crucified and
raised from the dead, will judge the world, and offers forgiveness
to. all men in His name. If we call this Monotheism, the ever
lasting gospel of the seer may be always described by the same
term. Since we have now to do with the publication of Christianity,
we need no longer adhere to the term " gospel," but may turn to
the " word of God and the testimony of Jesus " already referred to
in the section on the work of Christ and the activity of the Spirit.
We have there said that, in i 2, xvii. 17, xix. 9, 10, "the word
of God and the testimony of Jesus" has the narrower sense of

142 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
prophecy concerning the completion of the divine purpose con
cerning the world. We now add that, especially in such places
as i 9, vi 9, xx. 4, there might be substituted for the "word of
God and the testimony of Jesus," the word " gospel," according to
its use in Mark viii. 35, x. 29. Seeing that the latter is an Old
Testament expression, and is therefore apocalyptic also, while " the
word of God and the testimony of Jesus," as we found above, is
undeniably connected with the doctrine of the Logos, it is at the
first glance very remarkable that the seer uses this so much more
frequently than that. But the enigma is very easily solved when
we remember that these twofold names for the publication of
Christianity are, in the view of our author, essentially related to each
other, as the names Messiah and Logos are to Jesus ; but when he
wrote this book the word- "gospel" had no longer the mere Old
Testament and original Christian sense, it had already gained the
later New Testament signification which so often meets us in the ,
passages quoted from the Gospel of Mark and elsewhere , from
the publication of God's purpose, for the completion of His king
dom, through His Anointed, Christianity had come, as the already
apparent kingdom, or as the specific Christian conception and
doctrine of the kingdom of God. Thus the term " gospel " had,
for the seer, generally fallen into disuse, and was still applicable
only in those cases where it is self-evident that it occurs in its
Old Testament sense ("^3) ; in other words, where he speaks -of
the promises made through the prophets pf the Old Covenant,
and of the preaching of the apostles and evangelists to Jews and
Gentiles in the sense of Mark xvi 15. On the contrary, wher
ever he speaks of the gospel in its later sense as that for which
suffering is endured, as in i 9, vi. 9, xx. 4, or of Christian doc
trine, whether in its precepts or its promises, whether of Christ
during His earthly life or in His state of exaltation, as, for example,
in i 2, xii. 17, xix. 9, 10, he was compelled, as a seer, to sub
stitute for the Old Testament " gospel," with its limited significa
tion, the later " word of God and the testimony of Jesus," which,
though containing the narrower meaning, had a much more com
prehensive bearing, and at this point to show us how consciously
and designedly he used expressions and representations for his
purpose.

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 143

4. The Saints and their Works.
(a.) The Christian Life in its Origin.
The seven Spirits of God are sent out into all the earth, v. 6.
The angel which John saw flying in the midst of heaven with the
everlasting gospel, had it to preach unto them that dwell on the
earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
xiv. 6. The Lamb that was slain redeemed men to God with
His blood out of every kindred, and people, and tongue, and
nation, v. 9 (comp. vii. 9). Christianity has already, hyper-
bolically expressed, been published in all lands and in every
nation, and will, in ever-widening circles, be preached among
men ; and it has, moreover, no national limits, no particular, but
a common human universal signification (comp. Kbstlin, ut ante,
p. 489). Thus far, Christianity has not been received by any nation in
the gross, but only by individuals, and comparatively by very few
from the various peoples. According to vii. 9, the great multitude
of believers is, in comparison with the number of unbelievers, so
small, that the seer, as we have seen in the section on the earth
and its inhabitants, designates the latter by the simple terms,
" all the world," xiii. 3 ; " the men," ix. 20, xvi 8, 9 ; " them that
dwell upon the earth," iii. 1 0, vi. 1 0, etc.
If we ask what the author, in this respect, looks for in the
future, the answer, in the predictions of xi. 1-14, as we shall
show in the section on "the Holy City during the forty-two
months," informs us that he expects the conversion of Israel as a
nation before the second advent. And when, in xv. 4, the victors
say, " all nations shall come and worship before Thee, for Thy judg
ments are made manifest," John does not put such hopes into their
mouths merely that the subsequent obduracy of the world, in the
presence of God's righteous judgments, may appear in a more
striking light ; but he brings them before us as seeing and saying
what, according to his views, really will happen after the advent.
But we shall have frequent opportunity of pointing out how the
seer distinguished between the converted before the advent, the
individuals from amongst Gentiles and Jews on the one side, and
on the other the converts after the advent, the Gentile nations as
such. He does not see full Christians in these ; and if we take

144 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
the words " conversion," or " becoming a Christian," " believer," or
" Christian," in their full sense, — and for the sake of simplicity
we do so, — we must say that the seer expected that, in addition,
to individuals from various nations, the people of Israel would be
converted to the Christian faith, and that concerning the rest of
mankind he cherished a hope which reached beyond the advent,
but not to the conversion of individuals.
But, according to the purpose of God, should all men become
Christians ? With respect to this, our book presents us with a
threefold view. To the church in Philadelphia the Lord says, " I
also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come
upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth," iii. 10.
The plagues, accordingly, have the tendency, either of leading the
world to turn to God, or wholly against Him. We find also that
in this hour of trial the everlasting gospel, with its call to repent
ance, is proclaimed to all the inhabitants of the earth, xiv. 6, 7
(comp. xv. 3, 4). -Of the results of the trial, it is said repeatedly
that the "men repented not," ix. 20, 21 (comp. xvi. 9, 11). In
such statements God is undoubtedly conceived of as offering
salvation to the penitent and the impenitent, and men as volun
tarily accepting or rejecting it. It is thus that the seer looks at
the matter in relation to the world ; he expects that generally it
will be lost, but by its own fault. God is not unfaithful ; He
does everything to help it, and if it is not saved its ruin is self-
caused. But it is otherwise when He looks upon Christians. He writes,
xvii. 14, " The Lamb shall overcome them, — the ten kings, — for He
is Lord of lords and King of kings ; and they that are with Him
are called (kXtttoi), and chosen (iicXeteTol), and faithful (iriaToi)"
The first and second of these expressions differ widely from the
usual style of the book, and at the first glance remind us of Paul.
Hengstenberg, with most, translating ttuttos by "believing," remarks
(in loco) : " The expressions are among those ascribed to John but
enfranchised by Paul, and are to be regarded here as proper
names." But in other places of the book where ¦jtio-to^ occurs, it
evidently has the meaning of " faithful." And then, in the Pauline
sense, choice or election does not stand between calling and behef
(comp. Rom. viii. 28-30). Finally, it is hardly possible to point
to a specific Pauline phrase outside the salutations, i. 4, xxii. 21,
It will be more correct if we take the expressions " called " and

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 145
" chosen" in the sense of Matt. xx. 16, xxii. 14 (comp. xxiv. 22-24 ;
2 Pet. i. 10). When John treats of the perfected Christian, which
he does in the above passage, he considers his nature as consisting
of three things. He has been called, — that is, apart from his
own volition, God by His grace has invited him to be a partaker
of the Messianic salvation. Then he has been chosen ; he who
has obeyed the gracious call, or accepted the offered salvation, is,
as one who has come out of the world, received by God as His,
and appointed or ordained to salvation. Finally, he has been
faithful, — that is, he has held fast the offered and communicated
grace in his struggle with the temptations of the world and the
flesh ; he has proved himself by his deeds, and is therefore counted
worthy of eternal life. When it is said, " Blessed are they which
are called (KeicXrjp,evoi) to the marriage supper of the Lamb,"
xix. 9, judging from the connection, the call appears (comp.
especially vers. 7, 8) not merely as issued, but as accepted and con
firmed ; consequently, for the sake of the figure of an invitation to a
wedding feast, the single term is to be conceived in a wider sense,
embracing within it the other two; still, in the passages inMr.tthew,
with an evident similarity in the essential conception of the Chris
tian nature, it is distributed in a somewhat different manner, to the
two ideas of calling and choice. We can hardly venture to say,
with Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 625, note (comp. p. 5 9 3, note), that choice
and calling describe the same divine act from different sides, and
that calling may be considered as a destination to complete salva
tion. But how does the purpose of God with respect to Christians
show itself ? What is trial to the world is here grace, the bringing
salvation near, or offers or inducements and drawings to it;
briefly, the calling of grace, as the bestowment or award of salva
tion, separation from the world, and acceptance, in a word, the
election of grace is an affair of Christian fidelity.
Still otherwise does this relation appear to the author when he
refers the contrast between the world and Christians, perdition
and salvation, to the everlasting and almighty God and His abso
lute will. Christ said that He would not blot out the name of
him who overcame from the book of life, iii. 5. We read that
" all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him — the beast —
whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain
from the foundation of the world," xiii 8 ; and that " they that dwell
on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book
K

146 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
of life from the foundation of the world, when they see the beast,"
xvii. 8. John "saw the dead, both small and great, stand before
God : and the books were opened ; and another book was opened,
which is the book of life : and whosoever was not found written in
the book of life was cast into the lake of fire," xx. 12, 15. Ac
cording to xxi. 27, " there shall in no wise enter into " the New
Jerusalem " anything that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh
abomination, or maketh a lie ; but they which are written in the
Lamb's book of life " (comp. Ex. xxxii. 32, 33 ; Ps. lxix. 28 ; Isa.
iv. 3 ; Dan. xii 1 ; Phil iv. 3 ; Luke x. 20). The image of the book
of life has come from the registers which the authorities kept of the
citizens, and from which the dead were blotted out. It is the
symbol of divine appointment to eternal life revealed and realized
through Christ. Dusterdieck is certainly mistaken when he says,
p. 185, "A man is written in the book of life when he becomes
a partaker of new spiritual life (comp. iii. 1), when he receives
life-giving truth (comp. iii. 3), or becomes a child and heir of God
through faith in Christ (in baptism)." According to xiii. 8, xvii. 8,
those who are ordained to eternal life are written in the book
of life from the foundation of the world. Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 625,
on account of these passages, acknowledges that it seems as if
the gift of eternal life were bestowed through an eternal divine
predestination, but concludes from iii. 5, xx. 12, 15, that no
irrevocable divine purpose is involved with respect to individuals,
and refers only the calling of Christians to the eternal pur
pose. The irreyocableness of the divine purpose is certainly
excluded by the word-sense of iii. 5 ; but, on the other hand,
xx. 15 (comp. ver. 12) will hardly show that in the judgment
it will then be seen what names remain standing in the book
of life (see section on the judgment). To reftr only the calling
of Christians to the eternal purpose, cannot possibly be the
signification of the book of life, for it goes direct to the indi
vidual. Much rather, according to the views of the seer, God,
in the plenitude of His power, has from eternity resolved,
through Christ, to save a number, — the 144,000, and again, an
innumerable multitude, vii. 4, 9, — to bless them with eternal life ;
and they, or their names, are written in the book of life, or the
Lamb's book of life. This record, or this divine appointment
to salvation, reveals itself, or becomes a manifest reality, when
a man avails himself of the salvation of Jesus : it shows itself

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 147
to be firm and abiding when he remains faithful to Christ ; it
proves to be just and righteous when in the judgment the names
of those who on account of their works do not pass, are absent
from the book of life, and the names of those who do are present,
so that what has been, and what will be, — absolute predestina
tion, and salvation or perdition ; God's eternal purpose, and the
result of the whole history, — ultimately cover each other. When
Christ promises to him who overcomes that He will not blot
out his name from the book of life, iii. 5, there remains — pro
vided we neither ascribe to the book of life a twofold significa
tion, nor admit that those who from eternity are written in
the book of life may fall way — nothing for us but -so to under
stand the assurance of the Lord, that they who fall in the time of
trial show by their fall that they did not stand in the book of
life ; those who overcome are thus assured by their victory or
their faithfulness of the blessed certainty that their names are
in the book of life, and naturally cannot be blotted out ; so that
instead of expressing the matter with absolute accuracy, and
saying, " I will give him the certainty that he is written there," it
is said loosely, " I will not blot his name from the book of hfe."
The terrible nature of the temptations in the last time is nowhere
more strikingly shown than in the prediction that only those
recorded in the book of life from the foundation of the world, or
ordained to salvation by the eternal purpose of God, remain
faithful, xiii. 8, xvii. 8 (comp. Matt. xxiv. 24). But as they who
are written in the Lamb's book of life are those who are faithful
to Christ until death, and hold fast His works to the end ; so the
righteous, as partakers of eternal life, are said to be written in the
book of life, in contrast with the common mass of the abominable
and the false, xxi. 2 7.
To attempt to reconcile the differences in the representation of
the book of life, between this and the two-above mentioned, and
again between these themselves, would be for us an entirely super
fluous labour.
We may ask, What sort of men become Christians ? Not
merely Christians in name or profession, but in reality ; in other
words, upon what conditions or presuppositions does conversion
depend ? On the side of God it is His will that man should
have life. " Blessed are they who are called to the marriage
supper of the Lamb," xix. 9. Christians are said to be " called, and

148 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
chosen, and faithful," xvii. 1 4. In the first of these two passages the
seer evidently takes calling in a pregnant sense — the publication
of the gospel as designed of God for salvation, and its having
become a saving power. The called are here those men to
whom God has sent the gospel, with the intention that they should
receive it, and who therefore have received it. They are those
whom God has earnestly invited to the acceptance of the gospel,
and therefore the invitation has not been rejected. In the second
passage the author uses the word in a weaker sense, merely that
of the publication of the gospel as accepted or rejected ; thus with
respect to God, as designed in one case for faith, and in the other
for unbelief. Here calling being insufficient for salvation, the
writer adds choice, according to which God, with respect to a part
of those who hear the gospel, wills that they should really accept
it and be saved, and therefore they do not merely hear it, hut
receive it also. But the being chosen, absolutely considered, is
the same thing as being written in the book of life. Thus on the
side of God the condition of becoming a Christian is that a man in
the full sense be called, or that, in the narrower sense of the word,
he be called and chosen, or written in the book of life. For this
reason the victors, vii. 10, ascribe "salvation to our God which
sitteth upon the throne, and to the Lamb." Christians owe their
deliverance from sin and destruction, their sanctification and
heavenly blessedness, not to themselves, but to God and Christ.
Indeed, God says to the seer, " I will give unto him that is
athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely," xxi. 6 ; and at
the close of the book the writer cries to those who thirst, " Let
him take the water of life freely," xxii. 17. Christians have
paid no price, have no claim or merit, that they should be saved ;
their happiness is the unmerited gift, the free bestowment of the
grace of God in Christ. On the side of man, the condition of
becoming a Christian is his will so to do. This condition is
expressed in the oft-recurring expression, " He that hath an ear,
let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches," ii. 7, etc.
Certainly these words are always addressed to men who are
already Christians ; but if he uses the same expression for be
coming a Christian again as for becoming a Christian, namely,
" repent," we may surely suppose that he regards the condition
of becoming a Christian as being the same, — namely, that man
must have an ear to hear, that he must also meet the gospel

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 149
with a healthy organ, possessed of its attendant sense, with a true
receptivity, with the understanding, and with an open heart.
The human presuppositions for becoming a Christian are also
pointed out when God says, " I will give unto him that is athirst
of the fountain of the water of life freely," xxi. 6 ; and when it
is said that those who thirst may come and take of the water of
life, xxii. 1 7. Should thirst in the first of these places be limited
to the disposition of the Christian in his earthly life, the second
will doubtless suffice to reach those who are not Christians ; and
when they receive the water of life, they have nothing to pay,
nothing to bring ; they obtain it freely ; it comes from the free
grace of God; the only condition is, that they thirst for and
desire (dekeiv) salvation. Negatively, the same condition is
expressed in the words of the Lord to the church of Laodicea,
iii. 17, 18, which, for reasons stated above, we may refer also to
those who are not yet Christians. " Thou sayest, I am rich, and
increased with goods, and have need of nothing ; and knowest not
that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and
naked : I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire,
that thou mayest be rich ; and white raiment, that thou mayest
be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear ;
and anoint thine eyes with eye-salve, that thou mayest see."
On the side of man there is thus the condition of receptivity for
the truth of the gospel, a longing after happiness and the true
life, an unsatisfied sense of his condition in the world, subjec
tively as well as objectively.
But how does a man become a Christian, or in what does the
process of conversion consist ? According to the analogy of other
New Testament writers, we expect to find, as a common designa
tion, the expressions iruneveiv, irio-Ti<s. But the first is not used
at all, and the second occurs only in ii. 13, 19, xiii. 10, xiv. 12.
We meet with ino-Tos rather more frequently, i 5, ii. 10, 13,
iii. 14, xvii. 14, xix. 11, xxi. 5, xxii. 6 ; and once we find aVto-To?,
xxi. 8. Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 627, writes: "That faith is not
more frequently mentioned as the fundamental condition of salva
tion, arises from the fact that what is admonitory in the book is
governed by the thought that the whole development is a struggle
carried on by Satan and his instruments against the ehurch."
In these words he has correctly pointed out the reason why the
seer has spoken so little of that which precedes conversion, and

150 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
of its conditions, or, more strictly, of its means or instrumentality;
but with faith, in particular, it 'is somewhat different. Is there,
after all, nothing in this book respecting faith, in the sense of an
inward act grasping and appropriating salvation ? It is certainly
remarkable that irltrm nowhere occurs in the sense of the corre
sponding verb Trio-Teveiv. The adjective 7rt<rro? everywhere, even
in xvii. 14, where De Wette hesitates between fidelity and faith,
means fidelity or faithfulness. In xxi. 8, the airiaToi, according
to the arrangement of the sentence, belong to the SeiXoh, and
consequently describe, not, as Dusterdieck thinks, the inhabitants
of the earth considered as enemies of Christianity, but those who
have fallen away, the unfaithful or untrue. There must, then, he
special reasons, if we are to take ttio-ti,<; in an entirely different
sense. If, in ii. 13, xiv. 12, we take the genitive subjectively,
the word bears none of the three possible interpretations — behef
of, confidence in, or faithfulness to any one ; nor can we under
stand " faith " objectively in either place, for it would be against
the usage of the writer elsewhere, if in the former passage he
regarded holding fast the name of Jesus as one member of the
parallelism, and, as the other, the not denying His faith, thus ¦
describing the contents of the first negatively, and referring both
to a single case ; and if in the second passage he intended keep
ing the commandments of God as the first, and faith in Jesus,
though, in relation to the commandments of God, logically prior,
as the second object "kept." Again, the interpretation by "con
fidence in " is destroyed in the first passage by the words, " hast
not denied," and in the second by a comparison with the undoubted
parallel in xii. 17, where keeping the commandments of God, and
having the testimony of Jesus, cannot, in the second member of the
sentence, be explained as parallel to confidence in Jesus ; and it
is destroyed equally in both by the impossibility of conceiving
confidence to be subordinated to activity. In ii. 19 the writer
cannot have understood faith, for he subordinates it to love ; and
for the conception of 7r/a-n? as confidence, the eschatological con
nection fails. Finally, on the same grounds as xiv. 12, the
passage occurring in xiii. 1 0 is decidedly against the interpretation
of 7rto-Tt? by faith. There remains, then, nothing for us but to
understand by it fidelity or faithfulness. And has it not a good
sense, if in ii. 13, in addition to the name of Jesus as the objec
tive, fidelity to Jesus as the subjective side is meant ? And is

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 151
there not beauty in the arrangement of ii 19, if in love and
service, fidelity and patience, two pairs are represented, in each
of which the first proves itself by the second ? When fidelity
here stands before patience, and in xiii. 1 0 after it, we thereby
learn that patience may be regarded as a proof of fidelity, as much
as fidelity may be considered a proof of patience. That keeping
the faith of Jesus with respect to keeping the commandments of
God, xiv. 12, and having the testimony of Jesus with respect to
keeping the commandments of God, xii. 1 7, are as closely related
subjectively as the testimony of Jesus is related to the word of
God objectively, and that xiv. 12 and xii. 17 run parallel in the
second member with the meaning of having the testimony of
Jesus, as it appears from vi. 9, only when ttio-tk; is understood as
faithfulness, needs no further illustration. It is to me a source of
gratification to be able, on this point, to agree with Baur, who
expressly declares, p. 224, that ttIotk in the Apocalypse is not
to be understood in the Pauline sense, but in the sense of fidelity
in the confession of Jesus. Our agreement, however, is at an
end when he thinks that to the true worshippers of God, who
keep His commandments, if at the same time they are to be
described as Christians, there should be added the p,apTvpia
'Irjo-ov or the irian? 'Ir/trov ; for, apart from his misunderstanding
of pupTvpia 'I-no-ov as a testimony of Jesus, keeping the com
mandments of God does not describe the Old Testament com
mandments, nor does having the testimony of Jesus, or fidelity
to Jesus, describe those of the New, — the book nowhere makes
such a distinction, and least of all in xv. 3, — but there meets
us there in subjective Christianity the same parallelism corre
sponding to the Logos doctrine as in objective Christianity meets
us in God and Christ, xii. 10, and in the word of God and the
testimony of Jesus. Just as little can I agree with Baur, when
he says that'Tric-ns expresses a fidelity in the confession of Christ,
suitable to the times sketched in the Apocalypse, when Chris
tianity had to maintain so great a struggle with heathenism.
From the state of the times, it may certainly be explained why
the seer gives much less prominence to the reception of Chris
tianity than he does to its retention, but it will not explain how
he could have brought over the name of the former to the latter.
The truth is, the seer, in his usual manner, avoided expressing in
New Testament style the event of becoming a Christian, and

152 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
uses the word which in the New Testament writings signifies
" faith," in the Old Testament sense of fidelity. It follows, there
fore, that, according to the view of the writer, irio-Ti<i does not
belong to this part of the discussion, but to a later stage in the
section, namely, where we treat of the conditions upon which
they " overcome."
We have now arrived at the representations of the Apocalypse
concerning the process of becoming a Christian. We are at once
met by the phenomenon which we have often noticed before, — in
the foreground an artistic Old Testament form, but here and there
coming into prominence an entirely different appearance. Let us
at once consider the Old Testament form. It is said, " the rest of
the men which were not killed by these plagues yet repented not
of the works of their hands, . . . neither repented they of their
murders," etc., ix. 20, 21 ; "they blasphemed the name of God
which hath power over these plagues, and they repented not to
give Him glory," xvi. 9 (comp. Jer. xiii. 16) ; " and they repented
not of their deeds," xvi. 11. The obdurate do not submit them
selves ; they do not repent, nor do they glorify God. In these
statements we learn, by implication, what is done by those who
are susceptible to religious impression, namely, that which the
Lord demands from apostate Christians when He says, " Repent !"
ii. 5, 16, iii. 3 ; that which is said of the remnant after the judg
ments of God, " they were affrighted, and gave glory to the God
of heaven," xi. 13; that which the angel, with the everlasting
gospel, required, when he cried, " Fear God, and give glory to Him,"
xiv. 6, and which is described as the evident result of God's
righteous judgments : " Who shall not fear Thee, 0 Lord, and
glorify Thy name ? " xv. 4. They are seized with fear, or they
fear God, that is, they are plunged into a state of terror and
anxiety by the judgments of God threatened or experienced ; they
give God the glory, or glorify His name,— that is, they confess His
justice and power, His pity and His grace ; they repent, and turn
from their neglect of God, and opposition to Him. That the seer,
by these things, really represents the transition to Christian hfe,
we cannot doubt, after what has been said in the section on the
gospel, as the true interpretation of xiv. 6, 7, and after what we
have learned in that on the works of God (comp. also the section
on the works of the Spirit), respecting the relation between the
plagues and the proclamation of the gospel, or the offer of salva-

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 153
tion. After what we have seen of the uniform manner of our
author, there needs no special illustration of the fact that, on
account of the character of his book, he intentionally represents
conversion to Christianity in the style of the Old Testament ; and
though not mentioning it by name, he manifestly implies and
includes faith in Jesus.
But from a few faint and occasional indications, we may dis
cover that John has, in his ordinary language, otherwise described
the process of conversion. To the church in Sardis the Lord says,
" Remember, therefore, how thou hast received and heard," iii. 3
(comp. " he that hath an ear, let him hear," for example, in iii. 6 ;
and, " if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come
in to him," iii 20). To the church in Philadelphia he says,
" thou hast kept my word," iii. 8, and " thou hast kept the word
of my patience," iii. 10. The writer sees under the altar in
heaven " the souls of them that were slain for the word of God,
and for the testimony which they held," vi. 9. The dragon is
wroth with the woman, and goes " to make war with the remnant
of her seed which keep the commandments of God, and have the
testimony of Jesus Christ," xii. 1 7. We cannot here accept the
idea of Baur (ut ante, p. 207), that the seer intends by their
" having the testimony of Jesus " to designate all true Christians
as prophets ; thus, according to the passages quoted, in the esteem
of the author, a man is in the way of becoming a Christian when
the word of God and the testimony of Jesus is proclaimed to
him ; when he receives, and, in the pregnant sense of the word,
hears, so that he now has it as his own. Would it seem far
fetched if, from the oft-mentioned words of the Lord to the church
in Laodicea, iii. 17, 18, we should cpnclude that the seer repre
sented to himself the process of becoming a Christian as one in
which a sinful man discovers himself to be, in a spiritual sense,
wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked, and turns
to Christ, who offers to make him rich, to clothe him in white
raiment, and to enable him to see ? We may compare what is said
on this passage in the section on the earth and its inhabitants.
(b.) The Christian Life in its Meaning.
By a rapid transition we pass from the process of conversion to
its meaning ; from the inquiry, how a man becomes a Christian ?

154 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
to the question, what becomes of the man when he is a Christian?
The victors cry with a loud voice, " Salvation to our God which
sitteth upon the throne, and to the Lamb," vii. 10. After the
overthrow of the dragon, a voice is heard saying in heaven, " Now
is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and
the power of His Christ," xii 10. We refer to what has been
said in the section on the works of God about salvation, and
content ourselves here with the remark that lost men, who have
fallen before the devil, become partakers of the salvation or
deliverance which God wills and accomplishes through Christ;
they are saved when they become Christians. — Salvation describes,
very generally, the result of embracing Christianity. We therefore
seek for a more definite statement, and find several by a reference
to the sections on the condition of men without Christ, and on
the works of God ; for that which belongs to the subjective and
objective states of non-Christians ceases, on their acceptance of
Christianity, and whatever the work of Christ signifies, in that
the Christian has a share. From the former point of view, what
is it that happens to the sinner on his becoming a Christian ?
He turns from the works of his hands, and no longer worships
idols ; he also ceases from murder, sorcery, witchcraft, whoredom,
and theft, ix. 20, 21 (comp. xxi 8, 27, y^'i 15) ; in a word, he
ceases to transgress the first as well as the second table of the
commandments of God ; turning from all abomination on the one
hand, and from all falsehood on the other. He is washed from
his former uncleanness (comp. iii 4, vii 14, xxii 11, 15, xxi 27,
viii 22, 3). He has turned from his fornication (comp. ii. 21,
22, xiv. 8, xvii. 2, 4, xviii 3, 9, xix. 2). From misery he passes
to happiness, from wretchedness to gladness, from poverty to
riches, from blindness to sight, and from nakedness to being
clothed in bright array, iii. 17, 18 (comp. xvi. 15). From death
he is awoke to hfe, or enters into life, or rises to life, iii. 1—3.
He is delivered from slavery to the devil, and from the bondage
of sin, i 5, v. 9, xiv. 3, 4. Those who are separated from God
are brought into closest union with Him ; and the sufferers in this
life, who await death as its climax, are made heirs to life eternal,
xxi. 3, 4, xxii. I, 2. What, considered from the second point of
view, has Christ done for the men who became Christians ? He
who is a follower of Christ has received, heard, and possesses the
word of God. and the testimony of Jesus, iii 3, vi 9, xii. 7

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 155
(comp. xix. 10). He shares in the victory of Christ over the
devil, and in Christ has overcome him ; for him the Accuser is
cast out, iii. 21, v. 5, xii. 9-11. He is redeemed by God from
the earth, and from among men, v. 9, xiv. 3, 4. He has washed
his robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb, vii. 4.
He has experience of the love of Christ, and has been dehvered
by Him from his sins, i 5, iii. 9. He has become identified
with Him who has risen from the dead, and has thereby been
delivered from death, and has obtained the resurrection life, i 5,
17, 18. In all things Christ has become for him the pattern,
or, more correctly, the operative type, ii. 26, iii 21, xi. 8, xiv. 4.
— And that these things are, in the mind of the seer, associated
with baptism, we may the more readily believe, when, as remarked
in the section on the work of Christ, the washing or making the
garments bright in the blood of the Lamb, vii. 14, as also the
white or shining garments in iii. 4, 5, 18, vii. 9, 13, 14, refer
not to the baptismal robes only, but are rather a double reference
to these and to the priestly attire, in which reference the former
has an essential part. But when, in xvi. 15, it is said, "Blessed
is he that watcheth and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked,
and they see his shame" (comp. iii. 4, v. 18), the image of
washing or making bright is certainly changed into that of re
ceiving garments or being clothed ; still, however, it points dis
tinctly to baptism, for this rite alone, in its then existing form,
could have led the author to symbolize conversion to Christianity
by receiving white raiment, as well as by washing, and making
them bright.
The Apocalypse gives us yet another representation of the
meaning of becoming a Christian, in the names or predicates which
it awards to the followers of Christ. By far the most frequent
designation of Christians is that of "saints," v. 8, viii. 3, xi. 18,
xiii. 7, 10 (comp. Dan. vii. 22, 25), xiv. 12, xvi. 6, xvii. 6,
xviii 20, 24, xix. 8, xx. 9. The passage xxii. 11, "he that is
holy, let him be holy still," does not apply here, for it is spoken
of a saint, and not of the saints. Nowhere do we find any refer
ence by the saints to the sins from which, or to the world out of
which, they have been sanctified. The seer has evidently used
the honourable Old Testament name of Israel to some extent as
a proper name to designate Christians as the true Israel, — a cir
cumstance which as much implies consecration and nearness to

156 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
God (comp. v. 8, viii. 3, xvi. Tsi) as characteristics of saints, as
it does their separation from, and opposition to, the world (comp.
xiii. 7, xvii 6).
Next to the designation of saints, the most frequent name
applied to Christians is that of " the servants of God," vii. 3,
xi. 18, xix. 2 (comp. Ps. cxxxv. 1 ; Gen. 1. 17; Isa. Ixi. 6).
They are called "fellow-servants," vi. 11, xix. 10, xxii. 9 ; also
" the servants of Jesus Christ," i. 1, ii. 20. We do not here
consider the question whether these names are applied in a pre
eminent sense to a particular class of Christians, and confined
exclusively to them. Christians are sometimes called the ser
vants of God or of Christ, because they have been redeemed for
God and the Lamb, and thus properly belong to God and to
Christ, vii. 3, xix. 2, xxii. 6 (comp. v. 9, xiv. 4; also vi. 10, for
the designation of God as SeorroTsj? or proprietary Lord). In
other places they are servants of God, because they keep His com
mandments, xii. 17, or do them, xxii. 14, or wait upon Him in
priestly service, vii. 15, xxii 3. According to the same Old
Testament conception, from which we have the designation ser
vant of God for the individual, we have the collective title
"people of God" xviii. 4. The servants of God in their collec
tive capacity belong to Him in distinction from all other gods ;
they are chosen by Him, and honour and worship Him. With
reference to the misunderstanding which springs from the modern
use of language, and which leads to the supposition that the
names " servant " and " people of God " imply rights rather than
honours, there needs only the remark that the seer speaks as
much as possible after the manner of the Old Testament, and
that there, both names are titles of honour to Israel and the
Israelites. The twenty-four elders say to God, " the time is come that
Thou shouldest give reward unto Thy servants the prophets, and
to the saints, and them that fear Thy name, small and great,"
xi. 18. A voice is heard from the throne saying, " Praise our
God, all ye His servants, and ye that fear Him, small and great,"
xix. 5. In the first place, those who fear the name of God are
mentioned in addition to the saints ; and in the second, those who
fear God are spoken of with His servants. Since the author in
Old Testament style describes conversion to Christianity in the
words, " fearing God, and giving glory to Him," for example, in

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 157
xiv. 7, it would not in itself be remarkable if in Old Testament
language he represented the chief feature of Christian life to be
continuance in the fear of the name of the Lord, as Kbstlin, ut
ante, p. 491, explains the disputed expressions ; and in that case
we should have to treat of them in a later section. But they
appear only in the two places above mentioned, and in the form
quoted, and undoubtedly belong to the present part of the dis
cussion. This is not without meaning ; for, since Ps. cxv. 1 1 un
deniably in equal measure underlies both passages, and we have
always found so far that in the use of Old Testament language
the seer has special reasons, we must seek the reason in this case
also. Very forcibly we are reminded of Acts xiii. 16, 26, and
of proselytism. If we had only the expression : " them that fear
Thy name," in xi. 18, I should not hesitate to affirm that the
seer there distinguishes from the saints as those who had already
been converted, or would be converted before the coming of
Christ, — those men who accept Christianity at the time of the
thousand years' reign, who would then not be citizens properly
so called, but subordinates of the New Jerusalem, — briefly, those
who would stand in the same relation to Christians as the
proselytes did to the Jews. For when Dusterdieck on this
passage affirms that the expression : " them that fear Thy name,"
embraces conclusively and summarily the whole multitude of the
pious, whether prophets or simply saints, whether small or great,
the position of the words, as well as the teal before Tots
tpoftovpevois, is wholly against such an explanation ; and what
then could " ye that fear him," xix. 5, mean ? Even this place
forbids us to understand by those who fear God any other than
Christians. There remains, therefore, nothing for us but to
regard those who fear God in both places as Christians from
among the heathen, in distinction from Christian Jews. Certainly
we may not, as Volkmar does, ascribe to the writer the meaning
that converts from among the Jews were the only true Christians,
and that Gentile Christians were only proselytes or subordinates.
Prophets, saints, and those who fear God will alike receive the
reward. Servants of God and those who fear Him are alike
engaged in His praise ; the predicates are the same for both
classes ; and elsewhere Gentile Christians include servants of
God as well as saints, and Jews become Christians when they
fear Him, xi. 13 (comp. ver. 11). "Small and great" do not

158 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
correspond, however, as we shall afterwards see, to the saints
and those who fear God. The case stands thus : The seer knew,
and that without anti-Pauline fanaticism, that the early Christians
were partly Jews and partly Gentiles ; and while he has described
both elsewhere by the title of " saints " or " the servants of God,"
in the two places mentioned he has, in order poetically to express
universality, taken the pre-Christian relation as a pattern, and has
conceived of the saints or the servants of God in a narrower
sense, and has thus designated the Christian Jews, but has spoken'
of the Gentile converts as those who fear God.
We read that " the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went
to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the com
mandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ,"
xii. 1 7. The remnant of the woman's seed has been variously
interpreted. One class understands thereby individual Christians ;
in the woman they find the whole, and in the remnant of her seed
its individual members. Others see in the remnant those disciples
of the Lord who remained after the earlier persecutions, ii 13-16,
who, having partially escaped their pressure, were to be found in
the dispersion, outside Palestine or Jerusalem. Others, again,
refer the remnant to the Gentile Christians, as those who with
the woman, the true Israel, belong to the same seed. Some see
symbolized in the remnant the Gentile Christians as part of the
seed of the woman, the church of God, and so far the brethren
of the Messiah, the other line of Christ-worshippers having
become in Christ another branch of Israel. If we are to stand
by the words, Zullig's exposition unquestionably deserves the
preference. He says : " The remnant of the woman's seed are
the Zionites on earth, in contrast with the child caught up to
heaven" (comp. Hoekstra, p. 399). The seer would then con
sider Christians as children of the same mother as Christ, brought
forth after Him from the maternal bosom of the same church ;
brethren of Christ; He the first-born, and they the younger
children (comp. i 5). Who can deny that this view of the
question has strong analogies in the doctrines of this book ? Still,
to the unprejudiced reader the relation of the remnant to the born
and exalted child, ver. 5, would hardly present itself spontaneously.
Much rather will he involuntarily contrast the remnant of the
woman's seed with the woman herself, and that not as a part
contrasted with the whole, for the whole is persecuted in its

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 159
members, but as Gentile Christians contrasted with the believing
Jews. We notice how, in the course of the twelfth chapter, the
woman is silently transferred from the Old Testament church into
that of the New, into the church of the first or Jewish Christian
times ; and the author in vers. 13—16 has passed in thought to the
concrete, the Jewish Christians. We thus understand how it is,
that where he speaks of the New Testament church in the later
or Gentile Christian times, he describes these Christians as the
remnant of the woman's seed, as if in 1 3-1 6 he had spoken of
Jewish Christians as her seed. It is not the mere expression in
itself, for which in such a signification Dusterdieck vainly seeks
a parallel in the Old Testament, but the inner connection of
chap, xii, which compels us to understand by " the remnant of
the woman's seed " Christians from the Gentile nations. But the
predicates demand that we should regard that remnant as full
born, though, as Christians of the second period, later born ; for
they keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of
Jesus, — that is, they do and have that which the Jewish Christians
do and have, and are true Christians.
We come now to the royal-priesthood or priestly-royalty of
Christians., It is disputed whether in i. 6 John wrote vp.a,<s, or
ripJav, or r)piv, and whether in v. 1 0 we should read iirolrja-a^ ^/wi?
Tffl dem r)pmv fiacnXeis Kal lepei<s icai /3acrtXevaopev, or eirolr)<ra<i
(3a<rtXeiav Kal te/aew ical /3ao-iXevcrovcnv, or the last reading with
the difference of (iao-iXevovcriv. We have already said, in speak
ing of the twenty-four elders, that in the second passage, jj/ta?
rq> dem %p,a>v and ^aaiXev<rop,ev must be false. With respect
to the remaining discrepancies in v. 10, fiatriXeiav or fiaaiXeis,
j3ao-iXevo-ovo-iv, or what is more probable, fiaaiXevovo-iv, and in
i 6, ¦qp.oov, or rjpfiv, or rip,a,<}, may be the original ; for, according to
i 9, John is a companion of his readers " in tribulation, and in
the kingdom," or the authority, " and the patience," or stedfast-
ness, " of Jesus Christ," and so there can be no doubt of this at
least, that the book recognises the royal dignity of Christians
even on earth, and regards them as kings. Certainly, it is not
thereby proved that fiao-iXela, i 6, and probably v. 10, may be
explained as a kingly people, or a kingship. It must be
admitted that this word is to be understood in the Apocalypse
as it is everywhere else. Therefore, with De Wette, we under
stand fiaaiXeia, i 6, to mean the kingdom of God, the holy and

160 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
blessed community in which all are united, and through which
every individual enters into the position and holy dignity of
priests ; or with Dusterdieck, that the redeemed are the kingdom
of God, the subjects, but at the same time the blessed partners,
in the kingdom with God ; or with the same writer on v. 10, that
they are God's possession, redeemed for a fiao-iXeta to Him—
" as God's possession they are also gathered into His kingdom."
So also Kbstlin, ut ante, p. 404, says : " Christians are the priests
of God, forming a kingdom which governs the earth, and has
God Himself for its immediate Ruler ; " and thus we arrive at
another of the peculiar views of the seer concerning the import
ance of Christians. But, first, fiatriXela in this book means
kingdom, in the sense of the subjects of a king, only in one
place, xvi 10. In all others except i 6 and v. 10, for example
in xi. 15, xii 10, xvii. 12, 17, 18, it signifies kingly authority.
Secondly, the words : " and we shall reign on the earth," in v. 10,
are in no way, as Dusterdieck thinks, superfluous to the concep
tion of fiacriXela as kingship ; for to be a king, and to exercise
kingly authority, are different things, as we have already found
with regard to God and Christ. Thirdly, it does not read king
dom of God, as many expositors seem to suppose. But if we may
not interpret it by kingship, and only by realm or kingdom, the seer
has expressed himself in very important places insufficiently or
indistinctly. But, finally, while we can hardly fill up this idea
as expressed by kingdom from the contents of New Testament con
ception given elsewhere, which the seer so carefully avoids, the
reference both of i. 6 and v. 10 to Ex. xix. 6 (comp. Isa. Ixi 6 ;
Dan. vii 27) is so striking, that, taken in connection with other
reasons, we are certainly justified in regarding fiaaiXela in these
two places not as it is misrepresented as a nation of kings, but
as a kingly people, or a kingship. Ziillig is doubtless right when
he (I. p. 263) traces this designation of Christians to the rab
binical exposition of Ex. xix. 6, according to which it is there
predicted that the Israelites should one day be kings and priests,
and this at the same time, consequently, priest-princes, — as the
high priests were, — in such a way, however, that each of these
princes or kings had not a special sovereignty, but a sovereignty
in common under God, the supreme King. Ewald also, ut ante,
p. Ill, says, our prophet has followed the exposition of 'a 'o, Ex.
xix. 6, attempted elsewhere in the Jewish school, according to

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 161
which both words are placed loosely beside each other ; for all
three Targums translate either " kings, priests," or " kings and
priests." With Hengstenberg, we may venture to say, even on
account of the relation to Ex. xix. 6, that the seer starts with
this view of the priesthood, and from it infers the kingship,
since by the priesthood he evidently understands their direct
communion with God, in which they present themselves before
Him, offer their petitions, and generally give themselves to Him
in holy obedience and spiritual service (comp. xxi. 22, the New
Jerusalem without a temple, Dusterdieck on i. 5) ; and by
the kingship of Christians, their thereby inwardly-conditioned
sovereignty over the world ; or, so far as he describes them by
the name of priests, he conceives of them more in their relation
to God, and by the name of kings, more m relation to the
world (comp. xxii. 3, 5). But it is to be carefully noticed, that
he does not consider Christians to be first priests and then
kings ; nor does he regard them as Kbstlin does when he says,
ut ante, 494, "they are priests of God, because they live to
honour God, especially in bringing as offerings their prayers to
Him ; they are rulers on the earth, because to them even in
the present, and notwithstanding all afflictions, its possession in
the millennial reign is assured," i. 9. But Christians as such
are now priests and kings, kingly priests and priestly kings ; as
Baur says, ut ante, p. 220, so far as through Christ's death they
are consecrated to Him and to God His Father for a special
possession, they are called kings and priests ; and as kings and
priests they are the governing power in the world, the centre
around which it turns. Attention has already been called to the
connection between the priestly kingship, or kingly priesthood,
of Christians, and washing their garments and baptism , and it
needs only to be mentioned here, that we have before us in this
priestly kingship the whole specific designation of the dignity of
Christians, the carrying over of the New Testament idea of
sonship to God into the Old Testament ; and in the relation of
Christians as priestly kings of God to Christ, as the real priestly
king, there is a close parallel to the relation of the sons or-
children of God to the Son of God.
With the priestly kingship of Christians is closely associated
the idea of their being first-fruits. " These were redeemed from
among men, being the first-fruits unto God and the Lamb," xiv. 4.
L

162 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
Many expositors see in the 144,000, of whom these words were
spoken, Christians from amongst the Jews only, Ritschl, ut ante,
p. 141 (comp. p. 147), refers to this text as a proof that the
apostles held it to be a privilege resting on Old Testament pro
phecy (comp. Isa. ii. 49, 60 ; Mic. iv. ; Jer. iv. 1, 2), by virtue
of which Israel, as a nation, would be received into the Christian _
church before the Gentiles (comp. Acts ii. 39, perhaps also Jas.
i. 18). Other expositors, as Dusterdieck in loco, see in the
144,000 an election from the Gentiles; while some regard them
as the first-fruits chosen from believers, or from the blessed dead.
In the section on the churches, we shall show that the 144,000
represent Christians generally, as the elect. But in what sense
are Christians called " the first-fruits unto God and the Lamb " ?
It seems natural to understand the word in the sense of Rom.
xi. 16, xvi. 5, 1 Cor. xv, 20, 23, xvi 15, as related to what is
to follow, and all the more so because xv. 4, xx. 4, 6, xxi. 24-26,
xxii. 5, show that the seer really looked for such a succession;
that, as appears also from vi. 11, he expected in the present dis
pensation, in common with all who believed the second advent
to be near, including Paul, the conversion of a comparatively small
number of the Gentiles, as he expeeted also that of Israel at the
twelfth hour, as a nation ; but the great efficiency of Christianity,
only from the setting up of the kingdom of Christ on earth. Yet
certainly as the author cherished this expectation, he does not
refer to it in his use of the word " first-fruits." Neither " the
redeemed from among men " (comp. v. 9), nor the " being without
fault" which follows (comp. 1 Pet. i 19), leads us beyond the
idea of a consecration or an offering. Nor is the relation of
Christians to the converted nations in chap. xx. and xxi., as we
shall show in its place, a relation of first-fruits. I therefore follow
De Wette and Hengstenberg, the former of whom understands
" first-fruits" merely in the sense of a consecrated selection from the
mass of mankind ; and the latter considers the point of agreement
between " first-fruits " and Christians to be consecration, holiness,
conceived in contrast with the common, or with the rest of men
(comp. Jas. i 18).
" I, John, who also am your brother and companion in tribula
tion, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ," i 9. To
the martyrs white robes were given, " and it was said to them
that they should rest for a little season until their fellow-servants

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 163
also, and their brethren that should be killed, as they were, should
be fulfilled," vi 11, The words of the angel to John are, " I am
thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony
of Jesus," xix. 10. Christians are servants of God and of Christ,
but in relation to each other, fellow-servants. By their redemption
from among men, xiv. 4 (comp. v. 9), chiefly by the common
renewal of their nature accomplished in them by their reception
of Christianity, they enter into the closest mutual relation of
heart and life, — a relation symbolized by one of the nearest in
natural life, they are brethren. Thus their religion is represented
in three main aspects, as tribulation or suffering in Jesus (comp.
ii 9, 10, vii 14), as authority or kinghood in Jesus (comp. i 6,
v. 10), and, mediating between these two opposite poles, stedfast-
ness or patience in Jesus (comp. ii. 2, 3, iii 10, xiii. 10, xiv. 12).
Christians have these three features in common, and are companions
therein. To the passages quoted above (xix. 10, xxii. 9) we add xii.
10, 11, "I heard a loud voice saying in heaven . . . the
accuser of our brethren is cast down," where we think that by
" brethren " is meant only believers in their earthly life (comp.
Dusterdieck in loco) ; and thus it appears that the seer considered
real Christians (comp. xxii. 9) as not inferior in dignity to the
angels, or to the inhabitants of heaven generally, for they are
their feilow-servants and brethren.
(c.) Christian Life in its Activity.
In passing from a consideration of the meaning of being a
Christian to a discussion of the activity of the Christian life-
principle, we notice, first, how much more prominently this appears
in the Apocalypse than the continued saving operations of God
upon Christians. Not, however, as if the seer regarded men as
being left to themselves after they have become Christians, for
from first to last they ascribe their salvation to God and the
Lamb, vii. 10 (comp. xii. 10, xix. 1). So John at the beginning
of the book wishes for the churches grace and peace from God,
from the seven Spirits, and from Jesus Christ, i. 4 ; and he closes
with the prayer, " the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you
all!" xxii. 21. We find also that Christians continually need
the mercy, and grace, and love which God shows toward the

164 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
sinner, and that only thereby can the state in which all disturb
ance of spiritual life by depravity and sin is abolished, be main
tained for them, in them, and by them, progressively toward
perfection (comp. also xxi. 6, xxii. 17, "freely"). Otherwise the
tendency of the Apocalypse is to place the independent activity
of the Christian life-principle prominently in the foreground.
In the consideration of this activity we have, in the first place,
to establish the author's doctrine of works. We read of the works
of God : the victors sing, " Great and marvellous are Thy works,
Lord God Almighty ! " xv. 3 (comp. Ps. cxi. 2, cxxxix. 14) ; of
the works of Christ he says, " he that overcometh, and keepeth
my works unto the end ; " of the works of Christians : at the
beginning of each of the seven letters the Lord says to the church
concerned, " I know thy works," ii. 2. The church at Ephesus is
exhorted to do its " first works," ii. 5 ; the " last works " of the
church at Thyatira are more (-irXelova) than the first, ii. 19 ; the
works of the church at Sardis were not found perfect (TreirXrjpwpiva)
before God, iii. 2 ; those who die in the Lord are followed by
their works, xiv. 13. But we also read of the works of the
Nicolaitanes, ii. 6 ; of the works of Jezebel, ii. 22; of the works
of their hands of which the rest of the men do not repent, xvi. 11.
Babylon is rewarded double according to her works, xviii. 6 ; and
finally, the Lord says, " I will give unto every one of you according
to your works," ii. 23 ; " Behold, I. come quickly, and my reward
is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be,"
xxii. 12. " The dead were judged out of those things which were
written in the books, according to their works," xx. 12 ; "every
man according to their works," xx. 13 (comp. Prov. xxiv. 12, 29).
Kbstlin, ut ante, p. 490, affirms that in the doctrine of the Chris
tian Hfe the seer lays the greatest stress on the epya. He does not,
however, mean thereby the works of the Mosaic law, for the
entire sentiment of the church, to which, for example, genuine
faith belongs, is summed up in epya, iii. 1, 15 ; but even this
summing up is characteristic, since the Christian life is conceived
of from the standpoint of the judgment, according to an absolute
standard which it should cover, and is everywhere interrogated
according to what is really present and actual, and has assigned
to it proportionate reward or penalty. In the great emphasis
which the seer lays upon works, Kbstlin, pp. 482, 486, sees the
chief argument for the theocratic view of life, and the Old Testa-

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 165
ment prophetic and anti-Pauline character of the Apocalypse.
Baur also says, ut ante, p. 224, that since the essential definition
of the religious consciousness is described as the fear of God, it
must practically manifest itself, and thus the chief feature will
be works ; in the Apocalypse all things terminate in works ; there
must be some definite, actual, present results to which a man can
appeal before God He also sees in these works a proof that
even on the subjective side the standpoint of the Apocalypse is
that of the Old Testament religion. Hoekstra, p. 389, says, "the
writer rests wholly upon the standpoint of works, though by
' works ' he understands only moral and religious works, not cere
monial works, which for him had lost their value." Passing over
ix. 20, where, by " the works of their hands " — according to Old
Testament usage, 2 Kings xxii 17 ; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 25 — idols of
their own making are to be understood, as well as those places
where the works of God and Christ are the subject, we must not
only acknowledge that the " works " of the Apocalypse everywhere
refer to something actually done by men, and really existing, but
we must regard as significant that comparatively they are so often
mentioned. Evidently the seer did attach great importance to
works. But when Kbstlin and Baur speak of the emphasis placed
by the Apocalypse on works as an emphasis of the greatest
strength, they must have had in view ii 1 9 and iii. 2. Certainly,
in the first of these passages, the greater number, and in the
second — according to the analogy of vi 11 — the complete number
is the subject of remark ; but if we should conclude from this
that the seer regarded Christian life from the point of view of a
pattern number of works, we should overshoot the mark. He has,
in a poetic manner, used a numeral to express in the former case
the relation of the present to the past ; and in the latter, the rela
tion of that which actually existed to what ought to have been
"before God." Further, when the above writers find in the
manner in which the Apocalypse treats the question of works an
argument for its theocratic, Old Testament prophetic, and anti-
Pauline character, they first overlook the fact that here, as else
where, the writer was bound by literary art to clothe his ideas as
much as possible in the forms of Old Testament prophecy ; and
secondly, they fail to notice that, according to the nature of the
subject, he has far less to do with the origin of the Christian
principle than with its exercise, efficiency, verification, and con-

166 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
firmation (comp. Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 627). If the "works "of
our book were approached without prejudice, it woidd be seen
that the seer treats as such those which flow from the Christian
as well as from the anti- Christian principle, almost exclusively
according to their activity, development, and manifestation; to
express these, and again as a seer, he does not use an abstract
term, but the concrete " works ; " and whether in its use he means
the Christian or anti- Christian principle, he leaves us to discover
from the connection. Where he intends Christian works, he classes,
not characteristically, but consequentially, not only the ituttk, or
fidelity, but Christian activity in general, under the name of
works. Dusterdieck, on ii 2, explains works as meaning the
general conduct of the church, including its demeanour in suffer
ing ; on iii. 2, as the collective activity of the inner life in external
acts; and certainly he comes nearer the truth than Kbstlin ot
Baur, though the " works " of the Apocalypse do not express the
outward life as distinct from the inner, but the life-principle in
its activity, whether internal or external, as distinct from the
principle itself.
In what do the works of Christians consist ? Comparatively,
but self-evidently, little — or may we, with Baur, ut ante, p. 226,
regard it as a reproach to the writer, that where in the progress
of events the idea of Christianity realizes itself, the inner side of
Christian life is with him very subordinate to the outer, and that
the inner immanent development of Christianity, as well in the
life of the individual as in the great course of history, lies out
side the circle of his vision ? — is said of the activity of the
Christian principle apart from its reference to occurring hindrances.
If we first inquire with respect to it in general, the writer replies :
" He that is righteous, let him be righteous " — or exercise
righteousness — " still ; and he that is holy, let him be holy
(dyiaa-drJTco) still ;" and according to the common reading, " blessed
are they that do His commandments," or according to another,
" blessed are they who wash their robes," xxii. 14 (comp. vii. 14).
The Christian is as such holy ; conceived of in a different relation,
he is righteous ; figuratively expressed, he is clad in garments
clean and bright ; he unfolds, developes, and gives expression to
the Christian life-principle present within him when he continually
sanctifies himself, or exercises righteousness, or, conceived of in
the concrete form, keeps the commandments of God, or when he

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 167
continues to cleanse his garments and make them bright. The
individual acts in which the exercise of righteousness completes
itself are the righteous acts (SiicaiwpiaTa) of saints, of which it is
said, " to her," the Lamb's bride, " was granted that she should
be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white : for the fine linen is
the righteousness of saints," xix. 8. The maintenance of their
fidelity on the part of the saints is not to be found, as Diister
dieck remarks, in this passage; just as little can we find in the
words, " to her Was granted," as the same expositor does, a refer
ence to the grace of God as the original source of the righteous
ness of saints ; nor is there any ground for the remark of Baur,
p. 225, that the good works of individual Christians are here
conceived of as a unity ; and that if not regarded as the treasure,
they are considered as the ornament of the church, and in antici
pation a beginning is made to distinguish between works and
their moral subjects, from which as moral acts they cannot be
separated, and to ascribe to them in themselves a moral worth.
If the activity of the Christian life-principle is real, then, as
the Lord says of the church at Thyatira, " the last works are
more than the first," ii. 19; there is addition, growth, progress ;
then Christians are truly rich before God. " I know thy
poverty, but thou art rich," ii. 9 (comp. the contrast in iii. 17,
1 8) ; the aim is that the Lord may find the works of Christians —
as He did not find them in the church at Sardis — complete, in
full measure, and weight, and number, hi. 2 ; in other words,
that the activity of the Christian principle, judged not merely
according to appearances, and from a human standard, but accord
ing to an absolute rule, — a divine, true, and righteous judgment, —
should be wholly as it ought to be.
If we inquire after the non-antagonistic activity of the Christian
principle in the individual, the reply of the seer is in the one
significant word love. The Lord had somewhat against the
church of Ephesus, in that it had left its first love, ii. 4. He
knew the " works, and love, and service, and faith, and patience "
of the church in Thyatira, ii. 1 9. If we had only the first of
these texts, we should understand merely love to God or Christ, on
account of its near relation to Hos. ii. 15, 16, Ezek. xvi. 8-15,
as well as to the analogy everywhere occurring in the Scrip
tures, and especially in the Apocalypse (comp. xix. 7, xxii. 17),
between the relation of believers to God and that of the wife to

168 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
the husband. If we had only the second, we should understand
it to mean brotherly love, for the parallelism of love and service
with fidelity and patience points to that love which proves itself
in service to those needing help. We do not desire, however,
unnecessarily to attach different significations to the same word,
and must therefore say that love to God or to Christ, and love
to the brethren, are the same thing, presented to the reader at
one time in its relation to God or Christ, and at another in its
relation to the brethren ; or perhaps better still, it is love to
God and Christ manifesting itself in love to the brethren.
When Kbstlin, ut ante, p. 493, says that with the seer love
never fails a church, but it is not exalted to the highest practical
principle, and indeed is entirely denied to the outer Jewish and
Christian worlds, I acknowledge that I can understand how
the seer, ii. 19, can have, on account of its relation to the
brethren, associated love with fidelity as a specially prominent
feature of the Christian life, but I cannot understand how love
can have been to him in its full signification anything else
than the all-embracing practical principle. Love to the world,
the world in its ungodliness and opposition to Christ, is in the
Apocalypse nowhere to be found, except, indeed, that which a
Christian understands intuitively, an example of which we have
— .Le publication of the everlasting gospel, xiv. 6, 7, and espe
cially in the bitterness of the little book, x. 9, — pitying, seeking
love to the lost, or those who are not partakers of the salvation
of Christ.Prayer in our book is the transition of the Christian life-
principle toward antagonistic development. When the Lamb
has received or taken the book, " the four living creatures and
the twenty-four elders fall down before Him, having every one of
them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers
of saints," v. 8. " An angel came and stood at the altar, having
a golden censer ; and there was given to him much incense, that
he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden
altar which was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense,
which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before
God out of the angel's hand. And the angel took the censer, and
filled it with fire of the altar, and cast it into the earth : and there
were voices, and. thunderings, and lightnings, and an earthquake,"
viii. 3-5. " The Spirit and the bride say, Come ! " xxii 17. John

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 169
writes : " Amen : even so, come, Lord Jesus ! " xxii. 2 0. The con
nection of v. 8 decidedly forbids us to understand the prayers
of saints as special petitions. The seer must either intend the
prayers of Christians generally, by the offering of which they
show their reverence for the Lamb, or — and the context favours
this — the special praise and thanks of Christians of the kind
which immediately follows, v. 9, 10. On the other hand, the
connection of viii. 3-5 shows just as decidedly that by " the
prayers of saints " the seer there thought of supplication only.
Taking the usual view of the identity of the altar and the golden
altar, we may represent the event by saying that the angel fills
his censer from the same altar-fire which consumed the incense,
and then casts it to the earth (comp. Ezek. x. 2) ; or, more correctly,
distinguishing between the altar and the golden altar, the event
then appears to us thus : After the angel who stood at the altar
of burnt-offering, the symbolic offering-place of the saints, had
filled his censer with incense, and burnt it at the golden altar,
he took the same censer and filled it with fire, the image of
divine wrath, from the altar of burnt-offering ; and then followed
the signs of the coming judgments of God (comp. Ezek. x. 1-8).
In each case the prayers of saints and the divine judgment
stand in causal connection, and are therefore understood as peti
tions for the coming of Christ, as expressed in xxii. 17, 20. The
seer also " heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar,"
the locality symbolizing the prayers of saints, " saying to the
sixth angel which had the trumpet, Loose the four angels which
are bound in the great river Euphrates," ix. 1 3 ; the saints have
achieved the liberation of the angels by their prayers. We
learn the contents of Christian thanksgiving and prayer, not
merely from the few words of xxii. 17, 20, but also from the
petitions to which expression is given in heaven. The adorations
of the four living creatures, iv. 8, 9 ; of the twenty-four elders,
iv. 10, 11, v. 9, 10, xi. 16, 17 ; of the angels, v. 12; of the
victors, vii. 1 0, xv. 3, 4 ; and the heavenly inhabitants, xii. 10, 11,
xix. 1-7, we may certainly regard, even as much as the cry of the
slain for vengeance, vi. 10, (comp. Ps. lxxix. 10) as praise and
prayer, as in reahty they are offered by saints or Christians on
earth. The prayers of Christians, as the passages quoted show,
are sometimes addressed to God, sometimes to the Lamb, and
sometimes to God and the Lamb at the same time. They are

170 THE DOCTRINE OF THE ArOCALYPSE.
symbolized by the golden vials full of odours, v. 8. Incense is given,
and it ascends for them before God, viii. 3-5 ; when incense is
given, then they are made acceptable to Him, and are admitted to
an audience ; when the smoke of the incense ascends before God,
they are accepted and heard (comp. Ps. cxli. 2 ; Ezek. viii. 1 1, x. 2).
The elders and the angels have here no independent meaning.
That the prayers of saints are heard and answered depends on the
will of God and their supplications ; they do not need priestly
mediation, for through Christ, the perpetual Mediator and High
Priest, they are themselves a royal priesthood to God and the Lamb.
The writer sees in the petitions of Christians the activity peculiar
to this priesthood ; as suppliants who have always access to God
and the Lamb, and approach Him with praise and prayer, they
show their priesthood ; and as suppliants whose praise and prayer
is always acceptable and audible, and who thus control the destiny
of the world, they prove themselves to be kings on the earth
(comp. what is said above on the royal priesthood of Christians).
When we inquire respecting the form which subjective Christianity
assumes in relation to its opposites, the result is unusually rich.
The seer is as well acquainted with the dangers and difficulties
of the Christian life, which are found in the subject himself, in his
own flesh, the world within him, as he is with those which spring
from without, from the surrounding world, and which are the
cause of his fall. The latter, again, come partly from the Jews
and partly from the Gentiles, and consist not merely in persecu
tions by word and deed, but also in tempting delusive doctrinal
error. In the letters to the churches of Ephesus, Sardis, and
Laodicea, the subject is neither persecution nor the influence
of erroneous doctrine. Ephesus had left its first love, the love
shown at the time of its foundation, ii. 4, and its members had
fallen from the high position in which they then stood, ii 5.
In Sardis they had a name as if they lived while they were
dead, iii 2 ; a part of the church was ready to die (epLeXXov), iii. 2,
— terms which, when taken in connection with watching and
strengthening, in ver. 2, must be interpreted in the sense of
slumber and sleep. On account of their profession of the true
faith, they presented the appearance, and had the credit of pos
sessing Christian life ; but they were on the way or near to
complete spiritual inactivity and sloth ; indeed, the church gene
rally had already sunk into spiritual death. The same church

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 171
had a few names which had not defiled their garments, iii. 4, —
that is, either there were a few members of the church who did
not live an impure, sinful life ; or, with reference to washing
their garments and making them white through the blood of the
Lamb, as represented in baptism, there were a few persons in the
church who had not gone back to their former sins, or fallen
into the sins .of the heathen. A different image is used when
the Lord says : " Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his
garments, lest he walk naked, and they see bis shame," xvi. 15.
The righteousness of the saints is the fine linen given to the
bride wherewith to clothe herself, xix. 8 ; and they who do not
watch and care for righteousness fall back again into the natural
condition of the unrighteous, and expose themselves to shame.
Finally, in Laodicea thej' are neither cold nor hot, but lukewarm ;
they say : " I am rich, and increased with goods (ireirXovrriica)
(comp. Hos. xii. 8), and have need of nothing ; and know not
that they are wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and
naked," iii. 15—17 (comp. xvi 15), — that is, they are neither
attached to the Lord by ardent love (comp. ItfXwo-ov, ver. 19), nor
altogether estranged from Him by enmity and opposition. They
had fallen into a state of indecision, half-heartedness, and in
difference, and in this condition had come prominently before the
Lord for rebuke, — not in its essential nature, as many expositors
think, but in its consequences, the satiety, self-satisfaction, and
haughty self-deception in which they imagined themselves rich
in Christian feeling and conduct, as needing no improvement,
while their real condition was the opposite. Hoekstia, p. 391,
thinks that a man must be forsaken of all the gods if he explain
the self-glorification of the Laodiceans by self-righteousness.
From the standpoint of the seer (comp. iii. 4) self-righteousness
does not appear in such dark colours as in Protestant dogmatics,
and we have rather to think of a degenerate Pauhne liberalism,
which, indeed, might very easily overtake those whose glorying
in grace and knowledge (comp. 1 Cor. viii. 1) was associated
with abated religious zeal and relaxed morality. But we think
that a contradiction between the doctrine of salvation, as taught
in this book, and the censure of an unjustifiable self-satisfaction,
as here expressed, can be found only when we bring with us the
categories of Protestant dogmatics. That this self-satisfaction,
or rather its cause, the lack of zeal, had its origin in a degenerate

172 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
Pauline liberalism, is not implied by a single syllable. Why,
indeed, should the seer have avoided every indication of it, if he
had Nicolaitanism in view ? Or what is there to compel us, in the
entire absence of any indication, to derive from a single original
all the improprieties in the Christian churches which caught the
eye of the seer ? But Christians are not only overcome by the
flesh, but also by the pressure of false doctrine. The Lord says
to the church in Pergamos, " I have a few things against thee,
because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam,"
ii. 14; and "thou hast also them that hold the doctrine of the
Nicolaitanes," ii. 15. There is thus indolence, weakness, and
delay in the correction or rejection of the adherents of doctrinal
error. To the church at Thyatira it is said, " Thou sufferest that
woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and
to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things
sacrificed to idols," ii. 20 ; and, " behold, I cast her into a bed,
and them that commit adultery with her," ii 22 ; that is, those
who are sharers with her in this false prophetic nature, and thus
in the theocratic sense of the word violate the marriage vow, ii. 22,
those who patiently endure it, and unite in many things taught
and practised by it. Finally, persecutions are also regarded as
temptations. " Behold," says the Lord to the church at Smyrna,
" the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be
tried ; and ye shall have tribulation ten days," ii. 1 0. On account
of the expression, " that ye may be tried," rather than " that he
may try you," we are led to differ from many expositors, who
suppose that there was on the part of the devil a temptation
designed for their destruction, — though it is certainly to be
maintained that the work of the devil is under divine control, —
rather than a trial on the part of God which, according to His
purpose, should serve not only for the establishment and advance
ment, but for the separation of genuine Christians from the
counterfeit ; for then, to the latter, the tribulations which they
have to endure for the sake of Christ become temptations in au
evil sense, inducements to apostasy. Such are afraid of the
things they shall suffer, ii. 10; they do not hold fast the name
of Christ, iii. 8 ; they worship the beast, and receive his mark
in their foreheads and hands, xiii. 8, xv. 1 6, xx. 4 ; they are
cowardly and faithless, xxi. 8.
What happens to those who fall before the power of such

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 173
temptations ? The Lord says of Jezebel, " I gave her space to
repent," ii. 21; and where such space for repentance is not used,
then, as we have seen in the section on the work of Christ, He
comes in judgment. But He desires that men should repent,
ii. 5, 16, iii. 3, 19, and brings those who are His to this con
dition. He says, " As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten,"
iii. 19. To the church in Ephesus He says, " Remember, there
fore, from whence thou art fallen, and repent and do the first
works," ii. 5 ; to the church in Sardis, " Be watchful, and
strengthen the things which remain that are ready to die : . . .
remember, therefore, how thou hast received and heard, and hold
fast and repent," iii. 2, 3 ; that is, the church regarded as a
unity should arouse itself in its relatively healthy members
from the prevalent spiritual indolence or torpor, to an active arid
vigorous life, to a holy walk and conversation, and thus strengthen
those who were approaching spiritual death. They were there
fore to remember how, that is, with what zeal and living faith,
they once received Christian truth, and so to embrace it with
fresh ardour, and turn away from their present state. The
church in Laodicea is counselled by the Lord to buy of Him
gold (comp. Isa. Iv. 1) tried in the fire, that she may be rich ; and
white raiment, that she may be clothed, and that the shame of
her nakedness do not appear ; and to anoint her eyes with
eye-salve, that she may see, iii. 18. He exhorts her to be zealous
and repent, iii. 19; that is, — it is altogether arbitrary to refer the
gold, and the raiment, and the eye-salve to individual features of
the Christian life ; yet, with Dusterdieck, the gold and the raiment
are the blessings of salvation, the eye-salve is the enlightening
gift of the Holy Spirit; with Hoekstra, p. 392, the gold is
fidelity to the truth, the white raiment is chastity, and the eye-
salve pure doctrine, — the Lord exhorts to burning zeal in con
trast with lukewarmness ; to repentance springing from zeal, in
contrast with self - righteousness, originating in lukewarmness,
which is expressed in the three symbols — gold, bright raiment, and
eye-salve, closely corresponding to those of the false condition,
poor, blind, naked. The words " of me " do not express, as
Hoekstra supposes, a contrast with false apostles ; but they direct
the Laodiceans to Christ as to one whom they had disgracefully
forsaken, and to whom they must return if they are to receive
help. The church in Pergamos, which numbered Nicolaitanes

174 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
among its members, is simply called upon to "repent," ii. 16.
Manifestly, when the author wrote, no Christians had fallen
through persecution ; for while, in relation to those who endured
it, he has words of approbation and encouragement, there are no
exhortations to repentance.
We come naturally to the remark, that, according to the con
ception of the seer, Christians do not yield or sink under any
kind of persecution, but in all, and over all, obtain the victory,
or overcome, as Christ overcame, iii. 21. A voice from heaven
declares, " The accuser of our brethren is cast down, which
accused them before God day and night. And they overcame him
(iviKtjaav) by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their
testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death," xii.
10, 11. That is, as the devil is overcome by the death of Christ
objectively, so they have overcome hiih subjectively who have,
and because (Sid) they have, by faith appropriated the death of
Christ, and proved their faith by their testimony, or Christian
confession of Jesus, even to the surrender of their lives. Diister
dieck in loco says that " the iviicno-av is accomplished only when
the conflict, continuing until death, and demanding the surrender
of life, is at last fought out, and the garments washed in the
blood of the Lamb have been kept pure notwithstanding all the
temptations and oppressions of Satan. That, although the jubi
lant host in heaven know the struggle against the dragon to be
still before their brethren on earth, they can yet celebrate the
victory as already won, because the battle fought in heaven has
made Satan a conquered foe for the faithful on earth; in the
meantime, the celebration in heaven of a victory as achieved
which has yet to be accomplished by believers on earth must have
given to the latter the most efficient encouragement." But this
expositor has failed to notice, or at least has not given suffi
cient prominence to, the fact that according to the ideas of. our
author, just as the conquest of Satan through Christ, and the
authority of God and the Lamb wherever they are celebrated as
already present, are by no means conceived of merely as present,
but present in ideal reality ; so also the conquest of the dragon by
Christians, by the appropriation of the blood of the Lamb, by the
word of their testimony, and by the surrender of their lives, and
by subjective Christianity at every step of its realization from
the beginning onward, is also ideal reahty. In ideal reality

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 175
Christians have even as Christians overcome the devil. This is
the plain statement of the seer, a statement in complete harmony
with the whole doctrine of the book ; and when Kbstlin, ut ante,
p. 492, says in one breath, " the victory is completed only with
the successful self-prosecution of the conflict even unto death,"
and " only he who has successfully passed over has conquered,"
he makes two very different assertions, of which the first is as
true as the second is false. But as in the thoughts of the seer
there is given to those who have overcome a continued conquest,
so it is distinctly expressed in the remainder of the passage
quoted — " Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in
them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea !
for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because
he knoweth that he hath but a short time," xii. 12 ; that is, as
Dusterdieck says, " To the inhabitants of heaven alone belongs
pure joy ; to the earth and those who dwell on it there is woe ;
even to the faithful on the earth, for with the raging dragon they
have now to struggle even unto blood ; " or, as I would rather
say, the victory objective and subjective is still only ideal ; in
heaven, real ; on the earth, or visibly, yet to be realized ; there
fore, as the visible reality is the theatre of the despairing efforts of
the ideally overthrown Satan, so Christians, as far as they still
belong to the visible reality, are liable to temptation and suffering,
the subjects of the angry attacks of Satan. The Apocalypse
does not contain a direct exhortation to Christians to overcome
in such a struggle, but indirectly it is given at the close of each
letter, ii. 7, xi 17, 26, iii. 5, xii 21, and also in xxi 7.
But what must the Christian do in order that he may overcome ?
The Lord says to the church in Ephesus, " I know thy works,
and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear
them which are evil : and thou hast tried them which say they
are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars : and hast
borne, and hast patience, and for my name's sake hast laboured,
and hast not fainted," ii 2, 3. When Dusterdieck in loco finds
in the words " thou hast tried," etc., the exposition of the sen
tence, " canst not bear them which are evil," and in the words
" hast patience " the exposition of " thy labour and thy patience,"
and in " hast borne " a striking antithesis to " and canst not bear,"
and then says, " the labour and patience refers to all in which
believers fulfilled their peculiarly holy task with divine spiritual

176 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
strength and endurance, — a labour which must always be associated
with suffering in every form, and which therefore can never
be accomplished without patience," — it seems to me that the
exposition is forbidden by the words immediately following;
" Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast
left thy first love," ii. 4. These words demand that we should
understand the labour and the patience mentioned in the former
part of the paragraph in a special rather than in a general sense,
as referring to false teachers. The individual statements, in their
fulness of meaning, then at once arrange themselves. The
Ephesians had labour, — that is, they experienced difficulty and
trouble with false teachers, — but they had not become weary, nor
spared themselves ; they possessed patience (comp. ii. 1 9), and
thereby showed that in their struggle with error they had borne
for Christ's sake, and had not fainted ; but " them which are evil "
— probably standing in the same relation to the liars as the
righteous to the saints — they could not bear; they could not
therefore suffer (comp. ii. 20) those who said they were apostles,
and were not, but proved, tried, put them to the test, and found
them liars. Thus there was an indictment against teachers
of error, in the labour they undertook, in their not fainting, in
their having patience for the sake of Christ, but not beaiiig the
evil, in their close examination and searching scrutiny of fa><v
hood. Hating the works of the teachers of error, for which the
Lord praises the same Ephesian church, — " thou hatest the deeds
of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate," ii. 6,— differs little from
not being able to bear their authors. To the church in Thyatira
the Lord says: "I know thy . . . faith (fidelity), and thy
patience," ii. 19 ; and to as many as have not this doctrine He
says : " I will put upon you none other burden but that which ye
have already ; hold fast till I come," ii. 24 ; and, " he that over-
cometh, and keepeth my works " — that is, either the works which
I require of him ; or, in still sharper contrast with the works of
the Nicolaitanes, " my example, or the activity of the Christian
life-principle manifested in me and springing from me "  " unto
the end, to him will I give," etc., ii. 26. It is thus against the
teachers of error, and in favour of the Christians, that the latter
have not suffered themselves to be moved away, but have held
fast that which they had of subjective Christianity, and under
every temptation preserved the Christian life - principle within

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 177
them from adulteration, deterioration, or destruction. With respect
to persecution in word and deed, the Lord says to the church in
Smyrna : " Fear none of these things which thou shalt suffer . . .
be thou faithful unto death," ii. 10. To the church in Per
gamos He says, " Thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied
my faith (comp. ii. 10), even in those days wherein Antipas was
my faithful martyr, who was slain among you," ii. 13. To the
church in Philadelphia Christ says, " Thou hast kept my word, and
hast not denied my name," hi. 8 ; " thou hast kept the word of
my patience," iii. 10 ; "hold that fast which thou hast, that no
man take thy crown," iii. 11. The remnant of the woman's seed,
with which the dragon went to make war, is described as consist
ing of those " which keep the commandments of God, and have
the testimony of Jesus Christ," xii. 17. Where the subject is the
conflict of the beast with the saints, and divine retribution coming
upon the persecutors, xiii. 7-9, it is said, " Here is the patience
and faith of the saints," xiii. 10. It is the same where retribu
tion is predicted as coming upon the faithless, xiv. 10, 11. " Here
is the patience of the saints ; here are they that keep the com
mandments of God and the faith of Jesus," xiv. 1 2 ; and accord-
ding to one reading, xxii. 14 gives us, "Blessed are they who
keep His commandments." We have already shown that we are
not to understand the commandments of God in the Old Testa
ment law in distinction from those of the New Testament, but the
word of God on its preceptive side ; the remaining expressions
have also been explained. They overcome the dragon by the
blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony ; and do
not love their lives unto death, xii. 1 1 (comp. vi. 9, xi. 3, 8, xx. 4).
Thus they hold fast that which they have ; they hold fast the
name of Jesus ; they do not deny His faith ; they keep the
word of His testimony, they keep the word of His patience ;
they are not afraid of suffering; they do not love their lives;
they are faithful unto that death which overtakes those who
overcome in the midst of persecution. With reference to the
temptations which come from the flesh, the Lord says, " Blessed
is he that watcheth and keepeth his garments (comp. iii. 3, 4),
lest he walk naked, and they see his shame," xvi. 1 5 (comp. iii.
17, 18); so also we read: "Come out of her — Babylon — my
people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive
not of her plagues," xviii. 4. We may add here that the writer,
M

178 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
conscious of uttering the word of God, says, " Blessed is he that
readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep
those things which are written therein," i 3 ; and hears the angel
say, " I am thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren the prophets,
and of them which keep the sayings of this book," xxii. 9 (comp.
xxii. 18,19); and so also are described the chief features of those
who overcome the temptations of the flesh. Those who overcome
are lyrically depicted, both according to their nature and their
conduct, in the words : " These are they which were not defiled
with women ; for they are virgins. These are they who follow the
Lamb whithersoever He goeth. These were redeemed from among
men, being the first-fruits unto God and the Lamb. And in then
mouth was found no guile : for they are without fault," xiv. 4, 5.
We omit the exposition of this picture here, that we may not
separate it from its connection in the section on the saints in the
great tribulation. It remains only to point out that — not in the
almost entirely presupposed neutral activity of the Christian hfe
(comp. "love" and "service," ii. 19, with "my works" in the
same letter, ii. 26), but in its activity against its opposites, an'd,
indeed, in overcoming generally (comp. the frequent conquests
of Christ as those of Christians, and particularly iii. 21), espe
cially in overcoming persecutions, in patience (comp. iii. 10, ii. 10,
with ii. 26), in fidelity (comp. ii. 10 with iii. 14), hi testimony
or confession (comp. xii. 11, vi. 9, with iii. 14), in voluntary
self-sacrifice (comp. vi. 9, xx. 4, with v. 6, 9, also xi. 3, 8);
we may notice, moreover, the significant " with me," iii 4 — it is
distinctly evident that the seer regarded the activity of the
Christian hfe as an imitation of the example of Christ (comp.
xiv. 14).

(d.) Christian Life in relation to it
What prospects have those who overcome ? or-whatfis promised
to subjective Christianity? We stand here before one of the
decisive questions. According to Dusterdieck, p. 196, the closing
promises to the victors refer in all the letters to the time of the
eternal glory after the coming of the Lord ; and according to the
same writer, p. 294, there is given beforehand to the seer, in vii.
9-1 7, a glimpse of the final glory of all true believers, in which
it is shown to him how, after the great tribulation of the last

"NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 179
days, they will be perfected, and stand before the throne of God
and the Lamb. Kbstlin says, p. 494, "There certainly prevails
in the Apocalypse no such dualism of the present and the future
as that of James, who demands humiliation, sadness, and poverty;
but goodness, according to the law of recompense, brings its
good results only after death (comp. the closing verses of the
seven letters)." But are these assertions well-founded? With
absolute certainty, I say no. The future tense, " I will give,"
at the close of the letters, is, for a book with the style and
purpose of the Apocalypse, the only possible form of promise. It
is forbidden beforehand, by the laws of apocalyptic language, to
say, " He that overcometh eats of the tree of life," or " I have
given him to eat of the tree of life," etc. ; nor is it said to the
combatant who is admonished to fidelity and patience, " thou
eatest of the tree of life," or " I have given thee to eat of the
tree of life." The future means nothing more than that, accord
ing to the view of the seer, the contents of the promise belong
not merely to the past or the present, but must be a prediction
not yet wholly fulfilled. If we conclude, from the form of the
promises, that they belong to a period after the coming of Christ,
there is certainly a frequent agreement with the pictures of the
heavenly state. But first, there are not wanting contradictions
which, if we limit the promises to the latter, are inexplicable.
We need only compare the promise of being " a pillar in the
temple of God," and the assurance of the seer that he " saw no
temple therein," iii 12, xxi. 22. It is evident, further, from a
rather numerous group of promises, that while they reach to the
perfect or the heavenly state, they refer also to life on earth.
We may compare the statements of xiv. 3, 4, where those in
heaven are said to have1 been " redeemed from the earth " and
"from among men," with v. 10, where the same thing is said of
those "on the earth." Those who are in heaven wear white
raiment, vii 9-13, and so do those who are below, iii 4 (comp.
ver. 5). In heaven they stand " before the throne of God and the
Lamb, and serve Him day and night in His temple," vii. 15
(comp. xxii. 3, 4) ; but in the earthly life they are already
servants of God and of Jesus, ii. 20, vii. 3. The heavenly
inhabitants bear the name of God and of the Lamb on their
foreheads, xiv. 1, xxii. 4, and also on earth they have on their
foreheads the seal of the living God, vii. 3. In heaven they

180 , THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
serve God as priests, and rule over the world as kings, vii. 15
(comp. xxii. 3-5) ; and even here they are a kingdom, or a king-
hood, and a priesthood to God, and reign on the earth, i. 6, v. 10.
In heaven they follow the Lamb, vii. 1 7, xiv. 4 ; and here also
they walk with Him in white, iii. 4 (comp. also vii. 17 and iii,
20). The promise of Christ is, " I will give thee a crown of
life," ii. 10 ; and He also gives the admonition, " Hold that fast
which thou hast, that no man take thy crown," iii. 11. The
works of Christians follow them in heaven, xiv. 1 3 ; but Christ
says that true Christians are rich even here, ii. 9 ; comp. also
vii. 10 and xii 10. In the presence of such a number of
witnesses, which might be easily multiplied, can it be seriously
affirmed that the promises of our book, made to those who over
come, belong exclusively to the heavenly state ? How does the
case really stand ? When Kbstlin, p. 494, speaking of an earnest
of eternal life, and bringing into prominence the royal priesthood
of Christians even on earth, says, "still there is in the vucav
which in every struggle with the world has already triumphed
a feeling of superiority over it," he had at least a glimpse of the
truth. But we must go deeper, and say that the seer, in strieii
analogy with his entire views, and more immediately with those
respecting the triumphs of Christians, regards the promises as
being on the one hand fulfilled, as well in the conversion of the
man, with a view to the conquests of the Christian, as on the
other in his being a Christian and a gradual victor over evil.
They are continuously fulfilled, — in this life, amid struggle and
conflict with the external reality ; in heaven, in the ideal or
hidden reality ; and in the final perfect state, in ideal manifest
reality. Useless as it is to contend against the meaning of the book,
it would be not less so if, on the ground of a few modifications
in the imagery of its promises for the earthly life, for heaven, and
for the final state, we should endeavour to prove an essential
difference in their nature. The contents of the promises are
everywhere the same ; bufc the measure of their fulfilment in the
different stages is various, yet always more complete and glorious.
The question thus arises, whether we should throw the promises
together into one place, and into what place ; and though it
would not be out of order should any one treat together the
entire substance of the promises considered in itself, our repre
sentation demands that we should distribute it, and for the present

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 181
confine our remarks to that portion complicated neither with
heaven nor the final perfect state.
And what are the particulars in which this consists ? We
simply return to the letters to the churches. " To him that
overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the
midst of the paradise of God," ii. 7, — that is, the Christian shall
have eternal life in blessed communion with God. " Be thou
faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life," ii. 10.
Life is here the crown, and the Christian shall have eternal hfe
as the reward of victory. " He that overcometh shall not be
hurt of the second death," ii. 11. The second death is the
opposite of eternal life — condemnation, misery, and perdition ;
but it shall not harm the Christian, for he shall have eternal life.
" To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna,
and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name
written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it," ii.
1 7. The hidden manna, in distinction from the manna in the
wilderness, means the ideal or the heavenly manna. The Chris
tian shall enjoy the ideal food, the heavenly bread ; he shall have
eternal life. The gift of the white stone cannot here be regarded,
with Hengstenberg, I. p. 200, as having an independent signifi
cation, but must be taken in connection with the inscription of
the new name ; and certainly the gift of the tablet, as the medium
upon which to write, and its being bright or white, as material
corresponding with the inscription, are to be associated ; but the
new name (comp. Isa. lxii. 2, Ixv. 15) is the ideal glory of
believers ; the Christian as such shall have a standing or personal
relation with God and Christ, which, though incomprehensible to
the world, is perfectly known to himself. " He that overcometh
... to him will I give power over the nations " — the heathen —
" and he shall rule them with a rod of iron ; as the vessels of a
potter shall they be broken to shivers ; even as I received of my
Father. And I will give him the morning star," ii. 26-28. The
possession of power over the nations (comp. Ps. ii. 8, 9) denotes
earthly dominion (comp. xii. 5, xix. 15); but the morning star,
according to Num. xxiv. 17, Isa. xiv. 12 (comp. Dan. xii. 3,
Matt. xiii. 43), is equivalent to great glory and splendour of
authority. The Christian shall, with power and glory, rule the
world (comp.- v. 9). " Thou hast a few names even in Sardis
which have not defiled their garments ; and they shall walk with

182 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
me in white : for they are worthy. He that overcometh, the same
shall be clothed in white raiment ; and I will not blot out his
name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before
my Father, and before His angels," iii 4, 5. The bright or white
garments symbolize positive purity, holiness, or righteousness
(comp. xix. 8). The Christian, as holy, shall stand in the closest
personal community of life with Christ: he shall become holy,
ver. 4; he shall be recognised, declared, and honoured as holy,
ver. 5 (comp. xix. 8, it was given to her to be clothed with white
byssus). Being written in the book of life, describes the divine
election to eternal life ; on account of his holiness the Christian
shall be assured of eternal life or blessedness (comp. Luke x. 20);
and the confession before God and the angels is the absolute
declaration of their connection with Christ ; the Christian shall,
with divine certainty, be recognised by Christ as His (comp. Matt
x. 32). "Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan,,
which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie ; behold, I will
make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know
that I have loved thee," iii 9, — that is, Christians shall win
unbelievers to repentance and faith, and thus be the means of
extending Christianity to others, and saving them. " Thou hast
kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the
hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try
them that dwell upon the earth," iii. 10; by which the seer
intended to say that Christians, through the grace of Christ, shall
be dehvered from the great tribulation which is to precede His
coming, for John xvii. 15 shows that there is no essential dif
ference between Trjpelv diro and e'«; "to try them that dwell
upon the earth " does not mean that the temptation should come
upon these so far as they were not kept, — that the tribulation
which is to precede the coming of the Lord will come upon all
believers, will be shown later on to be unfounded,— but that
Christians should be spared the plagues which should come upon
the world to try whether it would repent or not (comp. vii. 1-3).
" Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my
God, and he shall go no more out : and I will write upon him the
name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is
New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my
God; and I will write upon him my new name," iii. 12. The
pillar in the temple of God is a distinguished part of it,— a sup-

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 183
port, — and its not going out indicates its continuance there ;
which signifies that the Christian is a support, an important
member of the kingdom of God, and shall remain there immove-
ably. The inscription of the three names relates to three aspects
of the life of the Christian, — his consecration to God, his citizen
ship in the New Jerusalem, and his belonging to Christ, with all
its endless significance (comp. xiv. 1, xxii. 4). " Behold, I stand
at the door and knock : if any man hear my voice, and open the
door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with
me," iii. 20, — that is, Christ enters into the most complete and
blessed life-relation and life-communion with the true Christian,
and the true Christian enters into the same relation with Christ
(comp. Cant. ii. 8, 9, v. 2). " To him that overcometh will I grant
to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set
down with my Father in His throne," iii. 21. Here the throne
of God and of Christ represents the divine power and authority ;
the Christian shall share in it with Christ, as Christ does with
God. How each of these promises was adapted to the condition
of the church concerned in it, is the business of the expositor to
point out. We refer to it here only to show that they do not
form a perfect whole, but only individual features, without claim
to completeness. We may, however, refer these promises to a few
general heads ; and the following are distinctly recognisable —
those relating to God, or personal communion with Him, ii. 17,
iii. 1 2 ; those relating to life and love, and even to nature and
honours, in common with Christ, ii. 17 (comp. iii. 12, xix. 12),
iii. 5, iii. 21, based upon that which is more prominent than all
— hfe, eternal life, ii. 7, 10, 11, 17, iii. 5 ; and further, the
divine features — holiness, happiness, glory, and power, ii. 1 7-2 7,
iii. 5, 12, 20, 21.
Let us now look back to the meaning of becoming a Christian,
and compare, for example, the walking in bright garments, iii. 4,
with the washing and making those garments white or bright in
the blood of the Lamb, vii. 14; the names of the saints, the
inscription of the names of God and Christ upon Christians, iii.
12, with the names servant of God and Christ, their being made
permanent pillars in the temple of God, and the inscription upon
them of the name of the New Jerusalem, iii. 1 2, as well as their
ruling over the nations with a rod of iron, and their possession of
the morning star, ii. 27, 28 ; their sitting with Christ upon His

184 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
throne and upon the throne of God, iii. 2 1, with the priesthood
and kinghood of Christians, i. 6, v. 9. Let us notice also that
several of the promises — for example, " I will not blot out his
name out of the book of life," iii. 5 ; " I will make him a pillar
in the temple of my God," iii. 1 2 ; and, indeed, most others — appear
in a remarkable manner to be more or less mere artistic varia
tions of what the Christian, as such, is and has ; for instance, his
name stands in the book of life ; he is a pillar in the temple of
God ; he has life, etc. ; and we must confess that, while the
promises of the seer are usually referred to the future, and not
at all to the present, even his promises for the present are essen
tially nothing different from the import or meaning of becoming a
Christian, only not represented by formal statement or predicate, but
as promise of reward, or as an end to be achieved. Those who have
not recognised this constant peculiarity of the seer, who conceives
and represents these things as being present, and yet future, — a?,
still to be attained, and yet possessed; as actual, and yet no1r
actual ; as reward (comp. xi. 1 8, xxii. 1 2), but, at the same time
as the result of a man's own nature, — want the master key foi
understanding this book. 5. The Churches.
The seer recognises not merely individual saints or servants of
God, — names, as he says, iii. 4 (comp. xi. 13 ; Num. i 2, 18, 20),
— but single communities, consisting of individuals, and a living
union of all these single communities, or a collective church.
Our representations must begin with the latter; and we shall
consider, first, its names and symbols ; then, its constituent parts ;
next, its organization ; and after that, its history ; and finally, its
present position. («.) Christendom according to its Designations.
First, the names and symbols of the church in general — " Come
out of her — Babylon — my people" — was the injunction heard
by the seer, xviii. 4 (comp. Jer. li. 45) ; and a voice from heaven
said, " Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will
dwell with them, and they shall be His people," xxi 3 (comp.
Num. xxiii. 21, 22 ; Ezek. xxxvii. 27). As the parallel passages

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 185
show, the expression drawn from the Old Testament closely
agrees in meaning with the name " servant " of God or of Christ,
mentioned in the former section as descriptive of individual
Christians. The designation " people of God " does not describe
Christendom in distinction from Israel, but the organic whole of
the servants of God, as in the predictive fact of the Old Covenant
it had already existed, as realizing its time fulfilment in Chris
tendom, and as it will find its eternal accomplishment in the
New Jerusalem. When, from the various tribes, there are sealed
144,000 of the children of Israel, vii. 4, and when the names of
the twelve tribes are written upon the gates of the New Jerusalem,
xxi. 12, we are to understand, as we shall afterwards show,
neither the Jews in contrast with the Gentiles, nor the Christian
Jews in distinction from the Christian Gentiles ; but Christians,
— the true Israelites, — whether Jews or Gentiles. The twelve
tribes of the children of Israel are therefore identical with the
people of God; only the latter are described in Old Testament
style, or typically, and as a great living organism.
In chap. xii. there appears to the seer "a great wonder in
heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her
feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars" (comp. Gen.
xxxvii. 9, also the description of Christ, i 12—16, especially
ver. 16). " She, being with child, cried, travailing in birth, and
pained to be dehvered," xii. 2 ; " the dragon stood before the
woman which was ready to be dehvered, for to devour her child
as soon as it was born. And she brought forth a man-child, who
was to rule all nations with a rod of iron : and her child was
caught up unto God, and to His throne. And the woman fled into
the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they
should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore
days," xii. 4-6. After the conflict with the dragon and his
overthrow have been narrated, we read, " And when the dragon
saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman
which brought forth the man-child. And to the woman were
given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the
wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and
times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. And the
serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman,
that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood. And
the earth helped the woman ; and the earth opened her mouth,

186 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his
mouth. And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went
to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the com
mandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus," xii. 1 3-1 7.
The church of God is represented by the figure of a woman in
the Old Testament (comp. for example, Isa. liv. 1, 13, Ixvi 8;
Mic. v. 1-3). The question now arises, whether we are here to
understand the church of the Old Testament or the New. Instead
of entering upon a consideration of the various expositions, we
affirm that, from the first verse of the chapter to the last, the
woman without doubt represents the same personality, and the
seer cannot have understood by the woman the New Testament
church in distinction from that of the Old Testament ; the general
statements of vers. 1-6 are against it ; nor is this interpretation
helped by limiting the meaning to the Jewish Christian church.
On the other hand, it is utterly impossible to understand by the
woman the Old Testament church in distinction from that of the
New, for then not only vers. 13-17, but even ver. 6, would be
without meaning. What, then, are we to understand by the
woman ? Simply the church of God, which already existed in
the prophetic fact of the Old Covenant, and which now exists in
its time fulfilment in Christendom, and will exist in its eternal
completion in the new heaven and the new earth.
We read, " Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to
Him : for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and His wife "—
ancient for bride (comp. Gen. xxix. 21) — "hath made herself
ready. And unto her was granted that she should be arrayed in
fine linen, clean and white : for the fine linen is the righteousness
of saints. And He saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which
are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb," xix. 7, 8. In
xxi. 2 it is said, " And I John saw the holy city, New Jerusalem,
coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned
for her husband ;" and the angel said, xxi. 9, to the seer, " Come
hither, and I will show thee the bride, the Lamb's wife." It is
written also, "the Spirit and the bride say, Come," xxii. 17.
The entire figure, with which also xxii. 2 is probably connected,
rests ultimately upon the Song of Solomon (comp. Jer. ii. 25; Isa.
lxii. 4, 5 ; Hos. ii. 19 ; Ezek. xvi. 8 ; Matt. xxv. 1-12). Weiss,
bibl. Theol. p. 610, though alone in the opinion, thinks that the
church which is to constitute the perfected kingdom of God is

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 187
now the bride of the Messiah ; but against this xxii. 17 is decisive.
Generally, expositors consider the bride of the Lamb to be the
New Testament church ; and, in fact, it is difficult to find a feature
which speaks in favour of the church of the Old Testament. But
if we first fix our attention upon xxi. 2 and 9, and then read how
the New Jerusalem, xxi. 1 2 — the bride, — has twelve gates, and
at the gates twelve angels, and on them twelve names, which are
the names of the twelve tribes of Israel, the conviction forces
itself upon us that the seer, even by the bride of the Lamb, does
not mean the New Testament church in distinction from the
church of the Old Testament, but here also the church, which
already existed as a prophetic fact in the Old Testament dispen
sation, which at present finds its time fulfilment in Christendom,
find which will come to perfection only in eternity.
If, now, we take in at one glance the three names and symbols,
— " people of God," pointing to the twelve tribes of Israel,
" wife," and " bride," — we shall see once more confirmed, in an
Important particular, our remark that the seer is mostly not in
harmony with the usual categories. He is superior to the alter
natives, according to which the woman in chap, xii must be
either the Old or the New Testament church. Such a view as
Kbstlin's — who says, ut ante, p. 489, "the woman, who is the
subject in xii. 1-6, 13-17, is the Jewish and the Christian
church in one person ; Christianity is thus nothing different from
Judaism ; it can at most be only a new form of the same " — is
not far from that of the seer. We would rather say that as,
according to him, God sits upon the throne from eternity, and
yet becomes Ruler only by progressive stages ; that as salvation
and deliverance in the ancient sacred records was through Moses,
but has been fulfilled in Christ, and will become absolutely com
plete through Him (comp. xv. 3, the song of Moses, the servant
of God, and of the Lamb, sung by the victors) ; that as the Chris
tian, at the time of his conversion, has overcome, and will con
tinue to do so to the end ; in other words, that as the ideal is for
the writer always already actual in its sphere, but, from one step
to another, more fully realizes itself, until it has reached per
fection, — so also the church of God, the ideal of humanity, was
in the true Israel of the Old Covenant already realized, is so,
more fully, in Christendom, and will be perfectly so in the final
state. The distinction between the church in the Old and the

188 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
New Testament stage, which, as chap. xii. plainly shows, he knew .
very well, and did not fail to make prominent by different names
and images for the two dispensations, can hardly have been to
him so great as to necessitate the designation of Christian things
by specific New Testament names. As to the clothing of Chris
tian doctrines in Old Testament forms, which are indeed still the
same, only in an earlier stage, he had, according to his views, the
right and, with his purpose, the obligation of pointing out, by
names and symbols, the church of God as the true Israel, which
is really nothing else than Christendom before and after the
appearance of Christ, — than Christendom which at an earlier jstage
expected the appearance of the man-child, and which in the present
expects His coming to judgment. But it is thereby obvious, that
while the idea of the people of God permits no modification, the
image of the woman must form itself into harmony with the con
nection. In chap, xii., where " the travail," that is, the painful]
hopes of the church of God in the Old Dispensation, are repre-|
sented, she naturally appears as a wife and mother; and the
same form is maintained where she is represented as persecuted
under the New Covenant ; but in chap. xix. and xxi., where the
subject is the marriage of the Lamb, the much-desired entire
union of the church with God, or Christ, or the blessed com
pletion of the church, she is just as naturally represented as a
bride. Should it be said that in the image of the wife the Old
Testament, and in that of the bride the New Testament, pre
dominates, there can be no objection ; only it may not be under
stood as a preponderance of the Old or the New Testament
church, but only of the two sides of one and the same church
of God, as related either to Christ in the flesh or to Christ in
His glory ; for, from the connection, we cannot fail to see why
the seer could not symbolize the church of God in the Old
Testament stage rather as a bride, and in the New Testament
stage as wife and mother.
An entirely different symbol for the general Christian church
appears in i 12, 13, and 16. In the first passage, John sees
" seven golden candlesticks ; and in the midst of the seven candle
sticks one like unto the Son of man." In the second, he sees the
same person having in His right hand "seven stars." The seven
stars are afterwards said to be the angels of the seven churches,
and the candlesticks are explained as meaning the seven churches.

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 189
We have already shown, in the section on angels, that the angels
of the churehes signify the churches themselves as religious
unities, or bodies or persons ; but the seven churches represent
the churches as the sum of the manifoldly various rehgious
individualities. The sacred number seven leads us to see in the
candlesticks and the stars, Christendom in Asia (comp. i 4) ;
and beyond this, Christendom in its entire extent (comp. xxii. 16),
for the book was undoubtedly intended for the whole church.
When John represents the angels of the seven churches by stars,
and the churches by candlesticks, we need not, with Dusterdieck,
p. 132, find in the latter symbol merely the representation that
the churches have their light from Christ, and are kept con
tinually by the Lord, who walks in their midst, and in the
former a kindred idea ; but by the image of the candlesticks we
shall, with Hengstenberg, I. p. 124, go back to Ex. xxv. 37 and
Zech. iv., and in the oil as a symbol of the Spirit of God, and
in the light as a symbol of spiritual light, we shall see the opera
tion of the Spirit of God, and ascribe to the seer the represen
tation that Christendom — the seven candlesticks — is filled by the
Spirit of God, and with its spiritual life shines into the darkness
Of the world (comp. Matt. v. 14, 15 ; Luke xvi. 8) ; while by the
symbol of the stars, which correspond to the angels signified by
them, we are to understand less the hght that is in the world,
than the heavenly, light-like, glorious, in a word, God-related, or
divine nature of Christendom itself.
Another entirely different image is given in the New Jerusalem ;
but this local symbol of the church in its final state will be better
illustrated in the section which relates to that period.
(b.) Christendom in its Constituent Elements.
We are now in presence of the question, In what relation, in
the view of the seer, did the two elements of the Christian church
— the Jewish and the Gentile Christian — stand to each other?
The four living creatures and the twenty-four elders say to the
Lamb, " Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals
thereof: for Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by
Thy blood out of every (irda'r)<;) kindred, and tongue, and people,
and nation ; and hast made us . unto our God kings and priests :
and we shall reign on the earth," v. 8, 9. The writer sees an

190 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
" angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel
to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation,
and kindred, and tongue, and people," xiv. 6, 7. In these pas
sages it is unmistakeably declared that not Jews only, but
men from all nations, had become Christians ; and that, without
distinction of nationality and religious antecedents, men might
and should embrace the Christian faith ; in other words, they
undoubtedly express the universality of Christianity; and so
decidedly does this feature belong to the entire tenor of the book,
that amongst expositors there is no sort of difference with regard
to it. On the contrary, with respect to the relation of Jewish and
Gentile Christians to each other, in the Apocalypse there are three
different views. De Wette, on vii. 4-8, says, " The seer makes
no distinction between Jewish and Gentile Christians, and somie-
times describes Christians as Israel, and at other times as the
chosen out of all nations and tongues, or from off the earth!
Hengstenberg, on vii. 4, remarks that in the Old Testamenf
the wicked, notwithstanding their natural descent from JacoJ),
appear as rooted out from among their people ; but that, on the
contrary, under certain limitations, native Gentiles could, on
account of their faith, become children in Israel ; and that, accord
ing to the announcement of the prophets (comp. Isa. lvi. 6-8 ;
Ezek. xlvii. 22, 23), at a future time these limitations would fall
away, and the adoption of the believing Gentiles, going hand in
hand with the exclusion of the false seed, would follow on the
grandest scale. He therefore takes the tribes of the children of
Israel in the Israelitish-Christian sense ; they are to him the
Christian church, as the legitimate continuation of the earher
Israel. The disciples of the Tubingen school think entirely
otherwise. Baur, ut ante, p. 211 (comp. Kbstlin, ut ante, p. 489),
certainly finds the universality of Christianity so far recog
nised by the seer, that he represents Christians as divinely con
secrated kings and priests, redeemed from all peoples and nations ;
but that he considered the Gentiles as being citizens of the New
Jerusalem, equal in birth and privileges, cannot, according to
Baur, be affirmed. " It is true that, in vii. 4, Jewish and Gentile
Christians are conceived of together, and the innumerable multi
tude of ver. 9 does not differ from those already mentioned ; but
it is easy to see how the Gentiles belong to the Christian church
only so far as they are received into communion with the Israehtish

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 191
race. The Jews still have the absolute privilege of being the
people of God ; they are the root and stem of the whole theocratic
community, and the Gentiles stand to them only in a secondary
relation and in a subordinate rank (comp. chap. xi. 11, 12).
The seer admits the Gentiles into the Messianic kingdom and
into the New Jerusalem ; but a perfect equality of Jew and
Gentile does not come within the circle of his vision. When
those only can enter the New Jerusalem whose names are written
in the book of life, we know not whether this category has a full
application to the Gentiles (comp. xxi. 24—27)." According to
Volkmar, ut ante, p. 146, the Christian community has for the
Jewish-Christian seer two different sides — the strictly citizen
community of the kingdom of God, consisting of the Israelites
who are faithful to God in their acceptance of the Messiah, xv. 3,
xi. 3, 4, vii. 1—8, xxi. 12, 19 ; and, on the other hand, the un
enfranchised believers from among the heathen. The former are
the numbered citizens of the twelve tribes ; the latter, the one mass
of the innumerable multitude, vii. 9-12, xxi. 24—27. Certainly
this distinction does not imply that the two sides cannot and
shall not meet. Ritschl, ut ante, p. 134, sees in the fact that
John describes the sum of those chosen from the twelve tribes
as the first-fruits of the saved, as the true Israel, vii. 4, xiv. 1-4,
and that he points to the privilege of the Old Testament people
within the New, evidence that he thinks of the reception of the
Gentiles, vii. 9, solely on account of their faith. By a third class
of expositors, such as Neander, Bleek, and Dusterdieck, it is
acknowledged that in this book Jewish and Gentile Christians are
distinguished from others ; but they deny that any preference is
shown for the former. With these I agree, though not for the
same reasons. It seems to me that, in the consideration of this
subject, it is above all important to distinguish and to keep
separate two pairs of ideas which Baur, and, after him, Kbstlin,
continually confound with each other, namely, Jews and Christian
Jews, Gentiles and Christian Gentiles. That the writer saw in
the Israelites before Christ essentially the people of God, the
type of the Christian church, and in the Gentiles before Christ
essentially the people of the devil, we have shown in the section
on the earth and its inhabitants ; and that he expected in the
future the conversion of the Jews in the gross, but amongst the
Gentiles only increasing obduracy, I shall point out in the sec-

192 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
tions on the holy city during the forty-two months, and the
continued impenitence of men. In the section on "The New
Heaven and the New Earth," I shall discuss the question of his
placing the great mass of the Gentiles who, only after the revela
tion of the judgments of God, give glory to Him, in eternal sub
ordination to the true Israel, the priestly kingdom of God. But
we have not to do here with Jews or with Gentiles, as Baur, ut
ante, p. 212, ambiguously writes, but with members of the church
coming from Jews and Gentiles ; and are we beforehand to expect
that the seer would give preference to Christian Jews, and assign
to the Gentiles only a secondary position ? No ; certainly we
need expect only that, considering the time in which the book
originated, there would be here and there a distinction made
between the two component parts of the Christian church ; hut
whether one is preferred and the other subordinated, we exptect
to learn only from the statements of the book which relate to cue
subject. In this expectation we are not deceived, for in a former
section we have shown that in the juxtaposition of the " saints "
and " them that fear the name of God," xi. 1 8, and of His " ser
vants" and them that "fear Him," xix. 5, as well as in "the
remnant " of the woman's seed, xii. 1 7, there undeniably meets us
— though with the exception of the last-mentioned passage, which
is misunderstood by most expositors — a distinction between Jewish
and Gentile Christians. But since nothing different is affirmed of
those who fear God and the remnant of the woman's seed, than
is affirmed of the saints, the servants of God, and the woman's
seed, we are able to recognise in the two first passages only a
poetic classification of Christians according to their origin, bor
rowed from the pre-Christian relation of Jews and proselytes, and
corresponding to the grouping found elsewhere in the book ; and
in the third, only a designation of Christian Gentiles suggested
by the connection, as of those who became Christians historically,
later. This distinction perfectly agrees with the addresses to the
seven principal Gentile churches ; with the name of the Christian
church, which in itself has no distinction between the Jewish
and Gentile elements ; and with the repeated and emphatic pro
minence given to the origin of the church from various nationali
ties. It would be otherwise if here and there the two classes of
Christians were placed in a position of superiority and subordina
tion. But is that the case ? I deny it, and deny even that in

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 193
any other than the passages quoted they are distinguished from
each other. The places which here come into question are,
vii. 1-8, vii. 9-17, xiv. 1-5, xxi. 12, 24-27. The relation be
tween vii. 4-8, vii. 9-1 7, and xiv. 1-5, is conceived in a three
fold manner, either so that in the first and third passage believers
from the Jews, and in the second believers from the Gentiles, are
meant ; or so that in the first believers from the Jews, and in
the second believers from both Jews and Gentiles, are intended ;
and in the third, an election from the Gentiles included in the
innumerable multitude of the second ; or finally, so that believers
generally are understood in all three places, without reference to
their origin. Against the first of these views it is decisive that
the words of vii. 9, " of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and
tongues," and of v. 9, x. 11, xi. 9, xiii. 7, — thus wherever they
occur in this book, — describe mankind in general, and without the
exclusion of the Jews or contrast with them ; that in the whole
paragraph contained in vii. 9-17 there is nothing specifically
Gentile-Christian ; and that, on the other side, there is not in xiv.
1—5 a specially Jewish-Christian feature to be discovered. The
second idea is wrecked, first, upon the impossibility of explaining
why, on the one hand, vii. 9—17 should be affirmed of Jewish
and Gentile Christians, and on the other, why vii. 4—8 should be
referred only to Jewish Christians; and further, upon the im
possibility of separating the subjects of vii. 4-8 from those of
xiv. 1-5. The want of the article before the 144,000 in the
latter place, to which Dusterdieck attaches importance, has its
reason, as Hengstenberg, ut ante, I. p. 115, justly observes, in the
fact that in our book the groups oftener formally maintain their
independence than refer definitely to those which are earlier
(comp. i 13 and xiv. 14, chap. xiii. and xvii. 3, 4, 6, and xv. 2) ;
and though the name-sign of xiv. 1 has a different signification
than the seal-sign of vii. 1-8, it can hardly be disputed that the
same persons in different situations may bear different emblems.
Moreover, both conceptions are alike incapable of making it even
distantly probable that, according to the expectation of the seer,
12,000 from the twelve tribes of the real Israel should certainly
remain protected when such an actual twelve-tribed people had
in his day long ceased to exist ; still less, that from each of the
twelve tribes an equal number of souls were or should be faithful.
All difficulty vanishes before the third interpretation, for, as De
N

194 THE DOCTRINE OF THE. APOCALYPSE.
Wette observes, it gives a very good sense if, where the mercy
of God and the love of the Lamb are praised, Christians are repre
sented as an innumerable multitude ; and where the purpose is
to confirm Christians in their confidence in God, or to impress on
the mind their high dignity, they are represented as the true Israel,
as the numbered or chosen 144,000 (comp. vi. 11, vrXripcodSm),
When, therefore, in vii. 1-8, xiv. 1-5, he treats of protection,
he has chosen the latter mode of representation ; but where he
speaks of the results of the same, he has chosen the former,
vii. 9-17; the number 144,000 serves to present the idea of
appointment and election in contrast with rejection ; .and, indeed,
it offered itself to the seer very naturally, since he retained for
the saved in each tribe the number twelve, so significant with
Israel, only multiplied a thousand-fold. The reference to the,
individual tribes owes its origin entirely to the effort of the author\
to make the election evident, and in our opinion has its analogy]
in many of the widely extended plastic images of the book. Thtf
passages found in xxi. 12, 24-27, differ from those of which wje
have hitherto spoken. The subjects are not the same, and there
can be no doubt that those of the latter are subordinate to those
of the former. But in the section on the new heaven and the
new earth, we shall show that by " the children of Israel," who
inhabit the New Jerusalem, not merely Christian Jews are in
tended, but all who have become Christians before the advent of
Christ, consisting for the present of individual Jews and Gentiles,
but finally, of Israel in the gross, and adopted Gentiles ; on the
other hand, of Gentiles who dwell around and frequent the New
Jerusalem ; all those who are converted during the thousand
years' reign, the " nations," — the Gentile peoples in the gross.
That between these two constituent parts of those who share in
the perfect kingdom of God there is a distinction in the repre
sentations of the Apocalypse, as between the citizens and the
dwellers around the city, as between priest -kings and a holy
nation, as between Israel and converted Gentile nations, cannot
be questioned. But that by the citizens, or the priest-kings, or
the true Israel itself, in its descent from Jews or Gentiles, a
relation of superiority or subordination is intended, there is no
proof. But the seer distinguishes Christians not merely according to
their descent, but also accordmg to their position or dignity,

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 195
according to their importance. Even in those places where, in
addition to the saints, he mentions those who fear the name of
God, xi. 18, and besides the servants of God, those who fear
Him, xix. 5, he also speaks of " small and great." That we are
not to regard this distinction as in apposition with those from
Jewish and Gentile Christians, as might be suggested by the
absence of "and" (comp. xiii. 16, xix. 18), is shown by the
position of small before great, which, though according to xx. 1 2,
was verbally not necessary, follows also from what has been said
before. But certainly the absence of " and " shows that we are
not to conceive of the distinction of small and great in Christen
dom as we do in the world, as a distinction placing the subjects
side by side, and in this case placing by the side of each other
Jewish and Gentile Christians, as analogous, but yet different, and
referring therefore to dignity, significance, and position. Nor does
the seer leave us in the dark with respect to what he means by
the distinction of small and great. As we have already seen, all
Christians are to him what true Israelites are in the Old Testa
ment, namely, servants of God. But when he writes : " The
revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto Him, to show
unto His servants things which must shortly come to pass, and
sent and signified it unto His servant John," i. 1, and that God
hath as a joyful message " declared it unto His servants the
prophets," x. 7, that the time has come " to give reward to Thy
servants the prophets" xi 18 ; and when in xi. 18, xvi. 6,
xviii. 24, with the saints, he expressly refers to the prophets, — we
must acknowledge that with him, just as in the Old Testament,
the prophets are distinguished as God's servants in a prominent
sense from Christians generally, who are all His servants. Instead
of saying, with Baur, ut ante, p. 207, "all true Christians are to
the seer, as such, also prophets ; true Christians are those who
have the testimony of Jesus, but this itself consists in a man
having all his thoughts and wishes directed toward the advent of
Christ ; in the same proportion in which the consciousness of the
Christian is filled by the idea of the advent of the future, has he
the Spirit of prophecy in himself," xix. 10, — we should more cor
rectly represent it thus : all true Christians are servants of God
and Christ ; angels are their fellow-servants, xxii 9 ; they have
the testimony of Jesus, xii. 1 7 ; but the prophets are servants of
God and Christ in an eminent sense; with special significance

196 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
the angel calls himself their fellow-servant, xix. 10; thefyhave
the testimony of Jesus in a special manner, xix. 10 ; a^nd the
difference between the prophets and saints in general is, tMiat the
former have received the Spirit of prophecy, therefore the testi
mony of Jesus directly, and for communication to others, xix. 10 ;
the latter, on the contrary, do not possess the Spirit of prophecy,
the testimony of Jesus directly, but they possess it through the
service of the prophets, and keep the word of the prophecy, xxii 9
(comp. i 3).
Another question is, whether the seer understood by the pro
phets only those who are usually described by that name. He
writes, " Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and
prophets!" xviii 20. Had he, in those places where he mentions
the prophets with the saints, no thought of the apostles ? Is it
not more probable that under the title of prophets he has included
all those whom in xviii. 20 he distinguishes as apostles and pro
phets. This supposition harmonizes perfectly with what we hawe
found above respecting the word of God and the testimony ;of
Jesus, namely, that to the author the word of Jesus sojourning
on the earth, and the word of Jesus exalted to heaven, was the
same thing ; must not apostles and prophets, therefore, have for
him essentially the same meaning, and be classed together, not
under the conception of " apostles," which was historically limited,
but under that of " prophets " ? (comp. Matt. x. 41). Certainly,
where he speaks only of prophets, as, for example, in xxii. 6, and
even where prophets and apostles stand side by side with each
other, as in xviii. 20, the seer intends prophets in the narrower
sense of the word, the organs of the exalted Christ ; on the con
trary, where, as in xi 18, xvi 6, xviii. 24, he mentions prophets
with saints, he understands by them all who are generally the
organs of Christ to the church, whether as apostles, or as prophets
in the narrower sense, they have directly received the testimony
of Jesus, in distinction from other Christians who possess the
same through their mediation. That " Asia Minor was the region
where we early find the prophetic Spirit as the direct leader of
the church, where it had not its rest in apostolic tradition, where
the Paraclete could manifest itself" (Kbstlin, ut ante, p. 495),
need not, so far as it expresses the importance of the prophets as
a peculiar class, be disputed. But we shall not say, " thus was
the church consistently formed after the reahty of the Old Testa-

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 197
ment theocracy " (Kbstlin), — in fact an inadmissible idea ! — but
thus the seer consistently used the theocratic form for the repre
sentation of the church.
Thus we have found, with the seer, the distinction, existing
from the beginning, between apostles and those converted by them
widened in a peculiar manner into a distinction between pro
phets and saints, the Christian productive and the Christian
receptive : let us now advance with him to another of these
peculiar distinctions. It is true that he describes all Christians
as those who keep the commandments of God, and have the testi
mony of Jesus, xii. 17. But when Jesus speaks of Antipas as
" my faithful martyr who was slain among you," ii. 13 ; when
John " saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for
the word of God and the testimony which they held," vi 9 ; when
it is said by the inhabitants of heaven, " they overcame him by
the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony ; and
they loved not their lives unto the death," xii. 11 ; when John
" saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of
Jesus, and for the word of God," xx. 4, — we can hardly fail to see
that he means " having the testimony of Jesus " in an eminent
sense. Look now at xvii. 6, where the writer sees " the woman
drunk with the blood of saints and the blood of the martyrs —
witnesses — of Jesus " (comp. xviii. 24), and we shall not be able,
with Dusterdieck, to explain this juxtaposition of saints and the
witnesses of Jesus by saying, " the witnesses are not separated in
kind from the saints, but the former designation is prominent,
inasmuch as the witness or testimony of Jesus borne by the saints
was the cause of their death " (comp. xi. 3, 8). We prefer saying
that, corresponding to the time in which the book was written,
and the peculiar demands it made upon Christians, those of them
who had the testimony of Jesus in an eminent, or, we may say,
in an energetical sense, that is, who testified the gospel to a perse
cuting world by their word, xii. 11, as well as gave themselves
to death for its sake, ii. 13, vi. 9, xii. 11, xx. 4, are distinguished
by the author from the mass of Christians as witnesses — martyrs,
xvii; 6. There was for the seer a distinction between those
Christians who simply had the gospel, and those who bore testi
mony in word and deed, with patient suffering (comp. iii. 1 0), and
with the 'sacrifice of life, xii. 11 (comp. ii. 10). That the martyr-
death, as a repetition of the death of Christ, purified ; that the

198 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
bleeding confessor sprinkled himself as it were with Christ's own
blood, and that this cleansed his garments, as Kbstliu* ut ante,
p. 493, after Ewald's example, infers from vii. 14, — has in this
passage, which speaks of Christians in general, no foundation
whatever. There is not in the Apocalypse even the most distant
indication that the seer regarded the " prophets " clerically, or the
" witnesses " as " martyrs in the catholic sense ;" and yet, as cer
tainly, there are present the historical connecting points of
hierarchy and saint-worship. (e.) Christendom in its Organization.
In what has been said above respecting the distinction of
prophets — referring also to apostles — from saints, and still more
in what was said earlier in the sections on the Spirit and on the
Gospel respecting the activity of the prophets and the publication
of the Gospel, we have greatly anticipated the inquiry into the
organization of Christendom. When Kbstlin, ut ante, p. 482,
remarks that in our book the church appears perfectly organized,
he is right so far as the two constituent elements of different
origin, . Jewish and Gentile Christians, are amalgamated ; the
churches in general were already an organic whole. But with
respect to the individual members and functions of the church
organism, we do not glean from the Apocalypse much informa
tion, — a very conceivable result when we remember the prophetic
contents, and consequent Old Testament drapery of the book.
What is certain may be given in few words. The symbols of
the seven golden candlesticks, in the midst of which Christ walks,
i. 12, 13, 20, and the seven stars which He holds in His right
hand, teach, as we have already remarked, both by their number
and their form — the garland — that the seer regarded, first, the
Christian churches in Asia, and then all the Christian churches on
earth, as a great living unity. He represents this organic whole
of Christendom in its manifoldness of Christian condition by the
seven churches to which the book was addressed, i. 4, 11, xxii.
16, and the variety of its Christian principles or fundamentals by
the twelve apostles, xxi. 14, 19, 20. Those who infer from the
names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb being written upon the
foundations of the New Jerusalem, the denial or rejection of the
Apostle Paul, must as a consequence call in question every refer-

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 199
ence of the book to any other than the seven churches expressly
mentioned. Whether we are to seek the reason why just these
and not other churches in Asia were selected as representatives,
beyond the concrete condition of the individual churches and in
a near ecclesiastical relation to the church at Ephesus, an already
formed metropolitan connection, is at least very doubtful. It
seems to me that such a supposition is very much like that which
regards the seven churches as having been chosen — only possible
to a very lively imagination — on account of their garland-like
situation with respect to each other, and is wholly incompatible
with the unmistakeable ground of choice found in the peculiar
conditions presenting the most various colours in the Christian
life. Of course, it is not denied that at the time of the authorship
of the Apocalypse the position of the Ephesian church in relation
to the Asiatic churches, in the germ, probably tolerably well
developed, may have contained the same metropolitan relation
which we see perfected in somewhat later times, but which we
find already in the Acts of the Apostles.
The supposed connection of the angels of the churches with
their individual organization, found by those who hold a different
view, falls away by our exposition of them. To refer the twenty-
four elders to the elders of the churches, the presbyters, is far
fetched ; nor is it the manner of the seer to use Christian names in
a New Testament sense ; rather, it might be concluded from the
names of the ideal church-representation, that in Asia the leaders
of the churches were called bishops. Still less have we occasion
from the service (Siatcovla), ii. 1 9, of the church at Thyatira, to
think of the diaconal office. On the other hand, it is easy to see
that the evangelist is represented in the angel with the everlasting
gospel, the joyful message to every nation and kindred, xiv. 6, 7.
When VoLkmar, ut ante, p. 132, on v. 8-13, remarks that
worship by the representatives of the priestly people in the
upper sanctuary has an aim beyond itself, and that the seer
desires to represent all Christian worship on earth, I agree in so
far as that he would certainly not have permitted such songs of
praise in heaven if the same had not been raised in the Christian
churches as well as in the temple and synagogues ; but to re
construct the form of Christian worship, or even that of Christian
praise only, from the devotions of the heavenly hosts, must ever
be a very uncertain task. Only two particulars of Christian

1200 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
worship come clearly to the front in this book. One of them is
given in i. 10, "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day." As we
have pointed out in the introduction, the Lord's day can only be
the day of Christ's resurrection, the dies dominica, the Christian
Sunday ; and John could only speak of it as he does on the sup
position that at least in the churches of Asia, Sunday was already
held as a special weekly festival for the celebration of the resur
rection. The other less important particular is given in the
words, " Blessed is he that readeth (readeth to), and they that
hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are
written therein," i. 3. This blessing, taken in connection with
other statements of the New Testament, shows that in the
churches for which the apostle wrote there was a public reader,
and that in their assemblies such writings as this book were read
by some one of the Christians present (comp. Volz, " iiber die An-
fange des christi. Gottesdienstes," in Stud, und Krit. 1872, p. 61,
etc.). (d.) Christendom with respect to its History.
The history of Christendom is distinctly divided by the seer
into two separate periods. Certainly, regarded from its eschato
logical point of view, instead of speaking of a history of
Christendom, we should more correctly speak of a struggle
between the church of God and Satan, and in this distinguish
three periods. The first of these is pictured in xii. 1-12, and
includes the conflict of the dragon with the Messiah, and closes
with the expulsion of the former from heaven, already considered
in the section on Christ. The second period of the struggle, the
first period of the history of Christendom, is represented in xii.
13-16. As in xii 6, in summary anticipation, it is said, "and
the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place
prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two
hundred and threescore days ;" so in xii. 13-16, a resumption
and further statement of ver. 6, we read, " and when the dragon
saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman
which brought forth the man-child.- And to the woman were
given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the
wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time,
and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. And
the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 201
woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
And the earth helped the woman ; and the earth opened her mouth,
and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his
mouth." In this picture Ewald finds a representation of the flight
of the Jewish Christian church across the Jordan to Pella ; and this
view is common, especially in popular expositions of the Apoca
lypse. It has also the great superiority over the older allegories, in
that it recognises past history in the related section of the twelfth
chapter. But, apart from all impossibilities in detail, Ewald's
interpretation is met by the insuperable difficulty of suppos
ing that the seer has given a prominent place in his magnificent
picture to such a fact as the flight to Pella. Even if the indi
vidual features required a reference to that episode in the Jewish
war, which they did not, we should still only say that in painting
the first period of the Christian history the seer has borrowed
the colours of that particular event, or has used its outline as
apocalyptic drapery for his picture. The design of xii. 13-16 is
— as xii. 1-12 sketches the history of Christ, but only on the
side harmonizing with the book, namely, as the conflict of the
dragon with the woman's child — to represent the first develop
ment of this history, or the history of Christendom on Jewish
ground, but again only according to the side suitable for the
purpose of the Apocalypse, namely, as the conflict of the over
thrown dragon with the woman who bore the child. If we do
not firmly hold that the author as a seer must in the course of
his representations, on the one side bring up episodically the
entire historical premises of his predictions, but on the other had
not as a seer the slightest inducement to disclose in the Christian
history anything else than the premises of his prophecy, that is,
the course of the conflict hitherto between Satan and the people
of God, especially with the Messiah, the twelfth chapter in its
second half, as in its first, must remain an enigma. How simple,
on the other hand, is every detail from the point of view of the
writer himself ! After his overthrow, the dragon " persecuted the
woman which brought forth the man-child ; " in these few words
he presents, as before in the words, " the dragon stood before the
woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child
as soon as it was born," less the history of Jesus than the
meaning of that history from an eschatological standpoint ; so,
again, less the history of the Jewish Christian church, or Christi-

202 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
anity among the Jews, than the meaning of this history from an
eschatological standpoint, and that is persecution, and on account
of the defeat suffered through Christ, only the more fierce perse
cution, ver. 12, of the church of Christ by the Jews: the rich
concrete basis of his brief words the author takes for granted as
known. But what is the result of the persecution of Christi
anity among the Jews? As "her child was caught up unto
God," so the woman fled unto " the place prepared of God ; "
that is, Christianity escaped the destruction threatened among the
Jews, while, through the divine arrangement, it spread among
the Gentiles. This important transition the seer represents hy
a skilful use of Old Testament symbolism. He represents the
Gentile world by the wilderness of Sinai, with its double anti
thesis to Egypt, the image of unbelief and persecution of the
people of God, and to the worldly Jewish people (comp. xi. 8),
as being the region of security, as well as the region of poverty
in resources. It is not to our author the natural ground, but
the asylum of Christianity, wonderfully prepared by God. The
woman is to be nourished in her place in the wilderness 1260
days, or 3| times, far away, and safe from the serpent ; nor
does he regard the Gentile world as the new and abiding home
of the kingdom of God, but as the seat of Christianity during
the time of tribulation appointed by Him ; and naturally during
that time the significance of Israel is not in its being the seat of
the kingdom of God, but in that which the eleventh chapter
explains. The two wings of a great eagle given to the woman
have their type in those of Ex. xix. 4 (comp. Deut. xxxii. 11).
There are for the seer wondrous ways and means of divine power
and grace by which Christianity is transferred from the Jews to
the Gentiles. The flood is, according to Ps. xviii. 4, 15, 16,
cxxiv. 4, 5, Isa. viii. 5-8, Jer. xlvi 7, 8, xlvii. 2, the figure of
great and pressing danger ; and from the symbolic language of the
Old Testament he has, as it were, produced bodily forms, eagle's
wings, and the flood of water. When " the dragon casts out of
his mouth water as a flood after the woman," the writer can
hardly have intended anything else than the difficulties which
the Jews cast in the way of the publication of the gospel, and the
formation and growth of Christian churches among the Gentiles.
Whether the swallowing of the water by the earth, which came
to the help of the woman, and which reminds us of Num. xvi

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 203
30-34, Isa. v. 14, is to be explained merely as a symbolic
representation, harmonizing with what precedes it, of the vanity
of Jewish opposition ; or whether by the name and image of the
earth we are to understand the Roman empire as a protection
of Christianity against the Jews, — it is difficult certainly to
ascertain. The second period of the history of Christianity, or the third
period of the conflict between Satan and the people of God, is
summarily pictured in xii. 17:" And the dragon was wroth with
the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed,
which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony
of Jesus." As the purpose of devouring the child represents the
history of Jesus, and the persecution of the woman the history
of Christianity among the Jews in Palestine and in the Hebrew
form ; so " making war with the remnant of her seed " signifies, in
apocalyptic style, the history of Christianity among the Gentiles,
in the countries beyond Palestine, and under the preponderance
of the Gentile-Christian element, until the turn of events intro
duced at xi. 13. The two earlier periods have been sketched
with only few lines, but the third appears in a more complete
picture of the past, the present, and the future. In this place
we have to do only with the past ; and even in the consideration
of that, we limit ourselves to the indications of the letters, apart
from the related data in the description of the beast, the false
prophet, and Babylon ; and, indeed, on a double ground, first,
because from this description the historical can hardly be cer
tainly and accurately separated; at the best, we rend asunder
things which belong to each other; and secondly, and chiefly,
because the absence of all reference in the letters to the beast
and to the false prophet shows that the seer himself has not
completed the connection of the previous persecutions and false
doctrine in his Asiatic circle with the past activity of the anti-
Christian powers. Therefore, instead of saying, with Neander,
ut ante, p. 474, that the Apocalypse everywhere testifies of the
flowing blood of the martyrs, and of the oppressions which
threatened Christians in prison, as of the still fresh memories of
Nero's cruelties ; and instead of combining, like other expositors,
the false prophecy of the letters and the false prophet of the
beast, — we acknowledge that John, in the conduct of the beast
generally, and in the persecution of the Asiatic Christians

204 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
especially, has recognised different things as little as he has in
the doings of the false prophet generally, and in the erroneous
doctrine amongst the Asiatic churches in particular ; but we find
it very conceivable that he has not therefore directly applied the
vision of the anti- Christian powers which came to him on Patmos
to the past history of his ecclesiastical circle, but has rather, in
his conception and representation, only placed the relations of
that circle and those of Christendom in general side by side with
each other. From this we infer the propriety of limiting our
reflections in this place to the indications of the letters con
cerning the war of the dragon, hitherto carried on with the
remnant of the woman's seed, in the seer's own circle.
Let us now hear what is said there concerning opposition or
persecution from without. To the church in Smyrna — with respect
to its external relations as well as to those of the apocalyptic
churches generally, comp. Hausrath, p. 654 — the Lord says, "I
know thy works, and tribulation (comp. i 9), and poverty ; but
thou art rich; and I know the blasphemy of them which say
they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.
Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer : behold, the
devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried;
and ye shall have tribulation ten days," ii. 9, 10. But to the
church in Philadelphia the Lord says, "I know thy works:
behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut
it : for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and
hast not denied my name. Behold, I will make them of the
synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do
lie ; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy
feet, and to know that I have loved thee," iii. 8, 9. We see that
the anti-Christian Jews had on their side not failed to persecute
the Christians ; certainly they had not the power to carry their
rage against them into actual ill-usage ; therefore, as far as pos
sible, they caused them to be suspected of the Gentiles. In
what such slanders consisted is not said; and when Ewald,
Geschichte, VI. p. 636, supposes that the Jews may easily have
used the privileges still left them under the Roman empire
against the Jewish Christians as apostates, and punished them
even in their own synagogues, it is at least not expressed in the
passages, ii. 9, 10, iii. 9, quoted by him. In Smyrna, as in Phila
delphia, the Christians had to suffer from such slander and

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 205
hunting down on the part of the Jews ; at the latter place they
had already maintained their ground when tempted to forsake the
word of Jesus, and to deny His name. To the church in Pergamos
the Lord says, "I know thy works, and where thou dwellest,
even where Satan's seat is : and thou holdest fast my name, and
hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas
was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan
dwelleth," ii. 13. We see that the Gentiles, in their enmity to
the Christians, could go more openly to work, and that they were
not backward in it. Still their hatred and persecution were not
everywhere equally fierce. The city of Pergamos, probably as
the seat of the worship of Esculapius, and of a medical school, as
the locality of a supreme court of justice, and probably also as
the residence of certain specially fanatic heathen, was among all
Asiatic cities the headquarters of Gentile opposition to Chris
tianity. This is indicated by the " seat " and " the dwelling " of
Satan, — possibly, as Hausrath, II. p. 656, thinks, with special
reference to the statue of Esculapius, upon which a serpent
entwined itself. There they had not only held fast the name of
Christ, and maintained their fidelity to Him, but a faithful
witness called Antipas had suffered death. Frightful things had
happened also elsewhere. Certainly it cannot be decided whether
the poverty of the church at Smyrna, of which the Lord speaks,
ii. 9, was caused by persecution, or whether it made the Chris
tians helpless against the bribery of Gentile magistrates and
officials by rich Jews (comp. Jas. ii. 5-7), or whether it is added
to the calumnies of the Jews and the cruelties of the Gentiles
as an aggravating circumstance ; but when the church is ad
monished not to fear those things it would have to suffer; when
it is warned beforehand that some of them would be cast
into prison, and that for a short time — meant by ten days — they
should have tribulation ; when it is exhorted to be faithful unto
death, — it may undoubtedly be assumed that tilings similar to
those predicted had already passed over them ; that as, according
to Diisterdieck's remark, the warning of the prison, more than the
mention of death, shows that here the Gentile authorities, incited
by the Jews, had begun to persecute. Very justly Neander, ut
ante, p. 455, note, says that the expression "beheaded," xx. 4,
points to something different from mere popular tumult, which
would not have satisfied itself by beheading the Christians ; and

206 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
that it rather shows that, in the administration of Roman justice,
this punishment was already applied to Christians. While by
the use of the term " beheaded," John may have had in his eye
the persecution of Nero, the " prison " at Smyrna places beyond
doubt that also in Asia, — though, indeed, the result of this per
secution at Rome, — not only the Gentile people, but the Gentile
authorities also, were already opposed to the Christians when this
book was written.
We will not here follow any further the statements of the
Apocalypse concerning the existing persecutions of the Christians
by Jews and Gentiles, but, under reference to the section on Anti
christ, turn to a consideration of what is said about seductions or
about heresies. To the church in Ephesus the Lord says, "I
know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou
canst not bear them which are evil : and thou hast tried them
which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them
liars : and hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name's sake
hast laboured, and hast not fainted," ii. 2, 3. And to the same
church He says, " But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds
of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate," ii. 6. In the letter to
the church at Pergamos He says, " But I have a few things
against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine
of Balaam, who taught Balak to cast a stumbling-block before
the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to
commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold the doc
trine of the Nicolaitanes," ii. 14, 15. In the letter to the church
at Thyatira He says, " Notwithstanding I have a few things against
thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth
herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit
fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. And I gave
her space to repent of her fornication ; and she repented not.
Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery
with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.
And I will kill her children with death ; and all the churches
shall know that I am He which searcheth the reins and hearts :
and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.
But unto you, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as many as have not
this doctrine, and which have not known the depths of Satan,
as they speak, I will put upon you none other burden," ii. 20-24.
By these indications we are led to ask whether we have to do

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 207
with one heresy or several. Though De Wette, speaking of the
false apostles, ii. 2, says that it does not with certainty anywhere
appear what error is meant, and that it is evident from ii. 15
that the Nicolaitanes and the followers of Balaam, though similar
to each other, were yet different parties, and that even Jezebel
appears to point to a special position, most expositors refer the
various expressions of our book, with respect to heresy, to a single
false doctrine. I do not find the truth on either of these two
sides. What Jezebel taught the servants of the Lord in Thyatira,
and to which she seduced them, — namely, to eat idolatrous sacri
fices, and to fornication, — is doubtless identical with the doctrine
held by the members of the church at Pergamos, — " the doctrine
of Balaam, who taught Balak to cast a stumbling-block before
the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to
commit fornication." Again, we find that ovtco<; ical a-v, of which
6p,oim<; is the only possible philological interpretation, identifies
the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes with that of Balaam. On the
other hand, I fail to recognise, in the commendation of the
Ephesian church, that they hate " the deeds of the Nicolaitanes,"
a repetition of the praise already bestowed, ii 2 ; much rather do
I see in the false apostles and the evil a reference to a heresy
different and, indeed, opposed to that of the Nicolaitanes.
But this point needs a searching discussion. It is well known
that the Tubingen school refers ii. 2, 3 to the Apostle Paul. We
may compare Baur, ut ante, p. 214, who, however, expresses him
self carefully and inquiringly when he says, " Since, on the
foundations of the New Jerusalem, only the names of the twelve
apostles are written, xxi. 14, we may properly inquire whether
among the apostles here the Apostle Paul is included, and whether
the seer regards as a true and genuine apostle one who took such
a mild view of eating flesh offered to idols, and did not utterly
condemn it." Kbstlin, ut ante, p. 486, according to whom the
seer, ii. 2, evidently had Paul in his eye ; Schwegler in Nach-
apostolischer Zeitalter ; and Volkmar, ut ante, — beyond all doubt,
on account of ii. 2, ascribe to the writer an entirely different contro
versy with the apostle. Keim, ut ante, I. p. 160, finds that the
Apocalypse presupposes the Twelve, and thus also John himself,
as kindred in sentiment, and pillars of the future Jewish Jeru
salem ; just as, on the other hand, in recognisable opposition, it
disowns and denies the position of Paul; and he adds the remark,

208 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
that we must certainly not go with Volkmar so far as to see
Paul in the false prophet, chap, xiii, which is very arbitrary ; but
in the letters, and chiefly in that to the Ephesian church, h. 2,
reference to the Paulites and their apostle is undeniable (comp.
1 Cor. ix. 1, 2 ; Acts xv. 25, 26; Rom. xvi. 17-20) (comp.
Hausrath, II. p. 645, etc.). I cannot, with Ritschl, ut ante,rj. 12b,
describe the proof of the anti-Paulinism of the author, drawn
from xxi. 14, as at the least ambiguous, because " twelve is a
round symbolic number which alone is suitable to the type
founded on the Israehtish tribes, and was so conventionally
established, that even Paul speaks of the Twelve, 1 Cor. xv. 5,
where only eleven were really concerned ; " for, certainly, he
did not number himself with the " Twelve," nor did others so
number him. But is it not also exceedingly plain that the seer
brings as a supplement to the Old Testament symbol of the
twelve tribes of Israel, a corresponding New Testament symbol,
and that he chooses as such " the twelve apostles of the Lamb,"'
as most nearly related to Christ's choice of, and promises to, the
apostles ? It almost appears as if the seer, to escape the suspicion
of the Tubingen school, must make Paul an original apostle, or ob
literate the distinction between him and the others. Very justly,
Hase (Tubing. Schule, p. 25) refers to the supposed opposition of
the seer to Paul, in the words, " Highly as Paul's importance may
be rated, his place was not among the apostles, the Twelve, in the
genuine historical sense."; — We find that ii. 2 relates to something
different ; and we cannot pass over it with so light a step as
Neander, when he says, ut ante, p. 474, " Falsifiers of the original
truth, who gave themselves out for apostles, became prominent ; "
and in a note he adds, that the polemic is not directed against
one, but several, and their character must be learned from the
remaining contents of the apocalyptic letters, which will lead us
to think of an opposition entirely different from that said to be
offered to Paul; nor, as Dusterdieck, who, p. 148, after he has
characterized the Nicolaitanes as ethnistic libertines, says that,
on the other hand, he will not affirm that they, ii. 2, usurped
an apostolic authority ; for when they, perhaps in the Pauline
sense, proposed to make Christian freedom a reahty, they would
be apostles in a similar manner to Paul. But we do not there
fore get away from ii. 2 so easily, because the name apostle,
even with Paul, or in a Pauline sense, by no means, as Duster-

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 209
dieck assumes, coincides with the name prophet ; and inasmuch as
a vision of the Lord, as well as a commission from Him, belongs
to the apostolic office as well as to the office of the prophet, the
difference can only be, that, the apostle has seen and heard the
Risen One in the body, the prophet in the spirit ; consequently,
the Gentile Christians could very well use the name prophet, but
under no condition that of apostle. Have we proof of this ? If,
now, these false teachers, who called themselves apostles, were
identical with the Nicolaitanes, they could only have been Jewish
Christians who by the assumption of apostolic authority were led
to fornication and eating of sacrifices offered to idols ; and what
other Jewish Christians could the seer have had in his eye,
than the Apostle Paul and his allies from among the Jews ? —
It is an entirely different question, however, a question which
should have been seriously considered before ii. 2 was used as
an important and sure ground upon which to construct the times
of the apostles, namely, whether in the passage under considera
tion the apostle and his associates could be intended. To an
unprejudiced student it must have already appeared impossible,
because it would place the seer, as far as we have understood
him, in absolute contradiction with himself, if he declared, as
some would gladly have it, that Paul was not only not true and
genuine, but that, as the words according to the interpretation of
our opponents demand, he was a lying or false apostle, a seducer
like Balaam and Jezebel. That the Apostle John was not capable
of this, is granted even by the opposite side. But even another
John would, not have been able to do it, simply because, according
to the unequivocal and complete statement of the first Epistle to
the Corinthians, from the fifth to the tenth chapter, Paul opposed
in Achaia exactly the same thing which, according to the ideas of
our opponents, he taught in Asia. So long as the views and
principles contested by Paul in the first Epistle to the Corinthians
are not proved to be his own, it is simply impossible to refer
Rev. ii. 2 to him. But does the seer describe the false apostles
as identical with the Nicolaitanes? It is said that ii. 6 has a
good sense only when there is seen in it a repetition of the com
mendation of ii. 2, and consequently the Nicolaitanes here, and
the false apostles there, are the same. Notwithstanding, there
occurs in the letter to Sardis, iii. 4, and also introduced with
"but," not a repetition of ver. 1, but something entirely new. Is
o

210 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
there, indeed, in any one of the seven letters, such a concluding
repetition as it is thought must be supposed in ii. 6 ? Will not
the assertion, that without such a supposition the Nicolaitanes in
this place are unexplained, and must remain so, immediately, fall
away if we compare the mention of the beast from the bottomless
pit, xi. 7 ? Is it not very significant that the author places the
approval of their unmasking false prophets at the beginning, and
the commendation of their hatred of the deeds of the Nicolaitanes
at the close, of the letter, if the temptations by false apostles, as
the aorist, and still more the fixed recognition of time in the
Apocalypse, permit us to suppose (we may remember that false
apostles can have existed only as long as the true), belong
mainly, or more probably altogether, to the past, and the works
of the Nicolaitanes, on the contrary, to the present, or principally
to the future ? On our view of the case, what a significant and
wholly unsought coincidence appears between the Apocalypse
and the apostolic history ! In his parting address to the Ephesian
elders at Miletus, Acts xx. 29, 30, Paul says, "For I know this,
that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among
you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men
arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them."
That these words point to a double danger threatening the
Ephesian church, one from without, and another coming from
among themselves, cannot be denied. And it is equally certain
that by grievous wolves which would enter the church, he meant
Judaists ; and by those speaking perverse things who should come
from among themselves, ethnistic false teachers. Whether we
consider the warning of the apostle respecting this double danger
to have been spoken by himself or afterwards put into his mouth,
— I adhere to the former alternative, — it is the same ; in the
first case, Paul must have already perceived the germ of antagon
istic errors ; and in the second, the author of the Acts of the
Apostles must have had knowledge of the existence in Ephesus of
both classes of error. Now we find again the indigenous ethnistic
heresy in the Nicolaitanes ; but where are the grievous wolves
who enter in, the Judaizing teachers ? We can look for them
only in those who give themselves out for apostles, and are not.
We can here only point to another coincidence, namely, with the
Epistles to Timothy, and simply mention also that Paul speaks of
the same sort of men as the seer does, when he writes, 2 Cor.

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 211
xi. 13, " Such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming
themselves into the apostles of Christ."
One of the two errors which the seer has in his eye, and
against which, with the exception of one place, he everywhere
struggles, he describes by various names. What do these signify ?-
When the name Nicolaitanes appears, ii. 6, according to xi. 7, it
is not to be concluded either that what has been said previously
relates to the same, or that the seer must have met with it before.
That he desired, according to the opinion of several Fathers of the
church and later writers, to designate the adherents of a man
called Nicolas, the proselyte of Antioch, mentioned in Acts vi 5,
is conceivable (we may compare the name Antipas, which is
decidedly not symbolic, ii. 13); but the comparison of ii. 14
and 15 shows unequivocally that, in perfect harmony with his
manner, he sought in the Old Testament an analogy to existing
error. This was found in the narrative of Num. xxxi. 15, 16,
xxv. 1,2; and the meaning of the name Balaam, destroyer of the
people, not escaping him, he rendered it by the somewhat similar
Greek name Nicolas, and so»t has come to be a symbolic party
name of the Nicolaitanes ; and in order not to lose the significant
analogy with the history of Balaam, at one time he has said,
" them that hold the doctrine of Balaam," and at another, " them
that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes." We are prevented
from understanding by the woman Jezebel, a woman in Thyatira,
who was really called Jezebel, by the meaning of the name, as well
as by the striking parallelism with Balaam ; even this parallelism,
as the change between the expressions, " them that commit adultery
with her," ii. 22, and "her children," ii. 23, shows, forbids us to
think of a single teacher of false doctrine in Thyatira. Much
more does the woman Jezebel describe symbolically the false doc
trine which has before been called "the doctrine of Balaam," ii 14,
and " the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes," ii. 15, and that, indeed, on
the basis of 1 Kings xvi 31, xxi. 21-26; 2 Kings iii. 2, ix. 22-37.
But in what do the two false doctrines opposed by the seer
consist ? We get no image of the Judaistic error, and doubtless
because its effects in the Ephesian church — we may compare the
aorist — had been subdued. Still, the expressions which are used
with regard to them and to the action of the church against them,
— above all, the statement that they say they are apostles, and
are not, and are found liars, that they are evil or wicked men ;

212 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
further, that the church had found it difficult to bear with them,
that it had labour with them, that it had shown patience toward
them, — fully justify us in finding amongst these seducers exactly
the same kind of Judaists as those who, according to the Epistles
of Paul, obtained during his lifetime an entrance into the churches
founded by bim, there to seek the advancement of their covetous
and tyrannical aims (comp. 2 Cor. xi, especially vers. 13 and 20;
Gal. v. 1-12 ; Phil, iii, especially ver. 2).
That which then existed in an appreciable stage of develop
ment, which was peculiarly dangerous, and for that reason almost
exclusively contested, was ethnistic error. We can therefore,
from the statements of the Apocalypse itself, furnish a probable
picture. Certainly the views of expositors differ. While Volkmar
admits that the Nicolaitanes, in their opposition to Old Testament
regulations, had still (?) some relation to the Paulinism of the
Gnosis, he regards them as nothing different, and nothing worse,
than open and reckless or coarse Paulites. Ritschl, p. 135, finds
in them Gentile Christians who, on account of their Christian
knowledge of the nullity of the«law, did not submit to the
conditions of the apostolic decrees, and, probably in designed
opposition to them, sought participation in heathen sacrificial
feasts, and married within forbidden degrees of relationship.
But Hengstenberg, I. pp. 172, 192, 208, 212 (comp.
Neander, p. 475, note; De Wette on ii. 24), explains the
ethnistic error of the Apocalypse to be Gnosticism in one of its
earliest forms. Let us begin with ii 24, so far as I can see, a
decisive passage, " Unto you I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira,
as many as have not this doctrine, and which (otrtves) have not
known the depths of Satan, as they speak." Among the various
expositions of this passage, first, that appears to me futile which
makes " the rest " the subject of the verb " speak," and ascribes to
it the statement that they " have not known the depths of Satan."
By this exposition, the words, " as they speak," would not only
be superfluous, but disturbing. The almost universally accepted
interpretation, " the depths, — not of God, as the Nicolaitanes say,
but of Satan," — is wholly madmissible ; the passage in ii 9,
"them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the syna
gogue of Satan " (comp. iii. 9), should not be quoted as a parallel ;
to serve that purpose it must have read, " who are the synagogue
of Satan, as they speak : " had the seer wished to say what some

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 213
desire he should, he would have written, " who have not known
the depths of God, as they speak." As the words read, and as
they only can be literally explained, they affirm that the false
teachers give themselves credit for knowing the depths of Satan ;
and that the seer, who in this direction perceived only theoretical
and practical error, ironically and sarcastically describes the
faithful Christians, with seeming pity, as those who were certainly
not so enlightened and free, really not so blind and wicked, as
the Nicolaitanes. In " the depths of Satan " we have, without
doubt, after the analogy of 1 Cor ii. 10 and the Gnostic phraseo
logy, to understand the popular recognition of the unfathomable
relation of being or mystery of the evil principle ; and in the
" knowing," according to the analogy of 1 Cor. viii. 1-3 and the
Gnostic self - description, the popular idea, the conception or
abstraction of the words and deeds of an overreaching specula
tive thought. If we add that Jezebel says she is a prophetess,
ii. 20, and on account of the relation to the Old Testament type
(comp. 2 Kings ix. 22), and still more on account of the specific
meaning of prophecy in this book, that the Nicolaitanes claimed
not only a better insight, but must have affirmed their supposed
deeper spiritual disclosures to be realized in an intuitive way
through inspiration ; and further, that, according to the indis
putable word-sense of ii. 24, the Nicolaitanes expressly and
specially prided themselves in knowing " the depths of Satan,"
but that in the nature of the case this was not the only, but the
more conspicuous instance, or the most important example, or,
for the polemical design of the seer, the only prominent subject of
their pretended "knowledge" — there then presents itself as the
theoretical side, or as the philosophical foundation of ethnistic
error, a lofty speculation in the form of inspiration, which claims
to understand the Godhead directly, as also all that is supernatural,
and to have a perfectly adequate knowledge of His nature ; in a
word, though yet in one of its earliest stages of development —
manifest Gnosticism.
But wherein consists the practical foundation of the error ?
The Lord says to the rest in Thyatira, " I will put upon you none
other burden : but that which ye have already, hold fast till I
come. And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the
end, to him will I give power over the nations," etc., ii. 24-29.
That we are to understand here, not a burden of suffering, but a

214 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
burden of law, a legal restraint, obligation, or command, is
universally admitted by modern expositors (comp. Acts xv. 28).
No matter whether the seer, by the assurance of the Lord, desired
to guard the faithful from the mistake of supposing that, if one
or two Old Testament commands had still a binding force, they
must take upon themselves the entire burden of the Jewish
law, or (and it is much more probable that the " burden " was a
contemptuous expression of the Nicolaitanes, and that the seer
spoke ironically) whether he desired to present sarcastically the
arguments of the Nicolaitanes, in each case there is a reference
to the error of the rejection of the limitations of the law, which
the seer desires should be firmly held by Christians. When, from
ii. 14 and 20, we see that the doctrine taught and led to eating
idolatrous sacrifices and to fornication, the first of these two
particulars calls for no remark. There are, however, different
views with regard to the second. The older expositors under
stand the expression in its usual sense; Ritschl, ut ante, p. 135,
explains it as equivalent to marriages forbidden by the Mosaic law ;
Volkmar understands it as marriage with Gentiles, possibly also
as disregard of other marriage laws of the Old Testament. That
which Ritschl adduces in favour of his view, namely, that Balaam
and Jezebel did not necessarily lead to unchastity, and that their
sin was in tempting the Israelites into matrimonial alliances
with the Canaanites, does not follow from the passages quoted hy
him, and already mentioned above ; on the contrary, the state
ments of Num. xxv. 1, 6, 18, xxxi. 16-18, refer to non-matri
monial intercourse between the Israelites and Midianitish women.
Jezebel cannot be mentioned as a symbol of the false doctrine
which taught and led to fornication, because she lived in the
married state with Ahab ; but because she insisted upon the
impure worship of Baal (comp. 2 Kings ix. 22). That fornica
tion consisted in marriage with the heathen, Volkmar maintains
only on the assumption that the Nicolaitanes were Pauhtes.
When he says that by what the Christians of the apostolic times
called fornication we cannot understand fornication properly so
called, and that it has long been acknowledged that it is marriage
contrary to the Old Testament economy, we would say more
correctly that, by the formcation of which the seer speaks, and
which is represented as a sinful casting away of the burden of the
law, we have to understand all that in this relation was forbidden

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 215
by the law, and thus impurity in our sense of the word, marriage
in near degrees of relationship, and with the heathen. By this
exposition of fornication, the reference or relation to the apostolic
decrees, Acts xv. 19, 20, which comes to light in the "burden,"
and in connection with " eating things sacrificed to idols," is in
no way excluded ; it only demands a wider corresponding concep
tion of " fornication " in that decision, which, moreover, even apart
from the Apocalypse, shows itself to be against its limitation to
marriage in forbidden degrees of relationship (comp. Ewald,
Geschichte des Volks Israel, VI. p. 437). It is also self-evident
that we are not to regard eating things sacrificed to idols and
fornication as the only illegalities of the Nicolaitanes, but in a
similar manner as " the depths of Satan," as the most striking
criteria, as it were the signs, or, in the apocalyptic concrete
representation, the only manifestations presented of a recent but
universally-developed Antinomianism.
But I am unable to see how, according to Baur's statement,
ut ante, p. 214, the difference of the two standpoints, of the seer
and Paul, at least in relation to eating things sacrificed to idols,
shows in its whole breadth wherein at this point the much
talked of opposition of the former to the latter consists, when the
apostle has confessedly written 1 Cor. v. 1-5, vi. 12-20, vii.
12-16, viii. 1-13, x. 6-8 (comp. Ritschl, ut ante, p. 136), so
long as it is not shown that a failure of motive, in one of the
two writers, for a common judgment, influenced their various
standpoints. If the seer, Hke Paul, regarded the eating of meat
offered to idols as in itself lawful, he could still not have intro
duced it into this book. But granted that it was to him not
lawful in itself, was it so even to Paul, where it appeared, as here,
in connection with heathen immoralities ? Much rather does the
error condemned in the Apocalypse appear to me to be the free-
thinking and essentially Gnostic -antinomian tendency, in a some
what advanced stage of development. I say an advanced stage, not
because of the general difference between 1st Corinthians and the
Apocalypse, which is difficult to authenticate, where even "the
depths " of our book, certainly alluding to the mode of speech used by
the opponents, appear (1 Cor. ii. 1 0) ; but only because it is to be
supposed that doctrinal error, both in theory and practice, must
have further developed during the period between the first Epistle
to the Corinthians and the Apocalypse; its results in both

216 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
respects have become more fully defined, and the error itself more
completely shaped into system and party, with which ii. 14 and
2 0, and especially the strongly pronounced " teach " in the latter
place, decidedly agree.
(e.) Christendom in its Existing Condition.
When Hengstenberg places the promises closing the letters in
which these errors are condemned in close relation with them, I
agree with him so far as, according to the peculiarity of the book,
the tree of hfe in the paradise of God, ii. 7, the new name, ii,
17, power over the nations, and the morning star, ii. 26-28,
certainly allude to and contrast with the nature, promises, and
results of false doctrine. But passing over the fact that we
cannot, like Hengstenberg, find the Gnosis of the second century
controverted in this book, the data of the letters, even with
microscopic research, are too sparing to allow us to hope that a
comparison of each promise with the error would lead us beyond
the sphere of uncertain conjecture. We therefore ask, What was
the condition of the churches in general under such temptations
of the flesh and the world, such persecutions from Jews and
Gentiles, such Judaizing and heathenizing doctrine ? The seven
letters give us a picture of sevenfold variety. While the church
at Ephesus had left its first love, fallen from its earlier state, and
was admonished to repent and do the first works, ii 4, 5 ; while
the church at Sardis had a name as if living, but was dead, and
was exhorted to be watchful, and to strengthen the things that
remain, and which were ready to die, since the Lord had not
found her works perfect before God, and to remember how she
had received and heard, and to hold fast and repent, ih. 1-3 ;
while the church at Laodicea was neither cold nor hot, but luke
warm, and said, " I am rich, and increased with goods, and have
need of nothing," and knew not that she was wretched, and
miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked, and was admonished
to be zealous and repent, iii. 1 5-1 9, — the poor church at Smyrna
was rich, ii. 9 ; and the last works of the church at Thyatira
were more than the first, ii. 19. Against the slanders of the
Jews, the church at Smyrna was exhorted to be faithful unto
death, ii. 9, 10. The church at Philadelphia had a little strength,
and had kept the word of the Lord, and had not denied His

NEARER PRESUPPOSITIONS. 217
name, but had used the door set open before it to repent, iii. 7, 8.
The church at Pergamos had held fast the name of the Lord
against the persecutions of the heathen, and had not, even in the
worst times, sacrificed its fidelity to him, ii. 13. The church
at Ephesus, in the midst of severe conflict, had withstood the
Judaizing errors which had burst in upon it, ii. 2, 3. The same
church had decidedly rejected the errors of heathenism, ii. 6,
while the adherents of those errors were found in the church
at Pergamos, ii. 14, 15, and were tolerated by the church at
Thyatira, ii. 20. Here we must assume, in conformity, on one
hand, with the number seven and the typical character of the
book, and with the name and concrete features on the other, that
in the letters to the individual churches John had in his eye
definite historic characteristics, but addressed his book to these
several churches, because each of them was a conspicuous type of
the varied condition of Christendom generally ; we see, therefore,
that at the time the book was written, life in Christendom was
not dormant, as most expositors briefly say, but that in some
churches it existed in full vigour ; that in others, compared with
what it was in the first Christian generation, it was already in a
state of decline ; that the pressure of the Jews, and the actual
violence of the Gentiles, though leading to severe and dangerous
temptation, had nowhere resulted in formal apostasy; and that
Judaistic error had, generally, no longer any footing ; but, on the
other hand, Gentile, libertinism had, in some churches, if not
numerous, all the more obstinate, ii. 21, and zealous adherents,
ii. 20 (comp. ver. 14).

218 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.

THIRD PART.
PROPHECY.
1. The Beast. The False Prophet. Babylon.
Christianity is nothing, and will be nothing else than the fulfil
ment of Old Testament prophecy, or the realization of Jewish
eschatology. But as Christ has already come, He is also to come
again ; thus Christianity in one respect is already present, but in
another there is an impending fulfilment or realization of the
religious ideal. While, for the historians, the evangelists, the
first aspect predominates ; for the prophet, the seer, the second
stands in the foreground. This future aspect, or, as we may now
say, this Christian eschatology, in times of extraordinary tension
between the kingdom of God and the world, presents itself to the
prophets, in the way of inspiration or of intuition, as a revelation
in visions and voices, but neither in their abstract universal con
tents nor in the form of their ultimate realization, but in concrete
forms, and, indeed, in the form of the nearest approaching stage
of fulfilment, in perfect analogy with the prophecies of the Old
Testament. For the Christian prophet, to whom the Messiah and
His kingdom have already appeared, the punctum saliens, and at
the same time the moving force, is obviously the manifestation
of Antichrist, according to the condition of which, the reaction on
the part of God or Christ in judgment, or otherwise modified,
must appear to the seer. From this it follows, that though the
statements of our book, in their main substance contained in
chap. xiii. and xvii, concerning the beast, the false prophet,
and Babylon, or the three antichristian powers, practically or
ecclesiastically regarded, in no way constitute its most important
contents, — though the Antichrist of the Apocalypse has not
entirely passed away with the Roman empire, but in the course of
centuries more than one new edition has appeared, and certainly
in the future there will be seen the fulfilment of all its essential
features, — but rather, from the idea of Antichrist proper to the

prophecy. 219
book, that the least controverted parts of it have for edification
immediate and most urgent importance ; we must yet not conceal
from ourselves the fact that, historically and scientifically con
sidered, we have now arrived at the real kernel of the Apocalypse.
We will explain in their order the meaning of the three individual
powers in which Antichrist presents itself to the seer.
(a.) The Beast.
It is said of the second antichristian appearance : " and I
beheld another beast," xiii. 11, and of the corresponding pheno
menon, that they "worship the first beast," xiii. 12. But as
the author himself elsewhere still describes the first beast simply
as " the beast," and as, xix. 20, xx. 10, he places the beast and the
false prophet beside each other, it will not be against his sense
if we — reserving the exposition of " another beast " — briefly call
the first antichristian appearance the Beast.
According to xiii 1, this beast has "seven heads and ten
horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the
name of blasphemy ; " according to xvii. 3 (comp. xvii. 7), the
same is " a scarleticoloured beast, full of names of blasphemy,
having seven heads and ten horns ; " but, according to xii 3, the
" great red dragon has seven heads and ten horns, and seven
crowns upon his heads." The similarity between the beast and
the dragon is remarkable ; and the difference urged by Diister
dieck, that the dragon has on his heads seven crowns, while the
beast has on his horns ten crowns, is explained very simply on
a comparison of xvii. 10 — according to which the seven heads of
the beast mean seven kings — with xvii. 12, which says that the
ten horns are ten kings. Thus there can be no doubt that the
beast stands in the closest relation of nature to the dragon, and
that the latter is in the eye of the seer the Antigod, and the
former the Antichrist.
But is it Antichrist in the sense of a single person ? John
sees the beast rise up out of the sea, xiii. 1, and, according to
xiii. 2, he " was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the
feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion." In this
description he undoubtedly had in view Dan. vii. 2-7, and there
fore, first, he does not intend us to see in the beast a single
person, but an empire. When expositors dispute whether the

220 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
beast is designed to represent the God-opposing world-power in
general, that is, in all its successive forms, or a single, and,
indeed, the last of these forms, it is most decidedly against the
first idea, that accordmg to it the seer must have omitted the fourth
beast of Daniel, while he gives us to understand clearly enough
by the ten horns of his beast that he intended by it that beast
as described in Dan. vii. 7. But it does not by any means
exclude the supposition that he saw in the fourth beast of
Daniel, and consequently in his own, the climax, or a combina
tion of the earlier three ; evidently it is not opposed to this that
Daniel says, " and it was diverse from all the beasts that were
before it ; " and it is not merely more expressive, but is also more
in conformity with the manner of the author (and, indeed, it is
directly indicated by the seven heads, of which, with Daniel, the
three first beasts have each one, while for the fourth there are four),
if we suppose that he has conceived the form of the fourth beast
of Daniel, which is not definitely given, from the prominent
features of the three preceding beasts combined, and has there
fore endowed his own with the same, than if we suppose that for
his beast he sought animal features only in a general way, and
so transferred to it those given by Daniel. Thus he does not
intend the ungodly power of the world in general, but one of its
various phases, therefore a definite individual empire, the latest
and most extreme, reproducing in itself all earlier phases of the
world's enmity to God ; or, the last and most remarkable of all
empires, the climax and complement of all that had existed
before it : this is the first meaning of the beast.
We find in chap. xiii. and xvii. an entire series of expressions
which are in harmony with the above interpretation ; and since
that with which Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 604, supports a contrary
interpretation is inapplicable, namely, that the appearance of the
last Ruler directly introduces the final catastrophe, while there is
given to the beast, after the healing of the deadly wound, a respite
of three and a half years, we may venture to ask, how could the
seer, by the beast which had seven heads and ten horns, which
mean seven and ten kings, the beast upon which the woman sat,
which represents great Babylon, have intended a single person
ality ? Yet, when it is said that the seven mountains on which
the woman sits are seven kings : five are fallen, and one is, and
the other is not yet come ; and when he comes, he must continue

PROPHECY. 221
a short space : and the beast that was, and is not, even he is the
eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition, xvii.
10, 11, — the seer has doubtless there understood not an empire,
but a single person. The exposition which finds everywhere only
an empire, fails as much as that which finds everywhere only a
single person. Are we then to understand that the seer, by the
one name of " the beast," wished in various places to describe
two entirely different things ? This, at all events, follows when
we find these two meanings apportioned to the first and second
representations in chap. xiii. and xvii. ; but while he, xiii. 3,
sees one of the heads " as it were wounded to death," he repre
sents the other beast, xiii. 14, as inducing the inhabitants of the
earth to make an image to the first beast, — " which (who) had
the wound by a sword, and did live," — implying that to him the
one head of the beast was identical with the beast itself ; while
the angel, xvii. 8, says: "The beast that thou sawest was, and is
not ; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into per
dition;" and the same angel says, xvii. 11, "The beast that was,
and is not, even he is the eighth," — the eighth king is identical
with the beast whose seven heads are seven kings. What
remains, then, but to say that if individual forms of world-power
appear to the seer to culminate and unite in an empire which he
calls "the beast," so he sees again the particular stages of the
development of this empire, the individual rulers of the same,
culminate in one prince, which he also describes as " the beast : "
as the leopard, the bear, and the lion are contained in the beast,
so are the seven heads of the beast contained in the one head.
We may say that, as he sees in an individual king the nature of
a definite empire, uniting in itself all earlier empires, personified,
so also he sees unfolded in this empire the nature of that indi
vidual king: this king is to him the empire in person; this
empire is to him the king in the form of a kingdom. It is also
evidently much easier in the one place to think of an individual
king, and in the other of an empire, and it is therefore ever to be
maintained that the seer so thought ; the empire of which this is
the king, the king whose is the empire. That this interpretation
has its analogies in the Apocalypse, for example, in " the word of
God and the testimony of Jesus," in the woman of chap, xii., and
especially in the double meaning of the three and a half years of
Antichrist, can here only be mentioned ; it may also be pointed

222 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
out that it is only by our interpretation that the readings dinov
in xiii. 8, and o? in xiii. 14, very simply explain themselves.
But when Weiss (bibl. Theol. p. 604, note) says, that by identify
ing the head with the beast, in order to represent, as with Daniel,
a collective idea, the entire allegory of the seer becomes confused,
we may indeed much rather refer to the departures of the seer
from the original sense of the Old Testament foundation passages
than to the supposed confusion of allegory.
But what empire and what king did John intend by the
beast ? The reply to the first of these questions, if considered
without prejudice, can hardly be doubted ; by the beast on which
the woman sits, which undeniably means Rome, the seer cannot
possibly have understood any other empire than the one of his
own times, the Roman empire. But in what individual
emperor does he see the antichristian nature of this empire so
fully manifested that he identifies him with the empire itself?
He says, xvii. 9-11, "The seven heads are seven mountains, on
which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are
fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come ; and when he
cometh, he must continue a short space ; and the beast that was,
and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth
into perdition." It is generally acknowledged that by the five
kings already fallen we are to understand the Caesars, — Augustus,
Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero. By the one who is, some
expositors understand Galba; on the contrary, Dusterdieck and
Weiss beheve him to be Vespasian. But when Dusterdieck says
that, according to a later historian, the rebellio trium principum —
Galba, Otho, and Vitellius — reduced the empire to an incertum et
quasi vagum, and that Vespasian appears as the sixth head of the
beast, because he was the first from the gens Flavia to establish
again the tottering empire, Volkmar (p. 193) justly asks, in
objection, whether, a couple of months before the destruction of
Jerusalem, about Easter 70, — where Dusterdieck places the
authorship of our book, — Vespasian became the founder of a
new imperial family ? whether, within half a year from his
exaltation, he differed in anything from Galba ? And with
similar propriety he remarks, that it might have been otherwise
if this period had been fixed upon from the second or third
century — by Dion Cassius and Suetonius ; — one might then have
seen in Vespasian the founder of a second dynasty after the

PROPHECY. 223
Julian, and regarded the three brief reigns as a sad interregnum,
and disowned Galba with the other two. There is still another
remark ; it is inconceivable that, in case John wrote in the time
of Vespasian, he should not once have mentioned the three
governments intervening after Nero ; the ten horns, xvii. 3, vii.
12, which Dusterdieck refers to here, have, as we shall see,
an entirely different sense. Thus the king who " is " is Galba,
whose period of government was the present of the seer, and the
time in which his book was written. After Galba he expected
one whose rule would " continue a short space ; " after this the
beast that was, and is not, will appear, and will be the eighth, but
still from the seven. By the one who is not yet come, and who
is to continue a short space, Dusterdieck understands Vespasian's
son Titus ; by the eighth king, who is of the seven, Domitian,
whom John regards not only as the individual personification of
the Roman Antichrist, but also as the last possessor of the
imperial power. But both these meanings fail with the
interpretation of the sixth head; and it is especially against
them that the important number seven does not take its due posi
tion. This takes place only upon the supposition that in the
seven heads, or kings, the antichristian nature of the Roman
empire gradually and partially unfolds itself; but after this
gradual and partial development has been completed, there appears
again one from the seven, and brings the antichristian nature
of the Roman imperial power to a complete realization ; as it is
on one side an individual head of the beast, and on the other the
beast itself, so it is on one side the eighth king, and on the other
one of the seven. Now, when this eighth, of which it is said "he
was, and is not," can be identified neither with that which is nor
with that which is not yet come, and thus neither with the sixth
nor the seventh, the question arises, which of the five emperors
from Augustus to Nero, in the sense of an individual personality,
was intended by the seer ? According to the testimony of
history, as also according to the historical background of our
book, the answer must be, the Emperor Nero. The words, " of the
seven," so strongly urged by Dusterdieck and Weiss, neither in
the genealogical nor in the decidedly more important sense of an
enigmatical indication, as uniting in himself all the seven, and, at
the same time, an individual of the number, lead to Domitian,
but in the latter sense compel us to think of Nero. With this

224 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
result the enigmatical number of xiii. 18 perfectly harmonizes,
" Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the
number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his
number is Six hundred threescore and six." It is not necessary
to speak of any other interpretations than those of AaTeivos and
ji*u iDp. That, on account of the expression, " the number of a
man," the number must intend the name of some particular
human person, and therefore that only the latter of the two in
terpretations is possible, cannot be admitted; according to the
analogy of xxi. 17 (comp. Isa. -viii. 1), the number of a man
signifies that the number expresses the name after the manner of
a man, that is, according to the numeral value of the letters
current with every man. If the choice is to be between two
interpretations, the former is to be preferred, because it is within
the language in whieh the Apocalypse was written, and there is
not a word by which we are led to think of a Hebrew name;
while from ix. 11, xvi 6, it is evident that the author wrote for
Greek readers. On the other hand, it is not to be denied that
the second meaning agrees better with the subject: — Antichrist —
of which it treats, and the question arises, whether the writer
by a numeral enigma intended the solution to be sought outside
the Greek language. With our view of the beast, it is really
perfectly indifferent which of the two interpretations is pre
ferred. Both of them agree with it, and confirm it. As a
pure supposition, however, and one to which I do not attach
much importance, I may suggest that both meanings may he
correct, and that the seer chose the number 666 because in
Greek it represented the name AaTeivo<s, and in Hebrew the
name |ro iDp, so that by its double meaning it might mean the
Roman empire as well as Csesar Nero.
As, according to the view of the seer, the world-power thus flows
in four different forms, which are symbolized by the leopard, the
bear, and the lion, and the beast which unites in itself the other
three, and has appeared in the Roman empire ; so — and this with
him is the principal thing— the Roman empire appears again in
seven representatives, seven individual emperors, symbohzed by
the seven heads of the beast, five of which belong to the past, one
to the present, one to the future, which in a short time Nero and
the antichristian nature of the Roman empire will follow as the
eighth, yet one of the seven ; and as during his hfe he had done

PROPHECY. 225
relatively, so then absolutely he will bring that nature into realiza
tion and manifest operation. What are the marks which, for John,
distinguish the empire in general, and the emperor in particular, as
the beast or Antichrist ? We should not beforehand expect that in
the delineation of the beast that which belongs to the empire and to
the emperor would be kept asunder. Further, we may assume that
in this delineation what has been and what is still to come will often
flow into each other. Finally, it should not pass without notice,
that since our author regards the beast as the fulfilment of Daniel's
prediction of the fourth beast and the httle horn, he has borrowed
the colours for his description partly from Dan. vii. Still the
historical foundation, or the historical point of connection, for the
picture of the beast, can be pointed out with tolerable certainty.
The dragon stood on the sand of the sea, and from the sea John
saw the beast ascend, xiii. 1 ; as also with Daniel, the four beasts
come up from the sea. We will not lay too great stress upon
the circumstance that " the great whore " appears sitting upon
" many waters," xvii. 1, and that these many waters are explained
to be " peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues." But
the relation of the sea to this beast, and that of the earth, xiii. 11,
to the other, is remarkable. We do not understand the sea, with
Dusterdieck, in its natural sense, nor with Volkmar and others
as that which covers the abyss, and is associated with it, nor
with some, as the sea " at Caesarea ; " but symbolically : the beast
ascends from the sphere of the earthly, in contrast with the
heavenly, and, indeed, from the sea as the department of earthly
movement and earthly occurrences, in distinction from the earth
as the- department of earthly being and feeling ; in other words,
John sees the Roman empire arise out of secular history, the
agitation and tumult of the nations, and called into being by that
enemy of God and man, the devil. It is a beast (dvplov), not a
living creature (££<w), compounded pf leopard, bear, and lion, xiii. 2.
As Daniel symbolizes the world-empires by wild beasts, in con
trast with the kingdom of God which follows, and which is typified
by a form like that of a Son of man, Dan. vii. 13, 14 (comp. also
Dan. iv. 28, etc.), in order to present those empires in contrast
with the beautiful human, humane, and Godlike character of the
kingdom of God, as animal, bestial, and brutish, and especially
the features of rude force, cruelty, and terror ; so there appeared to
him all these individual features united into one frightful whole
p

226 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
in the Roman empire. — The beast had on his heads the name
of blasphemy, xiii. 1 ; as also, according to xvii. 3, being full of
the names of blasphemy. Without doubt, the writer had in his
eye the titles by which the Roman emperor appropriated to him
self, and permitted to be appropriated to him, divine honours, as
Augustus, Divus. Caligula, at least, allowed himself to be saluted
Jupiter Latiaris (comp. Krenkel, p. 76). — The dragon gave to the
beast " his power, and his seat, and great authority," xiii. 2. As
called into being by the ruler of the ungodly world and its history,
from the ungodly course of humanity, the Roman power appears
to him as the earthly representation or self-assertion, the personal
medium or alter-ego of Satan; and his instrumentalities corre
spond to his origin and significance : power ; influence and import
ance : throne ; his all-subduing, irresistible works ; and authority,
" All the world wondered after the beast. And they worshipped
tbe dragon which gave power unto the beast : and they worshipped
the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able
to make war with him ?" xiii 3, 4. The seer obseives what
an imposing, overpowering, transporting impression the Roman
empire exercises upon men ; how the world is astonished at it ;
that it is amazed by its greatness, power, and glory, and does
homage to it ; how the world worships the dragon, because he has
given power to the beast, — that is, not consciously worshipping
the devil, but perceiving, in imperial power and in its individual
possessors, supposed manifestations of the divine, it really gives
divine honours to the devil ; he notices how, in striking contrast
to Ex. xv. 11, the world says, "Who is like unto the beast?
who is able to make war with him?" xiii 4, "in blasphemous
parody of the praise with which the Old Testament church
celebrates the unparalleled glory of the living God " (Dusterdieck),
the Roman power is deified as unequalled. — There was given unto
the beast " a mouth speaking great things, and blasphemies : and
he opened his mouth against God, to blaspheme His name, and
His tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven," xiii. 6 (comp.
Dan. vii. 8, xi 20, 25, 36; Ps. xii. 4). Whether John had
any individual thing in his mind, and what it was, cannot be
easily made out ; probably he perceived, especially in the pre
sumptuous style of the imperial decrees, and generally " in all
the language with which Roman arrogance ascribed to itself, not
only unlimited authority over the world, but also expressly cele-

PROPHECY. 227
brated with divine predicates and divine honours, the city, the
empire, and the emperor" (Dusterdieck), the beginning of the
fulfilment of Darnel's prediction of the presumptuous language
of the little horn, and, in anticipation, comprehensively ascribed
to the beast blasphemies against all holy things, as he really
expected them from the personal Antichrist. — " It was given
unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them,"
xiii 7 ; and, according to xi. 7, " the beast that ascendeth out of
the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall over
come them, and kill them ; " and in xvii. 3 we are told that the
beast is " scarlet-coloured " (comp. the red dragon). There doubt
less hovered before the mind of the seer in this opposition to and
slaughter of the saints, first, the persecution of the Christians by
Nero ; but, according to his views of the Jews, the Jewish war
may be also included in this feature. What the Roman empire
had already done in the bloody persecution of the true servants
of God — scarlet indicates at the same time both the Roman
imperial colour and blood — will reach its chmax in the rage of
the personal Antichrist ; for in this we have mainly to think of
the beast ascending out of the bottomless pit, which will neither
fear nor spare even the two witnesses — those men of God — Moses
and Elias. — " And power was given him over all kindreds, and
tongues, and nations. And all that dwell upon the earth shall
worship bim, whose names are not written in the book of life of
the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world," xiii. 8. " They
that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not
written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when
they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is," xvii 8.
That which the seer has already said, xiii. 2 and 4, of the power
and worship of the beast, he sees in the future, and, indeed, as
xvii 8 shows, where he has again chiefly in view the personal
Antichrist, through his appearance developed to the uttermost ;
the already huge power of the Roman empire extended over the
known world, and the widely-spread apotheosis of the imperial
power become universal, with the exception of the few elect.
By what signs has the seer recognised among the various
Roman emperors Nero in particular as the individual personifica
tion of the antichristian power ? It is to be doubted whether,
by the " beast," he desired to point to his bestiality and brutality,
— to the inhumanity which he showed to his mother, and wife,

228 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
and tutor. But he certainly intended by it to brand the detest
able persecutor of the Christians ; and this emblem of Rome
appears to have been in his thoughts in connection with their
persecution (comp. xvii. 16). But just as certainly did the Nero
legend, originating soon after his death, and widely spread and
firmly believed in Asia Minor, contribute very essentially in two
respects to present Nero to John as Antichrist. Dusterdieck justly
objects to the assumption of those expositors, according to whom
either the seer simply appropriated the contents of the legend, or
that it must have originally had the apocalyptic form. The
original form was, in fact, not that Nero ascended from the
bottomless pit, xi. 7, xvii. 8, but that he would reappear after a
temporary concealment among the Parthians. But he should not
therefore have called in question the undeniable connection of
the apocalyptic statement concerning the beast with the original
Nero legend, but should only have demanded the acknowledgment
that the seer may have suitably modified the popular expectation
respecting Nero, noticed and accepted by him. The ten horns of
the beast, xiii. 1, xvii. 3-7, are interpreted by the angel in xvii.
12—14 : " The ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which
have received no kingdom as yet ; but receive power as kings one
hour with the beast. These have one mind, and shall give their
power and strength unto the beast. These shall make war with
the Lamb." Diisterdieck's exposition, according to which, in the
remaining places, the ten horns are the ten rulers from Augustus
to Titus, including Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, and that, on the con
trary, xvii. 12-14 signifies ten future kings (comp. Dan. vii. 24),
needs no refutation. We are decidedly forbidden to find, like
many advocates of the Nero legend, the interpretation in his Par
thian allies, by the consideration that the ten kings are symbolized
by ten horns of the beast, and also by the statement that they
have yet received no kingly authority, but are to receive it with
the beast for one hour. It must be evident to every unprejudiced
reader that the ten kings signify Roman provincial prefects, pro
consuls, presides, rectores provinciarum. The seer reckons, in a
general way, ten great provinces in the Roman empire ; he had
/known it after Nero's death, and had seen how the prefects,
through their armies, received power as kings for one hour ; and
the representation is, that when Nero ascends from the abyss, the
provincial prefects generally will rise against the seventh and

PROPHECY. 229
last emperor, and unanimously attach themselves to Nero, and,
as his allies and helpers, march as well against Rome as against
Christ. When, by a candid exposition, the Parthian allies of
Nero, xvii. 12-14, have disappeared, where is there in this book
an indication that he sojourned among them, and would return ?
Certainly John knew of the Parthian allies of the beast, xvi.
12-16 ; but they come not with the emperor, until then hidden
among them, but at his call and for his help. Our author has
expressed himself in harmony with the popular faith. — Nero
received, indeed, a deadly wound, but was healed ; was not dead,
but hved, and in due time would come again. But in the eye
of the seer Nero lived, if we may call that a life, in the abyss ;
he went alive down to hell, and from hell would one day return
Thus modified, the Nero legend, in a double respect, helped to
stamp him in the estimation of John as Antichrist. Once, and
it is not commonly noticed, in this relation Nero forms such an
accurate personal representation of the Roman empire, that the
seer can in the one almost completely describe the other. When
he received a deadly wound, and the same was healed, xiii. 3,
did not the Roman empire, in his fall and the cessation of the
Julian dynasty, receive a deadly wound also, and did not John
expect it would be healed again, xiii 12 and 14? When he
says of Nero that he was, and is not, and shall reappear, xvii.
8—11, is it not true of the Roman empire, which, at the time he
wrote, to a certain extent was not ? Still, in the esteem of our
author, the contrast or counterpart which, in his conception of
the popular behef, Nero presented to Christ, was much more im
portant than the parallel with the empire. We may notice that
Christ "was slain," v. 9, and as the Lamb slain, stands before
the throne of God, v. 6 ; that of the seven heads of the beast, one
was "wounded to death," xiii. 3 ; that the beast had a "wound
by a sword," xiii. 14, "a deadly wound," xiii. 3. Christ was
"dead, and is alive again," ii. 8 (comp. i 17, 18); the deadly
wound of the beast was healed, xiii. 3—1 2 ; it " had the wound
by a sword, and did live," xiii. 14. Christ comes from the throne
of God, to which He is caught away, xii. 5, upon which He sits, iii.
21. He will come " with clouds, and every eye shall see Him, and
they also which pierced Him ; and all kindreds of the earth shall
wall because of Him," i. 7. The beast will ascend " out of the
bottomless pit," xi. 7, xvii. 8, and " they that dwell on the earth

230 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
shall wonder," xvii. 8 (comp. xiii. 3), and worship the "beast,
whose deadly wound was healed," xiii. 12. The antithesis
reaches still further, even to the reign of the beast and to the
reign of Christ during the thousand years, and closes with a
contrast between the casting of the beast into a lake of fire, and
the enthronement of the Lamb in the New Jerusalem. On the
whole, we may venture to say that the striking contrast between
Christ and Nero, as the Nero legend brought it near to the writer,
and as in his apprehension of the same it must have forced itself
upon him, where not the actually deciding cause, is still one of
the chief grounds why Nero was to him the personal Antichrist.
)As Christ, according to his representation, has already appeared
/on earth in Jesus, but only in His future coming will appear in
I His entire significance as the Messiah-Logos ; so also the personal
\ Antichrist has appeared in the historical Nero, but will only
reach his full manifestation in the Nero ascending from the abyss.
(b.) The False Prophet.
The second antichristian power, " another beast," as he is called,
in distinction from the first beast, xiii. 11, 12, the seer himself
explains as the false prophet, xvi. 13, xix. 20, xx. 10. The
question can only be, whether he understood thereby all false
prophecy, or an individual false prophetic personality, or, as
under the first beast, both in one. ^Volkmar, by an " impartial "
exposition, has found out that, on account of Rom. xiii. 1—7, the
seer regards the Apostle Paul as the. other beast. But we reject
this " historico-critical " interpretation, not less than Krenkel's
interpretation of Josephus, for it is difficult to discover a single
feature in the description of the false prophet which points to an
individual personality ; on the other hand, all is explained on the
supposition of false ^prophecy. But where are we to look for it ?
The assertion, for example, in Bunsen's Bibelwerk (comp. Schenkel's
Bibellexikon), that, "besides the heathen secular power, the
Christian church had another enemy, namely obdurate Judaism,
which now with its false Messiahs and false prophets (comp.
Matt. xxiv. 5, 24) disturbed the world, seduced many believers,
and falsified the genuine Messianic hope : as far as these false
prophets prepared an alliance with the Parthians, whence the
seer expected Nero, he represents this second beast as a satellite

PROPHECY. 231
of the first," may appeal with some plausibility to 2 Thess. ii.,
and especially to ver. 9, etc. ; but, notwithstanding, it needs no
refutation, for most of the characteristics of the other beast are
totally incompatible with Jewish false prophecy. But we preserve
an harmonious whole as soon as we acknowledge that, besides the
beast, he represents the false prophet as a world-power hostile
to God, as God-opposing wisdom and mental power (Lechler,
p. 201) ; that in distinction from Antichrist, in which " heathenism
is embodied more as the external force which at the same time
opposes Christianity and deifies itself, there is rather represented
in the false prophet the fraudulent means which it adopts in
order to establish itself as the religion of the world," Kbstlin,
p. 496; that John by the false prophet had in view " that form
of Roman heathen prophecy which was marked as much by magic
as by divination, and in this peculiarity, with all its augurs, inter
pretations of omens, and the like, was a powerful support to the
Roman empire " (Dusterdieck) ; or, as I would rather say, that the
seer by the other beast, or the false prophet, intended heathen
witchcraft and soothsaying, the heathen rehgion as divination and
magic (comp. "die Astrologen, und Mathematiker, die Chaldaer,"
Krenkel, p. 80), according to its demoniacal origin and background,
its demoniacal arts, and its demoniacal influence upon the mind. By
the similarity of the name (comp. ii. 2 0), as well as by the analogy
between the ethnistic error of the Apocalypse and the libertine
error, referred to " the last time," of the Epistle of Jude and the
second Epistle of Peter (comp. also 1 Tim.), it is certainly not a
wide step to say, with Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 604, though in the
circle of vision in which the prophet principally moved, false
prophecy was above all active in heathen soil, the appearances of
a Satanic false prophecy within Christendom could still not be
thought to be excluded as far as it tempted believers to heathen
immorality, and thereby also led them to allegiance to the empire.
We have, however, already remarked in the section on ,the
churches, when considering doctrinal error, that there is not to be
discovered the slightest evidence that our author really combined
false prophecy in the churches and false prophecy in the world,
and we therefore adhere to the interpretation which refers it to
heathen rehgion as magic and divination.
We shall find this view confirmed if we take a closer survey
of the characteristics of false prophecy. The writer sees " another

232 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
beast coming up out of the earth," xiii. 11. The heathen religion,
or heathenism, is homogeneous and similar in nature with the
heathen State or the God-opposing secular power, namely, sub
human, inhuman, and bestial. This other beast came up " out of
the earth," not, as Dusterdieck says, because it will operate upon
the whole earth and its inhabitants (comp. ver. 12), nor, as Ewald
thinks, because there were in Asia Minor so many delusions;
but as a parallel to the ascent of the first beast out of the sea.
Earth and sea are commonly the antithesis of heaven, of the ideal
world (comp. xii. 1 2) ; the sea means the ungodly and God-
opposing world on the side of movement and development, the
history of the world in an evil sense ; inasmuch as it is in this
that the world-power originates, the earth signifies the same
ungodly world on the side of being, consciousness, the spirit of
the world in an evil sense (comp. Jas. iii. 15), and therefore
heathenism, or the heathen religion, ascends out of it. — The other
beast " had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon,"
xiii. 11. We are reminded here of the seven horns of the Lamb,
v. 6, and also of the dragon " which deceiveth the whole world,"
xii. 9. But the seer does not refer here either to the lamb or to
the dragon ; his design is rather, by the other beast having two
horns hke a lamb, to express harmlessness only in appearance
(comp. Matt. vii. 1 5), and by its speaking like a dragon, — dragon
is often synonymous with serpent, — cunning, deceptive power
(comp. ver. 14) ; in a word, in distinction from the mere material
violent procedure of the secular power, he characterizes it as more
intellectual, and operating with intellectual instrumentalities, but
not therefore as a less diabolical power. — The other beast " exer-
ciseth," that is, brings into activity and full operation, all the
power of the first beast before him, and causeth, that is, induceth,
" the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first
beast, whose deadly wound was healed," xiii. 12 (comp. xiii. 5).
Thus the great power which the seer has repeatedly ascribed to
the first beast, xiii. 2, 4, 7, is used by the Roman empire only
because through its material resources it has religion with its
spiritual forces in its service, or " before " it, as a willing helper.
The idolatrous homage by which the empire was consecrated and
strengthened, it owed to the demoniacal influence of its religion
upon the mind. The other beast " doeth great wonders, so that
he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight

PROPHECY. , 233
of men," xiii 13. According to xvi. 14, there are " the spirits of
devils," who work miracles ; our author gives credit to the demon-
cultus, the demoniacal witchcraft, for accomphshing these signs
(comp. Matt. xxiv. 24), and in its approaching chmax of develop
ment it will work wonders which will compare in appearance
with the greatest miracles of the true prophets, for example, with
those of an Elias (comp. 1 Kings xviii. 38 ; 2 Kings i 10, 12 ;
Rev. xi 5). The other beast " deceiveth them that dwell on the
earth by means of those miracles which he had power to do in
the sight of the beast, saying to them that dwell on the earth,
that they should make an image to the beast, which had the
wound by a sword, and did live," xiii. 14 (comp. Dan. iii). If,
now, the heathen rehgion, with its demoniacal power, had already
deluded the world, much more will it be so in the expected com
pletion of that power ; and as already it consecrated images to the
Caesars for divine homage, as to gods, — it is natural here to think
of Caligula, who desired to place his image in the temple, and who
coveted divine honours (comp. Hausrath, p. 224), — so with the
appearance of the personal Antichrist, it will fully bring the
world to set him up as God, and to render him divine honours.
— The other beast " had power to give life unto the image of the
beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause
that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should
be killed," xiii. 15. The seer knew, and did not doubt what was
said among the heathen about speaking images ; and he expected,
therefore, that heathen sorcery would succeed in giving life, the
spirit of life (comp. xi. 11), to the image of the beast, so that it
•would speak, and thus be fully manifested to the world in its
usurped divinity. And, indeed, in his time it had already happened
that Christians were put to death because they refused to pay
divine honours to the image of the emperor ; so naturally would
it be in the future, as John foresaw, that refusal to worship the
speaking image, as in the case of Nebuchadnezzar, Dan. iii. 6,
would end in death. — And the other beast "causeth all, both
small and' great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark
in their right hand, or in their foreheads : and that no man might
buy or sell save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast,
or the number of his name," xiii. 16, 17. The Christians were
already variously and seriously hindered in business, because in
the Roman empire the heathen rehgion penetrated and governed

234 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
all civil relations, indeed in this respect they were under a ban;
there needed only one short step more, and as slaves bore the
name of their master, priests the name of their god, engraven
upon their skin to show to whom they belonged, — the seer com
bines the two, and in striking contrast with Ex. xiii '9, 16,
Deut. vi. 8, where the precept is given to bind the word of the
Lord upon the hand, and to have it between the eyes, — the wor
shippers of the beast, led by false prophets and rehgious fanaticism,
would willingly place the name or the number of the name of
the beast, as a sign that they belonged to him, upon their right
hands, or upon their foreheads, or in the most conspicuous places ;
and those who would not consent to this, Christians included,
y would be able neither to buy nor sell, they would be shut out
from intercourse, banned, marked and robbed of the vital air in
civil and social life.
In the consideration of the first beast, we have found how
important for this representation of the seer was the remarkable
contrast, according to his view of the Nero legend, between Christ
and Nero ; and at the close of our exposition of the other beast,
the question arises, to what, in the view of the seer, did it stand
opposed ? With this inquiry may be connected another, namely,
why in our book is the term Antichrist never used? and to both
we reply, that the Roman empire was not to the seer, either
generally or in its individual personification, the perfectly exact
counterpart of Christ, or the complete Antichrist. In his esteem
it lacked too much one chief feature, the rehgious ; he had found
this in the heathen religion of the State and of the people, with
its witchcraft and superstition ; but only the empire in union with
the heathen religion was to him the complete Antichrist, the full
antithesis to Christ, the first-born from the dead, and Lord of
lords, to Christ the faithful witness of God. But the absence of
the name Antichrist may also be explained from the peculiarity
of the apocalyptic language, and we may refer the false prophet
to a concrete antithesis indicated by the name itself, even true
prophecy. We bave seen, indeed, how Old and New Testament
prophecy are one, also how the activity of the Spirit coincides
almost entirely with prophecy. It may therefore best express
the sense of our author, if we say that the false prophet is the
exact opposite of the true prophecy of the Old and New Testa
ment, and as the first beast is Antichrist, so the second beast is

PROPHECY. 235
Antispirit. It agrees with this, that in the entire description of
the false prophet there is nothing that can relate to Christ, but
in more than one feature the antithesis is to the work of the wit
nesses of Jesus, especially of the two witnesses in the eleventh
chapter. It also appears to me, considering the inchnation of the
seer to contrasts, significant — and Ewald also has called atten
tion to this — that, according to the conception of the false prophet
as Antispirit, there appears in xvi. 13 an informal trinity, the
dragon, the beast, and the false prophet,, in contrast with the
divine Trinity of i. 4—6. (c.) Babylon.
John saw a woman sitting upon the first beast, xvii. 3 ; " and
upon her forehead was a name written, Mystery, Babylon the
Great," xvii. 5. " The seven heads are seven mountains, on
which the woman sitteth," xvh. 9. The woman " is that great
city which reigneth over the kings of the earth," xvh. 18.
There can be no doubt that by the woman John meant Rome,
for among the Jews it was frequently designated by the term
Babylon (comp. Hengstenberg, ut ante, II. p. 142). Thus,
according to the views of the seer, it holds a similar position in
the history of the New Covenant to that which Babylon held in
the history of the Old ; or, in other words, that which Babylon
signified in its time, was fully realized in Rome.
But in what does the Babylonian signification of Rome consist ?
The great whore sits upon many waters, xvh. 1 (comp. Jer. h.
13 ; Nah. ii. 9) ; and the many waters where she sits are
"peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues," xvii. 15.
The woman sits on "a scarlet-coloured beast, full of names of
blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns," xvh. 3, " The
woman is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the
earth," xvii. 18. Rome is the capital city, the seat and centre,
the metropolis of the Roman empire. " I will show unto thee,"
said the angel, "the judgment of the great whore," xvii. 1. On
her forehead was written, " Mystery, Babylon the Great," xvii. 5
(comp., great Babylon, xiv. 8, xvi. 19, xvii. 5, xviii 2; the great
city, xviii. 1 0, xvi. 1 8 ; and the great city Babylon, xviii. 2 1 ;
the mighty city, xviii. 1 0). Rome is a giant city. — " The woman
was arrayed in purple and scarlet-colour," — the former referring,

236 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
probably, to ruling power, and the latter to the shedding of
blood, — " and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls,"
xvh. 4 (comp. xviii. 3, vii. 11-19). Rome is the imperial city,
the city of wealth, and pomp, and luxury. — The woman had "a
golden cup in her hand full of the abominations and filthiness of
her fornication, and upon her forehead was a name written,
Mystery, Babylon the Great, the mother of harlots and abomina
tions of the earth," xvii. 4, 5. The angel said to the seer, " I
will show unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth
upon many waters ; with whom the kings of the earth have com
mitted fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been
made drunk with the wine of her fornication," xvh. 1, 2.
Already the angel has said, "Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that
great city (comp. Isa. xxi. 9 ; Jer. 1. 2, li. 8), because she made
all nations (Gentiles) drink of the wine of the wrath of her
fornication," xiv. 8 (comp. xviii. 3, 9, 23, xix. 2). "Mystery,"
as the position of the word and the sixth and seventh verses
show, does not mean that " Babylon the Great," etc., is a myste
rious name, but it is itself a part of the name, and rests on the
fact, inexplicable to the common consciousness, that Rome, not
withstanding its terrible guilt, stood there continuously so great
and glorious. The fornication cannot mean the idolatry prac
tised with Babylon, nor the worship of the secular power, hut
idolatry or heathen lawlessness generally, with its impurities
and abominations (comp. Lev. xviii. 2 7 ; Jer. li. 7 ; Ezek. xvi.
22), to which, indeed, the worship of the beast belonged as a
principal feature. It is said, however, "Come out of her, my
people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive
not of her plagues (comp. Jer. li. 6, 9, 45) : for her sins have
reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities,"
xviii. 4, 5. Rome appears to our author as the great whore,
because it influences the rest of the world, and is at the same
time the nourishing medium and starting-point of the Roman
state rehgion, of the heathen spirit ; as the mother of harlots, and
the other cities as her daughters (comp. Ps. xlviii 12), because
they and the provinces have received and accepted from her the
evil disposition ; the kings of the earth have committed fornica
tion, and lived wantonly with the woman ; she has made all
nations drunk with the wine of her fornication (comp. Jer. xxv.
15; Isa. li. 17, 21, 22; Nah. iii 4; Isa. xxiii. 15, 17); that is,

PROPHECY. 237
princes and nations are subject to the bewitching influence of
Rome, and have surrendered themselves to her abominations.
The writer also " saw the woman drunken with the blood of the
saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus," xvh. 6
(comp. xviii 20, 24, xix. 2, xviii 6). The persecution of the
Christians in Rome by Nero stands before the eye of the seer ;
but Rome is (comp. xviii. 24) .chiefly the central point and head
quarters of unjust persecution and bloodshed, and so may and
will be charged to her all the righteous blood shed on the earth
(comp. Matt, xxiii. 35 ; Jer. li. 49).
In the two beasts we have found counterparts of Christ and
the Spirit; to what does Babylon stand in contrast? The woman,
the whore, is plainly in opposition to the woman in the twelfth
chapter, and the Bride of the Lamb in xix. 7, xxi 2, 9 ; Babylon
the great city, to the beloved city, xx. 9 — the holy city, the New
Jerusalem, xxi. 2—1 0 ; the lot of the woman, xvii. 6, to that of
the Bride, xix. 7, xxi. 1. It is significant that Jerusalem is
described as the holy city, xi. 2, trodden under foot of the
Gentiles; but in xi. 8, as the great city, where our Lord was
crucified. Rome, in the view of the seer, is the antithesis of the
holy city, and of the church of the saints ; it is to him the place
and church of Antichrist.
2, The Seals, the Trumpets, and the Vials.
For doctrines of less importance, the three series of visions,
according to their extent, take an exceedingly significant place in
the representations of our book. The first of these, the seal
visions, introduced in the fifth chapter, are contained in vi and
viii. 1 ; the second, the trumpet visions, introduced in viii. 2-6,
are contained in viii. 7-13, ix. 1-19, xi. 15-19 ; the third, the
vial visions, introduced in xv. and xvi 1, are contained in xvi.
2-21. Let us first, in a few words, and as far as our purpose requireSj
establish the sense of the individual visions. The vision which
goes forth from the book of fate, after the opening of the first
seal, vi. 1, 2, namely, that of the rider upon a white horse, is
very variously interpreted (comp. Dusterdieck, p. 250). Many
expositors consider the rider to be identical with him who is
described in xix. 11, and refer the vision to Christ, and regard it

238 THE doctrine of the apocalypse.
as representing His triumphant progress, beginning with the
feast of Pentecost, at the commencement of the Christian church,
fulfilling itself in a time of triumph and joy, interrupted at the
end of thirty years by the storm of war. I do not understand,
however, how, from the circumstance that some of the character
istics both here and there are not of equal but only of similar
import, there can be inferred the identity of the two riders ; for
a certain similarity between Christ going forth to a victorious
conflict with His enemies, and a triumphant king or general
going out to conquest, leads as httle to the identity of the two as
the description of the angel in x. 1-3, on account of its simi
larity to i 15, 16, iv. 3, leads to an identity between the angel
and Christ or God. It is inconceivable how the seer could have
represented the Lamb as opening the first seal, and then going
forth from it in the form of a rider. When expositors adduce in
favour of identification, that since the appearance of Christ Him
self opens every vision which proceeds from the unsealed book, it
is evident that He guides and controls the course and aim of all
events portrayed in subsequent visions, this is a representation of
which the seer nowhere gives the slightest trace. Ewald, ut ante,
p. 174, very properly points to the bow as an emblem of wild
war unsuitable to Christ, and also to the fact that the first rider
in> not wholly unhke the following one. Finally, from the
apocalyptic standpoint, the beginning of Christianity was not
altogether a period of triumph. I, therefore, do not regard the
rider on the white horse as an antithesis to the rider of xix. 11-
1 6, but as a personification of war on the side of victory, with
which, as Dusterdieck, ut ante, p. 254, acknowledges, it agrees
that the third and following verses represent the other side and
its consequences. The rider on the red horse, vi 3, 4, is un
deniably, and to some extent, an acknowledged personification of
war on the side of bloodshed. The rider on the black horse, vi
5, 6, indicates both figuratively ¦ and literally a partial dearth.
The rider on the pale horse, vi 7, 8 (comp. Ezek. xiv. 21 ; Jer.
xxi. 7, xiv. 12), represents a somewhat devastating pestilence
and great mortality. The ground - thought of the four riders
appears to be a combination of ^ech. i 7, 8 with vi. 1, 8. The
vision after the opening of the fifth seal, vi 9-11, brings martyrs,
who pray to be avenged. After the opening of the sixth seal,
John sees a great earthquake, which announces the immediate

prophecy. 239
coming of the final judgments of God (comp. Isa. xiii. 13,
1. 3, xxxiv. 4, ii. 10-22, lxiii 4; Hos. x. 8 ; Joel ih. 4, i 15,
ii. 2 ; Nah. i. 6 ; Mai. iii. 2 ; also Isa. xiii. 1 0 ; Nah. iii. 1 2 ;
Amos vii. 9). In these six visions we have just the same
phenomena presented as in Matt. xxiv. 6-9 (comp. Luke xviii.
1-8) are predicted as the beginning of woe. — The silence in
heaven after the opening of the seventh seal, viii. 1, has evi
dently no independent meaning, but is rather an artistic device,
and should represent the anxious or intense expectation of the
inhabitants of heaven, who not only, after the exhaustion of the
sixth seal, look to the last decisive catastrophe, but from the
appearance of the seven angels, to whom were given seven
trumpets, conclude that it is near (Dusterdieck, ut ante, p. 299).
From the seventh seal there proceeds not merely a single vision,
but a whole series of visions, which, like the representation of
the last day, as the great jubilee, the divine day of the general
recompense and restoration of the just (comp. Isa. Ixi 2), as well
as on the ground of Ex. xix. 13-16, Isa. xxvii. 13 (comp. Zech.
ix. 14; Josh. vi. 3-16 ;. 1 Thess. iv. 16, 17; 1 Cor. xv. 52),
associates itself with the blast of trumpets. The first four trumpets
bring plagues, which affect the whole sphere of the visible world,
earth and sea and inland waters, stars and day and night. Sub
stantially, the Egyptian plagues furnish the images for the first
five. That which appears after the sounding of the first trumpet,
hail and fire mingled with blood, and destructive effects on the
land and its inhabitants, viii. 7, reminds us to some extent of the
plague described in Ex. ix. 22—25 and vii 19, 21 (comp. Joel
ih. 3). The sounding of the second trumpet is followed by a
sign which borrows its image from a volcanic mountain, and pro
duces destructive effects upon the sea and its inhabitants, viii.
8, 9. The third trumpet brings the poisoning of a third part of
the rivers and fountains of waters, and thereby the death of
many, viii 10, 11 (comp. Ex. vii. 21-24). The fourth trumpet
brings harm to the sun, the moon, and the stars, of which a third
partis darkened, and a third part of the light of day and night is
withdrawn, viii. 12 (comp. Ex. x. 21— 23 ; Joel iii 4 ; Amos viii.
9). These four plagues remind us of Matt. xxiv. 29. That only
a third part of each sphere of creation is affected by them, shows
that their purpose was only preliminary. As connected with
each other, and forming a whole, like the four riders of the seal

240 THE doctrine of the apocalypse.
visions, the plagues of the four first trumpets show that the three
following plagues, as three woes, are separated from them. The
fifth trumpet brings the first woe, namely, the infernal locusts, as
a plague upon the men who had not been sealed, ix. 1-12 ; and
the recollection of the Egyptian and later plagues of locusts,
Ex. x. 4-6, Joel i and ii. (comp. Deut. viii. 1 5 ; Ezek. ii. 6, 7 ;
Jer. viii. 3 ; Job xxxix. 20, 25), all the more causes the plague
here described to appear in its supernatural terror. The sixth
trumpet brings the second woe, wonderful horsemen, who kill the
third part of men, ix. 13-21, and whose description points un
equivocally to the Parthians. On the sounding of the seventh
trumpet, there arises a song of praise in heaven, which celebrates
the end as having already come ; the temple of God in heaven is
opened, and the ark of the covenant is seen, and there are signs
of the judgment of God, which brings the final consummation, xi.
15—19. This symbolic representation is related to the proper
contents of the seven trumpets, precisely as the half-hour's, silence
is to the contents of the seven seal visions ; and it is expressly
said, x. 7, that "in the days of the voice of the seventh angel
when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be
finished." As the seventh seal divides into the seven trumpets,
so again the seventh trumpet vision unfolds itself in the seven
vials of wrath. After the pouring out of the first vial, there fell
a noisome and grievous sore upon the worshippers of the beast,
xvi. 2 (comp. Ex. ix. 10, 11 ; Deut. xxviii 27, 35). The second
vial changes the sea into blood, and all the creatures in it die,
xvi 3 ; this plague is evidently an intensification of that which
followed the sounding of the second trumpet, viii. 8. The third
vial changes the waters of the continent into blood, xvi. 4-7, and
is an intensification of viii. 10, 11. The fourth vial is poured
upon the sun, and men are scorched with fire and great heat, xvi 8,
9, and there is an evident reference to viii 1 2. The fifth vial is
poured upon the seat of the beast, and his kingdom is filled with
darkness, xvi. 10, 11 ; it is similar to Ex. x. 21, 22 (comp. Isa.
xix. 11), and forms a parallel to an earlier stage, viii 13, 14
The sixth is shed upon the Euphrates, and its waters are dried
up, and the way of the kings of the East is prepared, xvi. 12-16.
The seventh angel pours his vial into the air, and brings thunder
and lightnings of unparalleled severity, as well as other signs
of the approach of divine judgments, xvi. 17-21 (comp. Zech.

prophecy. 241
xiv. 4; Josh. x. 11 ; Isa. xxviii. 2-17, xxx. 30, xxxii. 19); the
manifestations after the sounding of the seventh trumpet are
an enhancement, concretization, and progress to the last pre-
hminary judgment on Babylon. But the pecuhar contents of
the seventh vial consist in this as httle as the appearances after
the sounding of the trumpet were its pecuhar contents ; still it is
said, "It is done!" xvi. 17 (comp. xxi. 6): "Babylon came in
remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the wine of
the fierceness of His wrath," xvi. 19. Still the seventh vial
vision represents only symbolically what is given in the immediate
sequel, mainly in the actual fall of Babylon. Thus we may say
that all which follows until the advent is the contents of the
seventh wrath vial ; the seven wrath vials are again the contents
of the seventh trumpet, and the seven trumpets are the contents
of the seventh seal. Therefore the book sealed with seven seals,
which God held in His right hand, and which the Lamb took and
opened, v. 1, 7, vi. 1, etc., contains seal, trumpet, and vial visions,
or the whole preliminary judgments of God upon the world.
The question arises, what is the general meaning of these
visions ? The subjects as well as the " wrath," for example, xv. 1,
xvi. 1, the "judgments," xv. 4, and the righteous judgments,
xvi. 5, leave no doubt concerning their character as the avenging
judgments of God. On the other hand, it follows from the words
of the victors, xv. 3, 4, as well as from the repeated remark, that
notwithstanding the plagues, men did not repent, but blasphemed
God, ix. 19-21, xvi. 9, 11, 21, that these plagues designed the
conversion of the world. It is therefore as great an error to
describe the contents of the entire visions as punitive or portentous,
as it is to describe the contents of the seal and trumpet visions as
more distant and nearer portents ; and, on the other hand, the con
tents of the vial visions as pure penalty. Rather the whole, the seal,
trumpet, and vial visions, as vi. 17 especially shows, do contain
the avenging judgments of God, but only in the sense of warning,
threatening, and alarming portents, prehminaries, and preparations
for the great day of the divine wrath, designed for the deliverance
of the world from destruction, through which men might have
repented, but by which they were hardened (comp. iii. 1 0). Only
on this supposition can the interpretation of the avenging justice
of God be applied both to the cry of the martyrs to be avenged,
vi. 9-11, and to the drying up of the Euphrates, xvi. 12-14, 16.

242 THE doctrine of the apocalypse.
For when God allows outrage upon His saints to go unpunished, it
is a sure sign that His last judgment is approaching, and so far it
is an avenging judgment. The persecution of the faithful is also
mentioned, Matt. xxiv. 9, along with war, hunger, and pestilence,
as a sign of the end, Matt. xxiv. 33. The inner connection is
fully shown in 2 Thess. i 4-10 (comp. also Luke xviii. 1-8;
Phil, i 28). But so also the preparation of the way for the
kings of the East, as well as their assembling in Armageddon, is
a sure sign and direct approach of the final decision, — in the
sense of the author, a divine avenging judgment.
Another question is, whether the seer has given in all the visions
only those things which are yet future, or partly the so-called
vaticinia post eventum. The correspondence between the seal
visions and Matt. xxiv. is certainly undeniable, and therefore the
admission of an outhne scheme is not difficult ; but if it be once
granted that the seer saw Antichrist not only in the future, but
also in the past, in the history of the Roman empire, it would be
very strange if the plagues, for him corresponding with the past,
were not associated with it. The relation of the fifth seal vision to
the persecutions under Nero is then very striking. Further, the
remaining seal visions may, without any violence, be distributed
to the governments of the various Caesars ; and lastly, according
to the usual manner of the seer, it must have been to him in the
highest degree significant that the succession of emperors offered
the filling up of the apocalyptic sign scheme. We, therefore, with
many expositors, understand the rider on the white horse to refer
to the victories and triumphs of the Augustan, and of the earher
times of Tiberius ; the rider on the red horse, to the time when,
especially under Caligula, Palestine became the theatre of the
devastating Arabian war, and also of bloody party feuds, — the
Parthians threatened the borders, and in the chief city of the
world peace was disturbed by intrigues (comp. Hausrath, p. 191);
the rider on the black horse, to the scarcity under Claudius, as it
prevailed in Syria, in Asia, and most terribly in the year 44
throughout the empire (comp. Hausrath, p. 339); the rider on
the pale horse, to the mortality, pestilence, and war which fol
lowed the famine (comp. Hausrath, p. 342) ; the fifth seal vision
to the strangled martyrs under the fifth Caesar, Nero, in the year
64; the sixth, to the most recent past, in which, under Galba, by
the universal shaking of the Roman world, all were filled with

prophecy. 243
alarm ; and, or instead of this, to the earthquake which visited
Asia Minor at that time ; to the horrible portents which, according
to Plin. Ep. vi. 16, 20, Tacit. Hist, i 4, terrified the heathen
world. And thus have we come to the time which the seer, as
a time of pause and breathless expectation, an anxious, sultry
season before the coming storm, represents as silence in heaven
for half an hour (comp. Hausrath in Schenkel's Bibellexikon,
L 156). But if the trumpet and vial visions belong to the future of the
seer, the question arises with regard to them, whether he expected
that future to be exactly in the manner and order in which he
painted it, or whether he poetically represented it in artistic
elaboration of a given scheme. As we have hitherto learned to
know our author, it must a priori be most probable that both
possibilities meet in him. We are led to expect this by the seal
visions ; for, besides the striking coincidence of the same with
the signs of the end announced in Matt, xxiv., the grouping in
four and in three visions — the number four representing rapid
succession and stroke upon stroke, and the number three repre
senting great and decisive occurrences — is not to be mistaken ;
and yet this coincidence and this grouping is to John quite
historical. Similarly must we conceive also of the second and
third series of visions. With perfect justice it is pointed out
how for the trumpet and the vial visions, first the Egyptian
plagues, and then also other earlier events happening, for example,
in Joel's time, have furnished the type ; how, between the four
first trumpets and the four first vials, there exists a parallel, the
first plagues falling upon the land, the second upon the sea, the
third upon inland waters, and the fourth upon the heavenly
bodies ; how the trumpet visions correspond to the seal visions in
the numbers four and three, but that, on the contrary, with the
vial visions, at the quickening of the speed with which the end
hastens on, this distinction falls away; how the seal plagues
strike only the fourth part of the earth and its inhabitants, the
trumpet plagues the third part, the vial plagues all the worshippers
of the beast, and the sea and all that dwell therein ; how, finally,
the first series of plagues concern Christians, Jews, and heathen,
the second Jews and heathen, and the third the heathen only.
But through it all a real regulator is not excluded ; yet neither
with the distant, nearer, and almost present signs of the last.

244 the doctrine of the apocalypse.
divine judgment, nor with the exercise of the patience of the
saints, has the true purpose of the writer been seen. But it can
be recognised with absolute precision by a comparison of the seal
and vial visions (comp. especially, xvi. 10, 12 et seq.). The seer
has clearly distinguished three periods of Antichrist, — that lying
behind him, that in which the personal Antichrist will manifest
himself, and the period between, until the end of the then reigning
sixth, and under the seventh emperor. 'But the preludes of the
last judgment, taking equal steps with the development of Anti
christ, must also graduate themselves into three periods: the
past — seal visions ; until the appearance of Antichrist — trumpet
visions ; the time of the personal Antichrist — vial visions. Thus
is simply explained the — so far as I am aware, elsewhere unex
plained — threefold series of plagues, with their entire design. Dis
crepancy between beheving anticipation and the artistic creation
of what is presented in the trumpet and vial visions, cannot be
ascribed to the seer.
3. The Angel with the Everlasting Gospel.
It is said : " And I saw another angel fly in the midst of
heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach (evayyeXlo-ai) unto
them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred,
and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God and
give glory to Him ; for the hour of His judgment is come : and
worship Him that made heaven and earth, and the sea, and the
fountains of waters," xiv. 6, 7.
In the section on the gospel we have shown in detail that we are to
understand by the term nothing but the proclamation already made
by the prophets of the Old Testament and the New, of the comple
tion of the kingdom of God ; to the former, by His coming in the
flesh, which was still future ; to the latter, by the historical Christ.
When the seer in the spirit sees an angel who has this everlasting
gospel to publish to all the inhabitants of the earth, and when
he expressly exhorts them to conversion because the judgment of
God is near, it is evident that the angel is only an apocalyptic
art device, in a similar manner as the archangel Michael, in the
twelfth chapter, for the publication of this message of glad tidings
is in reahty accomplished by the apostles and other preachers.
Its meaning fully coincides with the words of Matt. xxiv. 14 :

prophecy. 245
" And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the
world for a witness unto all nations, and then shall the end
come." This close harmony, compared with that already seen to
exist between the seal visions and Matt, xxiv., and, moreover, the
position of the vision in the contents of the Apocalypse, do not
permit us to doubt that the seer saw in the publication of
Christianity in ever widening circles, together with warning,
threatening and alarming plagues, the admonishing, alluring, and
friendly signs and preludes of the approaching completion of
things, just as already we have felt ourselves compelled to refer
the seven lamps, the spirit, with the lightnings, and voices, and
thunders, and judgments, iv. 5, to this double side of the prepara
tion for the end.
4. The Saints in the Great Tribulation.
We have recognised as the time of the Apocalypse the period
under the sixth head of the beast, or the sixth emperor, xvii. 10,
the period of the sixth seal, vi. 12 et seq. The first of the three
periods of Antichrist, — namely, until the death of the fifth emperor,
under the sixth and seventh, and under the personal Antichrist,
as well as of the three periods of preparatory judgments, — the
seal, trumpet, and vial visions, belonged to the past, but the
other two to the future of the seer. From this it follows that
neither the fortunes, nor the task, nor the consolations of Chris
tians would be essentially different in the future from what they
had already been. It may therefore be questionable whether,
after a section on the saints and their work, and one on the
churches, there should follow another on the saints in the great
tribulation, and whether it would not have been better to have
presented the whole material either there or here. It may seem
all the more questionable when the seer, in the seven letters
from which we have chiefly drawn the contents of those earlier
sections, has occasionally considered the future (comp. ih. 1 0) ;
while, on the other hand, in the description of Antichrist, xiii.
xvii, the past is included. As, however, the chief contents of
the letters would be httle suited to this place, so a series of state
ments in the later chapters would in these earlier sections have
been omitted. They require special consideration here.
The Christians have thus far been tempted by the devil

246 THE doctrine of the apocalypse.
through persecutions and by false doctrine ; but these temptations'
appear to be frightfully intensified in the visions of the two
beasts, chap. xiii. Is not the ever-increasing might of the God-
opposing empire, xiii. 2, iv. 7 ; the ever growing power of its
enchantment over the mind, xiii. 3, 4 ; the influence and opera
tion of the heathen spirit by magic and divination, xiii. 12, 13;
the direct persecution by imprisonment, oppression, and death,
xiii. 7, 10, xv. 17 (comp. vi. 11, xii. 17, xx. 4), — in a word,
the tribulation, i 9, ii. 9, 10, the great tribulation, vii. 14, the most
dangerous temptation for Christians ? Moreover, our author fore
sees that all the inhabitants of the earth whose names are not
written in the Lamb's book of life will worship the beast, xm. 8.
Another, and hitherto much-controverted question, is how the
seer conceived of the relation of the plagues to Christians ? Since
the sealing, vii. 1-8, follows only the sixth seal vision, Diister
dieck, ut ante, p. 274, does not refer it to the six first plagues,
but only to the vision which succeeds it ; thus he also thinks tha/t,
according to the intention of our author, Christians were not
exempt from the preliminary judgments already executed. Weik
bibl. Theol. p. 601, who affirms that Christians were not generally
affected by the preparatory divine judgments, stands alone in this
opinion : the controversy arises first with the sealing described in
vii. 1-8. That we are not to understand by the 144,000 Chris
tian Jews, but Christians as the true Jews, has been shown in
the section on the churches. Whether, by the image of sealing,
we have to think of the ancient custom- of bearing sacred signs
impressed on the skin, the bearer thereby acknowledging him
self to belong to some god or sanctuary (comp. xiii. 16, xiv. 9, 11,
xvi 2, xix. 20, xx. 4 ; Isa. xliv. 5), or of the custom which placed
the name of the master upon the slave, or of the symbohc signature
of Ezek. ix. 4-6, Ex. xii. 7—13, or of the confirmation of a
document, Esth. viii. 8 (Krenkel, p. 68, finds in the mark on
the forehead a scarcely to be mistaken reference to baptism as the
substitute for the " seal " of circumcision, Rom. iv. 2), may remain
undecided, though I have no doubt that Ezek. ix. 4-6, probably
combined with one or the other, is the foundation passage. What
we are concerned to know is whether, with many expositors, we
are to find the interpretation of the sealing in the thought that
the sealed are to be protected from the coming plagues ; or, with
Dusterdieck, ut ante, p. 280, that by the sealing of those who are

prophecy. 247
the servants of God is meant the unchangeable firmness of their
election (comp. Matt. xxiv. 22-24), which was not to be disturbed
by the " temptation " (comp. iii. 1 0) of the last great " tribulation "
(comp. vii 14). In support of his view, Dusterdieck says that
it would be contrary to New Testament eschatology (comp. Matt.
xxiv. 20-22) if the seahng in the Apocalypse was designed to
shelter the sealed from the approaching visitation, so that they
should not be smitten like unbelievers, and that it would come
especially into conflict with the predictions of the Apocalypse,
which could pnly admonish to patient endurance to the end, and
encourage to ponflict and victory in every temptation and trial
(comp. chap. ii. and hi), on the assumption (comp. vii. 14) that
the servants of God would not be exempt from any of the suffer
ings which would come upon the world. But since God, Matt.
xxiv. 22—24, in) the impending tribulation, exercises a sparing
regard for the elect, the parallel is rather against Diisterdieck's
view. The admonitions and encouragements of our book have a
good sense, even if the tribulations of Christians proceed only
from Antichrist. Also, according to the analogy of ii. 10 (comp.
i 9), we interpret correctly the " tribulation," vii. 14, as temptation
by persecutions ; and when the Lord says to the church in Phila
delphia, " I will also keep thee from the hour of temptation, which
shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the
earth," iii. 10, it surely speaks of the preservation of the Chris
tians from the plagues ; that the locusts hurt only the men who
have not the seal of God on their foreheads, ix. 4, is seen, by a
comparison of xvi. 2 and 10, to be less favourable to Diisterdieck's
view, in that the sealed servants of God cannot be touched by a
plague coming from the bottomless pit, than the circumstance that
they are entirely safe from the trumpet and vial plagues. Moreover,
it would be very surprising if the seer had made use of the Egyptian
plagues without reference to the protection of Israel. The place
in Ezekiel also allows us to expect protection ; and it is unmis-
takeable how, agreeably with the assumption of protection, the
plagues from this time intensify themselves. I therefore decide
against Dusterdieck, and understand the seahng as a symbol of
divine assurance that His servants should not be smitten by the
greater plagues which were yet to come.
How does the task of the Christian present itself in relation to
the second and third phase of Antichrist ? John sees those who

248 THE doctrine of the apocalypse.
" had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and
over his mark, and over the number of his name," xv. 2. He sees
" the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus
and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast,
neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their fore- ¦
heads, nor in their hands," xx. 4 (comp. xii 11, 17, xiv. 4). Thus
they did not cowardly and faithlessly submit to the antichristian
power, with its alluring and terrifying temptations (comp. xxi. 8),
but overcame it, whether in prison or by a martyr's death. But
what does this include? "Here is" — that is (comp. xiii. 18),
here at this place, here belongs, here comes — " the patience and
faith of the saints," xiii 10;" here is the patience of the saints :
here are they that keep the commandments, and the faith of
Jesus," xiv. 12 (comp. i 9, ii. 10, xiii. 2, xix. 12, 17, xx. 4). ' Thus
the patience, and as its protection, faith ; or faith, and as its pro
tection, patience ; or the patience which protects itself in keeping
the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, are the forces
by which the victory of the Christian over Antichrist is conditioned,
— they constitute the task of the Christian against Antichrist.
But upon what does this patience of the saints rest ? What
encourages it, and helps them to remain faithful in the great
tribulation ? It is said, " If any man have an ear, let him hear :
he that leadeth into captivity, let him go into captivity : he that
killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword," xiii 9, 10.
An angel said, " with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast
and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his
hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which
is poured out without mixture into the cup of His indignation;
and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence
of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb : and the
smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever : and they
have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image,
and whosoever receiveth the mark of bis name," xiv. 9-11 (comp.
xi. 18, xviii. 6, 7). In both places it is expressly said that on
account of, or in view of, the severe retribution that threatens
Antichrist for its persecutions, and its adherents for their worship
of the beast, there is patience or faithfulness among Christians, —
that is, Christians, alarmed by the retribution falhng upon Anti
christ, are moved to a stedfast adhesion to Christianity.
But this is more a negative, fear-incentive. The positive motive,

prophecy. 249
consolation, is far more prominent. We pass over here the
reference of xx. 4 to the temptations of Antichrist, and limit our
selves to what immediately belongs to this place. It presents itself
for the most part, and in the fullest detail, in the great episode
between the sixth and the seventh seal visions. Here especially
the servants of God have received divine assurance, symbolized
by the seahng of 144,000 from all the tribes of the children of
Israel, vii. 1—8, that they should be safe from the plagues of the
trumpet and vial visions, as we have shown at length above.
They then venture to console themselves in their trials here with
the prospect which, as victors over Antichrist, xv. 2, awaits them
in heaven, vii 9-17, xiv. 13 (comp. vi. 9-11). Since we have
in various earlier sections already solved several questions sug
gested in these places, we occupy ourselves here with but one —
what is presented in them for the consolation of the Christian ?
Those " who have washed their robes, and made them white in
the blood of the Lamb," — that is, who, through Him who died
for them on the cross, have freed themselves from their sins, and
have become holy, vii 14 : " the dead who die in the Lord;" those
who enter into fellowship with Christ, and continue in the same
until death, xiv. 13 (comp. ii. 10), described in the common
expression ef our book as those who " overcome," — are " blessed
from henceforth," though not from the present of the seer, or the
vision, nor " because the glorious end which the perdition of the
enemy and the perfect blessedness of all behevers will bring is
immediately at hand," — for the following sentence does not agree
with this : the emphasis also hes on the contrast with the fore
going perdition of the worshippers of the beast, — but from the
moment of death, immediately on their departure, because they
do not, like other men, enter into the death state of the grave,
but into the state of blessedness in heaven, xiv. 13. Hoekstra,
indeed, with some other expositors, holds it to be most probable
that in such descriptions as vii. 9— 17, xiv. 1—5, xv. 2— 4, xix.
14, the writer anticipates, and that he may have been compelled
to it by the arrangement of his book, since here he can have
nothing to do with the actual dead; and that he explains this
himself when, in the description of the glory of these sleepers, he
uses the future, vii. 1 5-1 7, as also he permits to appear the souls
of those who were not yet dead, vii. 14, xv. 2 (comp. xx. 4).
And certainly we do not see how the passages referred to can be

250 the doctrine of the apocalypse.
regarded otherwise than as anticipatory ; only we do not so under
stand the anticipation as if the seer described beforehand what is
only in the final state, but what in that state is really anticipated
by the heavenly state, or what will occur for those who are still
living here. Hoekstra, p. 383, adds that the writer appears to
have conceived of the state of the souls of the faithful as a
naturally blessed rest (comp. xiv. 13, vi. 11); but one need not
be much versed in the Scriptures in order to know that the death
state, in tbe sense of existence in hades, and happiness are,
with a biblical author, two irreconcilable things. We desire to
conceive of heaven and the heavenly state as it is in the repre
sentation of the author, and we know that, with him, deceased
Christians are certainly dead, — some slain and killed, — and that
they shall be made alive again; but they, or rather their souls,
are not in hades, but in heaven, — -not in the hidden lower, but
in the hidden upper reality. They have now salvation, — that is,
the essentials of deliverance from sin and death, — which God,
through Christ, has imparted to Christians, as imphed in their
grateful ascription of the same to God' and Christ, vii 10. But
this salvation or blessedness in heaven has a negative and a
positive side. On the positive side it consists in freedom from
the sufferings of the earthly life. They come out of the great
tribulation, vii. 14; they rest from their labour, xiv. 13, vi. 11
(comp. ii. 2, 3) ; they "hunger no more, neither thirst any more,
neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat : and God shall
wipe away all tears from their eyes," vii. 16, 17 (comp. Isa. xhx,
10, xxv. 8). But while Christians in death leave their sufferings
behind them, — and here we come to the positive side of their
heavenly happiness, — " their works follow them." Not the reward
of their works ; still less do their works follow them to judgment
to secure their justification ; but " their works," that is, what con
stitutes them Christians, their Christian nature, which subjectively
makes them fit for objective blessedness, xiv. 13 (comp. ih. 4).
It appears also as a positive element of this blessedness, that
Christians have palms in their hands, vii. 10. The symbol is
certainly not, as Ewald says, from the Olympian games ; for, as
Hengstenberg correctly remarks, what follows treats not of victory,
but of salvation, and is drawn from the feast of Tabernacles, the
harvest festival, and joyful thanksgiving of Israel (comp. Lev,
xxiii. 40; Deut. xvi 14, 15; 2 Mace. x. 7") : and, as the same

prophecy. 251
expositor observes, there is probably in vii. 15 an allusion to the
tabernacle, in vii. 16 to the trials of the wilderness, in vii. 17
to the scarcity of water; we recognise in the entire picture a
heavenly feast of Tabernacles, and Christians, with trials overcome,
are in a state of festive joy. Further, they are " clothed in white
robes," vii. 9, vi. 11 (comp. ih. 45) ; as here they became sanctified,
or saints, so they are recognised and honoured as such in heaven.
They stand before " the throne of God and the Lamb," vii. 9 ;
they are before " the throne of God, and serve Him day and night
in His temple," vii. 15. Thus their activity is in the service
already carried on by them during the earthly life, the divine
service, now freed from earthly limitations, or more definitely the
priestly service, the uninterrupted adoration of God. " And He
that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them," vii. 1 5 (comp.
xxi. 3 ; Lev. xxvi. 1 1 ; Isa. iv. 5 ; Ezek. xxxvii. 2 7). God,
enthroned in glory, will be immediately -and personally present
with them; the divine Shechinah will no longer be veiled in
pillar of cloud or fire. " The Lamb, which is in the midst of the
throne, shall feed them, and shaU lead them unto living fountains
of waters," vii. 1 7 (comp. Isa. xlix. 10; Ps. xxiii 2). Thus as by
Christ, their atoning mediator, — for this is imphed by " in the
midst of the throne," — they were led and protected, and crowned
with eternal life here, so yonder there will be leading and pro
tection, only more direct ; and the enjoyment of eternal hfe,
but more complete. We therefore find our statements, in the
section on the saints and their work, with respect to their expec
tations, to be confirmed, — namely, that the heavenly promises
would add nothing essentially new to those already available for
the earthly Christian life. It is evident that the promise of
deliverance from tribulation, rest from labour, cessation of suffer
ing, as well as perpetual joy after trial overcome, belong only to
heaven. But otherwise the contents of heavenly blessedness are
distinguished from those of the promises in the letters only in
particular symbolic features, and it is still in nature the same.
The Christian has this blessedness at the moment of his becoming
a Christian ; but what he possesses and does, and is here in con
flict and growth, amidst the discrepancy of his real nature with its
manifestation in his life, and still more with the conduct of the
world, he possesses, and does, and is there, in rest and realization,
— not, indeed, in visible, but in a real ideal harmony of the sub-

252 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
jective and the objective, of the nature and the appearance, of
the inner and the outer, of the estimate and the result. I say
expressly, not in visible ideal harmony; for when we shah find also
that the preliminaries, as well as the perfect realization, both in
the thousand years' reign and in the new world, add nothing
essentially new to the heavenly promises ; so the fifth seal vision,
not only with its question, how long ? and its command to rest for
a little season until the numbers should be fulfilled, but also with
its souls of the slain under the altar, in distinction from " the
souls of them that were beheaded," who live, or are partakers of
the first resurrection, as well as with its " rest," in distinction from
" reigning with Christ," xx. 4-6, points distinctly and expressly
to this, that to the state in heaven there will yet foUow a higher
and highest.
This is the place for the examination of a vision which in its
meaning is for Christians in the great tribulation neither properly
admonitory nor consolatory, but, under the idea of exaltation,
partakes of both. I mean the vision contained in xiv. 1-5.
That we are to look for Mount Zion in heaven, or to regard it
as indicated by the connection as a special local symbol of heaven,
and to conceive of the 144,000 as identical with the harpers and
singers, has been shown in the section on heaven ; and that we
are to understand them as symbolizing neither Jewish nor Gen
tile Christians, but Christians generally, as the true Israel, or the
chosen people of God, has been pointed out in the section on the
churches. And since the "first-fruits" have been explained in
the section on the saints and their works to be the designation
of Christians as the divinely-consecrated or sanctified, closely
allied to the Old Testament kingly priesthood, there remains to us
here only to fix the meaning of the vision as a whole. This
presents itself on a comparison with the chapter immediately
preceding. John has seen how the first beast ascended out of the
sea, how it manifested its enmity to God, and how the world
wondered after it ; he has seen how the other beast arose from
the earth, and operating with devihsh temptations, drew the world
after it ; and then his prophetic eye turns from the world and its
antichristian state. Now he sees — not as Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 613,
supposes — the Messiah at the central point of the Old Testament
theocracy, the 144,000 assembled around Him, with whom He is
going forth to the last conflict ; but the hill of Zion, the sublime

PROPHECY. 253
height, the region of salvation where God's dwelling is, in contrast
with the sea and the earth, or with this lower world ; the Lamb
in contrast with the two beasts, and in contrast with the inhabit
ants of the earth who worship the beast, and have his mark on
their foreheads and their hands; the 144,000, the elect host, as
Israel, a people of God who have the name of God and the
Lamb on their foreheads, who are consecrated to God and Christ,
who are His peculiar people, and offer to Him priestly service
(comp. iii. 12). And what does the seer hear? While things
are 'going in the world so dreadfully, the chosen host sing — loud
as many, waters and -great thunders, sweet as the voice of harpers,
neither silenced nor subdued by alarm and anxiety, nor crying in
suffering and distress — "before the throne and before the four
living creatures and the elders ; " that is, not, as Hoekstra, p. 3 74,
thinks, to do homage to God and the saints (to the living
creatures also ?), but there, where the ideal reality is, they sing
a new song, or a song which is old but yet new, the song of
Moses and the Lamb (comp xv. 3), the grateful song of deliver
ance, which beside them no man is able to learn, because he has
not experienced it in himself (comp. ii 1 7, xix. 1 2). Even in this
festive, priestly song, this real lyric in the midst of the proceed
ings of Antichrist, is seen the exaltation of the chosen host
above the conflict and the strife. -But this exaltation springs
from their nature and its activities. Ideally seen in heaven, or
from heaven (comp. xii. 11 with ver. 10), they have, in the
most marked contrast to the world with its fornications, or
idolatrous worship and service of sin (comp, section on the earth
and its inhabitants), not defiled themselves with women ; that is,
in the strongest and fullest sense, they have not committed for
nication, have not been unfaithful to God ; they have not allowed
themselves to be tempted by the world, and have not sinned,
" for they are virgins ; " that is, what they are according to their
nature as Christians, pure, holy, chaste, has in their lives simply
perfected itself in gradual development, or in the particular case
maintained itself. Certainly many expositors take the words just
explained in a pecuhar sense, and determine the representation of
the seer to be, that perfect abstinence from sexual intercourse
belongs to the distinguished sanctity of the 144,000, and that on
this account they enjoy peculiar blessedness ; which, as Kbsthn, ut
ante,\>. 493, observes, is not merely in the spirit of the Old Testa-

254 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
ment, but (comp. die kolossischen Irrlehrer) is Esseno-Ebionitish
Not for the purpose of escaping " the thought prominent in the
word-sense," and apart from the impossibility of finding in the
Apocalypse any point of connection with Esseno-Ebionitish en-or, I
agree, for the following simple reasons, with the symbohc exposi
tion. The 144,000 are neither distinguished Christians, nor do
they enjoy peculiar happiness ; even on this supposition, it would
be wholly inconceivable that the seer should have imagined
144,000 unmarried Christians, and, according to the literal sense,
Christians of the male sex ; still less could he have regarded as
Christians only those who had not been married. When I do
not, with many expositors, place the meaning of these figurative
expressions in abstinence from the uncleanness associated with
idol-worship, or find in continence an example of all the virtues,
but agree, with Baur, ut ante, p. 225, who declares it to be at
least doubtful whether the unmarried state is not probably a
biblical expression for being spotless, the state of moral purity,
it is simply on account of the all-dominating contrast to the
world in its antichristian spirit ; and I find that John has spoken
of the idolatry and the sin of the world as fornication, with
sufficient frequency, and strength, and clearness, to enable us to
see in it the true interpretation of this imagery. It is to be
observed that, as it seems to me, the true sense more decidedly
presents itself if we begin, not with the first, but with the second
member of the sentence — " they are virgins," which is evidently
symbolic. The proof would then be, not that they have abstained
from fornication, but that they " were not defiled with women ; "
because of the second definite member, the first has taken a
rather indefinite form ; by the second the first is explained.
" These are they " — so with emphasis begins in the first sen
tence the description of the exaltation of the 144,000: "these
are they," continues the second sentence, " which follow the
Lamb whithersoever He goeth," not merely in suffering and death
on earth, nor merely to the blessed reward in heaven, but they
are everywhere the constant companions or disciples of the Lord,
whether He goes to the cross or to the crown. " These," — for so
again the third sentence emphasizes the statement, — " these were
redeemed from among men, being the first-fruits unto God and to
the Lamb," — that is, they are delivered from fellowship with the
world through Christ ; the first-fruits of humanity consecrated to

PROPHECY. 255
God and Christ. " And in their mouths was found no guile,"
that is, — the i/revSo? is the antithesis -of dXrjdivo's and dXrjdeia
(comp. xxi. 8, 27, xxii 15, also ii. 2, 20, hi. 9, xiii. 11, 12,
xix. 20), as fornication is the antithesis of purity or holiness, — in
contrast with the lies and frauds of the world, or the God-opposing
nature of the world, they have shown themselves true in thought
and word, in theory and practice, thus in this respect sinless ;
" for they are without fault," — that is, therein is completed, or
realized only in time, what, apart from time, they are according
to their nature and idea ; they are made spotless, perfectly right
eous. The whole picture has its parallel, not in vii. 9, 10, where
the design of consolation decidedly prevails, and just as little in
other places where there is the obvious purpose of admonition ;
but in xii. 10, 11, where the triumph of the faithful over Satan
is as ideally anticipated as the protection of the faithful amidst
the temptations of Antichrist is in this representation ; while in
vii 9, 10 they are really in heaven, they are in xiv. 1-5 there
ideally. Finally, the passage xv. 2-4 belongs to this place. As the
words themselves show, and as the connection demands, we must
in this scene put emphasis, not on the state of Christians, but
upon their words. Evidently the seer aims to intensify the
picture of the obstinacy and impenitency of the world, which he
represents in the course of the vial visions, and therefore, at the
commencement, calls up the expectation of a different issue;
but, on the other side, it is equally clear that he desires to soften
. the impression of the terrible judgments which he is about to
introduce, and therefore announces beforehand the final glorious
results. But through whom can these results be accomphshed ?
Only through those who as men can sympathize with the
plagues, but who at the same time, as Christians, as redeemed,
are dehvered from them, and can understand them in their
divinely intended meaning ; thus through Christians, as victors in
heaven, or in their ideal state. He sees them standing on a sea
of glass mingled with fire, having the harps of God, and they
sing the song of Moses and the Lamb ; that is, Christians above,
after they have overcome all the temptations of Antichrist, look
upon the holy and righteous judgments of God, or His works and
ways with the world, the contents of the plague visions, as once
Israel looked upon the plagues of Egypt and the Red Sea, — in-

256 * THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
deed, in these visions the Egyptian plagues frequently furnish
the type, — they sing the song of the deliverance of their persons,
the song of salvation, as the children of Israel once sung it,
Ex. xv., in its Christian fulfilment. Christian salvation is essen
tially that of the Old Testament, the completion once prepared but
now begun. According to Hoekstra, p. 380, it is, moreover, the
song which Moses and the Lamb first sung, and their foUowers
have learned. But it is not now shared by, but apphed to the
heathen ; it is the grateful adoring hope that the judgments of
God will accomplish their object, and all the heathen be converted
to Him. The tendency of this scene is neither admonition, con
solation, nor exaltation, but it presents, as it were by the way,
a supplement to xiv. 1—3, especially to xiv. 2, 3, and enables us
to recognise the Christian view of the judgments of God on the
world as one which, while understanding, admiring, and glorifying
Him, lovingly desires and hopes for its salvation.
5. The Holy City in the Forty-two Months.
Every exposition of chap. xi. which understands by the " holy
city," ver. 2, or the " great city," ver. 8, the secularized church, is
wrecked by the statement of ver. 8, " where also our Lord was
crucified," as it is also by the contents of ver. 13 ; for a city, the
tenth part of which is destroyed by an earthquake which slays
7000 persons, can only be a real city; and the real city, where
the Lord of the 'two witnesses was crucified, can only be
Jerusalem. At the same time, however, the exposition which
in the holy and great city finds Jerusalem in a merely local
sense, cannot, to say nothing of other considerations, be main
tained before vers. 1, 2. The type for these two verses is
Ezek. xl. 1-3 (comp. Zech. i 16, ii. 1, 2 ; Amos vii. 7-9; Isa.
xxxiv. 1 1) ; but the measuring does not here, as in Ezek. xl. 1-3,
mean making manifest the contents, but, as in Amos vii. 7, Hab.
iv. 6, exception from the destruction which should come upon
the unmeasured. When the seer measures "the temple of God,
and the altar, and them that worship therein," that is, the
priests, but leaves out " the court which is without the temple,"
he does not say that only the courts of the Gentiles and Israel
ites should be trodden down of the Romans, and that the
temple and the court of the priests should remain uninjured, or,

prophecy. 257
as the besieged believed, "that the Romans would not be able
to penetrate further than to the boundary which a Gentile, on
pain of death, was forbidden to cross, and that then the Messiah
would appear for their deliverance " (Hausrath in Schenkel's
Bibellexikon, I. p. 161). Is it conceivable that the seer imagines
the Romans entering the city as victors, and possessing the
temple court, and the temple itself remaining free from destruc
tion or desecration for forty-two months, the whole period of the
last tribulation? We may add to this, that the words themselves
show that John cannot have had such an idea. The altar, as we
have seen in the section on heaven, means the altar of burnt-
offering, in distinction from the altar of incense ; but the altar of
burnt-offering did not stand within the edifice of the temple, but
outside in the court of the priests. We may translate ev am&,
" at it," that is, the altar of burnt-offering, or " in it," namely,
in the temple ; and if against the laws of language we do not
directly or indirectly insert, in place of the court of the temple,
the outer court, the word-sense will always exclude only a part
of the court of the consecration, and then the whole court is
abandoned to the Gentiles. The word-sense carries us beyond
itself; the temple, the altar, and they that worship therein, as
well as the court of the temple, must be intended symbolically ;
the court of the temple, as a symbol of those standing without,
not the priestly, but the profane, the non-Christian Jewish people ;
but the temple, the altar, and those worshipping therein, the
priests (comp. the king - priesthood of Christians) as symbols
of the saints, the priestly, the Christian part of this people,
Jewish Christians. But this interpretation would certainly be
denied us, whether it were said, " leave out the court and the
holy city, for they are given to the Gentiles," or, " leave out the
court and the holy city, for the Gentiles shall tread them under
foot forty and two months," in other words, if the court and the
holy city were classed together; but nothing hinders us from
understanding the words, " and the holy city shall they tread,"
as an explanation rather than an amplification of the words,
"the court is given to the Gentiles." According to Luke xxi.
24, we may venture to assume (comp. Dan. ix. 26, 27, xii 7)
that the treading down of Jerusalem by the Gentiles was a
standing eschatological representation and mode of expression;
the seer has given its contents first with a view to the Jewish
R

258 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
Christians in the peculiar form : " the court which is withofit the
temple leave out, and measure it not, for it is given unto the
Gentiles ; " and then he gives the same contents in their statutory,
solemn form, "the holy city shall they tread under foot forty
and two months." Can we still understand "the holy city,"
" the great city," to be Jerusalem in a purely local sense ? No,
the city is Jerusalem, but, as frequently elsewhere, it is at the
same time the representative of the Jewish people. (Comp. Matt.
xxi. 5, xxiii 3 7 ; we may think also of Antichrist as equally
representing both Nero and the empire.)
What does chap. xi. say to us of Jerusalem in relation to th
Jewish people ? The true people of God, the servants of God, the
saints, are, to our author, Christians whether they come from
Jews or Gentiles; the believing Jews are to him, in contrast
with the unbelieving, the temple of God, and the priests serving
in it contrast with the court without the temple. Of those Jews
who hate, malign, and indirectly persecute (comp. ii. 9, 10) the
true Messiah and His followers, he says : " they say they are
Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan," ii. 9 (comp.,
as a contrast, Num. xvi. 3, xx. 4, xxxi 1 6). " I will make them
of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not,
but do lie," iii 9. But the chapter treats of the Jewish people
according as a small part of it was faithful to Jesus, and a far
greater part rejected Him, and continued unbelieving. The seer
was to "measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them
that worship therein ; " that is, as Christians generally were pro
tected from the trumpet and vial plagues, vii 1—4, so should
Christians out of Israel be protected from the judgments which
were to come upon Jerusalem and the Jewish people (comp.
Matt. xxiv. 15-18). On the contrary, the court without the
temple was to be "left out," for it was given to the Gentiles, and
they should tread the holy city under foot forty and two months;
that is, the judgments already predicted by Daniel will burst in
upon the non-Christian, unbelieving Jewish people. Whether
John, by its being given to the Gentiles, and their treading it
under foot, had in mind the destruction of Jerusalem, the words
do not expressly say ; correctly interpreted, the measuring of the
temple is not against it, and just as httle, that later the city
appears as still existing. When we look at 2 Thess. ii. 4, it is
significant that, in connection with the presence of the beast in

PROPHECY. 259
Jerusalem, xi. 7, his sitting in the temple is not mentioned ; and
since John, by its being left to the Gentiles, and its being
trodden under foot by them, cannot have meant a mere desecra
tion or damage, we must say that he expected its destruction,
and that of the temple, though not giving it prominence, and still
less describing it ; but with the future of Israel before him, he
implies it in the old prophetic and sacred expressions for the con
quest, ill-treatment, and spoliation of "the holy city." But in
a similar manner as God caused the publication of the gospel
to accompany the plagues which fell upon the heathen, so for
Jerusalem or the Jewish people He associates with judgments the
call to repentance. The Lord will give His two witnesses, that
they may prophesy for 1260 days clothed in sackcloth. When
the seer speaks of the two witnesses of Christ, he wishes it to be
understood that he intended definite personalities known to his
readers. But who were they? The expression, "their Lord,"
proves as little in favour of the disciples of Jesus, who might
still live in Jerusalem, as the words, " my two witnesses ; " and
the description of their activities and their fate is against this
idea. It reminds us rather of Moses and Elias. From the
report given of the Transfiguration by the synoptical Gospels, for
example, Matt. xvii. 1—13, as well as from further statements
(comp. Ewald, ut ante, p. 293), we know that one or two of the
great prophets of the Old Testament, especially those just
mentioned, — the law and the prophets, or the whole Old Testa
ment in its two poles, — were expected to appear in actual
personalities, as precursors and heralds of the Messiah. This is
the original type pf the two witnesses. But it is also said of
them, according to Zech. iv. 2-14, hi. 1-5, "These are the two
anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth ; " that
is, they will, like Joshua and Zerubbabel, made true prophets by
the Spirit of God, serve the Almighty, and He will protect and
honour them as His. By the two witnesses John thus under
stands two personalities, in whom, as their designation and destiny
show, — corresponding also to the culmination of all things already
in existence, which is to happen before the end, — the two
testimonies of God, law and prophecy, which were in vain for
Israel before Christ, will once more, and in the highest form,
personally appear ; in whom also, at the same time, their ful
filment, which appeared in unison in Christ Himself, according

260 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
to their two sides, or, so to say, polarized, consequently the
Christian testimony, the apostolate and prophecy, will come into
view in a doubly intensified representation, which as a new
Moses and Ehas, and as a new Joshua and Zerubbabel, will
prepare the Jewish people for the coming of the Lord in glory,
heralding His approach, testifying of Him, and labouring for Him
in word and deed. These two witnesses will prophesy, clothed in
sackcloth, 1260 days, equal to forty-two months, the time during
which the Gentiles tread down the holy city (comp. Jer. iv. 8 ;
Jonah iii. 5) ; that is, they will publish the gospel to the Jewish
nation for their repentance (comp. xiv. 6). " If any man will
hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth and devoureth
their enemies," — probably a combination of Jer. v. 14 and
2 Kings i 10, 11 (comp. Sir. xlviii. 1-3), "If any man will
hurt them, he must in this manner be killed," that is, in the
same manner in which he thought to have killed them. "These
have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their
prophecy," after 1 Kings xvii 1 ; and we may notice the agree
ment of the three and a half years with those of Elias (Jas. v.
17), and the forty-two months with the period mentioned by
Daniel. " And they have power over waters to turn them into
blood," according to Ex. vii. 1 9, " and to smite the earth with all
plagues as often as they will," after the plagues with which
Moses smote the Egyptians, Ex. viii et seq., and as it is said
later, ver. 10, "these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on
the earth." " When they shall have finished their testimony, the
beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit," that is, Antichrist
in the form of Nero, " shall make war against them, and shall
overcome them, and kill them," as, indeed, it is generally " given
unto him to make war with the saints to overcome them," xiii 7.
Where will that happen ? From what follows, it will take place
in Jerusalem. Thus Antichrist comes to Jerusalem, and dwells
there. One feels tempted to pursue the subject further, and to
think of the last manifestation of Antichrist, namely, the works
of the false prophet in Jerusalem, and the image of the beast in
the temple (comp. 2 Thess. ii. 3, 4) ; but in view of vers. 1, 2, we
adhere to what is expressly said. As the witnesses appear in
suffering there as imitators of Christ, as Jesus is slain by the
beast as the Roman empire; so they are put to death by the
beast as Nero, and this likeness goes still further. "The dead

PROPHECY. 261
bodies of the witnesses lie in the streets of the great city, which
spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was
crucified." In relation to the Gentiles, Jerusalem is " the holy
city," but to the witnesses, " the great city," in a similar manner
as Babylon in xvii. 18, analogous also to the temple and the
court, vers. 1, 2, as a statement of its profanation and fall; perhaps
also as an indication that the greatness is the worthless reason
of its godless security, and haughty rejection of Christ and His
witnesses. " Sodom and Egypt " (comp. Isa. i 9-1 1 ; Ezek. xvi.
46-49 ; Jer. xxiii. 14) denote perfect enmity against the true
God, His servants, and His people, the radically erroneous
position of the Jewish nation. That the Lord of the two
witnesses was crucified in Jerusalem, is naturally not a merely
local reference ; it is said therein that the antichristian enmity of
the great city is always the same ; that the same hatred which
once brought the Lord to the cross, now slays His witnesses, and
that because they are His; or that Jerusalem and the Jewish
nation stand in the same relation to the beast, and that, as in the
crucifixion of Jesus, so also the death of the two witnesses will
be shared when the God-opposing, worldly power in it gets the
upper hand, and comes to the hght. — " They of the people, and
kindred, and tongues, and nations shall see their dead bodies
three days and a half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to
be put in graves " (comp. Isa. hii. 9). The three and a half days
refer, without doubt, first to the three and a half years during
which the witnesses testify; they are the climax, the quint
essence, the sum of the great tribulation period; but if, in the
slaying of the witnesses, there is an unmistakeable analogy with
the death of Christ, so we shall find in the three and a half days,
though with a certain intensification, an allusion to the time be
tween the death and resurrection of the Lord ; and though the
intensification of the shame — the lying in the street, and the
denial of burial — stands in the foreground, yet, as Ewald, ut ante,
p. 229, remarks, " according to the sense of the entire prediction,
all that is terrible rises here to a point which it did not reach at
the crucifixion." "And they that dwell upon the earth," evi
dently the same as "they of the people, and kindreds, and
tongues, and nations," not only the heathen, though prepon
derating, but the world which worships the beast, ver. 7, Jews
and Gentiles, " rejoice over them and make merry, and shall send

262 THE DOCTRINE -OF THE APOCALYPSE.
gifts one to another," as on joyful occasions they were accustomed
to do (comp. Neh. viii 10-12; Esth. ix. 19-23), "because these
two prophets tormented them that dwell on the earth;" thus
also the world rejoiced at the death of Christ. But " after three
days and a half the Spirit of hfe from God entered into them"
(comp. Gen. ii. 7), "and they stood upon their feet" (compi
2 Kings xiii. 21 ; Ezek. xxxvii' 10) ; that is, they rose from the
dead as Christ arose ; " and great fear fell upon them which saw
them. And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto
them, ' Come up hither.' And they ascended up to heaven in a
cloud ; and their enemies beheld them." The ascension to heaven
reminds us directly of that of Elijah, 2 Kings ii. 11; but the
seer, as the expression "in a cloud" (comp. Dan. vii. 13;
Acts i 9) shows, had also in his eye the ascension of Christ,
By their being seen of their enemies, he points but, as in their
resurrection, only in stronger terms by the express mention of
their " enemies," the distinction, that what in the case of Jesus
seen by His followers, and by them made known to others,
happened here before all the world, and directly before the eyes
of their foes ; that thus the power of God verifies itself, as with
Christ, in the glorification of His servants after ignominy and
death, but in a much more striking and convincing manner.
"And the same hour," in which the two witnesses went, to
heaven, "was there a great earthquake" (comp. Matt, xxvii. 52,
xxviii. 2), " and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earth?
quake were slain of men seven thousand," — perhaps in antithetic
play upon 1 Kings xix. 18 : — "and the remnant were affrighted,
and gave glory to the God of heaven." God, in His miraculous
attestation of His two servants, thus sends upon Jerusalem a
similar but milder plague than that which fell on Babylon
(comp. xvi. 19, also vi. 8, ix. 18), and thereby the city, the
Jewish people in the gross, finally becomes converted. When
Weiss, with whom in other respects I have come to an inde
pendent agreement in the conception of xi. 1, 2, says, libl.
Theol. p. 602, " The seer ventures no longer, with Paul, to hope
for the final general conversion of Israel, but that, according
to the ancient prediction of Isa. i 9, x. 22, 23 (comp. Rom.
ix. 27-29), a remnant shall be saved," much rather, I think,
does John see that ancient prophecy fulfilled in the Jewish
Christian church intended in xi. 1 ; on the other hand, in xi. 13,

PROPHECY. 263
he intends essentially the same which is predicted in Rom.
xi. 25-27.
If we gather up the various particulars, the result is this : the
seer represents the Jews who brought the Lord to the cross
as exceedingly obdurate; the fate of the Christ-murdering city,
which, according to ancient prediction, was to be trodden down
of the Gentiles during the time ordained by God, apart from
individual conversions which will take place here and there, hi.
9, just as httle as the wonderful works of the two prophets,
or witnesses of Christ, expected in the last time, will of itself
lead to conversion ; but the wonderful history of the sufferings
and the glory of Christ, the intensified and more violent fate of
the two witnesses, in union with a relatively modified plague,
will at last so influence the Jewish people, who have been pre
pared by judgments and warnings, that they will cease to be,
contrary to their ideal, of the world, and will become a Christian
people, a true Israel, and Jerusalem a truly holy city. That the
Apostle Paul possibly regarded the fulness — that is, not, as
to my astonishment I find that every expositor under Tubingen
influence continually misinterprets, as meaning the whole number
of the heathen, but as with absolute certainty I affirm, the ful
ness of the ' divinely-ordained number which, before Israel's con
version, shall beheve — as being greater than the seer represents ;
further, that he has possibly represented the course of the con
version of Israel differently, — may be the more readily admitted,
since the circumstances under which Rom. xi. and Rev. xi were
written make such a difference almost necessary beforehand.
But how any one can quote the eleventh chapter of this book in
proof of the Particularism of the seer against the Universahsm of
the apostle — and yet Baur does this, ut ante, pp. 211—13 ; and, on
the other hand, how any one can say of Paul, that, in opposition
to the seer, he contemplated with equanimity the extinction of
Israel among mankind (comp. Schenkel's Bibellexikon, I. p. 162), —
must appear to a candid reader of Rom. xi. as a sheer curiosity,
or a remarkable proof of the power of prejudice.
6. The Impenitence of Men.
" And all the world wondered after the beast. And they wor
shipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast : and they

264 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast ? who
is able to make war with him ? " xih. 3, 4. " All that dwell
upon the earth shall worship him," — the beast in person, — " whose
names are not written in the book of hfe of the Lamb slain from
the foundation of the world," xiii 8. The other beast " causeth
the earth, and them which dwell therein, to worship the first
beast," xih. 12. The same "deceiveth them that dwell on the
earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do
in the sight of the beast, saying to them that dwell on the earth,
that they should make an image to the beast," xiii 14. Indeed,
" he caused all, both small and great, both rich and poor, free and
bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads,"
xih. 16. Great Babylon " made all nations drink of the wine of
the wrath of her fornication," xiv. 8. "And the nations were
angry," xi. 18. Thus the earth, the inhabitants of the earth, the
men, the heathen, as a whole and in the gross, have allowed them
selves to be led astray — have become antichristian, and pursue
an antichristian course. t
Therefore follows " the hour of temptation which shall come
upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth," iii 10.
God visits them with the growing judgments of the seal, trumpet,
and vial visions, but at the same time publishes, in ever-widening,
circles, among the inhabitants of the earth, the everlasting gospel,
that they may be led to repentance, xiv. 6, 7.
What will be the result? According to the vision of the sixth
seal, " the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men,
and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bond man,
and every free man, hid themselves in the dens, and in the rocks
of the mountains ; and said to the rocks and the mountains, Pall
on us, and hide us from the face of Him that sitteth on the throne,
and from the wrath of the Lamb : for the great day of His wrath
is come ; and who shall be able to stand ? " vi. 15—17. And at
the beginning of the vial visions the victors on the sea of glass
sing, " Great and marvellous are Thy works, Lord God Almighty ;
just and true are Thy ways, Thou King of nations. Who shall
not fear Thee, 0 Lord, and glorify Thy name ? for Thou only art
holy: for all nations shall come and worship before Thee, for
Thy judgments are manifest," xv. 3, 4. But do men repent?
No. After the judgments of the seals and trumpets have fallen,
and slain a large proportion of them, it is said, " and the rest of

PROPHECY. 265
the men, who were not killed by these plagues, yet repented not
of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils,
and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood ;
which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk. Neither repented they
of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornications,
nor of their thefts," ix. 20, 21. And is it better when the plagues
of the highest degree have fallen ? By those of the fourth trumpet,
men " were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name
of God, which hath power over these plagues : and they repented
not to give Him glory," xvi. 9. By the pouring out of the fifth
vial of wrath " upon the seat of the beast, his kingdom was full
of darkness ; and they gnawed their tongues for pain, and blas
phemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores,
and repented not of their deeds," xvi. 10, 11. Even after the out
pouring of the last wrath vial, men " blasphemed God because of
the plague of the hail ; for the plague thereof was exceeding great,"
xvi. 21.
While the seer thus expects of the Jews, with the self-evident
exception of those who in truth are not Jews, but are of the
synagogue of Satan, that through God's chastising and persuasive
judgments they will, notwithstanding all resistance, at last as a
people repent, he also expects — possibly, as Weiss conjectures,
on account of a pause in the Gentile mission through the perse
cution of Nero, but more probably as well on account of his
original expectation as his subsequent experience of the heathen
world, and, as far as I can see, in perfect agreement with the
Synoptists and the Apostle Paul — of men in general, the heathen
in the gross; but again, with the exception of those who are
written in the book of hfe, and allow themselves to be redeemed
by God from among men, though considered from the ideal,
we should doubtless expect the opposite, that by all the chas
tening and persuasive judgments of God, even when the same
have reached their highest development, they will not be brought to
repentance. What remains, then, but that God should judge, or
complete His true and righteous judgments, xix. 2, no more for
warning and deterring fear, but for severe and rich retribution ?
xiii. 10, xviii 6, 7, xi 18.

266 the doctrine of the apocalypse.
7. The Fall of Babylon.
The fall of Babylon forms the transition from the preparatory
to the final judgments. For certainly as it constitutes the chief
contents of the seventh wrath vial, xvi. 17-21, and so far belongs,
to the last preliminary judgment, and appears proleptically as a
motive to repentance, xiv. 8, it still cannot be denied that it
was referred by the seer more to the final judgment, chap. xvii.
and xviii, as is shown by the independent description, the
absence of every expression concerning continued obduracy, not
withstanding the event, and the immediate succession of the advent.
If, instead of treating of the fall of Babylon under " the seals, the
trumpets, and the vials," we now speak of it in a separate section,
it will be justified when, in conclusion, we quote the remark of
Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 506, "as once the fall of Jerusalem was the
signal for the closing catastrophe, so it is now, when at the
beginning of the last period of tribulation stands the fall of the
chief city of the world."
That Babylon, the imperial city of Rome, as the chief city
and capital, the home and origin, the local representation of
Antichrist, will fall, and, indeed, for the reivard of her sins will
certainly, suddenly, and awfully perish, the seer can hardly proclaim
often and strongly enough. " Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that
great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the
wrath of her fornication," xiv. 8. So speaks an angel of her
coming doom as already past. The last vial plague " rends the
great city into three parts, the cities of the nations fall, and great
Babylon comes into remembrance before God, to give unto her
the cup of the wine of the fierceness of His wrath," xvi. 19.
After that, John says of one of the seven vial angels, " he carried
me away in the spirit into the wilderness," and said, " I will show
unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many
waters ; with whom the kings of the earth have committed forni
cation, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk
with the wine of her fornication," xvii. 1-3. He sees " another
angel come down from heaven, having great power ; and the earth
was hghtened with his glory. And he cried mightily with a
strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is
become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit,
and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. For all nations have

prophecy. 267
drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings
of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the mer
chants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her
delicacies," xviii. 1-3. John heard " another voice from heaven,
saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of
her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues: for her sins
have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.
Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her
double, according to her works : in the cup which she hath filled,
fill to her double. How much she hath glorified herself and
lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her : for she
saith in her heart, I sit as a queen, and am no widow, and shall
see no sorrow. Therefore shall her plagues come in one day,
death, and mourning, and famine ; and she shall be utterly burned
with fire : for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her," xviii. 4-8.
And again, " A mighty angel took up a stone hke a great mill
stone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall
that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no
more at all. And the voice of harpers, and musicians, and of
pipers, and trumpeters, shall be heard no more at all in thee ; and
no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he be, shall be found any more in
thee ; and the sound of a millstone shall be heard no more at all
in thee ; and the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in
thee ; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be
heard no more at all in thee : for thy merchants were the great
men of the earth ; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.
And in her was found the blood of prophets and of saints, and of
all that were slain upon the earth," xviii 21-24.
The manner in which judgment will come upon Babylon is
shown by the angel in chap. xvii. The waters which John had
seen, xvii. 1, and upon which the woman sits, are " peoples, and
multitudes, and nations, and tongues," xvii. 15, or the manifoldly
various nations constituting the Roman empire. The ten horns
which he saw, xvii. 3—7, "are ten kings, which have received no
kingdom as yet, but receive power as kings one hour with the
beast," xvii. 12 ; that is, the prefects, governors, commanders, and
rulers over the various provinces, countries, and peoples of the
Roman empire, who, on the appearance of the personal Antichrist,
and by their connection with the same, for a short time made
themselves independent of Rome, and were raised to sovereign

268 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
power in a similar manner, only in a smaller measure, as it hap
pened after Nero's fall. These revolutionary sovereigns have but
one mind,- and give their power and strength unto the beast, xvii
1 3. " For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil His will, and to
agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast," — that is, to pro
claim Antichrist as emperor, and to subject themselves to him as
vassals, — "until the words of God shall be fulfilled," xvii. 17,
" The ten horns and the beast shall hate the whore," — the former,
because Rome will not endure their separation and independence ;
the latter, Nero, because Rome had fallen away from him, and
led to his ruin, — " and shall make her desolate and naked, and
shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire," xvii. 16 (comp. xvii
3, xviii. 2, 6, 8, 18). Thus Antichrist — Nero and his vassals, the
angry governors in the Roman empire — will march against Rome,
and — as the small example of the Vitellian war, and the greater
one of the Neronic conflagration, and the subsequent persecution
of the Christians, had to a certain extent given the type — they
will, in the most terrible manner, ill-use, plunder, burn, and
utterly destroy the imperial city.
How will this destruction of Rome be regarded on earth and in
Jieaven ? " The kings of the earth, who have committed fornica
tion, and hved dehciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament
for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning, standing
afar off, for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas ! that great
city Babylon, that mighty city ! for in one hour is thy judgment
come. And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn
over her ; for no man buyeth their merchandise any more : the
merchandise of gold, and silver, and precious stones, and of pearls,
and fine hnen, and purple, and silk, and scarlet, and all thyine
wood, and all manner vessels of ivory, and all manner vessels of
most precious wood, and of brass, and iron, and marble, and
cinnamon, and odours, and ointments, and frankincense, and wine,
and oil, and fine flour, and wheat, and beasts, and sheep, and
horses, and chariots, and slaves, and souls of men. And the
fruits that thy soul lusted after are departed from thee, and thou
shalt find them no more at all. The merchants of these things,
which were made rich by her, shall stand afar off for the fear of
her torment, weeping and wailing, and saying, Alas, alas ! that
great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet,
and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls ! For in

PROPHECY. 269
one hour so great riches is come to nought. And every ship
master, and all the company in ships, and sailors, and as many as
trade by sea, stood afar off, and cried, when they saw the smoke
of her burning, saying, What city is hke unto this great city !
And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing,
and saying, Alas, alas ! that great city, wherein were made rich all
that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness ! for in one
hour is she made desolate," xviii. 9-19. So on earth. But in
sharp contrast it is said, " Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye
holy apostles and prophets ; for God hath avenged you on her,"
xviii. 20. "And after these things I heard a great voice of
much people in heaven, saying, Alleluia ; Salvation, and glory,
and henour, and power, unto the Lord our God : for true and
righteous are His judgments ; for He hath judged the great whore,
which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged
the blood of His servants at her hand. And again they said,
Alleluia. And her smoke rose up for ever and ever," xix. 1-3.
8. The Coming of the Lord.
It is said, " Behold, He cometh with clouds," i 7 (comp. Matt.
xxiv. 30, xxvi. 64). " That which ye have already, hold fast till
I come," ii. 25. " Behold, I come quickly," ih. 11, xxii. 7, 2%
(comp. Matt. xxiv. 33, 34). " Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed
is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked,
and they see his shame," xvi. 15 (comp. Matt. xxiv. 42-51 ;
1 Thess. v. 2 ; 2 Pet iii. 10). "The Spirit and the bride say,
Come. And let him that heareth say, Come!" xxii. 17. "He
which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly : Amen.
Even so, come, Lord Jesus," xxii. 20. There needs no proof that
in all these places the coming of the Lord in the usual sense of
the advent is intended. But in ii. 5, the Lord says to the church
of Ephesus, after He has exhorted it to repentance, " else I will
come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of
his place, except thou repent." To the church in Pergamos He
says, " Repent ; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will
fight against them" — the adherents of the Nicolaitane error —
" with the sword of my mouth," ii. 1 6. To the church in Sardis,
" Remember, therefore, how thou hast received and heard, and
hold fast and repent. If, therefore, thou shalt not watch, I will

270 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I
will come upon thee," ih. 3. To the church of the Laodiceans,
" Behold, I stand at the door, and knock : if any man hear my
voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with
him, and he with me," iii 20. We cannot, without doing violence
to these passages, interpret them in the sense of Christ's second
coming. An unprejudiced comparison of the passages in which
the seer speaks of the coming of the Lord (epxeo-dai and tficew),
shows that he understood any personal revelation or energetic self-
affirmation of the exalted Christ, as a coming of the Lord ; some
times it is preliminary, and refers to individual Christian churches,
or to members of a church ; and sometimes it is final, and relates
to all men ; at one time it is a manifestation mainly of judicial
chastisement, and at another rather of gracious blessing, and only
from the connection can it be decided which of these meanings is
intended in the particular case. We meet here once more with
that peculiarity of our author, which has so often been observed
before, namely, that he describes the beginning and the end of an
action or state by the same terms, because he regards both as
common and equal On account of this view, every personal
energetic interposition of the Lord in the outer or the inner life
of the church or the individual is as much a coming of the Lord
as His second advent will be ; and had there been occasion, he
would doubtless have considered Christ's appearance in the world,
and the beginning of His public hfe, as a coming of the Lord,
because essentially similar to His second coming.
We are now concerned only with the coming of the Lord in
the narrower sense, with His second advent ; and first, we inquire
at what time John expected His final appearance. The Gentiles
shall tread under foot the holy city forty and two months, xi 2.
The two witnesses shall prophesy 1260 days, xi. 3. The woman
is to be nourished in the place prepared for her in the wilderness
for the same period, xii. 6 ; and the same is to happen to her for a
time, and times, and half a time, xii. 14. Power is given to the
beast to continue forty and two months, xih. 5. Twelve hundred
and sixty days are equal to forty-two months, or to three and a
half times, or years ; and thus the measure of the time before the
end, or until the coming of the Lord, is given. It is figurative
time measure ; according to the precedent of Daniel (comp. Dan.
vii. 26, xii 7), — equally misunderstood, — the seer describes by

PROPHECY. 271
these limitations the time before the end, with the enmity of the
world increasing to a climax ; its persecutions of the devout, ever
becoming more insufferable ; the divine plagues reaching their
most terrible development ; the constantly widening pubhcation
of the gospel, with a view to repentance, as a troubled respite
accurately measured by God, and in its continuance proportion
ately short. But when expositors — Hengstenberg, for instance —
deny to this specification of time all historical meaning, they fail
to justify the striking agreement between the historical relations
and the symbolic time specifications of the book. The seer would
not have written, " Behold, I come as a thief," xvi. 1 5 (comp. ih. 3),
if he had fixed to a day the appearance of the Lord ; nor would
he have written, " I come quickly," hi. 11, xxii. 7, xii. 20 ; " which
must shortly come to pass," i. 1, xxii 6 (comp. Dan. viii»26,
xii. 4, iv. 9) ; " the time is at hand," i 3, xxii. 10 ; " the dragon
knoweth that he hath but a short time," xii. 12 ; that the seventh
head " must continue a short space," xvii. 10, — if he had expected
the end in ten years, or even after thousands. The " speedy "
coming of the Lord — undeniable in the face of the doubt and
perplexity respecting it which arose at the beginning of the second
Christian generation, and which crippled the life of the churches
— is the chief occasion of the origin, as well as the chief power
in the consolatory aspect of the book. The author is faithful to
the eschatological principle expressed in the Synoptists and in the
Epistles to the Thessalonians ; time and hour, that is, the definite
point of time of Christ's coming, is known to God only; but Chris
tians, and especially the prophets, do right, and are in duty bound
to observe the signs of the times, and to draw conclusions from
them respecting the nearness of the coming of the Lord. Now
from these signs John had become certain that He would come soon,
and had therein found himself justified in explaining the 3^ years,
the 42 months, the 1260 days of Daniel, at one time in the sense
of 3tj decades, or thereabout, from the ascension of Christ to His
second coming, and at another in applying this period in the
proper sense to the 3-^ years, or near it, of the personal Anti
christ, as it were the concentrated 3^ decades of Antichrist in
general (comp. xi 11).
But how will the Lord come ? The Apocalypse contains a
threefold representation of His advent. It is said, " Behold, He
cometh with clouds ; and every eye shall see Him, and they also

272 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
which pierced Him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because
of Him," i 7. The saying rests upon a union of Dan. vii. 13
and Zech. xii. 10. By the words, " they who have pierced Him,"
we are not to understand the actual murderers of Christ still
living ; and we are forbidden to refer them to the Jews, and the
" kindreds of the earth " to the Gentiles, as Dusterdieck does, by a
double consideration ; first, as the absence of a predicate to " they
also which pierced Him " shows, it is impossible that they and
" the kindreds of the earth " are parallel parts of " every eye ; "
second, that the only general predicate, " shall see Him," would,
by Diisterdieck's exposition, be affirmed of universal man, and then
also of the Jews, but the Gentiles shall mourn because of Him.
On a closer examination of the passage in Zechariah, the convic
tion forces itself upon us, that, applied in its original sense to the
advent, we can understand by the mourning only a penitent
sorrow, and by "they also which pierced Him," and "the kindreds,"
equally the Jewish people (comp. Acts ih. 11-26) ; but gradually
with the widening of the view beyond Israel into the Gentile
world, the subjects of the mourning have become instead of the
Jews, unbelievers, — the murderers of Christ, the kindreds of the
earth, — and from a penitent mourning eV avTm, it has become
a fearful mourning eV ai)Tov (comp. Matt. xxiv. 30). If we thus
understand " they also which pierced Him," and " the kindreds," as
essentially identical, the supposed contradiction between the state
ment of i 7 and other representations of the last things in the
Apocalypse falls away, and we have a new confirmation of the
fact that the author has throughout amalgamated with his thoughts
and descriptions, Old Testament and Jewish Christian expressions
and images. Certainly the position of the passage — the author
brings forward just at the beginning, in a few strong words, the
sum^of the whole book (comp. Amos i. 2), — and the use of it, —
it consists of a quotation — does not leave us in doubt that John
speaks here of the advent in a solemn formula, probably from a
writing much read and generally known ; it is manifestly to him
the Shibboleth of the Christians : — " he cometh " (comp. 1 Cor.
xvi. 22) is only the theme, the concrete exposition of which is
the subject of his prophecy.
The Apocalypse gives another representation of the second
advent in xiv. 14-20. It is based on Joel iii. 17, 18 and Isa.
lxiii. 1-3, and in its first half reminds us of such wprds as Mark

PROPHECY. 273
iv. 26-32 ; Matt. xiii. 30, 39 (comp. ix. 37, 38). We have
shown in the section on the person of Christ, that by Him who
sits on the cloud we are to understand Christ Himself ; and in the
section on heaven, that the altar from which the second angel
came, points to the martyrs crying to be avenged, vi. 9, ix. 13,
xvi. 7 (comp. viii. 3—5) ; and in the section on angels, that by
the fire over which this angel had power, is meant fire chiefly in
its judicial signification, but with an evident allusion to the fire
of the altar, to the avenging judgments of God called forth by
the prayers of the saints, viii 3-5. The city outside of which
the wine-press is trodden, can be no other than Jerusalem ; the
distance of 1600 furlongs to which the blood flowed, up to the
horse bridles, may be referred to the proximate length of Palestine,
as originating in the quaternion, the four corners of the earth.
But little as the writer permits the advent actually to appear in
xiv. 14— 20, just as httle does he give us the concrete form in
which he expected it. Rather in the harvest as well as in the
vintage he brings before us, in a manner suitable to the connection
prehminarily and typically, the coming of Christ to judgment in
some of its principal features, namely, as harmonizing with the
full ripeness of the world, and as beyond measure terrible ; and he
does it in the parabohc, or, more correctly, in the plastic forms of
Old Testament prophetic language, whereby the words, " without
the city — even unto the horse bridles," and " a thousand and six
hundred furlongs," in their incongruity with the image of the
vintage, form the transition to the actual representation of the seer ;
while, on the other hand, "the wine-press of the fierceness and wrath
of Almighty God," xix. 1 5, in its incongruity with the description
there given, points to the earlier and preliminary. Both descriptions
in their substantial features are based on prophetic (comp. Isa.
lxiii. 1-4), and also, indeed, upon apocalyptic precedent.
Finally, the advent, as John actually expected it, is placed before
us in the concrete form in chap. xix. If we combine the descrip
tion here given with aU preceding indications, we get the following
picture. The personal Antichrist having come up from the abyss,
the prefects or generals of the empire who had attained inde
pendent authority, but who had allied themselves with Antichrist
as their head, with united hatred have moved against the imperial
city, and devastating, plundering, and burning it, have reduced it
to destruction, xvh. 8-10. At the same time (comp. xiii 2-4),
s

274 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
there appears in this the fulfilment, or the last and complete
realization, of antichristianity, chap. xiii. Again, as the highest
point of this complete realization, John represents, in harmony
with Matt. xxiv. 15, 2 Thess. ii. 3-10 (comp. Dan. xi. 31,
xii. 12 ; 1 Mace. i. 54 ; 2 Mace. vi. 2), thus also in conformity
with one of the permanent eschatological features, that Antichrist
comes to the holy city which is trodden by the Gentiles, and
there slays the two witnesses, and generally fulfils the predictions
concerning itself, as far as the then existing locality and circum
stances of Jerusalem permit in its last and most awful features,
xi. 7-10, chap, xiii., especially vers. 6, 7, 14, 15 (comp. 2 Thess.
ii. 4, 9, 10; Matt. xxiv. 11, 24). Immediately after, yet in
the last hour, unbelieving Israel in the gross having given glory
to God and repented, xi. 13, Antichrist, with his confederates
and accomplices, the false prophet (comp. xix. 20) and the
authorities of the empire (comp. xvii. 14), as his allies, prepares
himself for a final conflict. God has already caused the river
Euphrates to . be dried up, that the way might be prepared,
xvi. 12, for the kings of the East, or the Parthian princes;
" out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of <
the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet," "three
unclean spirits went forth," " unto all the kings of the earth and
of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day
of God Almighty," xvi. 12-14, — that is, indirectly Satan, directly
Antichrist and the false prophet, by their devihsh influence
have aroused the rulers outside the Roman empire throughout
the world who were essentially like-minded with themselves,
especially the Parthian princes, who were attached to Antichrist,
to the last, destructive conflict. They assembled in "a place
called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon," xvi. 16. Ewald's
explanation, Harmagedol, cabbalistic anagram for Roma hagge-
dolah, Roma magna, is wrecked by the form of the reading, as
well as by the consideration that " the battle of that great day of
God Almighty," xvi. 14, takes place not in Rome, but in Palestine
(comp. xii. 7, xiv. 20). It is clear that by this name we are
rather to understand Megiddo, which Judg. v. 19, 2 Kings xxiii.
29, 2 Chron. xxxv. 20-24 (comp. Zech. xii. 10, 11), mention
as the great battle-field of the Old Testament. But a mere
statement of locality cannot be intended, for then it would not
be called Armageddon, but Megiddo or Magedon, nor would it be

PROPHECY. 275
said that the locality was so called in the Hebrew. This addition,
as well as the compound name, compels us to notice the verbal
meaning, and yet not the etymological meaning of Magedon, which
John, on account of its difficulty, would certainly have added in
Greek (comp. ix. 11), but only that Armageddon in Hebrew
means, hill of Megiddo. It is in the highest degree probable that
in this designation the seer refers to Zech. xii. 11, " in the valley of
Megiddo," — valley, symbol of defeat ; hill, of victory, — and wishes
us to understand that what the heathen once did against Josiah
and his people at Megiddo, would now find its counterpart in
what they did against Jesus and His followers ; but that as once
in the valley of Megiddo the theocracy was borne to the grave
with Josiah, so in Armageddon, the hill of Megiddo, the Lord
would avenge the crime of the heathen. Antichrist, the false
prophet, and the antichristian princes of the empire, and the kings
of the known world, with their armies, the worshippers of the
beast, free and bond, small and great, have assembled, xix. 18-21,
on the ancient battle-field of the kingdom of God, which now
must have another signification ; and against them stand the
" called, and chosen, and faithful," the few who have survived all
persecutions, and have stedfastly continued to be saints. Then
the Lord comes, the heavens open, and upon a horse of brilliant
white Jesus appears, who, according to Hoekstra's (p. 382) very
good remark, here for the first time acts directly, or presents
himself in his proper person, in the exhaustless significance, and
in the wholly irresistible revelation of His Messiah-Logos nature,
xix. 11-16 (comp. "He who is to come"). "The armies in
heaven," the holy angels, xix. 14 (comp. Matt. xvi. 27, xxiv. 30,
31, xxv. 31; 2 Thess. i 7-10, ii. 8), follow Him clad in gar
ments of shining white byssus, upon horses of the same brilliant
colour. When Hoekstra affirms, p. 396, that the "called, and
chosen, and faithful," xvh. 14, follow Christ as armies in heaven
on white horses, xix. 14, first the subject in these two places is
not at all a following in heaven ; secondly, the " called, and chosen,
and faithful," on account of xx. 4, cannot be conceived as coming
on white horses from heaven, but only as opposing the beast and
his followers in conflict upon the earth ; thirdly, " the armies in
heaven," with which Christ comes to the final decision, according
to universal biblical usage and standing eschatological representa
tion, do not mean Christians, but the holy angels ; nor can the

276 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
shining white byssus' determine otherwise (comp, xix. 8), for the
vial angels wear the same, xv. 6. The time has now come when
the great prediction of i 7 is fulfilled, " Behold, He cometh with
clouds ; and every eye shall see Him, and they also which pierced
Him : and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him.
Even so, Amen." The beast, and the kings of the earth, and their
armies have gathered together to wage war against Him that sat on
the horse, and against His army, xix. 1 9 ; but what is the issue ?
"The beast was taken, and with him the false prophet," and were
" both cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone," xix.
20 (comp. Num. xvi. 32-34; Isa. v. 14); not being of human
nature, they do not suffer an earthly death in order to receive
their reward in the judgment of the world ; but as hellish or
devilish powers in human form, they are judged already, and
return condemned to the place whence they came, and to which
they belong. But the rest, kings, and captains, and mighty men,
horses and riders, free and bond, small and great, xix. 18, wor
shippers and allies of the beast, the forces of Antichrist, the
inhabitants of the earth, are " slain with the sword of Him that
sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of His mouth,"
xix. 21 (comp. ver. 15, i 16), — that is, by the word of His lips
(comp. Isa. xi. 4) ; " and all the fowls," which an angel has already
summoned to the great feast, xix. 17 (comp. Ezek. xxxix. 17-20,
xxix. 5; Jer. vii. 33; Matt. xxiv. 28), "were filled with their
flesh," xix. 21 (comp. ver. 15, xiv. 20). — This representation of
the coming of the Lord for the final struggle with His enemies,
and of the struggle itself, rests upon a combination of Old Testa
ment descriptions of the judgment, as the conflict and victory of
God over the heathen nations assembled against Israel, as, for
example, Ezek. xxxix., Zech. xh\, Isa. lxiii. ; and the expectation
of John has clothed itself therein, because it corresponded to the
circumstances and relations of his time, and to the course of
development which, in his opinion, antichristianity and the divine
reaction must take. 9. The Thousand Years' Reign.
John " saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key
of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. And he
laid hold on the dragon, and bound him a thousand years, and

prophecy. 277
cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal
upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the
tJwusand years should be fulfilled : and after that he must be
loosed a little season." By the conflict of Michael and his angels
with the dragon and his angels in heaven, the latter were cast
down to the earth ; but while the inhabitants of heaven rejoice,
there sounds over the earth a woe, because the devil has come
down in great wrath, knowing that his time is short, xii. 7—12.
We recognise as the meaning of this, that in consequence of the
birth and taking away of the promised child, xii. 1-5, or of
the appearance, the works, the conflict, the sufferings, and the
exaltation of Christ, the power- of evil in the ideal reality, and for
all living in the same, was overthrown ; but since evil feels its
defeat to be quickly and unavoidably approaching in the visible
or earthly human reality also, it presents in this sphere of exist
ence temptation all the more wicked, and persecution all the
more bloody. This short time, with all that it brought with it
for antichristendom, on one side the tribulation and patience of
the saints, and on the other the persuasive, and warning judg
ements of God, has passed away. The once born and exalted child
has now come from heaven in His full Messiah-Logos glory. Anti
christ and the false prophet are hurled alive into the lake of fire
and brimstone ; their accomplices, allies, and adherents, the wor
shippers of the beast, are destroyed. Now, after the organs of
Satan are thus routed, and his kingdom on earth is broken in
manifest reality, he himself, the personal absolute ground and
originator of all evil, of the God and Christ opposing disposition,
is banished from the earth, out of the manifest earthly human
reahty, into the abyss, the sphere of the sub-earthly, of the anti-
ideal and hellish being, and there chained and imprisoned ; he can
no longer do what from the beginning he has done with such a
terrible result, namely, deceive the nations, or the inhabitants of
the earth. Christ can now assume His authority in the world,
and it may become the kingdom of God and His anointed.
And this will be for a thousand years, xx. 3-6. At this length
do eminent Rabbis fix the duration of the Messianic kingdom ; and
they do so according to a combination of Isa. lxiii. 4 and Ps.
xc. 4 (comp. 2 Pet. hi. 8), probably in union with the reasons
adduced by Barnabas, that as God in six days created the world,
and rested on the seventh, so in six thousand years, as in six

278 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
world-days, all will be finished, and on the seventh and last
thousand, a great world-Sabbath (the Messianic reign) will be
celebrated. From the brevity with which the seer treats of this
period, it seems to follow that he regarded it as well known, and
that it had for him a symbolic value, and signified a long but
limited period of time.
After the dragon is cast into the bottomless pit, John sees
" thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto
them" xx. 4 (comp. Dan. vii. 9, 10, 22, 27). According to most
expositors, the thrones, on account of the passages in Daniel, and
the expression " judgment," are not to be considered as those of
kings, but only as thrones of judgment, and that the reference
here is only to decisions concerning worthiness to share in the
thousand years' reign. But then, who are the judges ? When
God and Christ are excluded by the expression, " judgment was
given unto them," one hesitates between the twenty-four elders,
the angels, and the apostles. In my opinion, the seer can here
have desired to give only either a symbohc intimation that a
judgment takes place, so that by " them " no definite persons are
intended (comp. Hoekstra, p. 379) ; or, and I think it is the only
correct idea, since the Messianic judgment (comp. xix. 11-21)
has been held already, he intends by " them " persons who
present themselves in the connection. But what persons besides
the saints does the connection represent as surviving the advent \
Certainly they cannot sit in judgment on themselves ; but has
not judgment, in the only pertinent foundation-passage, Dan.
vii. 22, the meaning of judging, as the chief power in govern
ment ? We may compare with this Matt. xix. 28 and 1 Cor.
vi. 2, 3. On our view, the following comes here as a suitable
conclusion. Finally, in this way only can a great difficulty be
removed. When, for instance, some expositors assume that the
seer conceives of all Christians as being dead at the advent, they
contradict not only the representations of all other New Testa
ment writers, but also those of John himself. The passages i 7,
ii. 25, 26, hi 11, xvi. 15, xxii. 12, show that, in perfect agree
ment with 1 Thess. iv. 15-17, 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52, he expected
that some Christians would be ahve at the coming of Christ.
But where, in the view of the thousand years' reign, is there
express mention of these survivors, if not in this place, ? I find
therefore here, according to the analogy of i 7, xi. 2, the solemn

PROPHECY. 279
expression for the beginning of the authority of the saints who hve
to see the second advent (comp. Lechler, p. 203, note). That those
who sit down upon thrones, and to whom judgment is given, consist
only of real saints ; that at the advent many who have the name
or appearance "of such come to shame ; indeed, that according to
strict recompense the saints, in various degrees, will share in the
salvation now to be manifested, — is evident, and follows from the
passages referred to above, namely, xvi. 15, " Behold, I come as
a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments,
lest he walk naked, and they see his shame;'' and xxii. 12,
" Behold, I come quickly ; and my reward is with me, to give
every man according as his work shall be " (comp. ii. 23). The
contents of this judgment we learn from what follows. The
first resurrection presses itself so much into the foreground, that
the seer no longer expressly thinks of survivors; but, in the first
place, the " judgment " in its real meaning requires that John,
like Paul, 1 Cor. xv. 52 (comp. Phil. iii. 21 ; 1 Thess. iv. 17 ; also
Luke xx. 34-r36), must have expected a change of the living ;
and then the being priests, and the reigning of ver. 6, in compari
son with the reigning specially ascribed to the risen in ver. 4,
show that in the second half of ver. 5, and still more in ver. 6,
the thought has unobserved extended itself from the risen saints
to all who share in the thousand years' reign ; in other words,
that the first resurrection, the blessedness and holiness of those
partaking of it, the exaltation above the second death, the being
priests and kings, chief features in the self-evident modification
of the change, to the seer hold good for the survivors.
In the foreground, however, there is for our author, as also
earlier for the Thessalonians, 1 Thess. iv. 13-18, especially ver.
15, and in its position with regard to actual and expected time
relations, very intelligibly the question respecting the fate of
those Christians who die before the advent. How is it with
them ? John " saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the
witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not
worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his
mark upon their foreheads or in their hands ; and they lived and
reigned (became kings) with Christ a thousand years. But the
rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were
finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he
that hath part in the first resurrection : on such the second death

280 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
hath no power ; but they shall be priests of God and of Christ,
and shall reign with Him a thousand years," xx. 4-6. The seer
had in his eye two classes of the dead : first, those who have for
the gospel surrendered their lives, the witnesses of Jesus in a
special sense, xvh. 6, not only those whose souls, vi. 9, are under
the altar, but those also who come after, vi 11 (comp. xiii. 7,
x. 15, xvi. 5, 6, xvii. 6, viii. 24) ; the full number of those who,
according to the will of God, should die ; until the completion of
which — and therefore until the judgment and avenging wrath of
God — those already killed must rest in heaven, vi. 9-11 ; — then,
all other believers who, notwithstanding affliction and threatened
death, remain faithful, and have died in the Lord, xiv. 13, xiii
15, 16; in a word, all real Christians who have died either a
violent or a natural death. Hoekstra, p. 392, affirms that the
two classes of the privileged are properly only one, the martyrs ;
the second is particularly mentioned because the writer wishes to
give prominence to the then existing persecution, and nothing
can be more certain than that, according to the Apocalyse, the
privilege of a thousand years' hfe in glory, prior to the final
catastrophe, is awarded to martyrs only, as a recompense for their
sacrificed hves. We should agree to this representation if its
rejection, as Hoekstra declares, led to the strange conclusion that
at the great resurrection day only the condemned will rise. But
this is not the case, for to the " rest of the dead " belong, above
all, the pious of the Old Testament also. That the second class
is not a special one, is not indicated in the least. Not worshipping
the beast refers throughout, according to the correct explanation
of the beast, not merely to the existing persecution, and is — the
exclusion by the author of a Stephen or a James is inconceivable
— still again only the concrete form for Christian faithfulness
without the surrender of life, as the being beheaded for the same
is with it. While the remaining dead, good and bad, remain dead
during the thousand years' reign until the general resurrection,
the sleeping saints or Christians live, that is, rise from the dead
(comp. Ezek. xxxvii. 1-14), and, indeed, according to i 5, ii. 8,
are thus glorified as Christ, and according to xi 11, as the two
witnesses. This resurrection is called the first, in distinction from
the general resurrection of the dead to judgment described in
xx. 12, 13. That the seer means by it what Luke xiv. 14 caUs
"the resurrection of the just" (comp. Luke xx. 35, 36), and what

PROPHECY. 281
Paul speaks of as " the resurrection of the dead," Phil. iii. 1 1
(comp. 1 Thess. iv. 16 ; 1 Cor. xv. 23), in which is included the
change of the living, there can be no doubt. " Blessed and holy
is he that hath part in the first resurrection," — blessed, because,
negatively understood, the second death (comp. ii. 1 1), condemna
tion, perdition, misery, has no power over them ; holy, because,
understood positively, they reign with Christ a thousand years ;
are priests of God and of Christ, and reign with Him ; and as the
holiness is in various degrees, so is the blessedness (comp. xxii. 1 2,
xvi 15, ii. 23). Thus, in a word, the entire contents of Christian
prophecy, as in detail we have above represented them, will now
no longer be tentative, hidden, and suffering from opposition to
their manifestation, but a perfected, visible, glorious state, as far
as within the limits of the finite it is possible on this earth.
Then is fulfilled that great word : " Behold, I come quickly ; ¦
and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his
work shall be," xxii. 12, the beginning of which points us to the
advent and the thousand years' reign, even as the meaning of the
other words of reward, xi. 18, point to the judgment of the
world and the final state. Both describe the same, but in
different degrees or stages, as indeed the judgment of the world
and the final state, are in general, the advent and the thousand
years' reign in a higher potency ; and, as throughout with our
author, the higher stages of the development of the kingdom of
God, and the Christian hfe, — hke the opposite, — consist only in
the intensification of a lower degree. Faithful to the principle of
treating the individual features of the promises in the place where
the apostle presents them, we refrain from showing how he con
ceives them fulfilled in the thousand years' reign ; and since the
writer has not mentioned them, we pass over such expressions as
" power over the nations," and riding them " with a rod of iron,"
ii. 26, 27, which in their meaning belong properly to this place.
Nor can even the words, "the marriage of the Lamb is come,
and his wife (bride) has made herself ready," xix. 7-9, occupy
our attention here, since they have no place in the description of
the seer, — although they undeniably point to the advent and the
thousand years' reign, preceding them, as it were, like a herald's
cry; and although we do not agree with Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 610,
in finding it very remarkable that in the earthly completion of the
kingdom of Christ the highest union of the church is not realized.

282 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
We satisfy ourselves with showing that the contents of the same are
to be conceived of as having a temporal fulfilment in the thousand
years' reign, that is, the contents of the words : " Alleluia : for
the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth. Let us be glad and rejoice,
and give honour to Him : for the marriage of the Lamb is come,
and His wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted
that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white : for the
fine hnen is the righteousness of saints. And He saith unto
me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage
supper of the Lamb," xix. 6—9. How the seer represented to
himself in detail the relations, conditions, and activities of th
priestly kingdom of Christ and the saints on earth, he does not
inform us. We can only infer from the idea of the priesthood,
from xv. 2-4, a description certainly belonging to this connec
tion, and from what follows in xx. 7—9, that He conceived
Jerusalem purified and holy, as the local centre, the chief city ;
tbe known world, ihe orbis terrarum, as the sphere ; the nations
which have not taken part in the conflict against the saints, and
therefore have not been destroyed in the battle of Armageddon,
but have been influenced by the righteous judgments of God, xv. 4,
as its inhabitants ; Christianity, as the unhindered and blessed
power, spreading on every side, penetrating, transfiguring, and
glorifying all, — all the heathen will come and worship before the
king of nations, xv. 3, 4, — the whole as the fulfilment of all
divine promises to Israel and mankind within the limits of
finality. He has not finished the picture, because, on the one
side, he wished to reserve the Old Testament colours alone avail
able for a higher stage in chap, xxi, and on the other, because
it would have carried him beyond the preliminary to the final
issue. But "when the thousand years are expired, Satan shah be
loosed out of his prison, and shall go out to deceive the nations
which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to
gather them together to battle ; the number of whom is as the
sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth,
and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved
city : and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured
them. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake
of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are,
and shall be tormented day and night for ever," xx. 7-10. The

PROPHECY. 283
kingdom of Christ, or of God and the saints, will exist upon the
earth for a thousand years ; Christianity has a period before it,
and indeed a long one, of unimpeded, powerful, and blissful ex
tension and authority in this present world; but this period
must one day come to an end: the earth in its present sin-ruined
form, or rather state, cannot become the eternal or absolute state,
form, or manifestation of the Christian ideal world. Evil, though
so long and so extensively kept in abeyance, will once more
arouse itself for the struggle with the kingdom of God. After
the course of a thousand years, the personal principle of all
ungodliness will be loosed from his prison, and, according to the
purpose of God, will again become active on the earth ; the devil
has still a footing there ; evil yet exists, and must show its
activity in opposition to God and His kingdom. Christianity
has spread and triumphed even to the end of the earth; but there
are yet heathens who are not subject to it, but who, enslaved and
led by the devil, seek to destroy it. *Gog and Magog, Ezek.
xxxviii. and xxxix., the former the king, the latter the people',
but in rabbinical theology the allied nations, the heathen peoples
on the border of the earth, or in the extreme north, the heathen
nations opposed to the kingdom of God, under apocalyptic names
and apocalyptic images, assemble in numberless hosts on the
plain of the earth, and surround the beloved city, — without
doubt Jerusalem, having now become the holy central point of
the kingdom of God, — and the saints who have encamped.
around it. But, according to the type, Ezek. xxxix. 6, fire falls
from God out of heaven, in which, as Hoekstra, p. 381, justly
observes, God Himself appears for the first time as acting
directly upon the aggressors and consumes them ; God interposes
with the fullest manifestation of His wrath, and the last rising
of evil upon the earth finds a deservedly terrible defeat. Satan
will not again be cast into the prison of the bottomless pit, but
into the lake of fire and brimstone, whither his two representa
tives, after they had filled up their measure, preceded him, for
now Satan's time also is run out. Evil has realized its last
possibility, and has been overcome ; there is therefore nothing
more for him to do on earth, and he goes into his proper state,
namely, that of everlasting perdition.
Ewald, ut ante, p. 324, correctly remarks of the millennium,
that this hope, in the definite form in which he sees it, did not

284 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
originate with the seer; perceptibly it appears with him as ait
already given, stedfast, and almost matter of course expectation,
while it is nevertheless pecuhar, and of the highest importance, and
could not, as it were, by the way, thus penetrate the whole circle
of such hopes. Only we must go a step further, and entirely give
up the view that the seer started from the expectation of the
final end described in chap, xxi ; but, as Ewald says, there came
to him the representation of a thousand years preceding the
ultimate state of blessedness, which would be more glorious and
happy than the present, but still not the time of the full end,
and that the application to his own circle of the new views and
hopes of this thousand years became to him a grand interval,
when an earthly kingdom of Christ would reign, at least within
the wide sphere of the Roman empire and upon its ruins, the
reformed earthly Jerusalem being its central point, where thus,
under the strong protection of Christ, now restored to His people,
the kingdom of the glorified would begin in a narrower compass,
and as the prelude of the universal and eternal glory. Moreover,
everything favours the idea that our author proceeded from the
expectation of the millennium as the ultimate point of hope, and
it was therefore to him originally far richer in contents. As
observed above, he has treated it with remarkable brevity, because,
on the one hand, he desired to spare the only colours remaining
to him for the higher state which was to follow ; and still more,
On the other, because it would have carried him beyond what was
' preliminary, to the goal itself. But would he have so spared those
colours, and would it have thus driven him forward, if really " the
representation of the thousand years' reign of Christ in Jerusalem,
with the undestroyed temple as the chief point, formed the centre
of gravity to the whole Apocalypse" (Weizsacker, p. 237), if the
earthly kingdom of Christ had not been to the seer much rather
an essential and indispensable element of the eschatology, the
contents of which were to pass over almost entirely into the
heavenly state ? Only on this supposition can the brevity and
fragmentary character, the enigmatic and almost absolute poverty,
of distinctive features in the description of the millennium be
explained; only thus can we see why, for example, at xi. 18 it is
not expressly introduced ; only thus can the expression, sounding
so decidedly Jewish, "with Christ," xx. 4, and, above all, the
feature of non-citizens in the final state, xxi. 24-26, be cleared up.

PROPHECY. 285
Had the seer, starting from the idea of that state, conceived the
thousand years' reign not merely as received, but also as essen
tially the pattern of his hopes, the representation of the same
would have been far richer in colour and in detail. We can with
less difficulty show the chihasm of our book to be an exceedingly
important idea, if we find independently predicted in it, or at
least foreboded, " the Christian time," or " the, national church."
But it is certainly more correct to say the idea of an earthly
kingdom of Christ, originally inherited by the seer, is for us a
highly important one ; but for himself this idea, on account of
that appropriated later, of an absolute final state, is thrown so
much into the background, that it might be entirely left out<
without creating any great blank in his system. His hopes pro
perly rest not upon this earth, nor in the condition of Christ's
kingdom, but on the absolute realization of the ideal world.
10. The Judgment of the World.
At the opening of the sixth seal, men " hid themselves in the
dens, and in the rocks of the mountains (comp. Isa. ii. 19); and
said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the
face of Him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the
Lamb : for the great day of His wrath is come ; and who shall be
able to stand?" vi 15, 16 (comp. Mai. ih. 2). On the sounding
of the seventh trumpet, the elders in heaven said, " We give Thee
thanks, 0 Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to
come ; because Thou hast taken to Thyself Thy great power, and
hast reigned. And the nations were angry, and Thy wrath is come,
and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that
Thou shouldest give reward unto Thy servants the prophets, and
to the saints, and to them that fear Thy name, small and great ;
and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth," xi. 17, 18.
After the pouring out of the sixth vial, " three unclean spirits go
forth unto the kings of the earth, and of the whole world, to
gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty,"
xvi. 14. Of these three passages, the third is connected with the
contents of chap. xix. as certainly as the second is with xx. 7-1 1
or with vers. 12-15. The connection of the first admits of doubt,
as the ruin described on the opening of the sixth seal may be
understood in a politico-social as well as in a cosmic sense. The

286 the doctrine of the apocalypse.
great day of wrath (comp. Isa. xiii 13; Ezek. vii. 19; Zeph.
i 15 ; Rom. ii. 5, 6), that great day of God (comp. Jer. xxx. 7;
Joel ii. 11, iii 4 ; Zeph. i 14 ; Mai. iii. 2 ; Acts ii. 20 ; Jude 6),
means with our author, as with other Old and New Testament
writers, the final catastrophe in which God will fulfil to the world
His threatenings and promises in manifest reahty (comp. xi. 19),
Since, therefore, this final catastrophe in the view of the seer
occurs prehminarily at the advent, and fully at the judgment, he
can use the names of the great day for the preliminary as well as
for the full realization ; and we have therein a new example of
the peculiarity of the writer, who in his descriptions combines
commencement and completion. It would be a mistake to dis
tribute the advent and the judgment to the beginning and the end
of the great day : to the author they are the same in different
degrees. It would be a mistake also to represent the first degree
as preponderating with him ; for, as xi. 1 7, 1 8 and the parallel
of the millennium show, the representation of the seer lives more
in the second — in the final and the absolute. A discrepancy, as
Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 608, imagines it, when he says that in an
earlier vision the eternal kingdom of God and His Anointed, xi. 15,
appears directly after the conversion of Israel, xi. 13, at the close
of the great tribulation, xi. 2 (comp. xiii. 5) ; but that here, on the
contrary, the kingdom of the Messiah separates itself from the
perfected kingdom of God. But such a discrepancy, in view of
the unity everywhere else perceptible in the thoughts of the seer,
we cannot admit.
" And I saw a great white throne, and Him that sat on it,
from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away ; and there
was found no place for them," xx. 11. The distinction of "the
great white throne " from the " thrones " of ver. 4, as well as its
agreement with xxi. 5, and still more, the constant description of
God as " He who sits on the throne," compels us to regard the
above passage as referring to God, but not to God in distinction
from Christ. According to the Christology of the seer, it is d
priori wholly inconceivable that he has represented Christ as
having no share in the judgment. To this add that, according to
hi. 2 1, He sits with His Father on His throne ; that vi. 1 6 places
together " the face of Him that sitteth on the throne " and " the
wrath of the Lamb ;" that directly before the announcement of the
judgment of the world, xi. 15-18, it is said, ver. 15, "the king-

prophecy. 287
doms of this world have become the kingdoms of our God and of
His Christ, and He shall reign for ever and ever ;" that the book
of life, upon the statements of which here, ver. 1 5, depends eternal
damnation, is called " the book of hfe of the Lamb slain," xiii 8 ;
and that Christ promises to him who overcometh, that He will not
blot out his name out of the book of hfe, but will confess his
name before His Father and before His angels ; that, according
to xiv. 10, where death and hades are cast, vers. 14, 15, with
all who are not written in the book of hfe, the worshippers of
the beast shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the
presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb ;
and there then can be no doubt that, according to the represen
tation of the author, and, indeed, according to the whole Chris
tology of the book, as well as the indications of ih. 5 and xiv. 10,
Christ is to be thought of as concerned in the judgment as its
executor, or, more correctly, its mediator. But why is not the
Lamb expressly mentioned here, with Him who sits on the throne,
as well as in vi. 1 6 ? According to the author's representation of
the judgment (comp. ih. 5, xiv. 10), Christ's place is not in xx.
11, but in the verse following; and that He is not expressly
mentioned and personally introduced, admits of easy explanation,
since, on the one hand, from its pecuhar brevity or sketchiness,
similar to that of the scene which immediately precedes, and also,
on the other hand, similar to the obvious conditions of the de
scription of the thousand years' reign, other things thrust them
selves into the foreground. As there the change of the living,
so here the activity of Christ in the judgment was self-evident ;
as there the first resurrection predominated, so here the general
resurrection and the fate of those who rise. Possibly also it may
have been for the sake of formal distinction ; as at the advent
Christ only is mentioned, so at the judgment God only.
What is the first exercise of the great wrath of Him who sits
on the great white throne ? At the opening of the sixth seal
" there was a great earthquake ; and the sun became black as sack
cloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; and the stars of heaven
fell unto the earth, even as the fig-tree casteth her untimely figs,
when she is shaken of a mighty wind : and the heaven departed
as a scroll when it is rolled together ; and every mountain and
island were moved out of their places," vi. 12, 14; so that all
men believed that the great day of His wrath had come, vi.

288 THE doctrine of the apocalypse.
15, 16 : as at the pouring out of the seventh vial "there came
a great voice out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying,
It is done. And there were voices, and thunders, and hghtnings;
and there was a great earthquake, such as was not since men
were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great. And
the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the
nations fell : and great Babylon came in remembrance before God,
to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of His
wrath. And every island fled away, and the mountains were not
found. And there fell upon men a great hail out of heaven, every
stone about the weight of a talent," xvi. 1 7-2 1 ; and now these pre-*
monitions find their fulfilment in that earth and heaven flee away
before the face, from the wrath, of Him who sits on the throne; and
there is found no place for them, in other words, in the destruc
tion of the whole present visible world. That we need not under
stand by heaven here the invisible ideal world, wants only the
proof lying in xxi. 2—10 (see the section on heaven). Evidently
the world passes away before the anger of God, because it has
become the place or kingdom of evil, and is disfigured by sin, and
therefore falls beneath the divine judgments. The seer does not
give us a description of the destruction of the world. To con
clude from the precedents in chap, vi and xvi, he would represent
it almost as it is in 2 Pet. iii. 7-10 (comp. Ps. cii 27 ; Isa. h, 6 •
Heb. ill; Matt. xxiv. 35).
Judgment is executed on the world universally, but it is exe
cuted on every individual, and that in two periods, — first, in the
general resurrection, which the seer himself introduces only as
supplementary : " And the sea gave up the dead which were in
it ; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them,"
xx. 13. That by "death and hell" we are to understand the
grave- world on or rather under the earth ; and by " the sea," the '
great watery grave ; by tbe " sea, death, and hell," the universal
hidden region of the dead, — has been shown in the section on the
earth and its inhabitants. This universal unseen region gives up
its contents — its prey, its citizens. But who awakes them ? It
can be no other than He who, according to i 1 8, has the keys of
death and hell, — namely, Christ. It is self-evident, moreover, that
in this general resurrection the saints have no share, inasmuch as
they had part in the first resurrection, and the change at the
advent of Christ. Those who rise now are the rest of the dead,

prophecy. 289
who, according to the express statement of xx. 5, live not again
until the thousand years are finished.
" And I saw the dead,, small and great, stand before God : and
the books were opened ; and another book was opened, which is
the book of life : and the dead were judged out of those things
which were written in the books, according to their works," xx. 1 2 ;
" And they were judged every man according to their works,"
ver. 13 ; " And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This
is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the
book of life was cast into the lake of fire," vers. 14, 15. The great
declaration of xi 18 is now fulfilled. When Baur, ut ante,
p. 208, says, "those who are counted worthy of the first resur
rection probably do not come into the judgment of the world," it
is so, as he understands coming into judgment. When, on this
occasion, the book of life is opened, the saints collectively (comp.
xi. 18) are interested in it; but since, by the first resurrection,
they are already recognised as registered in the book of hfe, they
are not now judged according to their works ; for them the
general judgment can be nothing else than the declaration of
what they are, the solemn confirmation of what was assured to
them by their sharing in the thousand years' reign (comp. xx. 6),
Christ's acknowledgment of them as His before His Father, and
before the holy angels, hi 5, the distribution of reward in the
highest degree, the completion of that which came to them at
the advent (comp. xxii. 12, xi. 18). On the other hand, all the
rest of the men, without distinction or exception, are judged accord
ing to their works ; with respect to which, against Kbsthn, who says,
ut ante, p. 491, "works are what save the righteous in the day of
judgment," we refer to the section on the saints and their works.
That the books in which the works of every one are written, debt
and credit, according to the contents or balance of which every
one is judged, are to be, in an inner relation, classed with the
book of life, is, as Dusterdieck remarks, in loco, perfectly true ;
but we have already shown, in the section on God, how this inner
relation is not so intended that it is according to the works which
are written in the books that their names are found in the book
of hfe or not, but so that after the account of each is shown in
the book of reckoning, his name is referred to in the book of hfe ;
and, indeed, according as the name stands there or not, it is
represented how God's eternal predestination or gracious purposes
T

290 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
(comp. xiii 8) has found realization or fulfilment in the works
how the elect are also the justified, and the non-elect are also the
rejected ; or as Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 610, expresses it, the definite
sentence only affirms what has long been fixed in the purpose of
God. All those whose names are not written in the book of hfe,
— the case absolutely as seen by God and from eternity, — all
those whose works are evil, the same relatively considered from
a human and historical standpoint, will now manifestly, as the
rejected of God, receive their merited doom ; they will be cast into
the lake of fire. Thither death and hades — in this place, ver. 14,
not to be understood (comp. the abyss), as directly before, ver. 3,
locally, but potentially — have preceded them ; death is not simply
destroyed, but as a devihsh power, the auxiliary or instrument
of the evil one (comp. Heb. ii. 14, 15), it is abohshed for ever,
made innocuous, condemned, and annihilated (comp. 1 Cor.xv. 26).
What comes to all those whose names are written in the book of
life, and what sort of reward they receive for their works, will be
shown in the next section. The mistake, for example, of Heng
stenberg, as if in the judgment of the world only the condemned
appear, needs, indeed, no refutation ; — or did the seer think of
Moses and the servants of God, the prophets, as appointed to the
lake which burneth with fire and brimstone ?
11. The New Heaven and the New Earth.
The religious- ideas-ofjhe seer do not flow into a restoration,
but into mvg^toe^MaMsmTN With the judgment of the world,
the struggle between'GocT^and the devil, heaven and hell, the
ideal and anti-ideal, is finally decided, and for ever closed. God,
heaven, and the ideal, have obtained the victory. The devil, hell,
and the anti-ideal, have been defeated. But the devil is not
changed, hell is not purified, the anti-ideal is not idealized, nor
are they destroyed in the sense of ceasing to exist ; but from the
final decision they continue eternally without any intervening
medium, like earth and heaven, in their present position, in
absolute contrast with each other : here, the lake of fire and brim
stone ; there, the new heaven and the new earth. Heaven and hell
are now in visible reahty what they were in the hidden reahty,
or in their ideal, and they have now really what, according to
their nature, always belonged either to one or the other.

prophecy. 291
"This," the lake of fire, "is the second death," xx. 14. The
second death, a rabbinical phrase, relates to death in a similar
manner as the first resurrection, xx. 6, relates to the resurrection
of the dead ; the first resurrection, the resurrection in the higher
sense, is the coming of the saints to the eternal life, which is
never lost, xx. 6 ; the second death, the intensified death, is
the coming of sinners to the eternal death, from which there
is no resurrection, or to perdition (comp. xvii. 8, 11), which
consists not in the " destruction of the wicked," but in the definite
loss of happiness, in eternally restless pangs, and perpetual con
sciousness of consummated death. The beast and the false
prophet, their time having expired, are thrown into the lake of
fire and brimstone at the coming of Christ, xix. 20 ; then, after
the suppression of the last outbreak of Antichrist, the course of
the devil having been run, he is cast in also, xx. 10; in like
manner death and hades, after the destruction of this world and
the resurrection of all the dead, are assigned to the same place,
xx. 14; so also, after they have been judged, are all those who
are not written in the book of life, xx. 1 5 ; and there, too, must
we look for Babylon in her doom, xix. 2, 3. The devil, the
beast, and the false prophet, will be tormented there for ever and
ever, xx. 1 0. " If any man worship the beast and his image,
and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same
shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out
without mixture into the cup of his indignation ; and he shall be
tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy
angels, and in the presence of the Lamb : and the smoke of their
torment ascendeth up (comp. Isa. xxxiv. 1 0) for ever and ever :
and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and
his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name,"
xiv. 9-11. "The fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable,
and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters,
and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth
with fire and , brimstone : which is the second death," xxi. 8
(comp. ver. 27, xxii. 3, 15). "They said, Alleluia. And her
(Babylon) smoke rose up for ever and ever," xix. 3.
But decidedly as the author holds an eternal damnation, and
strong as the colours are in which he represents it in his threat-
enings, he does not place it before us in a special vision as he
does its opposite, and that evidently with tbe highest flight of

292 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
his plastic poetic power, and with the application of all the gifts
at his command.
" And I saw," he begins, " a new heaven and a new earth : for
the first heaven and the first earth were passed away ; and there
was no more sea," xxi. 1. Here the seer had before him Isa.
Ixv. 17 (comp. Ixvi 22, liv. 9). He probably held (comp. xx. 11,
the face), in harmony with Jewish opinions, which meet us also
in 2 Pet. iii. 5, x. 12, 13 (comp. 1 Cor. iii. 13), that as the first
world came forth from water, it would be destroyed by fire, and
the new world be formed by the same element. Possibly, on
account of the origination of the new world by fire, he conceived
of it as being without sea ; or thinking of the sea as the birth
place of the old world, he regarded it as ceasing with it ; possibly
also the absence of the sea in the new, is only to place it in con
trast with the old world ; but most probably, by leaving out the
sea, he simply wishes to express the new in the fuller sense of
the word, the ideal, or the perfection of the new world, inasmuch
as — on account of its dangers, and the many deaths in it (comp.
xx. 13), but chiefly because of its being repugnant to all the
ancients — he regarded the sea as an unpleasant feature, and a
prominent imperfection of the present state. Moreover, he did
not intend the common Jewish representation, that the new world
will be new in substance, but that it will be renewed, refined,
transfigured, new in the sense of the ideal, and will be related to
the old as gold which has passed through the purifying fire is to
the unrefined ore. When Baur, ut ante, p. 209, declares it to be
undeniable that the apocalyptic kingdom of Christ is much below
the moral idea of the kingdom of heaven presented by Jesus,
because the seer not only teaches chihastically an earthly kingdom
of Christ, but also that the condition of perfection and blessedness
following this kingdom will be that of an earthly heaven, and
that in the view of the Apocalypse it can only be realized on the
material foundation of the final though transfigured earth, not
only does the supposed difference between the heavenly kingdom
of Jesus and that of the seer, but also Baur's entire conception
of the apocalyptic final state, rest upon a gross misunderstanding,
only to be explained by a prejudiced judgment. While the old
heaven and the old earth were the visible, fluctuating, or contested
reahty, lying between the ideal and the anti-ideal, the new heaven
and the new earth are the ideal reality made visible, or heaven

PROPHECY. 293
manifested. As the ideas, prototypes, the souls or spirits of all
past, present, and future, personal and impersonal sanctities, sub
limities, and glories on earth or in this world, or in the first
heaven and the first earth, existed in heaven in ideal but hidden
reahty ; and as, on the other hand, all this was in the first world,
in manifest but unideal reality ; so in the new heaven and on the
new earth all this is no more in a visible but ideally inadequate
manner as in the first world, nor in a really ideal but hidden
manner as in heaven, but in manifest ideal reality. The first
has gone, and He who sits upon the throne says, "Behold, I
make all things new," xx. 4, 5 ; and the renewal reaches to every
thing that can become ideal, because it has an idea: to all which
has been in this world, and has had its ideal in heaven. We
may compare Rom. viii 18-21 ; 2 Pet. hi. 13.
It is therefore an error to identify the new heaven and the
new earth with the New Jerusalem, for thereby the understanding
of xxi. 24-27 is beforehand rendered impossible. The New
Jerusalem is ever only a part of the new world, though according
to its meaning as well as in its representation it almost entirely
occupies the foreground. It means, the people of God, the multi
tude of the saints, the church, the kingdom of God, in the stricter
sense of its completion (comp. Heb. xi 10, xii. 22, xiii. 14;
Gal. iv. 26). For its description two representations offer them
selves to the writer, in hke manner as Babylon and the great
whore present themselves for the description of the church of
Satan, namely, a personal and a general one. The former, resting
upon such Old Testament passages as Isa. liv. 1-3, Hos. ii.
19, 20, Ezek. xvi 7—14, and especially upon Solomon's Song,
regards the Messiah as the bridegroom, and the church as the
bride ; the final consummation is the time of the marriage, as an
image of the close and indissoluble union between the Lord and
the church ; the happiness of the heavenly state appears under
the image of a marriage feast ; and the saints are those who are
called to it, the marriage guests. This representation, hke those
of the coming of the Lord, the harvest, and the vintage, have been
used by John before. After judgment has come upon Babylon,
he " heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the
voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings,
saying : Alleluia : for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth. Let us be
glad and rejoice, and give honour to Him : for the marriage of the

294 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
Lamb is come, and His wife hath made herself ready. And to her
was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and
white : for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. And He
said unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the
marriage supper of the Lamb," xix. 6-9. In the proper repre
sentation of the heavenly state, this personal description appears
at xxi. 2, where John sees the New Jerusalem come down out of
heaven prepared as a bride adorned for her husband ; and at xxi.
9, 10, where, in significant contrast with the vision of the great
whore, xvh. 1, 2, one of the vial angels says to the seer, "Come
hither ; I will show thee the bride, the Lamb's wife," and then
points out to him the New Jerusalem ; and at the close of the
book the same image meets us once more in the words : " the
Spirit and the bride say, Come."
For this description of the people of God in their perfection,
John has used, in its rabbinical interpretation, the general picture
of the New Jerusalem offered to him in the Old Testament. In
the letter to the church at Philadelphia, the Lord said: "Him
that overcometh I will make a pillar in the temple of my God,
and he shall go no more out : and I wiU write upon him the name
of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is New
Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God; and
I will write upon him my new name," iii. 12. Now in the new
world John sees " the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down
from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her
husband," xxi. 2 ; and, for the sake of a closer description, it is
said, "there came unto me one of the seven angels which had
the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with
me, saying, Come hither ; I will show thee the bride, the Lamb's
wife ; " and he led the seer to a great and high mountain (comp.
xvii. 3), and showed him Jerusalem, the holy city, descending
out of heaven from God, xxi. 9, 10 (comp. xxii 19).
In keeping with this general representation, John next depicts
the perfect state of the church by a description of the New
Jerusalem in its architecture, after the type of Ezek. xlviii.
30-35. From the great and high mountain to which the angel
had led him (comp. Ezek. xl. 2 ; Rev. xvh. 3), John saw the holy
city descend — become realized in visible ideality — out of heaven —
the invisible ideal world — from God, with whom the ideal world
exists, or with whom in an "ideal manner the final consummation

PROPHECY. 295
is already prepared long before it is realized at the end of time "
(Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 6 1 0). " The city lieth four-square, and the
length is as large as the breadth ; " the ground- plan forms a quad
rate (comp. Ezek. xlviii. 16); "the length, and the breadth, and
the height are equal ; " and the whole is a cube, like the Holy of
Hohes in the Mosaic sanctuary (comp. Ex. xxvi., xxvii.). And
this cube is wonderful in size, for the angel that talked with the
seer " had a golden rod to measure the city, and the gates thereof,
and the wall thereof," xxi. 15 (comp. Ezek. xl. 3, 5-16); and,
according to the measuring of the angel, the extent of the city is
12,000 furlongs in length, and breadth, and height, xxi. 16. The
square, the quadrate, the cube, are all symbols of the complete,
the perfect, and the universal (comp. Isa. xliii. 3-6) ; and the
specially large proportions point to the remarkably large number
of the complete church of God. The material of the city is of
"pure gold, like unto clear glass," that is, of pure transparent
gold, xxi. 1 8 ; the streets of the city consist of the same, — "pure
gold, as it were transparent glass," xxi. 21. Around the city is
" a waU great and high," xxi. 1 2 ; the height of the wall is " an
hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a
man, that is, of the angel," xxi 17. According to Dusterdieck,
the relative lowness of the wall is indicative of the security of
the city (comp. Isa. liv. 14) ; and very justly do we see in the
size of the city, and the height of the walls, so prominently ex
pressed, a symbol of its safety from every danger. In these walls
are twelve gates (comp. Ezek. xlviii. 30-35), three towards' each
quarter of the heavens, xxi 12, 13; each gate consists of a
single pearl, xxi. 2 1 ; and there stand at them twelve angels, as
ideal gatekeepers, symbols of divine protection, after Isa. lxii 6 ;
and the names of the twelve tribes of Israel, that is, of the people
of God, are written thereon, xxi. 12 (comp. Ezek. xlviii. 31-35).
The twelve gates are for the entrance of the chosen ; and their
direction toward the four quarters of heaven points to the uni
versal character of the New Jerusalem (comp. Isa. xliii 3, 4).
These walls have twelve foundations, that is, the sections of the
walls between the twelve gates are borne by one stone, xxi. 14;
and these foundations are " garnished with all manner of precious
stones" (comp. Isa. liv. 11, 12), jasper, sapphire, chalcedony,
emerald, sardonyx, sardius, chrysolite, beryl, topaz, chrysoprasus,
jacinth, and amethyst, xxi. 19, 20 (comp. the stones in the high

296 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
priest's breastplate, Ex. xxviii. 1 7-20) ; and upon them are " the
names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb," xxi. 14 (comp. Matt.
xvi. 18 ; Eph. ii. 20-22). "The building of the wall," that is,
the superstructure raised 'upon the foundations, consists of jasper,
xxi 18 (comp. 1 Cor. iii. 10-15). The New Jerusalem is there
fore, in extent and amplitude, in beauty of material and form,
indeed in every respect, a perfect building; and this perfect
building is the image of the final state of the church, as a perfect
one, whether considered in its universal importance, in the num
ber of its members, in its inviolabihty and peace, or in its magnifi
cence and glory.
In harmony with the general representation of the final state,
John further exhibits it by a description of the conditions in the
New Jerusalem. And he does so in a threefold manner. As he
saw the New Jerusalem descend, " he heard a great voice out of
heaven, saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and ,
He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God
Himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall
wipe away all tears from their eyes ; and there shall be no more
death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more
pain : for the former things are passed away. And He that sat
upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And He
said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. And
He said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the
beginning and the end : I will give unto him that is athirst Of
the fountain of the water of life freely. He that overcometh shall
inherit all things ; and I will be his God, and he shall be my
son," xxi 3—7. In the final state, those great promises in Lev.
xxvi. 11, 12, Ezek. xxxvii. 27, Jer. xxiv. 7, xxx. 22, xxxi. 33
(comp. 2 Cor. vi 16 ; Heb. viii. 10), are fulfilled. That God
Himself dwells with men is not symbolic, as in the Old Testa
ment, but in nature and disposition He is really and directly
near, joined and present with them — " men," the people of God ;
" God," the God of men ; indeed, those great words of 2 Sam.
vii. 14 are also fulfilled, and God stands to them individually in
the relation of Father, and they stand to Him in the relation of
sons. When Hoekstra says, p. 371, "God is never called the
Father of men, not even where the opposite, sons or children of
God, seems to demand it, xxi. 7 ; manifestly the writer uses "the
word son here because the collective people has no singular form

PROPHECY. 297
to express the individual, and sonship denotes belonging to the
people of God," it is admitted that the individuals of the people
of God are called servants of God ; thus, when God says, " I will
be his God, and he shall be my son," and not " he shall be my
servant," it is clear that the seer limits the parental name of God
to Christ, but considers the relation of Christians to God in its
fulfilment not as a servile, but as a filial one ; and, on the
contrary, precisely on account of the Old Testament prophecy, he
would not use for the people of God the names "family" or
" house," corresponding to its reahzation. Then is fulfilled also
the prediction of Isa. xxv. 8, Ixv. 1 9 ; with the first earth, all
suffering connected with it, and even death itself, pass away ; it
is a new and blessed state, corresponding to the new earth. In
the closer description of the New Jerusalem, John sees "the
glory of God : and her hght was like unto a stone most precious,
even like a jasper-stone, clear as crystal," xxi. 11. He sees "no
temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the
temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the
moon, to shine in it ; for the glory of God did lighten it, and the
Lamb is the hght thereof," xxi. 22, 23. It is said "there shall
be no night there ; and they need no candle, neither light of the
sun : for the Lord giveth them hght," xxii. 5. But the glory of
God is the revelation of His nature as hght, and so in the New
Jerusalem the prediction of Isa. Ix. 19, 20 is fulfilled also;
instead of earthly light as a symbol, instead of the sun and
the moon as emblematical bearers of the divine light, there is
in the heavenly state " the glory of God," and by it the noblest
of all hght ; the glory of God so shines that there is " no more
night;" and the light thereof, that is, the light-bearer, mediator,
revealer of the divine glory, is the Logos-Messiah. The angel
shows to the seer " a pure river of water of hfe, clear as crystal,
proceeding out of the throne of God and the Lamb. In the
midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was
there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and
yielded her fruit every month : and the leaves of the tree were for
the healing of the nations. And there shall be no more curse: but
the throne of God and of the Lamb shall -be in it; and His
servants shall serve Him : and they shall see His face ; and His
name shaU be in their foreheads . . . and they shall reign for ever
and ever," xxii. 1—5. Thus that great prophecy of Ezek. xlvii.

298 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
1-12, concerning a stream of hving water and healing trees, is
fulfilled; also that of Zech. xiv. 11, that no one shall again fall
under the destroying curse of the Lord : therefore there is in it
the throne of God and of the Lamb ; that is, God, relatively
Christ, is in the absolute fulness of His being active there,
" His servants shall serve Him," that is, their entire activity is a
priestly service ; " they shall see His face," in other words, they
shall enjoy immediately His bliss-giving presence and absolute
self-revelation (comp. Matt. v. 8) ; " His name shall be in their
foreheads," they are manifestly His ; " they shall reign for ever
and ever;" that is, as in their relation to God, so they are in their
relation to men and things, the absolute and eternal fulfilment of
the prediction of the royal priesthood of Israel, Ex. xix. 5, 6,
If we look at the entire - description of the final state in its
relation to the promises to Christians on earth, in heaven, or in th
thousand years' reign, we shall find that confirmed which was said
in the section on the saints and their works, namely, that the
promises in this book are for all stages essentially the same, and
that, evidently for the sake of avoiding uniformity, here one, and
there another phase, is brought into prominence, and that similar
promises made to various stages undergo a corresponding modifica
tion in their meaning. What the perfected are, God's peculiar
people, priestly kings to God out of all nations, they were from
the moment of becoming Christians (comp. i 6, v. 9, 10); the
worship of the heavenly state they already celebrated on earth
(comp. v. 8), — even there they were immoveable pillars in the
temple of God, and bore the name of God, of the New Jerusalem,
and of Christ (comp. hi 1 2) ; already as victors they ate of the
tree of life (comp. ii. 7) ; they had the crown of hfe, and could
not be hurt of the second death (comp. ii. 10, 11); they had
power over the nations (comp. ii. 26); their names were in the
book of life (comp. iii. 5) ; they sat with Christ on His throne
(comp. iii. 21), and as victors inherited all the promises. As in
the New Jerusalem, so also they stood already in heaven before
the throne and before the Lamb (comp. vii. 9—1 5) ; as here, so
there they serve God day and night in His temple (comp.
vii. 15); as here God dwells with them, and beams upon them,
so there He does also (comp. vii 15) ; as here all suffering
passed away, so there also hunger and thirst, and burning heat,
ceases for them (comp. vii. 16); as here, so God has already there

PROPHECY. 299
wiped away all tears from their eyes (comp. vii. 17) ; as here the
river of the water of life flows for them, and God gives freely to
the thirsty of the living fountains of waters, so the Lamb leads
them there to the same (comp. vii. 17); as here there is no
more curse, so already the 144,000 virgins were without guile
or fault (comp. xiv. 4, 5). In the thousand years' reign the
perfected were already priests of God and Christ, and reigned
with Him, and the second death had no power over them (comp.
xx. 6). And is not the church below already the bride of the
Lamb (comp. xxii. 17)? does she not already appear on earth as
the true Israel (comp. vii. 4-8) ? There is hardly a feature in
the description of the final blessedness which has not been
recognised by us before, with the obvious exception of those
which are conditioned by the peculiarity of the stage itself. All
that the saints and people of God were and had on earth, in
ideal hidden reality, in process, and amidst suffering, — what they
were and had in heaven, in similar reality realized and free from
suffering, and what they were and had in visible ideal reahty,
in finite relations during the thousand years' reign, they are and
have in the final state of blessedness, in visible reality, absolutely,
eternally, and perfectly.
But is the. share in this blessed state equal for all, or is it
various ? and if so, in what manner ? It is said, " The nations
(edvri) of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it : and
the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day ; for there shall
be no night there. And they shall bring the glory and the honour
of the nations into it. And there shaU in no wise enter into it
anything that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination
or maketh a lie ; but they which are written in the Lamb's book
of life," xxi. 24-27 (comp. Isa. Ix. 3-14; Ps. lxviii. 30, lxxii.
10,1 5). The meaning of this passage is disputed. Some expo
sitors understand the edvn to be the heathen. But while Messner,
bibl. Theol. p. 375 (comp. Hofmann, ut ante, II. 2, p. 660),
finds indicated the susceptibihty of the heathen to conversion in
that state, Kbstlin sees, ut ante, p. 490, in those heathen who " do
not come into the holy city itself," xxi. 24, the same of whom it
is said, " All nations shall come and worship before Thee ; for Thy
judgments are made manifest," xv. 4. On the contrary, accord
ing to Weiss, ut ante, p. 615, the prophetic expectation that only

300 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
in the millennium would the theocracy include within it the heathen
in the gross, so dominates the view of the seer, that in the form
of an entirely unassimilative representation it still mingles with
the description of the heavenly Jerusalem. Baur, ut ante, p. 212,
on account of xxi. 12, affirms that, according to our author, Jewish
Christians will always form the basis of the Christian church;
and, in the ambiguous style already animadverted upon, goes on to
say that " the heathen — heathen Christians are intended — stand
always only in the second rank ; and one does not know — since
there can come into the New Jerusalem only those whose names
are written in the book of life — whether this category will find
its full application in the heathen," — that is, heathen Christians.
A third class of expositors — as Hengstenberg, in loco ; Liicke, ut
ante, p. 738; Lechler, ut ante, p. 205; Dusterdieck, in loco—
take the edvrj for nations who are allied or belong to the holy
city. The last mentioned of these expositors finds described in
this passage, with the tone and style of the ancient prophets, the
people which shall find entrance into the future city ; in general,
only those who, as ver. 2 7, in a positive, exclusive manner affirms,
are written in the book of hfe; but vers. 24-26 would also
describe expressly, and agreeably to the ancient predictions, the
heathen as such who would find admittance into . the city. To
Dusterdieck it does not seem justifiable to conceive of the nations
and the kings as dwelling without the city ; much rather would
the " essentially parallel description," vii. 9—12, lead him to think
of behevers from the heathen as domiciled in the New Jerusalem.
The peculiar representation is, according to him, conditioned by
the Old Testament type, in the perspective of which that which ,
falls in the earthly period of the Messianic times does not appear
definitely separated from that which for New Testament prophecy
lies beyond the second coming of the Lord. I cannot entirely
agree with any of these interpretations. The naturahzation of
the heathen in the New Jerusalem would be too peculiarly repre
sented by vers. 24—26 ; and hitherto the seer has given no occa
sion for the assumption that, by his leaning to Old Testament
types, he has been led in his representation to mingle the citizen
ship of the heathen in the New Jerusalem and their conversion
on this earth with each other. The nations "allied" with and
those " belonging" to it are different ; the " allied," the apostle
has been able to represent not unskilfully through vers. 24-26 ;

PROPHECY. 301
on the other hand, the " belonging " is precisely that which, in
distinction from the " allied," the citizen will explain. That the
twelve tribes of Israel, whose names are on the gates of the New
Jerusalem, are not Jewish Christians only, or the believing Jewish
nation, but the true Israel from Jews and Gentiles, we have shown
earher ; but of Gentiles who do not come into the holy city itself,
in whom the category of the book of life possibly finds not its
full application, there is in this place simply nothing said. The
conversion of the heathen in the future state has certainly some
thing attracting ; since, at the judgment of the world, all the dead
from all nations and times arise, and since only those are con
demned who by their works cannot stand, and whose names are
not written in the book of hfe, one is disposed to ascribe the re
presentation to the seer. In the final state, the true Israel of all
times, the pious of the Old Testament, who believed in a predicted
Messiah, and the pious of the New, who believed in a Messiah
who had come, and who have kept the faith, form the central
point for the multitude of the heathen, who in the course of the
thousand years in various lands have longed for the light, and
have not found it on earth, but with unsatisfied longing have
gone thither. In the New Jerusalem is the perfected church :
there is the glory of the Lord, and it shines forth ; there the per
fected serve the holy God as His priests; but around it is the
church, included only in the last stage, which walks in the light
streaming from the centre, and brings its glory thither for the
worship of God. It would be in harmony with such a conception,
that in the New Jerusalem the tree of life bears its fruits for the
inhabitants — for the nourishment, strengthening, and maintenance
of the eternal life ; but its leaves are for the healing and recovery
to eternal life of the nations dwelling around and coming to the
city for worship, xxii. 2. Nevertheless, satisfactory as this inter
pretation appears on aH sides, it has a defect which outweighs ah
its excellences, namely, that there is not a single word expressly
in its favour ; we therefore let it drop. But are, therefore, the
contents of vers. 24-27 an entirely unassimilative representation ?
Kbstlin has justly pointed to xv. 4 ; only he should not have, at
least doubtfully, explained ver. 2 7 as if these Gentiles should not
come into the holy city itself. There is also with him at the
bottom the false assumption that the final condition of the new
world will be again that of the present. The hope expressed in

302 THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE.
xv. 4 is, as the ways, judgments, and righteous acts there men
tioned, and the kinghood and priesthood of Christians, xx. 4-6,
show, fulfilled first in the millennium ; while before the mani
festations of the righteous judgments of God, individuals from
various nations accepted redemption, — v. 9, for example, — and
thereby entered the true Israel; then all the heathen, that is,
the nations still continuing heathen, will generally, or in the
mass, revere and honour the name of God, and will come and
worship before Him. But what we find in the millennium exist
ing in a temporary, hmited manner, will have place in the new
world absolutely. As there the beloved city is the central point
of the kingdom of God, xx. 9, so it is here ; as there the true
Israel is a nation of priestly kings dweUing at the centre, serving
God and governing the world, so also in the final state (comp
xx. 4, 6, 9, xxi. 12, xxii. 3-5); as there the heathen nations
come, and princes and peoples bring their offerings and receive
the blessing, so also in the New Jerusalem, everything there,
unhke the earthly prelude, is in the most perfect manner. This
representation must certainly appear unassimilative until we per
ceive the distinction which the author makes between individual
heathens and the heathen nations. When he wrote the Apocalypse,
the Christian church consisted of a small number of beheving
Jews and a larger number of believing Gentiles ; the latter had
for him the same importance as their brethren from the Jews.
Christendom, composed of these two elements, was to him on one
side the twelve tribes, the true Israel, the 144,000 elect, the
first-fruits, the priestly kingdom of God, as well as on the other,
the innumerable multitude "of all nations, and kindreds, and
peoples, and tongues." But the woman with the twelve stars fled
into the wilderness ; the existence of the Christian church mainly
outside the Holy Land, and its composition, principally of non-
Israelites, is for John a temporary condition. He expects in the
future that the heathen in the gross will be more obdurate ; but
that, on the contrary, the Jews will be converted to Christ. The
church, consisting of Jews in the gross, and of many, though of
individuals only, adopted from the Gentiles, reigns with Christ in
the millennium on earth ; and — though not expressly stated, but
evidently understood — after the general resurrection and the judg
ment, its number increased and completed by the Christians before
Christianity, the true Israel of the Old Testament, it will reign

PROPHECY. 303
also in the new world for ever. On the other hand, the heathen
nations in the gross are converted only after Christ's coming on
earth, — not- to the saints or to Israel, but they are " Christianized,"
and in the final state form the population of the new world around
the city of God, corresponding, indeed, to the completion of the
church of God by the Old Testament " Christians," increased
from the " devout " heathen of all times. Little, therefore, as we
are to think of an exclusion of the Gentiles from the dwelling-
place of God and His priestly people, or from the enjoyment of
salvation, — the fruit and leaves of the tree of life, the nourish
ment or refreshing and healing are the same for different persons,
— just as httle are we to conceive an identity of those living in
and around Jerusalem. As between the New Jerusalem and the
new world, so there is, and for ever remains, the distinction
between "Israel" and the "nations," the "priest-kings" and the!
people or kingdom, the centre and the circumference. In con- ]
elusion, we find it once more confirmed that the seer is not in
harmony with modern categories. Particularism and universalism
show themselves to be equal in the Apocalypse ; and just as cer
tainly does it appear that the judgments and representations on
each side are not contradictoiy, but are the equally justified
features neither of a particularistic nor universahstic, but of a
view pecuhar to the writer.

THE RELATION BETWEEN THE
DOCTBINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
AND THE
DOCTBINE OF THE GOSPEL AND THE EPISTLES OF JOHN.

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.
IN the year 1826, De Wette wrote, in his Lehrbuch der historisch-
kritischen Einleitung in die Bibel Alten und Neuen Testaments,
II. p. 355: "In New Testament criticism there is nothing so
certain as that if the Apostle John is the author of the Gospel and
Epistles, he did not write the Apocalypse ; or if this is his work,
he cannot be the author of the other writings." This alternative
had for a long time, in the esteem of critics, a sort of axiomatic
value. Within its limits the contrast has completed itself:
while the school of Schleiermacher, as here specially represented
by Liicke, Bleek, and Dusterdieck, accepted the apostolic author
ship of the Gospel and the Epistles, and, on account of the
supposed irreconcilableness of these writings with the Apocalypse,
decidedly denied it to be John's, the school of Baur for a long
time more or less expressly recognised the Apocalypse as the
work of that apostle, and as such used it in disputing the
authenticity of the Gospel and the Epistles ; and to this day, non-
critical theology generally ascribes to the apostle all the writings
of the New Testament known by his name, only because tradition
is in ,his favour.
In the meantime there has long been perceived in many
critics, even of entirely opposite tendencies, a departure, to a
greater or less extent, beyond the earlier alternative. In his
80-4

THE APOCALYPSE, AND THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 305
Christenthum der drei ersten Jahrhunderte, p. 132 (comp. theol.
Jahrb. 1844, p. 691; Kanonische Evangelien, p. 380), Baur
declares it to be an error, if, on account of the difference and
contrast, we overlook the close relation in which the Gospel
stands to the Apocalypse ; that it cannot be mistaken that the
evangehst, in order to use the authority of John in Asia Minor
on behalf of his Gospel, has imagined himself in the place of
the seer, and, indeed, that it was not merely an external leaning
to a much honoured name, there being not wanting an inner
point of contact between the Gospel and the Apocalypse ; the
latter especially offers so many connecting points for the higher
conception of Christianity, that one can only admire the deep
geniality and delicate art with which the evangehst, in order
to spiritualize the Apocalypse into a Gospel, has appropriated
the elements which, from the standpoint of the former, lead to
the freer and higher standpoint of the latter (comp. Kbstlin, p.
498). Even the ultra -Tubingen Volkmar says (p. 43): "The
new form of John or of the Gospel, named by the Cathohc
Church, ' according to John,' consists in any case only — still
thus ! — in an idealizing of the last apostle, who in this
Apocalypse of Judaism has so freely soared toward God, pro
claimed the ' Logos of God,' so fervently testified of the ' Lamb
that taketh away the sins of the world.' " Though, for the
whole Tubingen school, the origin of the fourth Gospel was, at
the earliest, long after the latest conceivable termination of the
hfe of the Apostle John, and thus a fundamental critical article
is in the way of the supposition, it cannot be denied that the
concession, or, more correctly, the assurance of an inner connection
between apocalyptic and evangelic doctrine, notwithstanding the
diligent and skilful denial by Liicke, and also by Dusterdieck,
indicates a noteworthy step in advance. — From an entirely
different side Neander (p. 481, note) cannot recognise the Apoca
lypse as a work of the apostle ; but he finds that it bears witness
of an already existing Johannine doctrinal type ; and as a sign
thereof, he reckons the agreement in the doctrine of the Logos,
the description of the living waters, and many things in the super
abundant descriptive symbohc expressions. Even the similar
apostohc origin of the Gospel and the Apocalypse has gradually
found a series of more or less decided defenders. Weiss,
in his Johanneischen Lehrbegriff, p. x., proceeds upon the suppo-
u

306 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
sition of the genuineness of the Gospel, and reckons himself among
those who regard the inquiry into the apostolicity of the Apoca
lypse as in no way closed. But in his opinion, it belongs in any
case to another epoch in the hfe of John, and therefore to another
stage in his doctrinal development. The same writer, in his
Lehrbuch der biblischen Theologie des Neuen Testaments, p. 656, note,
expresses his view most distinctly, that bibhcal theology may be
fruitful for the solution of the critical question so far as it shows
whether or not there is found in the Apocalypse the connecting
point for the development of the doctrine before us in the Johannine
theology. Ritschl treats the Apocalypse simply as a work of the
apostle, and also regards the Gospel as genuine (comp. p. 48, note),
though he finds tbat, as far as it directly or indirectly represents
the standpoint of the Apostle John, it has far overstepped the
relative contrast between the original apostles and Paul Hase,
p. 25, without reserve declares himself for the common origin of
the Apocalypse and the Gospel from the Apostle John. He finds
in the former, instead of a strict Judaistic sense, only Jewish forms ;
and instead of an entirely sensuous perception, the immanent
presence of a clear Christian self-consciousness in gospel predic
tions and visions, — at least in the form of rehgious poetry, — over
against which there is not wanting in the Gospel the transcendent
and the sensuous. With him, the distinction between the Apoca
lypse and the Gospel is only that of an advance to a loftier
height — externally, indeed — occasioned by the divine judgments
on the Jewish people, but inwardly by the natural development
of the Christian spirit. The Gospel appears to him as a sub
limated Apocalypse, only corresponding in its manifold relations
and analogies to the higher development of John. Lechler,
p. 228, describes the harmony presented by the doctrine of the
Gospel and the Epistles on one side, and the Apocalypse on the
other, as remarkable ; and he calls attention to a few chief points
in order to establish the decided recognition " of the unity of the
spirit, and, in fact, also of the doctrine of the writings themselves
under their different drapery and different aims."
Niermeyer, in his Verhandeling over de echtheid der Johanne-
ische Schriften, 1852, crowned as a prize work by the Hague Society
for the Defence of Christianity, but known to me only through
Lechler's full review in Studien und Kritiken, 1856, 4 Heft,
has compared the spirit and doctrine of the evangelist and the

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 307
seer, and has deduced the result that the Apostle John may have,
must have, written the Apocalypse, the Gospel, and the Epistles.
I am therefore not wholly without precedent, when, starting
from the possibility that the tradition of the common origin of the
writings going universally under the name of John may be in
harmony with fact, I compare the doctrine of the Apocalypse on
the one hand, and the doctrine of the Gospel and the Epistles on
the other, in order to ascertain whether their mutual relations
confirm, or rather demand, the acceptance of the identity of the
authorship, and thereby — since the Apocalypse was written by
the Apostle John — prove also for the Gospel and the Epistles the
authorship of the same writer.
Even for such a comparison, the conjecture raised here and
there, especially by the Tubingen school, that even the Gospel and
the Epistles may be assigned to several authors, is not without
importance. In the meantime, apart from the notorious weakness
of the evidence for such a suspicion (comp. Grimm in Studien u.
Kritiken, 1849, p. 269 ; Dusterdieck, die drei johanneischen Brief e,
I. p. 57), and from the surrender of the same, almost without
exception, by recent critics (comp. Keim, I. 149 ; Holtzmann in
Schenkel's Bibellexikon, III. 349), it is open to every man to ob
serve in the result, all those positions which stand or fall with the
unity of the authorship of the Gospel and the Epistles. I do not
think that the issue will thereby be essentially altered.
Certainly I need for my undertaking some concessions. First,
I require to be granted — what, indeed, is commonly admitted
— that the destruction of Jerusalem lies between the production
of the Apocalypse and the other Johannine writings, and there
fore that the differences between the two, which can be satisfac
torily explained by this event, do not involve different authors.
Secondly, it may be granted me beforehand, that a Gospel, especially
apostolic Epistles, and an Apocalypse — apocalyptic letters also —
are various in their object. Further, that an Apocalypse and a
Gospel, as such, must treat of manifoldly various subjects and on
various sides ; consequently there is no proof of various authorship
if one writing contain many things of which the other is silent,
provided this difference arises from the evangelic or the apoca
lyptic character of the book. Finally, it may be granted on one
side, and on the ground of our representation of the apostolic doc
trine, that the seer has not presented his ideas unveiled, but with

308 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
full consciousness, and to the best of his ability, has clothed them in
Old Testament forms of speech and thought ; and on the other side,
on the ground of obvious fact, that the author of the fourth Gospel
has not presented the evangelic material chronologically, but
according to premeditated selection and personal views, so that
differences between the apocalyptic and the evangelic doctrine,
which in the respective writings find sufficient explanation in th
different purpose and the different representation conditioned by it,
prove nothing against the identity of the author. When, against
these three concessions, I expressly reject the later stage in the
doctrinal development of John, asserted so emphatically by many
expositors, — as, for example, Ritschl and Weiss (comp. bibl. Theol.
p. 656), — and, indeed, on the double ground that to me the ad
mission of an essential change in doctrinal views and teachings
in the time between the Apocalypse and the Gospel appears to
remove the question of the identity of the author from the sphere
of investigation to that of pure conjecture, and also because I
am certain that an expedient so questionable is not needed,
the unprejudiced reader, so far as I am concerned, will hardly
have occasion to mourn over conditions too severe. Far rather it
may seem to him, notwithstanding the preparation by means
of the representation of apocalyptic doctrine, a bold beginning
when I endeavour to provey by a comparison of their teaching,
that the notorious "fantastical, Judaizing-zealotic " (Strauss)
author of the Apocalypse, and the lauded final reconciler of all
the contrarieties of the first and of half the second century,
the author of the fourth Gospel, are one and the same apostolic
_personality. I expect tolerably general agreement when in this endeavour I
do not distinguish between the doctrine of Jesus in the fourth Gospel
and that of the fourth evangelist. And hardly will any one object
that here I do not, with Weiss, discriminate between the great
mass of evangehcal doctrine and those doctrinal elements, on the
one side dehvered, but still not perfectly assimilated, and on the
other side independent, but not associated with Christ's words.
Isolated doctrinal elements, given by the evangelist from memory,
may not always be perfectly assimilated or independently reahzed
even by himself; on the other side, individual portions of his
doctrinal statements may in his recollection find no point of con
tact with the discourses of Christ (Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 660).

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 309
Both elements bear too little upon our aim to lead us to a special
consideration of them.
It will probably be strongly regretted that I do not compare
at considerable length the spirit or character of the apocalyptic and
the evangehcal theology ; nor is it my intention to deny the truth
and high importance of a remark like that of Baur (theol. Jahr-
bucher, 1844, p. 691), that the narrative in the Apocalypse and
in the Gospel concerns itseK with a great struggle on the part of
Christ with Satan, the prince of this world. And when Weiss
(bibl. Theol. p. 662), among other things, presents as a peculiarity
of the evangelist that he sees everywhere only the pervading con
trasts of God and the devil, hght and darkness, truth and false
hood, life and death, love and hatred, in such a way that he mani
festly takes no account of the various stages of the development,
because he recognises in each only the nature of that which in a
certain measure and degree is reahzed in it; or when he (bibl.
Theol. p. 660) remarks that the law and the prophecy of the Old
Testament appear to the evangelist as a positive preparation and
introduction to Christianity, and, indeed* that the pre-Christian
revelation, in its manner and effects, is often brought by him into
very striking parallel with the completed revelation in Christ, —
we shaU have to show, as the most important result of our com
parison, that these and other pecuharities are common to both
evangehst and seer ; only, first, it should not be expected from us
"—as here and there it has been — that we should speak briefly of
originality, genius, poetic flights, depth of emotion, or, on the other
hand, of the lack of gentleness and patience, in literary historical
categories. Characteristics and parallels of this kind are generally
of only doubtful value, and have for the question before us no
importance. And, secondly, it will not be required that we class
together the common features which we may discover, in a special
section ; we must desire that the reader in this matter will follow
us from point to point with " microscope" and " retort;" and he
who has done this will need no summary repetition.
After Weiss, in his Johannine doctrine, has gained the honour of
, finally estabhshiag the Old Testament foundation, of the Johannine
theology, it may seem proper, in the comparison of the apocalyptic
and thp evangelic doctrine, to keep the common Old Testament,
especially the common original apostohc, and the common properly
Johannine doctrine separate from each other. In fact, I have hesi-

310 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
tated whether I should endeavour to carry out this distinction or
not. Apart, however, from the unavoidable prolixity and repeti
tion associated with it, can there be drawn here a firm and sharp
border hne ? May not the use by the seer and the evangelist of
Old Testament representations occurring in other New Testament
writings be wholly peculiar ? And has not the production of an
Old Testament statement, common to the seer and the evangehst, or
of a common original apostolic representation, on both sides, under
the circumstances, an importance equally as great or greater than
the proof of a specifically Johannine characteristic? From this and
kindred considerations I have preferred generally to avoid in the
comparison the distinction between that which is founded upon
the Old Testament and the specifically Johannine, and to credit
the reader with a knowledge of the Old Testament foundation of
the Johannine theology (comp. Weiss, der Johanneische Lehrbegriff,
pp. 101—191), and at the same time with a corresponding apprecia
tion of all the individual results of the comparison ; and on my
part, as far as I am able, so to present and group the various
results, great and small, that, by their united force, they may pro
duce a common and decisive impression.
It appears to me self-evident, that in a comparison between
the doctrine of the Apocalypse and that of the Epistles and Gospel
of John, based on the ground of a preceding representation of the
doctrine of the former, that we should maintain the order there
followed. The sections here will therefore closely correspond in
number and order.

THE COMPARISON. 1. God.
(a.) The Nature of God.
" Little children," writes the evangelist, " keep yourselves from
idols," 1 John v. 21. The so-called gods of the heathen are to
him just as they are to the seer, according to their appearance,
idols, images, the work of men's hands ; but according to their
significance and nature, — otherwise he would not have written,
"keep yourselves from them," — demons or supernatural evil
beings (comp. Rev. x. 20). He presents God, in contrast with false

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 311
i, as the Creator (comp. Rev. xiv. 7), as the King of nations,
xv. 13, as the only holy, xv. 14 ; so also the evangelist expresses
this contrast in the words, " that they might know Thee, the only
true God," xvh. 3 ; and also when he says, " this is tbe true God,"
1 John v. 20 (comp. ver. 21, and John v. 44, the only God).
It is true, and obviously so, as Kbstlin remarks, p. 483, that
the evangelist expresses the contrast with heathenism by giving
prominence to the nature, but the seer by calling attention to the
attributes of God ; and would not an author now change his
method of representation according as he wrote prose or poetry ?
— In the second of the above passages, however, the evangelist's
contrast with false gods steps back considerably toward the abso
lute sense of the " true," and everywhere else it is with him, as
with the seer, an entirely different contrast which conditions the
statements concerning God. Certainly it is not the same, but
corresponds with the statement, that the evangelist emphasizes
the nature of God against heathenism, and the seer His attri
butes ; when we find that the latter says of God, what can protect
against the world's course — consolation and warning ; the former,
what promise and obligation have in them for Christians against
the nature of the world, the flesh. If we have grasped this differ
ence in the point of view from which the Apocalypse and the
Gospel speak of God, we have with it brought into recognition
the difference between evangehcal and apocalyptic representation,
and the assurance that neither of the two writings will yield a
" doctrine of God ; " and, moreover, that it is accidental, when
the evangelist does not describe God as " the truth," etc. ; we
shall therefore, beforehand, expect in statements concerning God
only infrequent and slight contact between the seer and the
evangehst. All the more remarkable, therefore, are the unmis
takable traces of relation, and even of identity, which upon a
closer consideration press themselves into view. — " God is a
Spirit" said Jesus to the woman of Samaria, John iv. 24. No
even remotely similar statement is to be found in the Apocalypse.
If we get rid of the modern fancies respecting this expression
of Jesus, and understand it as He Himself presents it in the con
nection, what else does it contain but the foundation, lying in
the nature of God, of the prediction that instead of the worship
offered on Gerizim and at Jerusalem, vers. 20, 21, He should be,
and indeed already was, vers. 23, 24, worshipped in spirit and

312 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
in truth ? And in what else does this foundation consist than in
the statement that " God is a Spirit ;" that is, not flesh, or fleshly,
in the sense of the material, the sensible, in the sense of space
and time, or limitation and finitude ; but supersensual, absolute,
perfect being ; therefore He seeks those who worship Him agree
ably with His nature, not outwardly, materially, in symbolical
forms, but in the element of the spirit, and therefore in a really
corresponding manner. But we remember how frequently and
expressly the Apocalypse represents Christians as priests, or
priestly kings, for example, i. 6, v. 10 ; how the prayers of saints
are as incense presented to God, v. 8, viii. 3 ; how the death of
Christ is the great passover (comp. the Lamb) ; how the martyrs
are described as slain and sacrificed, vi. 9, xviii. 24 ; how it is
promised to the faithful that he shall be a pillar in the temple
of God, iii. 12 ; and how it places the throne of God and of the
Lamb in the New Jerusalem, where His servants render Him
priestly service, xxii. 3, 4. If in all this the Christian worship
of God in the present, and its perfection in the future, is un
doubtedly represented as the worship of God in spirit and in
truth, must not the seer necessarily have conceived of God as a
Spirit wholly in the sense of the Gospel ? — Christ says, " As the
living Father hath sent me," vi. 5 7 — " as the Father hath hfe in
Himself," v. 2 6 ; and the evangehst writes, " This is the true God,
and eternal life," 1 John v. 20. In these places God is described
as the possessor of absolute life, as the personal absolute life ; and
we find that this is the sense of Rev. iv. 1 0, x. 6, xv. 7, vii. 2.
Absolute or eternal life is manifestly to the evangehst as important
an element in the nature of God as it is to the seer. The hving
Father of the former points not less decidedly to the Old Testa- •
ment than the living God of the latter. In John v. 26, the
absolute life of God is placed almost exactly in the same relation
to death and resurrection as in Rev. vii 2. — " This, then," it is
said, " is the message which we have heard of Him, and declare
unto you, that God is hght, and in Him is no darkness at all"
1 John i 5. Certainly this is not expressly said of God in the
Apocalypse ; but if He who sits on the throne is like unto jasper,
iv. 3 ; — if the city needs not the light of the sun, nor of the moon,
to shine in it ; because the glory of God doth lighten it, and the
Lamb is the hght thereof, and the nations walk in its hght,
xxi. 24, 25 ; — if there is no more night, and it needs not the light

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 313
of a candle, nor the light of the sun ; because the Lord God giveth
them light, xxii. 5, — so we have already found in the consideration
of these passages in our Representation of Doctrine, that to the
seer holiness is the ethical, essential nature of God, and that this
holiness is similar in its signification to light, or the nature of
light. The statements of the evangelist concerning God as being
light, have no other sense than that in His nature and will He is
holy, ethically perfect or absolute. — It is saidj^God islovej3. John
iv. 8, 16. Nowhere does the Apocalypse affirm this"~bf God, nor
does it ever speak expressly of the revelation of the love of God
in sending or giving His only-begotten Son (comp. 1 John iv. 9 ;
John iii. 1 6). But when the evangelist writes, " Behold what
manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should-
be called the sons of God," 1 John iii. 1, there answers to it
that word in Rev. xxi. 7, " He that overcometh shall inherit all
things ; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son." That the
love of God generally is no strange thing to the seer, we have
shown in detail in the proper place. — When Christ says, " My
Father, which gave them me, is greater than all ; and no man is
able to pluck them out of my Father's hand," John x. 29, we are
reminded less strikingly of the Lord God, the Almighty, than of
the Lord of the earth, who will not permit His two prophets to be
hurt unavenged, Rev. xi. 4-13 ; we think of the scene where the
four angels could not hurt the earth, or the sea, or the trees,
until the servants of God were sealed in their foreheads, vii. 1-3 ;
of the Lord holy and true, to whom the martyrs cry for vengeance,
vi. 10, 11 ; and of the appearance of Christ, as He held the seven
stars in His right hand, i 16 (comp. ii. 10, hi 10). That God
is greater than our hearts, and knoweth all things, 1 John iii. 20,
connects itself in meaning with a statement, not indeed concern
ing God, but Christ, according to which all the churches shall
know that He searches the reins and hearts, and gives to every
man according to his works, ii. 23. The "faithful emijust" God
of 1 John i 9, and the " righteous " Lord, " which art, and wast,
and shalt be," Rev. xvi. 5 (comp. xv. 3, xvi. 7, xxi. 5, xxii. 6),
as well as the Holy Father upon whom Christ calls, John xvii. 11,
and the Lord, holy and true, to whom the martyrs pray, vi. 10
(comp. the thrice holy of iv. 8), need no proof of their relation
ship. — That true, real, the truth, has with the evangelist, besides
the meaning of moral truthfulness, still another, will not be dis-

314 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
puted. But it is ever worthy of notice that dXi)9iv6<; occurs in
proportion more frequently with the evangehst and the seer than
with any other New Testament writer ; that this word, occasionally
with the evangelist, and always with the seer, expresses the con
trast to the deceptive, lying, and false in a moral sense; for
example, " herein is that saying true," John iv. 37; " His record
is true," xix. 35 (comp. Rev. xix. 9, xxi. 5, xxii. 6); that as the
seer uses dXr}divo<; more in the sense of dXrjdr)?, so also the evan
gelist does not distinguish these words from each other (comp.,
for example, John xix. 35), and that he, like the seer, gives great
prominence — positively and negatively — to the moral truthfulness
of God (for example, John iii. 33, viii. 26 ; 1 John i 10, v. 10).
— With regard to the wrath and the love of God, we may with
reason say that, in the prominence given them, they stand with
the evangehst in an inverse relation to their position in the
Apocalypse. Still, not only is what was said of wrath in the
Apocalypse apphcable to love in the Gospel, namely, that it neces
sarily presupposes wrath as its reverse, as is manifest from the
contrast of perdition and eternal hfe, John hi. 16 ; not only do
such expressions as salvation and condemnation point to the wrath
of God as a very essential feature in the evangelist's doctrine, — but
at least once the evangelist speaks of it very expressly, " He that
believeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God
abideth on him," John iii 36, and thereby satisfactorily shows
that only the difference between apocalyptic and evangelical writ
ing has given tp the anger and the love of God such a different
position. For the same reason, a symbolic representation of God
is not found in the Gospel ; we may, however, mention here
its direct tendency to point to the historical, personal, real
symbolization or glory of God in Jesus (comp. John i 14, xiv. 9,
xvh. 4; 1 John i 1-3, etc.). There is no contradiction between
the evangehst and the seer when the former makes Jesus say :
" Not that any man hath seen the Father, save He which is of
God, He hath seen the Father," John vi. 46 (comp. iii. 12, 13(
v. 37); when He Himself says : " No man hath seen God at any
time ; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father,
He hath declared Him," John i. 18 ; and, "No man hath seen
God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us,"
1 John iv. 12 (comp. ver. 20) ; and when the seer, on the other
hand, describes how he has seen the glory of God, Rev. iv. 2-6.

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 315
For what the seer reports of himself, the evangehst ascribes —
expressly with reference to Christ, and on account of Isa. vi,
tacitly with reference to God— also to the prophet Isaiah, "These
things said Esaias when he saw His — Christ's — glory, and spake of
Him," John xii. 41 ; and as the evangelist expects for Christians
of tbe heavenly state the vision of God in the sense in which the
Son sees Him (John xii. 45, xiv. 7, 8, 3 John 11, do not apply
here), " we shall see Him as He is," 1 John ih. 2, so the seer
writes, " and they shall see His face," xxii. 4.
(b.) God's Works.
The foundation of the world appears in John xvii. 24 under
the same name as in Rev. xih. 8, xvii. 8, and is referred to in
tbe expression, " before the world was," John xvii. 5 ; in the
sentences, " all things were made by Him (the Word), and without
Him was not anything made that was made ; " " In Him was
life," John i. 3, 4; "my Father worketh hitherto," John v. 17 ;
but it is naturally less frequently and prominently brought forward
in the Gospel than in the Apocalypse, for which omnipotent
power revealed in the creation, as well as the sole right of God
to the world founded thereon, in contrast to the manifest opposi
tion of the course of this world, must have had the greatest
significance. Still more is God's government of the world kept
back in the Gospel ; it meets us almost only in the saying of Jesus
already quoted, v. 1 7, and evidently on account of the purpose of
the book. The characteristic " shall " and " given " of the seer
meets us again with the evangehst (comp. John iii. 14, xii. 34,
xi. 51, xii. 33, iii. 30, ix. 4, xx. 9, iii. 27, v. 26, 36, xix. 11,
etc.). The relation between God and men is, with the evangelist
as with the seer, wholly disturbed ; by what means and to what
extent, the section on the devil and on mankind will tell
Therefore the activity of God is directed on one side to the deliver
ance of men from perdition, and on the other to the bringing His
glory or Himself into recognition. The evangelist speaks of
deliverance, or " salvation," iv. 22, precisely as the seer, vii. 10,
xii. 10, xix. 1 (comp. to deliver, John hi. 17, xii. 47, v. 34, x. 9 ;
the deliyerance, John iv. 22; and the Deliverer, John iv. 12;
1 John iv. 14, as well the negative and positive contents : shall
not perish, but shall live : life, shall have eternal life, of which

316 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
we shall treat later). The glorification of God is certainly only
seldom specially mentioned in the Apocalypse, xix. 1, vii. 12,
iv. 11 (comp. xi. 13, xiv. 7, xvi. 9) ; while the same substantially
as well as verbally is very often introduced in the Gospel, for
example, in vii. 18, xi. 4, 40, xii. 28, xih. 31, 32, xiv. 13, xv. 8,
xvii. 1, 4; but instead of this, the Apocalypse brings the glorifi
cation of God into almost all its episodes ; for what is becoming
a King, or making Himself a King, or taking the power, etc., of
which we find in the Gospel only weak analogies in the kingdom
of God, John iii. 3, and in the kingdom of Christ, xviii. 36, 37,
but the evangelical glorification in poetic concrete expression?
The contact of the two writings at this point is, in fact, very
complete. It is true that if the exposition of God's plan with
the world is to be taken into account, the Gospel and the
Apocalypse, agreeably with their purpose, widely diverge: the
Apocalypse has to do with the completion of God's purpose, Rev.
x. 7, and therefore describes His righteous judgments (comp. Bev.
xvi 7, xv. 3, 4), and presupposes the revelation of God in Jesus ;
on the other hand, the Gospel has directly to do with this,
and hardly touches the finishing of the mystery of God, for its
design is chiefly to show the same as already essentially present,
and therefore almost exclusively it describes the work of God
in the world, as giving His only-begotten Son, John iii. 16, as
sending Him, 1 John iv. 10; as showing what was to be done
and said by Christ, John v. 20, xii. 49, 50 ; as glorifying Christ,
viii. 54, xii. 23, xiii. 31, 32; as glorified in Christ, xih. 31, 32,
xii. 28, xiv. 13, etc. — But would there be any difficulty in main
taining this distinction in the points of view, if the seer and the
evangehst, in doctrines still to be considered, were in the contents
of their statements less frequently in contact than we shall find
them to be ? 2. The Angels.
When the evangehst reports that " others said, An angel spake
to Him," xii 29, it points only to popular belief in angels; still
it cannot be disputed that there is a close relation between the
voice from heaven, which the multitude said was thunder, and
some the voice of an angel, and the cry of the angel after which
the seven thunders uttered their voices, and whose words the seer

o

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 317
was about to write, Rev. x. 3, 4, But when the evangehst narrates
how Mary Magdalene saw two angels in white sitting in the
sepulchre of the Lord, — one at the head, and the other at the feet,
where the body of Jesus was laid, — and how they said to her,
"Woman, why weepest thou ?" the faith of the evangelist himself
in the existence of angels is proved. The words of Christ to His
disciples, " Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see
heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending
upon the Son of man," i 51, though we may refer the promised
experience of communion between heaven and earth, God and
men, reahzed and reveahng itself in Christ, agreeably with the
connection (comp. ver. 51), only to the miracles of Christ or to
His glory generally, show us that with the Jesus of the evan
gehst there is found the same Old Testament poetic use of angelic
representations as are found in the Jesus of the seer. With
respect to the genuineness of the words : " An angel went down at
a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water : whosoever
. then first, after the troubling of the water, stepped in, was made
whole of whatsoever disease he had," v. 4, I agree with De
Wette in loco ; but if the evangelist wrote these words, or only
something near them, he shared in the Rabbinical representation
of the Apocalypse concerning angels as spirits of the elements,
and at the same time betrays, in a manner intolerably objection
able to such expositors as Liicke, his near relation to the seer.
That, with the latter, angels occur more frequently than with the
evangehst, Liicke, ut ante, p. 740, finds to be natural in an
apocalyptic representation after the type of Daniel and the Old
Testament generally. The case of the angels as bearers, com
municators, and interpreters of God's revelation in the Apocalypse,
in which he finds an important peculiarity against the Gospel,
has been noticed in the proper place.

3. Heaven.
The evangelist, like the seer, describes the creation as a compact
whole by the term "world," John xvii. 5, 24 (comp. Rev. xiii 8),
and with relation to the sum of its parts by the phrase " all," or
"all things," John i. 3 (comp. Rev. iv. 11). It is not surprising
that with him the poetic description of the world in its chief
divisions is wanting. But the names of those chief divisions

318 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
serve him to designate tlie various spheres of existence ; heaven is
the region of the supersensual, the higher and divine ; earth, the
region of the earthly, lower, and human existence. That he has
recognised a third — the hellish, devihsh, anti-ideal existence — is
imphed in the meaning which he attaches to the devil This,
however, will find more direct expression in the chapter on per
dition. — The heaven, with which we have to do here, comes before
the evangelist in a physical, though general sense, only in xii. 28,
xvii. 1 ; but in a tropical sense more frequently, as in i. 32, 51,
iii 13, xxvii. 31, vi. 31-33, 41, 42, 50, 58. In this sense Jesus
also calls it the "above," the higher world, viii. 23 (comp. ih.
3, 7,, 31, xix. 11) ; His " Father's house," xiv. 2. He means this
when He says : " from the Father," xv. 2 6, xvi. 2 8 ; " to the Father,"
xvi 10, 17; "to Him that, sent me," xvi 5; "where He was
before," vi. 62; "whither I go," xiii 33, 36; "where I am,"
xii. 26, xiv. 3 ; and others mean this when they say : " from God,"
iii. 2, xvi. 30. Of apocalyptic appliances and objects in heaven,
such as thrones, altars, ark of the covenant, etc., we do not meet
with one in the evangelist ; but that saying of Christ's, " in my
Father's house are many mansions," xiv. 2, shows that the evan
gehst had the same local symbolic conception of heaven as the
region of the ideals of the holy places on earth. That the heaven
of the evangelist, like that of the seer, had God, Christ, the Spirit,
and the angels for inhabitants, needs no proof ; nor does it need
stating that the twenty-four elders and the four living creatures
are not mentioned in the Gospel. That the Christian conquerors,
with the evangehst, have their place, in heaven, we shall show
later. The seer speaks of those who dwell in heaven ; so in the
Gospel we hear Christ speak of many mansions in His Father's
house; and if, with Hengstenberg, we think of the heavenly
inhabitants of the Apocalypse as Christians, so far as exalted above
the world they hve in the sphere of the ideal, we find the parallel
in John iii. 13 (comp. i 18), " No man hath ascended up to heaven,
but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is
in heaven." The conditions and incidents in heaven are naturally
not represented in the Gospel apocalyptically ; we have compre
hensive names instead, — " If I have told you earthly things, and
ye beheve not, how shall ye beheve if I tell you of heavenly
things ? " iii. 1 2. But many comparisons may be made in parti-
• culars ; for example, between the open heaven to and from which

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 319
angels ascend and descend upon the Son of man, John i. 52, and
the heaven of the Apocalypse, whose God has power over the
plagues, Rev. xvi. 9, and from which the angels so frequently
descend to accomphsh God's purposes on the earth ; or between
the locality where Christ is, and where His servants shall be also,
John xii. 26, and the hill of Zion where the Lamb stands, and the
144,000 who follow Him whithersoever He goeth, Rev. xiv. 1-4.
Instead, however, of losing ourselves in individual comparisons,
we would rather establish the fact that the evangelist, not less
than the seer, whether he calls it heaven or uses circumlocution,
means the ideal world, or the ideal sphere of existence in the
widest and fullest sense of the word ; but that evidently, with the
former, heaven is mentioned almost exclusively as the place where
Christ was before, vi. 62 ; from which He has come down, ih. 13,
xvi. 28 (comp. ih. 2, xiii. 3) ; in which He is, iii. 13 ; whither He
wiU go, vi 62, xiii. 33, 36 ; and where He will be, xii. 26, xiv. 3.
On the contrary, it is mentioned in the Apocalypse chiefly as the
region from which proceed God's judgments on the world, and in
which the blessed result of the same is already present. The
" new" of the seer meets us with the evangehst only in the " new
commandment," xiii 34 ; 1 John ii. 7, 8 ; 2 John 5. It is only
when we understand the " new " of the evangelist in the sense of
the seer, — not merely as that which has had no existence before,
but also as that which belongs to the ideal sphere, — that all
hesitation about the expression of the evangehst passes away ; at
the same time, it is worthy of notice upon what foundation the
statement, " the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth,"
1 John ii. 8, is based.

4. The Devil.
Of the designations of the evil principle in the Apocalypse,
there meet us in the Gospel and the Epistles : " the devil," John
vi 70, viii. 44, xih. 2 ; 1 John ih. 8, 10 ; and " Satan," xiii. 27.
We do not find either the serpent or the dragon ; " the evil one,"
John xvh. 15 ; 1 John ii. 13, 14, ih. 12, v. 18, 19 ; and " the
prince of this world," xii. 31, xiv. 30, xvi. 11 (comp. 1 John
iv. '4), are new. We found that the seer would have given the
contents of xii. 7-9 (comp. xii. 4) in another form, if there had
not been in his memory, on one side, the standing of Satan before

320 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
God in heaven from the Old Testament, and on the other, from
Jewish ideas, his fall and expulsion, as well as the defection of a
part of the angels. Closely corresponding to this is the ovk earn-
tcivai of the devil in the truth, John viii. 44. Little as in itself
it describes his fall, still, in its peculiar form, it can be explained
only on the supposition that, according to the conception of the
evangelist also, the devil has fallen from God. Certainly, — and
so far Kbstlin, p. 128, is right in his assertion that, with the
evangehst, the doctrine of the devil excludes the thought of his
having been a good spirit, — with the evangelist as with the seer,
the retrospect to the fall of the devil before the beginning of time
is thrust far into the background, — at one time by a rehgious
historical regard to his works from the commencement of the
human race, and at another -by a, so to say, speculative view of
the same as the personal original principle of all evil appearing in
time. The devil with him stands to God in a relation the direct
reverse of that of the Logos. As the Logos is God, and tends to
God, and is in constant union with Him, and is the principle of
all that is godly in the world ; so the devil is antigod, ahenated
from God, in constant apostasy from Him, and is the principle of
all that is ungodly. It appears to us that, with the seer, the devil
takes precisely the same position. As the latter does not lack the
association of such a conception with that of the creation of all
things by God, so with the evangelist the creation and the evil
principle stand directly together. There also meets us in the
attributes and activities of the evil principle a striking agreement
between the seer and the evangelist ; falsehood and murder, or
persecution, are here, as there, the two essential features of his
character. The old serpent that deceiveth the whole world dis
tinctly looks forth from the devil, who, " when he speaketh a lie,
he speaketh of his own, for he is a har, and the father of it,"
viii. 44 (comp. Rev. iii. 9). We may compare also, to tempt,
temptation, the tempter, John vii. 12, 47; 1 John i. 8, ii. 26,
iii. 7, iv. 6; 2 John 7; Rev. ii. 20, xii 9, xiii. 14, xviii. 23,
xix. 20, ih. 8, 10. The great dragon is unmistakeably the apoca
lyptic " prince of this world ; " his being red finds its interpreta
tion in the words : " he was a murderer from the beginning," John
viii. 44 (comp. 1 John iii. 10, xii. 15 ; Rev. ii. 9, 10, 13). When,
in addition to the terms devil and Satan, the " evil one " appears
in the Gospel as a proper name of the evil principle, its absence

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 321
in the Apocalypse is satisfactorily explained by its abstractness.
That Satan and the, devil are with the evangelist only varieties
in language and not in meaning, is shown by a comparison of
John xiii 2 and 27. Naturally we need not expect to find the
accuser of the heavenly brethren with him ; but, apart from the
striking parallel of Rev. xii. 11 and 1 John ii. 13, 14, we shall
find the sense of the apocalyptic statement, namely, that until the
overthrow of the devil, the pious, in a manner different from the
world, were subject to the devil, very definitely expressed in his
doctrine. — How the case stands in the eye of the seer with
regard to the position of the devil in heaven, has been shown in
the proper place; the parallel to Rev. xii 7-9 is John xii. 31,
xvi. 11 (comp. John xiv. 30, xvi. 33). — The angels of the devil,
is language which belongs solely to the Apoealypse. Demons are
known also to the evangelist, vii. 20, vhi 48, 49, 52, x. 20, 21 *
also unclean spirits, though he does not thus designate them,
1 John iv. 1-3. — "The Satan of the Apocalypse," writes Kbstlin,
p. 495, "has great similarity to the Johannine prince of this
world;" and (p. 496), "without doubt the Satan and the Anti
christ of the Apocalypse are to be regarded essentially under the
presuppositions which have conditioned the Johannine doctrine
respecting these enemies of Christendom, and which at the same
time make explicable the extreme power and wickedness which
are ascribed to them by John." 5. Perdition.
At the first glance, the difference between the seer and the
evangehst on the doctrine of the abyss seems greater. We seek in
vain in the latter for the same or even a similar expression, in
vain for the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, and in
vain also for all those existences which the seer represents as
coming up from the abyss. And yet Christ speaks there of " the
son of perdition," John xvii. 12 ; He says that those who believe
in Him shall "not perish," iii. 15, 16 (comp. vi. 39, x. 28, xi. 50,
xviii. 9, xii. 25); and unmistakeably there stands before us the
perdition into which the beast of the Apocalypse goeth, Rev. xvii.
8, 11. And what is the "death," for example, of John vi 50,
xi. 26, viii. 51, 52 (comp. vhi. 21, 24), except the death of the
Apocalypse, ii. 11, xx. 6, 14? Indeed, little as, with the evan-
x

322 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
gelist, an anti-ideal sphere of existence, with its second death, its
perdition, opposed to the heavenly ideal sphere of existence, with
its eternal life, its salvation, comes into the foreground, it still
belongs to his doctrine as essentially as to that of the seer. We
may notice, moreover, that as the conception of eternal life, as
already manifest in Christ and present in believers, and also that
of perdition, as already decided and present with unbelievers,
obviously agrees with the Apocalypse ; so also the surprise, or
overtaking of men by the darkness, and their walking in darkness,
whereby they know not whither they go, John xii. 35 ; 1 John ii.
11 (comp. John xii. 46) ; the death in sin, John viii. 21, 24; the
abiding of the wrath of God, iii. 36 ; the condemnation, hi 18;
death, v. 24 ; 1 John iii. 14, v. 16, 17 ; and many similar things,
with the evangehst, agree with a much more concrete meaning—
they are the conditions of the abyss, in their beginning, present
already (comp. John ih. 18) in sin and unbelief.
6. The Earth and Mankind.
The earth, in the proper sense of the word, does not occur
with the evangehst. Mankind dwelling upon it, whom the seer
describes by the names " earth, world, inhabitants of the earth,"
are called by the evangehst "the world," John vii. 4, viii. 26,
xii. 19, xviii. 20. The individuals are "men," which term the
seer also has frequently.
In the conception of the nature of men there is harmony
between the seer and the evangelist. Though the latter often
designates by " the flesh " the opposite of " spiritual" life, which
is not expressed in the Apocalypse, he still uses the word for the
sensible, material, physical, common to men and animals, John
i. 14, vi 51-56 ; 1 John iv. 2, 3 ; 2 John 7. But man, as such,
has with him also a body, John ii. 21, xix. 38. The living soul,
as the principle of annual life, we do not meet with in the evan
gelist ; but we find the spirit as the principle of the super-animal
life, John vi. 63. He has certainly the spirit as well as the soul,
as the dichotomic description of the inner nature, John xi. 33,
x. 24, xii. 27, which is accidentally wanting in the Apocalypse.
To the soul, as the sentient life principle of man, Rev. xii. 11,
there is an almost verbal parallel in John xii. 25. As a name
for the desiring and avoiding life, as a designation of the life

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 323
which is not extinguished in death, the soul is not used by the
evangelist (comp., however, John xii. 25). The heart is with the
evangehst the seat of feeling, desire, purpose, resolution, — for
example, John xii. 40, xiii. 2, xiv. 1, xvi. 6, 22. He does not
mention the understanding.
, The expression " the world," or rather " this world," is used by
the evangelist instead of the apocalyptic names, " the earth," " the
earth and the sea," " the earth and the heaven," " the first heaven,
and the first earth, and the sea," for that which lies between the
ideal and the anti-ideal, the earthly sphere of existence, — for
example, John i. 10, iii. 17, 19, vi. 14, ix. 5, xi. 27, xii 46,
xiii. 1, xvi. 28, 33, xvii. 11-16, xv. 18, xviii. 37; 1 John iv. 1,
iii. 9; John i 9, viii. 23, ix. 39, x. 36, xi. 9, xh. 25, xiii 1,
xiv. 30, xvi. 11, xviii. 36; 1 John iii. 17, iv. 17. But "this
world" reminds us of the Rabbinical contrast of this and future
aeons ; and it thus corresponds more with the apocalyptic " first
heaven and first earth," or the first, in distinction from the new
heaven and the new earth, or the " new " (comp. Rev. xxi. 1, 4, 5).
The other designation of the evangehst for the earthly sphere of
being, " beneath," in distinction from that which is " above," or
higher, vhi. 23 (comp. iii. 31), springs from another view, but has
its parallel in the apocalyptic " earth and sea," in distinction from
heaven (comp. Rev. xii, 12). Indeed, in surprising agreement
with the Apocalypse, the Gospel uses, interchangeably with the
expression beneath, and in contrast with heaven, the expression
the earth, John hi. 31 ; and in contrast with the heavenly, the
earthly, hi. 12.
As the seer does not expressly say that the first heaven and
the first earth were originally good, but implies it in his doctrine
that God created all things for His good pleasure, iv. 11 (comp
hi. 14, Christ the beginning of the creation) ; so the evangelist
does not anywhere speak of the original goodness of this world,
but assumes it as self-evident when, according to him, all things
were through the Logos, John i. 3, 10. That the evangehst
regards the change as having taken place in the same manner as
the seer, namely, through the fall and the loss of paradise, is
shown when, in almost universal parallelism with the Apocalypse,
he says that the devil, who is a liar, and the father of lies, vhi. 44,
is a murderer from the beginning, viii 44 ; that he sinned from
the beginning, 1 John iii 8 ; and also makes an expressive

324 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
reference to Cain and Abel, 1 John iii. 12, and to the water,
John iv. 10-14, as well as to the bread of life, John vi 27-35.
The state of the world, entering with this change, the seer
describes, on its subjective side, in peculiar and entirely general
language, — unrighteous, unrighteousness, unrighteous deeds, sins ;
works, in a bad sense. In the evangelist also we meet with
peculiar and general expressions, — unrighteous, or unrighteous
ness, vii. 1 8 ; and stronger, — sin, 1 John v. 17; and then the
strongest, " transgression of the law," 1 John 3, 4 (comp; vers.
7, 8). Individual acts are called sins, John i 29, viii 7, 21 ;
1 John i 7-10 (comp. John v. 14, vhi 11, ix. 16, 24, 25;
1 John hi. 8) ; works, in a bad sense, John iii. 2 0 ; evil works,
John iii 19; evil, ih. 20. In the naming of individual sins
there is only httle agreement between the seer and the evangelist';
and it is easily understood, because the former has to do chiefly
with the moral state of the heathen world in its concrete features ;
the latter, on the other hand, chiefly with the moral condition of
Christendom in its inner relations. It must appear all the more
significant that in the evangelist we meet with idol-worship in a
very express warning, 1 John v. 2 1 ; that as the transgressions of
the second table come into prominence with the seer, especially
in murders, sorceries, fornications, and thefts (comp. Rev. ix. 21),
so with the evangelist they appear in " the lusts of the flesh, and
the lust of the eyes, and in the pride of life," 1 John ii. 16
(comp. generally, 1 John ii. 15—17 and Rev. ix. 20, 21; also
" the works of the devil," 1 John iii. 8, and the deceiver of " the
whole world," Rev. xii. 9) ; that murder plays so prominent a part
with the evangelist (comp. John viii. 37, xl. 44; 1 John iii.
12-15 ; comp. also the slain in Rev. vi. 9, etc.) ; and that lying, so
strongly emphasized by the seer, is frequently mentioned by the
evangehst (comp. John viii. 44, 45 ; 1 John i. 6, 10, ii. 4,
20-23, 27, iv. 1, 20, v. 10). But when the evangelist, with
unequalled frequency, speaks of the "truth," John i 14, 17, hi.
21, iv. 23, 24, v. 33, viii. 32, 40, 44-46, xiv. 6, 17, xv. 26,
xvi. 7, 13, xvii. 17, 19, xviii. 37, 38, xix. 35 ; 1 John i 6, 8,
ii. 4, 21, iii. 18, 19, iv. 6, v. 6 ; 2 John 1-4 ; 3 John 1, 3, 4,
8, 12, there is still essentially the same view of sin as with the
seer, Rev. xxi. 8, 27, xxii. 15 (comp. xiv. 5). Especially in
structive is John viii. 46, 47 (comp. vii. 18) ; the juxtaposition
of innocence and speaking the truth, and, John iii. 20, 21, the

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 325
contrast of doing evil and the practice of truth, or walking in the
truth, and " doing " the truth, and " walking " in the truth, 1 John
i, 6 ; 2 John 4 ; 3 John 3, 4 ; we may here mention also what
has been said of temptation in the section on the devil Par
taking of the sins of others, against which Christians are warned,
Rev. xviii. 4, finds a literal parallel in partaking of the evil deeds
of others, 2 John 11.
Of apocalyptic images for sin, we meet with impurity or con
tamination, in the history of the foot-washing, John xiii. 4-17,
especially ver. 1 0, as well as in the words : " cleanse us from all
unrighteousness," 1 John i 9, and also in " every man that hath
this hope in him purifieth (dyvi^ev) himself, even as He is pure,"
1 John hi. 3. We are distantly reminded, of the image of whore
dom by .the words to the Samaritan woman, " Thou hast well
said, I have no husband, for thou hast had five husbands ; and he
whom thou now hast is not thy husband " (comp. 1 John hi. 3).
Between the words to the Laodiceans, " Thou knowest not that
thou art blind. I counsel thee to buy of me eye-salve, that thou
mayest see," Rev. ih. 17, 18, and the history of the man born
blind, John ix., especially ver. 39, "For judgment I am come into
this world, that they which see not might see, and that they
which see might be made blind," there exists an unmistakeable
connection. The shame of nakedness, Rev. iii. 1 8, still more, the
shame at Christ's coming, Rev. xvi. 15, appears in 1 John ii. 28,
" that when He shall appear we may have confidence, and not be
ashamed before Him at His coming." The figure of death is very
common with the evangelist; for example, John v. 21, 24, 25 ;
1 John ih. 14. Sin appears to him as slavery, John viii. 32-36.
The seer does not describe sin as debt so expressly as the evan
gehst does, John xx. 23 ; 1 John i 9 ; though, on account of the
Old Testament foundation of . his doctrine of redemption, the
image undoubtedly underlies it. The figure by which the evan
gehst most frequently represents the state of sin — namely, that
of darkness — we certainly at first sight seek for in vain in the
Apocalypse ; but apart from what is more distant,— the bright and
shining garments, Rev. iii. 4, 5, iv. 4, vii. 13, 14,— all that we
have heard of light, in the apocalyptic doctrine of God, the light
attribute of Christ and the church, and lastly and chiefly, the
supremely important position of light in the heavenly state, Rev.
xxi. 23, 24, xxii. 5, show undoubtedly tbat to the seer sin

326. RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
appeared under the image of darkness, and that it was avoided
by him as not being from the Old Testament.
With respect to the two chief features in the objective side of
the world's condition presented by the seer, we find the absence
of God (negative) and the wrath of God (positive), with the evan
gehst, in the oft-recurring emphatic statement that " no man hath
seen God at any time," John i 18, vi. 46 ; 1 John iv. 12 (comp.
iii. 2) ; and, reasoning from the opposite, in the words concerning
the fellowship of Christians with God, 1 John i. 3, 7, their being
in God, for example, 1 John ii. 5, as well as in the wrath of God,
John iii. 36 ; but the other feature — the miseries of life and death
— meets us in the miraculous narratives of the Gospel, — as, for
instance, in the multitude of sick at the pool of Bethesda, John
v. 3, and the words of Jesus to the man who was healed, " Sin
no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee," ver. 14 ; in the
diseased, vi. 2 ; in the man born blind, ix. 1-3 ; in the history of
Lazarus, John xi, especially vers. 33, 38 ; and in the opposite of
eternal hfe, — for example, John xi. 25, 26.
That this condition of mankind appeared to the evangehst
unbroken until the coming of Christ, appears from the statement
that the devil is the prince of the world, and was overcome and
cast out by Him ; that this state was also, in the eye of the evan
gehst, general, — that is, prevailed through the mass, — is evident
from the circumstance that he uses the names " men," iii. 19,
" world," xvh. 14, to describe the ungodly race of mankind, — both
in closest harmony with the practice of the seer. But as little as
the seer does he regard this general state of pre-Christian humanity
as being without exception. With him also there runs through the
whole history the same contrast which now exists between Chris
tendom and the world. As, now, on one side there are the children
of the world, and on the other the children of the devil, those who
are born of God or from God, and those who are of the devil,
1 John ih. 8—1 0 ; so there were before Christ, the children of
God, John xi. 52, such as were of God, vhi. 42, 47, and also such
as had the devil for their father, viii 44. What is said in
1 John iii. 12, 13, allows us to assume that, according to the
views of the evangehst, there flowed alongside each other from
the beginning — that is, from Cain and Abel — two entirely dif
ferent streams, or that two classes of men stood opposite each
other, even the children of God and the children of the devil.

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 327
But while the expression, "the world," as well as the desig
nation of the devil as " the prince of this world," presents
ungodly mankind as a comprehensive whole, as a Satanocracy,
the theocracy is more a self-evident assumption, without, how
ever, entirely lacking an express description; as, for example,
" He came unto His own, and His own received Him not," ill
(comp. Ex. xix. 5 ; Deut. vii. 6, xiv. 2) ; "the sheep of this fold,"
x 16 (comp. Ps. xcv. 7, c. 3). On the other hand, such words
as, " He came unto His own, and His own," etc., i. 11; " behold
an Israelite indeed," i. 47 ; " salvation is of the Jews," iv. 22,
show decidedly that, like the seer, the evangelist essentially iden
tified the theocracy and the Jewish people ; while the correspond
ing relation of the Satanocracy and the Gentile world is rather
presupposed as self-evident, though wholly distinct, as indeed
is indicated by the judgment on the prince of this world, John
xii. 31 (comp. 1 John v. 19), with its reference to the Greeks of
vers. 20-22. That this essential identification of heathen and
Jewish humanity with the kingdom of the devil and the kingdom
of God is, in the sense of the evangehst, as httle as in that of
the seer, an external mechanical one, is seen in that the scattered
children of God, for the gathering of which Christ died, taken in
connection with the nation, can only mean heathen, John xi. 52,
and that those who are of their father the devil, John vhi. 38—40,
are externally the seed of Abraham, ver. 37.
But is the evangelist's contrast of the pre-Christian children of
God and of the devil the same as the post-Christian ? It is true
that the darkness has not comprehended the hght which shines
into it, John i 5 ; that the works of men were evil before Christ,
iii 19^ 20 ; that already a Cain had slain his brother Abel, because
his works were evil and his brother's righteous, 1 John iii 12; but
the world has come to judgment, and trial, and sentence only
because Christ has come, and has spoken, John xv. 22 ; because
He has done the works which no other man did, John xv. 24
(comp. xii. 37) ; and the Spirit has reproved the world, John
xvi 8-10, and the world has loved darkness rather than hght,
John hi 19 (comp. xii 37-39), and has not believed in Christ
because He has told the truth, John viii 45, but has hated Him,
John xv. 18-24. The world before Christ was so far relatwely
without sin, John xv. 22, 24, not yet so hardened and blinded,
John xii. 40, nor so full of hatred against the children of God,

328 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
1 John iii 13, 14, nor so entirely of the devil, 1 John v. 19.
But we need only to clothe this view with apocalyptic forms,
and we have the old serpent and the great red dragon before us,
who deceives the whole world, stands threateningly before the
woman in travail, and after his overthrow, descends to the earth
with great wrath. The world before Christ is more only the
type, 1 John iii. 12, the prediction, John xii. 38-40, of the world
since Christ. — On the other hand, the Old Testament church of God
stands as high with the evangehst as it does with the seer. Jesus
says of Abraham, he " rejoiced to see my day, and he saw it, and
was glad," John viii. 56 ; of Moses, that he wrote of Him, v. 46;
that Moses and the prophets wrote of Him, i 45; that Isaiah saw
His glory, and spoke of Him, xii. 41 ; and that the Scripture
cannot be broken, John x. 35. We may add to this tbe repeated
appeals to prophecy which occur in almost all the important
parts of the evangelical history, for example, John ii. 17, vii 38,
xii. 14-16, 38-40, xv. 25, xix. 36, xx. 9, etc. According to the
view of the evangehst, as also according to that of the seer, the
devout of the Old Testament already had all that is given to
Christians in Christ. But they had all, precisely as with the
seer, only as prophecy in word and deed (comp. the paschal
lamb), therefore yet only in longing hope. I cannot recognise in
John vhi 56 a perception of the fulfilment in paradise, where
the patriarch still sympathized with the circumstances of his
people ; the Rabbinical view, that God revealed to Abraham all
the future, leads not to a seeing in paradise, but to this —
Abraham rejoiced that he should see the day of the Lord, — see
in the sense of surviving, sharing in the kingdom of God in its
perfection (comp. John iii. 3), — " and he saw it " — saw it in the
sense of prophetic vision (comp. John xii. 41), — "and was glad"
— a conception analogous to John iv. 23, v. 25. On the other
hand, the pious before Christ had, in real actuality, the law with
which, in John i 17, grace and truth is contrasted, which Christ,
in conversation with the Jews, calls "our law," John viii 17,
and in conversation with His disciples, " their law," John xv. 25;
which mainly describes the theocracy, the Old Testament, less
according to its eternahy valid side, the word, and the will, and
the commandments of God, John v. 38, 39 ; 1 John ii. 17, hi
22 ; less also according to its predictive, pre-representing side,
the Scriptures, John v. 39, xix. 36, but more according to its

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 329
human, John vii. 22, 23, v. 16-18, temporary, i. 17, imperfect
side ; therefore Moses, especially in the Gospel, has a twofold and
entirely different meaning (comp., for example, John i 17, hi 14,
v. 45-48, vi. 32, vii. 19, 22, 23, viii. 5, ix. 28, 29). The same
evangehst, who represents Christ as dying to gather the scattered
children of God, xi. 52, sums up the meaning of Christ's death
in His giving power to those who believed on Him to become
the sons of God, i 12 ; the pre-Christian children of God were
not yet free, vhi. 32-34, but were under the law, and had not
yet grace and truth, i. 1 7, but stood under God's wrath, ih. 3 6.
Even, therefore, eternal life had failed them ; Abraham and the
prophets were dead, viii. 52 ; the Old Testament saints were, hke
all other men, dead, vi. 49, 58, dead in their graves, v. 28, until
the resurrection at the last day, v. 28, 29, xii. 48. But in all
this, is not the relation of pre-Christian devout men to Christians
given in another form, though in the same sense, as it is by the
seer, in the pregnant and travailing woman, in the accuser of the
brethren, and in the rest of the dead, who hved not again until
the thousand years were finished, xx. 5 ?
7. Christ.
(a.) The Life of Jesus.
As the near or more distant relation of Rev. xii. 1-6 to
the Virgin Mary, King Herod, the Bethlehemitish slaughter,
and the flight to Egypt, accepted by many expositors, has been
shown by us to be unfounded, so now we have to affirm a
negative agreement between the seer and the evangelist with
respect to the birth and childhood of Jesus. On a closer con
sideration, we find also a positive agreement between the two on
this point. It is indeed remarkable that the seer writes, " she
brought forth a man-child, who was to rule all nations with a
rod of iron: and her child was caught up to God, and to His
throne," Rev. xii. 5, and thus, immediately after the appearance
of the Messiah in the world, — for that is the meaning of the
birth of the child from the Old Testament church, — he represents
His exaltation to heaven. But is it not precisely the same con
ception of the hfe of Jesus in the two periods of His entrance
into the world and His departure to heaven, when the evangelist

330 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
writes, "Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things
into His hand, and that He was come from God, and went to
God," xiii 3 ; or when Jesus says, " I am come forth from the
Father, and am come into the world again; I leave the world
and go to the Father"? xvi. 28 (comp. iii. 13, vi 62, viii 14).
Kbstlin, p. 486, finds a difference on this point between the seer
and the evangelist, in that the former gives prominence to Jesus
especially in His descent from Israel, from the tribe of Judah,
and from the family of David, to which the latter is indifferent.
The passages which Kbstlin, p. 133, quotes in proof of this
indifference, John i 46, vi. 42, vii. 42, 27, are so httle con
clusive, that Weiss (johanneischer Lehrbegriff, p. 153) refers to
the last as evidence of the meaning which the Messiahship of
Jesus had for the evangehst ; but here the consideration is
sufficient that the seer does not give prominence to the descent
of Christ from Israel out of Jiidah, and from the Davidic race,
but in sacred language to the Messiahship of Jesus on the side
of power, and so indirectly testifies that descent to us, as the
evangehst does the Messiahship on the other side, which lay
nearest to his immediate purpose ; but not less emphatically does
he imply, and therein also indirectly testify, that Jesus was to
him an Israelite of the tribe of Judah and of the family of David.
That there exists no discrepancy between the indications of the
Apocalypse concerning the history of the life of Jesus — doctrine,
miracle, apostleship, conflict — needs only to be mentioned, for
the pertinent statements of the Apocalypse are too meagre for
a thorough comparison.
In considering the historical declarations of the Apocalypse
with regard to the death of Christ, we arrived, through the
recognition of Christ as the true Paschal Lamb, at the conjecture
that, according to the views of the seer, Christ must have been
slain at the time of the paschal "offering. It is confessedly a
still unreconciled difference between the fourth and the synop
tical Gospels, that, according to the latter, Jesus was crucified
on the first day of the paschal feast, and in the morning;
according to the former, on the eve of the passover, and nearly
at mid-day, thus at the same time in which the paschal lamb
,was slain. The position of the heathen world-power in the
person of Pilate, and also that of the apostate Jewish people
with relation to the death of Christ, as the evangelist represents

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 331
it, cannot apocalyptically be more strikingly expressed than
through the beast which kills, and the great city, which spiritually
is called Sodom and Egypt. As the seer says of the Messiah,
coming with clouds, "every eye shall see Him, and they also
which pierced Him," i. 7, so the evangelist writes, after he has
narrated, xix. 32-37, how one of the soldiers pierced the side of
Jesus with a spear, "again another scripture saith, They shall
look on Him whom they pierced." The common reply to this
parallel, — which is all the more important since the passage in
Zechariah, which lies at the bottom, is nowhere else applied, —
''fhat the expression of the seer may describe mainly the death,
that of the evangelist chiefly the piercing of Christ, we have
already referred to ; but we have there granted that in them
selves the words of the seer may be applied as well to piercing
the side of Jesus as to piercing His hands and His feet. There
fore, be it as it may, the seer and the evangelist are equal, and
alone, among New Testament writers, find in the death of Christ
— or shall we say, with Kbstlin, p. 497, that the former sees the
prediction fulfilled in the advent, the latter in the death of Christ ?
—a very remarkable prediction fulfilled ; will not every unpreju
diced reader see in this a striking indication of the identity of the
two? According to the evangehst, Jesus, when on the cross,
" bowed His head, and gave up the ghost," xix. 3 0 ; can it be
accidental that the seer never uses of the death of Christ the
expression dtrodaveiv, but always says veiepb? iyevero, Rev. i 13,
ii 8 ? The significance of the time between the death and
resurrection of Jesus, which appeared to us throughout the three
and a half days of the two witnesses, Rev. xi. 9-11, is, according
to John ii. 18-20, not strange to the evangelist. There must
have been for him, as well as for the seer, some amount of
unseemliness in the burial of Jesus, when he expressly remarks,
John xix. 42, that on account of the Sabbath of the Jews, they
buried Him there, for the grave was near. The joy of the world,
Eev. xi. 20, meets us again literally in the prediction of Christ,
John xvi 20, that "the world shall rejoice."
If it is the Spirit that quickeneth, vi 63, how can the
evangelist have conceived the resurrection of Jesus otherwise
than that " the Spirit of life from God entered " His body, Rev.
xi. 11, and that thereby He was made alive, Rev. ii. 8, xx. 4 ?
There is with him, moreover, in the saying of Jesus respecting

332 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
the travailing woman, John xvi. 21, certainly the image of birth
for the resurrection of Christ! That the evangelist, like the seer,
conceived the resurrection body as exalted above earthly, limita
tions, but in no way inaccessible to the senses, even bearing
upon it the marks of the death of the cross, follows irresistibly
from John xx. 14-17, 19-21, 24-29. The ascension of Christ
is described by the evangelist in the same words used in the
Apocalypse to describe the ascension of the two witnesses, John
vi. 62, xx. 17, Rev. xi. 12; for the vision of those raised, and
ascending, both have the same expression dewpelv, John vi. 62,
xx. 14; Rev. xi. 11, 12. But we may consider the fact of the
ascension to be represented by the evangelist as taking place
between, John xx. 17, 19, or as begun with the resurrection, and
gradually completed — with which, indeed, John vi 62, in com
parison with John xvi. 10 (comp. ver. 17), the absence of a
difference between the appearance to Mary Magdalene and to the
disciples, even the typical significance only recognisable on this
explanation of the desire " to touch " on the part of Mary, better
agree ; in any case, evangelist and seer are one in this, that they
do not, as all the synoptical writers when ¦ correctly interpreted
(comp. Matt, xxviii. 7 ; Mark xvi. 7 ; Luke xxiv. 50 ; Acts i 3),
conceive of the ascension as having been divided by a long period
from the resurrection.

(b.) The Person of Christ.
"We have been accustomed," says Weiss (johanneischer Lehr-
begriff, p. 152), "to regard the Johannine Christology as the higher
stage of the Christian consciousness, from which there is no
longer seen in Jesus the popular Messianic idea, as with the
Synoptists, but a higher dogmatic knowledge expressed in the
doctrine of the divine Word which was made flesh." Against this
accustomed view Weiss then shows that the proposition that
Jesus is the Messiah cannot be more designedly presented in the
synoptical Gospels than it is in the fourth Gospel, especially in
the first part (comp. i. 19, 20, 34, 42, 46, 50, iv. 25, 26, 29, 42,
vi. 14, 15; Deut. xviii 15 ; John vi. 69, vii. 27, 31, 41, 42, 47,
48, ix. 22, 38, x. 24, 36, xi. 27, xii 13, 15, xviii. 37, xix. 24,
28, 36, 37, xx. 9). "Hardly," he adds, p. 153, "from the
Gospel of Matthew, which is generally supposed to be intended

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 333
to furnish Jewish Christians with proof^ of the Messiahship of
Jesus, can more evidence be brought, even if we consider that
all the places elsewhere in the fourth Gospel, in which the fulfil
ment of Messianic prophecy is referred to, really, count under this
testimony." Such a design certainly did not lie before this
Gospel, inasmuch as it was written for Gentile Christians ; never
theless the great prominence given to the Messiahship of Jesus
cannot have been purposeless ; and this is pointed out very
clearly by the conclusion of the book, — " these1 are written, that
ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God,"
xx. 31. That which Weiss, to whose exposition in detail we
refer (comp. also bibl. Theol. p. 680 ; Weizsacker, p. 260), says of
the relation of the fourth to the synoptical Gospels in the promi
nence of the Messiahship of Jesus, also applies literally to the
relation of the fourth Gospel to the Apocalypse, as a comparison
of the pertinent passages of the former with the Messianic state
ments of the latter, shows at the first glance.
But we must at some length refer to the other Christological
feature, the Logos doctrine present in the Apocalypse ; and against
that which Weiss, ut ante, p. 239, especially p. 250, objects to
the contrary, we must still maintain that the direct and indirect
statements of the evangelist concerning the " Word " imply more
than an agreement in expression, even an actual or historical con
nection with the original Alexandrian doctrine of the Logos ; or, in
other words, contain the doctrine of the Logos itself, whether for
the present we regard it as directly or indirectly from Alexandria.
It is obvious that we are not led to this position by prejudice in
favour of the unity of the Apocalypse and the Gospel. We
might have spared much labour, and still have fully maintained
the identity of the two authors, if, with a great number of ex
positors, we had denied the Logos doctrine to the seer. But
we were under the necessity of vindicating this doctrine of the
Apocalypse without reference to the Gospel ; and the eventuality
of a coincidence in this case with the Apocalypse need not hinder
us from recognising the Logos doctrine in the evangehst.
Certainly, if it meant so much as to ascribe to the evangelist
an a priori speculation respecting the nature of God and His
relation to the world, or more especially if it meant that the
Johannine doctrine comes more or less exclusively from that of
Philo, as 'Weiss, ut ante, really appears to think, then would

334 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
the admission of the Logos doctrine in the Gospel exclude the
apostolic authorship. This at least we do not affirm, but rather
that the evangehst as well as the seer first recognised the
Messiah in Jesus, and only afterward may have found in the doc
trine of the Logos the full truth ; or, in other words, the perfectly .
appropriate expression ; or, in still other words, have seen in the
language and views of their scientifically-educated contemporaries
the correct translation of the Messianic idea of the Israelites.
Therefore, here as well as there, we leave the question open whether
the Logos doctrine came to the evangehst in its original Alexan
drine form, or already combined with the Messianic idea, or
actually apphed to Jesus ; or further, whether the evangehst was
prepared for the Logos doctrine, in this or that form, by acquaint
ance with a popular growing Palestinian Christology representing
the Messiah; or was prepared only by his own impulse, or especially
by a higher testimony on the part of Jesus Himself, to find for his
experience of Him a loftier form of thought. As we said of the seer,
that since he conceived the Messianic idea in its modern form, so
also he must have conceived the Logos doctrine, because other
wise, agreeably with his entire individuahty, he must have rejected
it, so the comparison of the first and the last words in the Gospel,
i 1 and xx. 31, which finds confirmation in a comparison of the
whole prologue with the entire Gospel, — there, it is announced that
in Jesus the Logos was made flesh ; here, it is shown that Jesus
is the Messiah, — proves incontrovertibly that the evangelist also
must have found in the Logos doctrine nothing else than the
modern scientific conception and expression of the Messianic idea.
Weiss, ut ante, p. 154, comes very near to this confession; but
by his aversion to an a priori speculation allows himself, p. 239
(comp. bibl. Theol. p. 687), to be led to ascribe to the evangelist
an a posteriori speculation, which, without connection with the
existing philosophic dogma, must have led him in a more re
markable manner to the same result. Little as we can agree
with this expositor when he denies the Logos doctrine to the
evangelist, we are thankful that, in his interpretation of John
i. 1-3 and 1 Johni 1-3 (ut ante, pp. 241-244, comp. bibl. Theol.
p. 689), he clearly shows how, for the evangelist, all that he un
derstands by " tbe Word " was already given in the Old Testa
ment, Gen. i. ; Isa. ii. 3 ; Jer. i. 4-11 ; Ps. xxxiii 6. Thus the
very same characteristic which strikes us in the seer, namely, that,

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 335
with undeniable reference to the Old Testament, no matter to
what particular place, he calls the Logos " the Word of God," and
with not less striking Old Testament reference affirms the same
to be " the beginning of the creation of God," is proved also in
the evangelist without reference to the Apocalypse. How im
portant it is at this point to observe that the evangelist takes
precisely the same position with regard to the Old Testament
which has such an all-pervading influence in the thoughts of the
seer! We may especially notice also how characteristically
evangelist and seer agree in the circumstance that, as both hold
the doctrine of the Logos, so both only once, or seldom, give it
expression, — the evangelist, only in the prologue of the Gospel
and in the beginning of the first Epistle ; the seer, apart from " the
beginning of the creation," at the commencement of the last of the
seven letters, thus from a high altitude, — only at the appearance
of Christ, and, so to say, at the highest elevation. It may be
noticed also that neither of them at any time puts the term
" Logos " into the mouth of Christ as a description of Himself.
It is evident from what has been said, that just as the seer
neither refers Messianic predicates solely to the Messiah, nor
Logos predicates solely to the Logos, but both equally to the
Messiah-Logos, so the evangehst everywhere, when he speaks of
Jesus or introduces Jesus speaking, had the Messiah-Logos in
both Messianic and Logos expressions equally in his thoughts.
With others, he correctly sees from his standpoint, even in the
confession of the common Messiah -faith, the sublimest faith in
the Logos as a present living germ (comp. the confession of
Andrew, John i 42 ; of Phihp, i. 46 ; and of Nathanael, i 49) ;
but there is not a single case in which unhistorically, instead of
the accepted Messiah-faith, he puts into the mouth of any one the
Logos doctrine itself ; a sure proof that wherever he represents
John the Baptist and Jesus Himself as uttering super-Messianic
ideas, he was not unhistorical, but was certain that by the names
and statements which he there used he perfectly reproduced for
his readers the real contents of the expressions of Jesus and the
Baptist, only in a somewhat different, more comprehensible and
significant form, — a form, so to say, Hellenized, after the analogy
of Luther's rendering of the Bible into German. And the his
torical character of the Synoptists being assumed, it may be
seriously contended that the Baptist, or even that Jesus in His

336 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
apprehensions and teaching, went far beyond the popular Mes
sianic idea, and must have said, only in Palestinian or Jewish
form, what the fourth Gospel reports of Him. Or does it agree
with the statements of the Synoptists, if we assume that Jesus
apphes to Himself the title of Son of God or Son of man only in
a popular Messianic sense ? And are not even these and others,
no matter whether wholly independent or whether in partial
connection with an already existing, loftier Palestinian Christo
logy— the latter is, on the whole, more probable, and especially
according to the Messianic idea of the Baptist — referable, from
Jesus Himself, to a higher expression of loftiest significance, in
which the fourth Gospel preferably presents Him as speaking ?
It might certainly very well consist with the fundamental
agreement of the evangelist and the seer in Messiah-Logos doc
trine, that in individual predicates resting on common ground the
two writers might not in a single case be in harmony. Yet there
is no failure of contact even in particulars. "Jesus Christ,"
occurring at the beginning and the end of the Apocalypse,
meets us in the Gospel only in i. 17, xvii 3, but in the
first Epistle oftener, i. 3, 7, ii. 1, iii. 23, iv. 2, v. 20, also in
the second Epistle, iii. 7. Jesus is described as the Christ
much more frequently by the evangelist than by the seer; for
example, John iv. 29, 42, vi 69, vii. 26, ix. 22, x. 24, xi 27,
xx. 31 ; 1 John ii. 22, v. 1, 6 ; 2 John 9 (comp. John i 20,
25, iii. 28, iv. 25, 26, vii. 27, 41, 42, xii. 34). The Lion of
the tribe of Judah, the Root and the offspring of David, Rev. v. 5,
xxii 26 ; we find again in the utterances of one of the parties
among the people, John vii. 41, 42 : " Shall Christ come out of
Galilee ? Hath not the Scripture said that Christ cometh of the
seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David
was?" The bright and morning star, Rev. xxii 16 (comp.
ii. 28), we have in the glory of Christ, John i. 14, ii 11, xh. 41,
xvii. 5, 22-24 (comp. vii. 39, xh. 16, 23, 28, xiii. 31, 32,
xvi. 14, xvh. 1, 4, 5, 10). To the taking away of the child to
God and His throne, Rev. xii 5, corresponds the exaltation of
Jesus, John iii. 14, viii. 28, xii. 32, 34 ; to the " I am set down
with my Father in His throne," Rev. iii. 21, the going to the
Father of Jesus in John xiii 1, 3, xiv. 12, 28, xvi. 10, 16, 17
(comp. xii. 26, xvii. 1, 2, 24) ; to " the Lord of lords and King of
kings," Rev. xvii 14, xix. 16 (comp. i. 5), "the Father had given

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 337
all things into His hands," John xiii. 3 (comp. iii. 35, xvii. 2).
We are reminded of the key of David with which Jesus opens
and shuts, Rev. iii. 7, by what He says, John xx. 23, about
remitting and retaining sins, and still more by the w-ords, " Him
that cometh to me I will in nowise cast out," John vi. 37.
Once Jesus describes Himself in the Apocalypse as " the Son of
God," ii. 18, and in the Gospel He speaks of Himself in the
same manner, v. 19-23, vi. 40, ix. 35-37, x. 36, xi 4, xiv. 13,
xvii. 1 (comp. viii. 35, 36) ; others also thus designate Him,
i 34, 50, iii. 35, 36, vi. 69, xi 27 (comp. xix. 7), and so
does the evangelist, iii. 16-18, xx. 31 ; 1 John i 3, 7, ii. 22-24,
ih. 23, iv. 10, 14, v. 9-13 ; 2 John iii 9. He is also called
the only-begotten Son, John i 14, 18, iii. 16, 18 ; 1 John iv. 9.
When Christ speaks of God as His God — in which Baur finds
a strong proof of the lower Christological standpoint of the Apo
calypse — the evangelist has for this also a parallel, xx. 1 7. In
the Apocalypse, Christ calls God His Father, ii. 27, iii. 5, 21;
and God is called the Father of Christ in John xiv. 1. In the
Gospel, from ii. 16 to xx. 21, Christ often speaks thus; and from
i 14 to xiii. 3, the evangelist does so frequently. According to
Eev. i 6, Christ has made His people priests unto God and His
Father ; and in John, the Risen One says : " I ascend unto my
Father and your Father, and to my God and your God," xx. 1 7.
Is it not remarkable how almost every Messianic expression of
the seer finds its echo in the evangehst ?
In the meantime the two do not separate from each other at
all, even in super-Messianic predicates. We regard it as significant
that the seer, in both places where he speaks of the Son of man,
uses, not <&?, but fyioto? ; and we must conclude that he desired
by this comparison to characterize Christ as not human, but as
the human form of a divine being, the Logos having been made
flesh ; and on what other interpretation can we at all reconcile
(comp. Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 677) the passages in the Gospel where
Christ speaks of Himself as the Son of man, namely, i 51,
iii. 13, 14, v. 27, vi. 27, 53, 62, viii. 28, xii. 23, xiii. 31 (comp.
xh. 34) ? The parallel of Christ with God, for example, in Rev.
vi 16, xii. 10, meets us also in the Gospel, v. 17, 19, 21,
23, 26, viii 15, 17; 1 John ii. 23. We found statements
applied in common to God and to Christ in Rev. v. 13, vii. 10,
xi 15, xiv. 4, xxi. 22, xxii. 1 ; and in the Gospel also, in
Y

338 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
viii. 16, 19, x. 30, xv. 23, 24, xvi. 3, xvii. 3; 1 John i. 3,
ii. 22, 24 ; 2 John 3, 9. The identification of Christ with God,
as it meets us, for example, in Rev. vi. 17, xx. .6, xxii. 3, is in
the Gospel, according to its real ground, the oneness or the inter
community of being, very strongly emphasized, x. 15, 30, 38,
xiv. 9-11, xx. 17, 21 (comp. xiii. 31, 32, xvii. 1). When
Christ has ascribed to Him in the Apocalypse the same attri
butes, actions, and states as are ascribed to God, we find
examples of the same in the Gospel, and this not merely in the
record of miracles, concerning which we may compare Weiss,
bibl. Theol. p. 684. When the seer speaks of Christ as the Living
One, i 18 (comp. iv. 9, x. 6), so also Christ says : " As the Father
hath hfe in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in
Himself," v. 26. According to the evangelist, Christ calls Him
self the light of the world, viii. 12, ix. 5 ; and the writer speaks
of Him as the light of men, i 4—9. He also says of God
that He is light, 1 John i 5. Christ calls Himself the resurrec
tion and the life, John xi. 25; the life, xiv. 6 (comp. 1 John
i 2) ; and God is eternal life, 1 John v. 2 0. Christ prays,
" Holy Father ! " John xvh. 1 1 ; and the evangelist writes,
1 John ii. 20, " Ye have an unction from the Holy One," that is,
Christ (comp. Rev. iii. 7). Christ prays, " 0 righteous Father ! "
John xvii. 25 ; and in 1 John i 9 it is said of God, "He is
faithful and just." Christ is expressly described as righteous,
1 John ii. 1 (comp. ii. 29, iii. 7); and, John v. 30 (comp.
viii. 16), Christ says, " My judgment is just" (comp. Rev. xix. 11).
As in the Apocalypse judgment is ascribed equally to God and
Christ, — for example, xix. 2, 11, — though the statements of the
evangehst referring to the judgment need an inner connection,
which we shall endeavour to find in the section on the judgment,
we may provisionally point to John viii. 50, where God is the
Judge, and to v. 22, 27, according to which Christ judges. The
" coming," in the eschatological sense, as stated in the Apoca
lypse, of God and Christ, likewise requires, as stated in the Gospel,
a closer exposition, and it will follow in the section on the
coming of the Lord ; but we may mention here that, according
to John xiv. 18, Jesus comes to His own; according to xiv. 23,
He and the Father will come (comp. 1 John ii. 28, 29). The
sending of the angel to unfold the future, which Rev. xxii. 6
ascribes to God, and i. 1, xxii. 16, to Christ, has a close corre-

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 339
spondence in the Gospel, inasmuch as, according to John xiv. 26,
the "Father, and according to xv. 26, Jesus, will send the Com
forter. The action which at one time is expressed as common to
God. and Christ, at another as belonging to Christ only, — as, for
example, Rev. xxi. 23. xxii. 5, — perhaps needs in the Gospel only
the instance already mentioned, xiv. 23, 18 (comp. x. 28, 29).
An immediate change of person from God to Christ is nowhere to
be found in the Gospel ; but there are not altogether wanting
passages in the Epistles where " He " refers to God, though
before, the subject of discourse was Christ ; for example, 1 John
i. 9, ii. 3, ii. 29, and also the contrary, iii. 1-3. Divine adora
tion, which in the Apocalypse Christ so often shares, v. 13,
vii. 10, we find again in the Gospel, in the form of the adora
tion and glorification of Christ, xih. 31, 32, xvii. 1, 4, 5, v. 23,
xiv. 13, xx. 28. Old Testament predicates of Jehovah applied
to Christ, we shall naturally not look for in the Gospel, still the
sense of some of them is to be found even there. Should His
head and hair, white and glistening hke wool, Rev. i. 14, signify
His eternal vitality, we have already seen how strongly the
evangelist declares that, as God has life in Himself, so Christ has
hfe in Himself — is the life. To his eyes as a flame of fire, i. 14,
ii. 18, symbolizing the holy indignation of Christ, we may pro
bably find a parallel in John ii. 1 7. To the two-edged sword
which goes out of Christ's mouth, and expresses His magisterial
power, correspond the judgment and the judging word of Jesus,
John v. 22, 27, xii. 48. . With the countenance of Christ shining
as the sun in his strength, Rev. i 1 6, we may compare His words,
"I am the light of the world, John viii. 12 (comp. xii. 35, 36).
The falhng down of the seer as if dead at the feet of Jesus has
its parallel in the prostration of those who came to apprehend
Him, John xviii. 6 (comp. xx. 28). As Christ claims to search
the hearts and reins, Rev. ii. 23, so it is said that Jesus " knew
aU men, and needed not that any should testify of man : for He
knew what was in man,". John ii. 24, 25 (comp. John vi. 61,
70, 71). The rebuking and chastening of those whom He loves,
Rev. hi. 19, Jesus shows in the foot-washing, John xiii. 1-3
(comp. John xv. 2). The Spirit of God, symbolized by the seven
eyes of Christ, Rev. v. 6, is, as we have seen above, said in the
Gospel also to be sent by Him. The feeding and leadmg to
living fountains of waters, Rev. vii. 17, we find again in the

340 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
Good Shepherd, x. 11, and in the living water which Jesus
offered to the woman of Samaria, John iv. 10-14. In what
sense Jesus calls Himself " the beginning of the creation of God,"
Rev. iii 14, we discover from the prologue of the Gospel. Also
at the commencement of the first Epistle, as well as in Rev.
xix. 1 3, there appears the Logos-name itself ; and the " in the
beginning," and "from the beginning" (comp. 1 John ii. 13, 14),
remind us strongly of " the beginning of the creation of God."
After all this, we may with the fullest justice affirm that the
relation of the Messiah-Logos to God is with the evangelist the
same as it is with the seer, — the Messiah-Logos is equal with
God and still under God (comp. John xiv. 9, 28); He is per
fectly one with God, and yet distinct from God, John x. 30, vii.
16 ; He is all that God is, but has become so through God, or
has received it from God, John v. 26, vi. 57, xi 25 ; 1 John
i 1, 2 ; He has all that God has, but it has been given Him of
God, John vii. 16, 17, xih. 3, xvii. 8, 22 ; He does all that God
does, but God has given, willed, or showed it to Him, John v. 17,
19—21, 30, 36, xii. 49. The evangelist can also, like the seer,
ascribe one and the same thing to God and to Christ ; to God as
the absolute, and to Christ as the mediate cause ; for example,
God sends the Spirit, Christ sends the Spirit — Christ prays to God,
and at His request the Spirit is sent by God. That we have
selected from the Gospel only one or two proofs of this statement
will, with our aim, need no apology ; it seems to us that the
result of our comparison can only gain in importance if we leave
the reader to work out the proof of this somewhat optional point.
Certainly he who demands from the seer that he should present
Jesus to us in detailed discourses concerning His relations with
the Father, or, on the contrary, that the evangehst should present
Him revealing in Old Testament symbol His Messiah-Logos posi
tion, if the two are to be proved identical, would not be convinced
even by ten times the number of proof passages ; nor could it be
proved to such a one that Wilhelm Meister and Faust were
written by Goethe.
There only remains for us now to compare the seer's concep
tion of the various positions of Christ, the pre-existent, the his
torical, and the exalted state, with that of the evangelist- To an
expositor who affirms that the seer, in his direct application of
predicates of pre-existence to the historical Christ, has left un-

. AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 341
noticed the distinction between that which is yet to be realized
and that which is already realized historically, between ideal and
real existence, we have replied, that according to the apprehension
of the seer, who contrasts not the ideal and real, but the ideal and
the historical reality, the Messiah-Logos is from eternity realized
in Jesus ideally, but when the time has come, in Jesus historically.
Is it not remarkable that the evangelist has made himself liable
to the same charge of supposed neglect of the distinction between
the ideal and real existence as the seer ? Jesus says, " Before
Abraham was, I am," John vhi 58. "0 Father, glorify -Thou
me with Thine own self with the glory which I had with Thee
before the world was," xvii. 5 ; " that they may behold my glory,
which Thou hast given me : for Thou lovedst me before the
foundation of the world," xvii 24. Christ frequently says that
He — not the Logos — came forth from the Father, and has come
into the world, John xvi. 28, vi 62. The Baptist says of Jesus,
" He it is, who, coming after me, is preferred before me,"- — •" for
He was before me," i 27, 30. The evangehst says that Jesus
" knew that He was come from God, and went to God," xiii. 3,
and that Isaiah " saw His glory," xii. 41. It is clear that the
evangelist distinguishes, as little as the seer, between ideal and
real existence ; but to him also Jesus during His earthly life was
the Messiah-Logos in historical reality, as during His pre-existence
He was the same in ideal reality. — We have recognised as the
seer's idea of the relation of the historical to the pre-existing
Christ, that Christ in His earthly life manifested His eternal
Messiah-Logos glory, and not only in displays of glory properly
so called, but also in self-humiliation and self-denial ; we said
that the picture of Christ's hfe, according to his views, must con
tain such contrary manifestations harmoniously beside each other.
Does the sketch of Christ's hfe in the fourth Gospel permit itself
to be otherwise characterized ? Self-abnegation in the usual sense
of the words cannot have been seen by the evangelist in the
earthly life of Jesus when he writes, " The Word was made flesh,
and dwelt among us ; and we beheld His glory, the glory as of
the Only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth," i 14.
We may compare, moreover, the narrative of miracles from ii. 11
to xii 37. But, on the other side, there is in the earlier portion
of the Gospel no lack of humiliation, — we think of His continued
denial and rejection,— and from the foot-washing onward the

342 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
narrative is eminently one of humihty, — the sufferings and death
of Jesus, — until the resurrection. Where is the reconciliation
of this contrast ? Undoubtedly in the view of the evangehst,
that the abasement of Jesus, because self-abasement, was really
a manifestation of His glory. It is only thus explained that he,
so specially and emphatically, in all the sufferings of Jesus, points
out their voluntariness, designedness, and the entire absence of
constraint ; we need compare only a few passages, such as John
x. 17, 18, xii. 27, xiii. 3, 4, xiv. 31, xviii 4, xix. 30, and it is
only thus, also, that hght is thrown upon the peculiar use of the
phrase — being lifted up, for example, in John iii. 14, xii. 32, 34.
To the question respecting the humanity of Jesus in the doctrine
of the Apocalypse, we must reply that in it Jesus could not he a
man in the proper sense, that is, a " real " not an " ideal " man,
nor as the head of the human race referable to it ; but rather He
is regarded as the Messiah-Logos, become hke a Son of man, and
become like a Son of man that He might make " men " into
" inhabitants of heaven," or like Himself (comp. Rev. xiv. 3) ; and
with respect to the doctrine of the evangelist, the question can
hardly be answered in any other way. Certainly, the Word is
made flesh, and Jesus is " wearied with His journey," iv. 6, and
desires to drink, iv. 7 ; He weeps, xi. 35; He groans in the spirit,
and is troubled, xi. 33, 38 ; His soul is troubled, xii. 27; He
thirsts, xix. 28; He is a man, viiL 40, but He is not flesh, bom of
flesh, iii. 6 ; He is in heaven, iii. 13; He is from above, and cometh
from heaven, iii. 31; He is not from beneath, but from above, vhi.
23 ; He is not of this world, vhi. 23 ; He says, " whoso eateth
my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life," vi. 54. It is
evident also that to the evangehst Jesus is not a man in the
apocalyptic sense of the human, but He has taken a human appear
ance, flesh in the " ideal " sense of the word, in order to lead men
away from the flesh in the " real " sense of the word, to the spirit ;
to give them life, and to make them like Himself. Neither does
the evangelist know anything at all of a head of humanity ; the
vine and the branches represent something different, xv. 1-8. —
We have seen tbat the seer did not consider the exalted state of
Christ as if the divine glory of the exalted One was not before
possessed, and only given and received at His entrance upon His
exaltation, but that his representation is rather that Jesus had this
glory pre-existently, and as given again in His earthly life ; but

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 343
while in the former case He received it in ideal, and in the
latter in mixed ideal historical reality, He has, on the contrary,
received it as the exalted One in historical, ever perfecting, and,
as it were, increasingly historical reality. And just as little does
there he at the bottom of the statements of the evangehst the
antithesis of to possess and to receive, — the Messiah-Logos indeed
possesses everything as received ; with him also, the distinction is
that between to receive and to possess in ideal and in historic
reality. Only thus conceived has the relation of the exalted to
the pre-existent and to the earthly Christ a good sense, when
Christ prays, " Now, 0 Father, glorify Thou me with Thine own
self with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was,"
xvh. 5 ; and when He also says, " The hour is come that the Son
of man should be glorified," xii. 23 (comp. xiii. 31); while at
the wedding at Cana He had already manifested His glory, and
while, moreover, that glory had already been seen by Isaiah
(comp. xi. 4, xii. 28, xiii. 31, xvii. 10). The gradual historical
progress of the glory of the exalted One, which we noticed in the
Apocalypse, we find again in the promise of Jesus, " He that
believeth on me, the works that I do shah he do also ; and greater
works shall he do ; because I go to my Father," xiv. 1 2 ; and that
" whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that tho
Father may be glorified in the Son," xiv. 13 ; and that the Com
forter shall glorify Him, xvi 14 (comp. xii 32, x. 16). Only the
evangelist knows this progress of the historical development, not
as the seer, merely in the exalted state, but, as we have just seen,
in the earthly sojourn, and, as the prologue shows, in the pre
existent state also. But this progressive histoficalness of the
ideal reahty, with God and Christ, is one of the most striking
peculiarities in the doctrine of the Apocalypse ; and we need not
especially point to the importance of the circumstance, that pre
cisely the same pecuharity, only, in harmony with the design of
the book, more extended and complete, distinguishes the evangelist
also. (c.) Christ's Work.
When in the doctrine of the Apocalypse we spoke of the works
of- the pre-existent Christ, we affirmed only that the description
of Him -as the " beginning of the creation of God," and as " the
Word of God," implies a pre-existent activity. And what is the

344 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
entire content of John i. 3, 4 (comp. vers. 9, 10), but an exposition
of that which hes in these two predicates of Christ, namely, that
He, as the real principle of the whole creation of God, and all
revelation of God, has been active from eternity ?
What we have mentioned as being, according to the Apocalypse,
one of the chief features in the earthly work of Christ, namely,
the word of God and the testimony of Jesus, meets us again in
the evangehst in the same sense. Apart from the remarkable
agreement of the evangehst with the seer in the frequent use of
the words, testify and witness, it is expressly declared by Jesus
in the former, that He came into the world to bear witness unto
the truth, John xviii. 37 (comp. hi 11, 32, v. 31, vii. 7, viii 13,
14, 18, xiii. 21) ; and as expressly it is also said, " The words that
I speak unto you, I speak not of myself," xiv. 10;" The word
which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me,"
xiv. 24; "I have given unto them the words which Thou gavest
me," xvii. 8 ; " I have given them Thy word," xvii. 14; "As my
Father hath taught me, I speak these things," viii. 28 (comp.
ii. 26, 40); "My doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me,"
vii. 16 (comp. ver. 17; John iii. 2, 34, viii. 47, xh. 49, 50).
There cannot be a doubt that the evangelist regarded the word of
God and the testimony of Jesus as one and the same, only con
sidered from different sides ; neither can there be a doubt that
therein appeared to him, in historical reahzation, the general rela
tion between God and Christ. If we must, with the seer, include
in the word of God and the testimony of Jesus, the law and the
prophets also, so it attains with the evangelist its full meaning
only when He who says : " Search the Scriptures, for in them
ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they which testify
of me," v. 39 ; " Had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed
me, for he wrote of me," v. 46 (comp. xii. 41), — has testified of
Himself through the Scriptures and by the prophets, and now
does so by His word, vhi. 1 8, as indeed He must have done, as
the light of men shining in the darkness, from the beginning,
John 1 4, 5, and as the word of God which Jesus teaches (by
the Logos-Messiah) must have been spoken also through the pro
phets or in the Scriptures ; the evangelist distinguishes as little
as the seer between the Old and the New Testament word of God
(comp. v. 38, vhi 55, xvii. 6, 8, 14, 17; 1 John i 10). It is
worthy of notice, moreover, that by the evangelist, as well as by

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 345
the seer, prominence is frequently given to the preceptive side of
the word of God, and that even — who would have supposed it
possible ? — by the commandments are to be understood, just as
with the seer, neither Old nor New Testament commandments
only, but the union of both (comp. John xii. 49, 50 (?), xiii. 14,
xiv. 15, 21, xv. 10, 12, 14, 17; 1 John ii 3, 4, 7, 8, iii. 4,
22-24, iv. 21, v. 2, 3 ; 2 John 4-6).
The conflict of Christ with the devil, to which the Apocalypse
often refers, certainly meets us frequently in the Gospel. " For
this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might
destroy the works of the devil," 1 John iii. 8 ; who does not
think here of Rev. xii. 1-12, especially of ver. 5 ! When Jesus
says to the Jews, " Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts
of your father ye will do : he was a murderer from the beginning,"
viii. 44 (comp. v. 16, 18, vii. 19, 20, 25, viii. 37, 40, xi. 53,
xv. 18-24) ; and when the devil put into the heart of Judas
Iscariot to betray Him, xiii. 2, and entered into him after the
sop, xiii 27, it is only the historical expression of what is apoca
lyptically represented in Rev. xii. 3, 4. Christ says : " the prince
of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me," xiv. 30 (comp.
x. 11—13), and the same is tacitly assumed in Rev. xh. 5. Christ
is crucified, but His crucifixion is His exaltation, xii. 32, 33
(comp. iii. 14) ; and in Rev. xii. 5 the child is caught away to
God and His throne. Christ says, " I also overcame, and am set
down with my Father in His throne," Rev. hi. 2 1 (comp. v. 5) ;
and in the Gospel He says, in the manner we have already seen
to be common to the seer and the evangelist, " be of good cheer,
I have overcome the world," xvi. 33 ; and His death, is going to
the Father, for example, xvi 28, and is also His glorification,
xii. 23, xvii 5.
We cannot expect to find in the Gospel a representation of the
victory of Christ over the devil as the seer gives it, xii. 7-12.
But do we not find the contents of that apocalyptic scene given
by the evangelist ? Christ says, " now is the judgment of this
world; now shall the prince of this world be cast out," xii. 31.
The connection of these. words is, that to Christ, His death in the
trying, ver. 27, as well as in the saving signification, vers. 28-30,
has become fully present; therefore there is also present " now " as
completed in the same, the judgment of this world ; that is, as
through this death, apparently the overthrow (comp. ver. 24), really

346 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
the exaltation of Christ (comp. ver. 32), this world as the sphere
of sin and death is condemned, judged, and ideally destroyed, so—
the same thing seen and extended from another point of view;
instead of the kingdom, the king ; instead of the beginning as
present, beginning and end conceived together as future — through
the same death the prince of this world is cast out, not from
heaven, not from his sphere, not from his authority, but parallel with
" the judgment of this world," he is judged, condemned, ruined—
in a word, overthrown. According to John xvi. 11, the Paraclete
is to convince the world of judgment, that the prince of this world
is judged ; here appears as completed what in the earlier passages
is at one time represented as perfected in the present, and at
another in the future. From this point let us now look at such
words as John -xvii 15, 1 John v. 18, 19, and we shah not say,
with Kbstlin (p. 498), that the evangelist assigns the time of
His exaltation, the victory of the Son of man and His judgment
upon the world, and upon the devil and his instruments, which
with the seer begin only with the second advent; rather with
the evangelist, as with the seer, the conquest of the devil and his
kingdom through the exaltation of Christ in death is accomplished
in ideal reality, and will some time — and when, but at the last
day ? — be accomplished in historical reality. The first half of
John xii. 31, like xvi. 11, presents a close parallel to Rev.
xii. 7-12 ; in the second half of xii. 31 — similarly as we find it
in Christ's predictions of His future coming — the beginning and
the end, which in the Apocalypse are assigned to chap. xii. and
xx., are conceived together. We recollect how the seer in chap.
xii. perhaps does not represent the expulsion of the devil from the
ideal world, but the ideal, or subjugation in principle of the devil,
in the visionary form of an overthrow of the same from heaven ;
and we can scarcely refrain from the supposition that the figura
tive expression of casting out in xii 31, at the meaning of which
from the connection no expositor has yet arrived, will be explained
by the presupposition of the scene of the overthrow of the devil
in Rev. xii. In any case, the objector to the identity of the evan
gelist and the seer must grant that this coincidence respecting ¦
such a cardinal point is a very important element in the contro
versy. That the evangelist regarded the crucified Jesus as the true
paschal lamb follows, apart from John xix. 14 and the history of

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 347
the last days, irresistibly from the words : " These things were
done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of Him
shall not be broken," John xix. 36 (comp. Ex. xii. 46; Num.
ix. 12). On the other hand, the words of the Baptist, "Behold
the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world," refer
too definitely to Isa. liii, especially to vers. 4, 7, 11, 12; besides,
in this connection they can be associated only with the historical
Baptist. But from the manner of the evangelist elsewhere, it is
wholly improbable that he would have given i. 29 and xix. 36
as heterogeneous; and it is just as improbable that he has, without
any medium, applied the type of the paschal lamb to Christ; the
result is this, that in the lamb-representation of the evangelist,
as in that of the seer, the type of Isaiah and of the passover are
combined, but the latter decidedly preponderating; indeed, the
much controverted expression a'lpeiv, John i 29, can find its full
explanation only when we recognise in the lamb symbol of the
evangelist, not less than in that of the seer, a third element,
namely, the lamb in its significance as a cleansing sacrifice.
We pass on to individual statements of the meaning of Christ's
death. In Rev. v. 9, 10, xiv. 3, 4, we found the Old Testament
idea of the sin-offering, and the other Old Testament idea of an
acquired people combined, and both mediated by the later idea of
the kingdom and claims of the devil. In vain we look in the
Gospel for such expressions as " Thou wast slain," or hast per
mitted Thyself to be slain, and "hast redeemed." But Christ
says in His intercessory prayer, " for their sakes I sanctify my
self," that is, " present myself as a holy sacrifice," John xvii. 1 9
(comp. Lev. xxii. 2, 3) ; " my flesh which I will give for the life
of the world," John vi. 51; and, "I lay down my life for the
sheep," x. 15 (comp. v. 13). The Baptist says, "Behold the
Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world," i 29.
The evangelist writes, 1 John ii. 2, " He is the propitiation for our
sins, and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world"
(comp. 1 John iv. 10, iii. 5, 16). Can such expressions be ex
plained otherwise than by the idea of an atoning sacrifice ? The
idea of an acquired people appears with special distinctness in
'John xi. 51, 52, " This spake he not of himself: but being high
priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that
nation ; and not for that nation only, but that also He should
gather together in one the children of God that were scattered

348 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
abroad" (comp. John x. 11, 15, 16; 1 John i 3, 7). The
parallelism of these passages with Rev. v. 9, 1 0, xiv. 3, 4, is
exceedingly striking. Finally, the kingdom and claims of the
devil, from which Christ has dehvered His people, appear in
John viii. 32-36; and especially the words, "whosoever com
mitteth sin is the servant of sin : if the Son therefore shall make
you free, ye shall be free indeed," which, though not standing in
express relation to the death of Christ, form the background,
John iii. 14, 15, x. 11, 13, xiv. 30 ; 1 John iii. 8.
Another prominent representation is expressed by the Apocalypse *
in the words, they "have washed their robes, and made them white
in the blood of the Lamb," vii. 14. When the evangelist writes,
" The blood of Jesus Christ, His . Son, cleanseth us from all
sin," 1 John i. 7 (comp. ver. 9, "if we confess our sins, He
is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from
all unrighteousness ") ; " this is He that came by water and blood,
even Jesus Christ, not by water only, but by water and blood,"
1 John v. 6 ; " there are three that bear witness in earth, the
Spirit, and the water, and the blood, and these three agree in
one," ver. 8 (comp. John xix. 34, "forthwith came thereout blood
and water"), — we have a close parallel to the passage in the
Apocalypse ; though by the present tense in 1 John i 7, 9, the
purifying operation is not described as accomplished once for all, but
as present and continual (comp. Lechler, p. 220). In the passage,
" he that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean
every whit," John xiii 1 0, there is expressed, as so often with the
evangelist, only the general significance of Christ, that which is
given in 1 John i 7 as the meaning of the one fact in His
history, and in 1 John i. 9 as the act of God. The relation of
purification, or washing with the blood of Christ, to baptism
pressed itself upon our attention in the Apocalypse, so it is not
less undeniable in the quoted statements of the evangehst,
especially in 1 John v. 6, 7. The reading of Rev. xxii. 14,
" who wash their garments," has a value for our comparison, so
far as, by its description of the washing as continuous, it would
furnish a more expressive parallel to 1 John i. 7, 9, than Rev.
vii. 14. If we notice the difference between the evangelic and
the apocalyptic method of representation, we shall also observe
tbe similarity of thought between, " Except ye eat the flesh of
the Son of man, and drink His blood, ye have no life in you.

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 349
Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life ;
and I will raise him up at the last day," John vi 53, 54 (comp.
ver. 51) ; and, "all that dwell upon the earth shall worship Him,
whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb
slain from the foundation of the world," Rev. xiii. 8 ; here Jesus,
through His death, the principle of eternal life for all, cannot be
overlooked. The two readings in Rev. i 5, " dehvered us from
our sins," and " washed us from our sins," appear to us to stand
opposed to each other with equal claims ; while the washing has
its parallel in the second passage quoted from the evangelist in
this paragraph, xiii. 10 (Xoveiv), the delivering harmonizes with
many of those mentioned before, especially John viii. 34 (comp.
1 John ii. 12). As in Rev. i. 5 the love of Christ to His people
is emphatically expressed as the motive for giving His life, so
in John xv. 13 (comp. vi. 51, x. 11—13, xih. 1 ; 1 John iii. 16)
it distinctly appears as the moving cause of His self-sacrifice.
Bespecting the universal significance of the death of Christ, we
may compare Rev. v. 9 (comp. vii. 9, 10, with 1 John ii. 2, John
vi. 51, xi. 52). Thus far even Kbstlin (p. 486) finds the agree
ment of the seer with the evangelist, with regard to Christ's work,
very remarkable.
In the representation of apocalyptic doctrine, against an ex
positor who would give to the work of Christ, especially to His
death, a merely typical meaning in the thoughts of the seer, we
had, with the objective, to give prominence also to the subjec
tive side, in its true signification. How would that expositor
maintain his position if we should oppose to him the parallels in
the typical, from the Gospel and the Epistles ? Just as in the
Apocalypse Christians are witnesses, and in the word of their
testimony, Rev. xii. 11, xvii. 6, imitate Christ, the true witness,
Rev. i 5; so in the Gospel the disciples witness, xv. 27, as Christ
has witnessed, xviii 37. As there, Christians overcame as Christ
overcame, Rev. iii. 21, xii 11 ; so here Christians have overcome
the wicked one, 1 John ii. 13, 14, as Christ has overcome the
world, John xvi, 33. There, Christians allow themselves to be
slain, Rev. vi. 9, like the slain Lamb ; and here it is said, 1 John
iii. 16, "He laid down His life for us, and we ought to lay
down our lives for the brethren" (comp. John xii. 25, 26). But
what need of many examples ? He who will see may see, that
little as, with the seer, the objective meaning of the work of

350 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
Christ excludes its subjective meaning, or the reverse, since both
exist in and with each other, so for the evangelist the two sides
are related to each other, as different sides of one and the same
subject. We now turn to the resurrection of Christ. "Destroy this
temple," He said, "and in three days I will raise it up," ii. 19 ;
" as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them ; even
so the Son quickeneth whom He will," v. 21;" the hour is
coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the
Son of God ; and they that hear shall live. For as the Father hath
life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Him
self," v. 25, 26 (comp. ver. 28) ; "this is the Father's will which
hath sent me, that of all which He hath given me I should lose
nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is
the will of Him that sent me, that every one which seeth the
Son, and believeth on Him, may have everlasting life : and I will
raise him up at the last day," vi. 39, 40 (comp. vers. 53, 54);
" therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life,
that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I
lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have
power to take it again," John x. 17, 18; "I am the resurrec
tion, and the life ; he that believeth in me, though he were dead,
yet shall he live : and whosoever liveth, and believeth in me,
shall never die," xi. 25, 26. Of these passages, ii. 19, v. 26,
x. 17, 18, are in their meaning strikingly parallel with Rev.
i. 17, 18, ii. 8, and there needs only a reference to what has
been said in the doctrine of the Apocalypse. The significance of
the resurrection of Christ is once stated by the Apocalypse to be
that Christ, as risen from the dead, has the keys of death and
hades, i. 17, 18; and the same power is ascribed to Him in John
v. 21, 25, vi. 39, 40, xi. 25. But when this significance is by
the evangehst ascribed to Christ generally, and not merely to
Christ risen from the dead, as with the seer, it has its ground far
less in the circumstance that Christ, as reported by the evangelist,
thus speaks of Himself not yet risen, than in the peculiarity of the
evangehst, only recently noticed, that he often states generally of
Christ what belongs to Him only according to a definite side of
His nature, or rather according to an individual manifestation of
His nature ; the seer, on the other hand, wholly in keeping with
his task as an author, gives prominence precisely to the individual

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 351
side and the manifesting fact. Should it be said, on the con
trary, that the seer looks upon Christ as if only through His
resurrection He attains to the keys of death and the world of the
dead, it is refuted by a correct exposition of Rev. i. 17; Christ
is also to him the first and the last, living for ever, who through
His resurrection is only revealed and historically realized as
such, but by no means only becomes such. In a similar manner
with the seer, as with the evangelist, Christ becomes mediator
between God and the world not only through His giving Him
self to death, much more is He also the mediator from eternity
as the Messiah-Logos, who through His death of love has, so
to say, historically realized and actually revealed His ideal as
mediator, and, indeed, in the special sense of the atonement.
Those who have taken a deeper glance, though only at one point,
of the reciprocal courses of thought, as above expressed, will
with difficulty still believe in two different personahties. — The
Apocalypse ascribes to the risen Jesus yet another meaning;
according to i 5, He is also " the first-begotten of the dead ; "
and again I content myself with referring to what has been said
concerning this expression in "the Doctrine," but especially to
the fact that Christ charges Mary Magdalene with a message to
His disciples — " Go to my brethren, and say to them, I ascend to
my Father, and your Father ; and to my God, and your God,"
John xx. 1 7, whereby, as the Risen One, He directly claims for
Himself the relation of first-fruits to His people (comp. John
xiv. 19).
Jesus exalted, John iii. 14, xii. 32, glorified, John vii. 39,
xii 16, 23, xiii. 31, 32, xvii. 1, 5, and gone from the world to
the Father, vii 33, xiii 3, xvi. 5, 10, 16, 17, viii. 21, 22, xiii.
33, 36, xiv. 4, 5, 28 (comp. Rev. xii. 5), with the evangelist, as
with the seer, continues the activity existing from eternity, and
which has become historical in time. With' the evangehst also
the universal sphere of this activity is separated from the special
sphere of Christendom; the atoning and revealing is also dis
tinguished from the governing activity. If we take 1 John ii. 1
with the second half of ver. 2, we see at once in the advocate
with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, the Lamb standing
in the midst of the throne, and the four living creatures, and in
the midst of the elders, the propitiation for the world, Rev. v. 6.
The Lamb with "the seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of

352 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE ATOCALYPSK
God, sent forth into all the earth," Rev. v. 6, according to John
xiv. 16, prays the Father, and He gives the disciples another
Comforter, that He may abide with them for ever; this Comforter,
the Holy Ghost, the Father sends in the name of Christ, John
xiv. 2 6 ; after He has gone He sends the Comforter to His
disciples, John xvi. 7 ; after His resurrection Christ sends the
disciples, as He is sent by the Father; breathes on them, and says,
"Receive ye the Holy Ghost," xx. 21, 22 ; when the Comforter is
come whom Christ sends from the Father, the Spirit of truth
which proceeds from the Father, He testifies of Christ, and the
disciples also testify, John xv. 26, 27. Christ prays even for
those who should believe on Him through the word of His
disciples, John xvii. 2 0 : He is in the Gospel, as in the Apocalypse,
continually the revealer of God to the world. — As in the Apocalypse
Christ sits with His Father on His throne, ih. 21, so in the Gospel
He is glorified by the Father with the glory which He had with
Him before the world was, xvii. 5. God has given Him power
over all fiesh, that He may give eternal life to as many as the
Father hath given Him, xvh. 2 ; the Father has given all things
into His hands, xiii 3. Nor is- the peculiarity of the seer, that
Christ's authority on one side already exists, and on the other is
only future, like that of God,- wanting in the evangelist. We
need only compare John vii. 39, xii. 16, 23, 28, xiii. 31, 32,
xvii. 1, 5 : He is, and will be glorified. — That the duality in the
relation of Christ to Christians, according to which He is the
deliverer, as well as the head of the delivered, reaches to the
exalted state of Christ, is shown by a comparison of 1 John ii. 1
with 1 John v. 16 (comp. John xx. 23), of John xx. 21, xvii. 20,
of John xv. 26, 27, of John xiv. iii. 19, xii. 26, xvii. 24, xvi
23, 26. — The activity of the exalted Christ in the narrow circle
of Christendom is well distinguished in its individual aspects as
little by the evangelist as by the seer. Moreover, the prophetic
activity of the exalted Christ, contrary to the Apocalypse, in
which He appears to the seer, and speaks through Him to
Christendom, recedes in the Gospel. But if we observe, notwith
standing, how the apocalyptic letters begin, " These things saith
He " (Christ), aad conclude, " the Spirit saith ; " if we notice how
both are to the seer the same thing ; and if we further notice
• that to the evangelist the works of the exalted Christ and the
works of the Holy Spirit are also one and the same,— we shall see

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 353
jn the difference of the two writings on this point- nothing more
than the prominence of different aspects, conditioned by their
design and form. If we take into account, in the comparison,
that the evangehst had in his eye, not churches, but individuals,
and that, as everywhere else, so here, the punitive works of Christ
are thrown much into the background, it will be all the more
significant how, with the evangehst, the parallel, xiv. 21, 23, to
the words of Rev; iii. 20, presents itself, "He that loveth me
shall be loved, of my Father, and I will love him, and will mani
fest myself to him;" "if a man love me, he will keep my words :
and my Father will love him, and we will love him, and we will
come unto him, and make our abode with him ; " and the parallel
in the parable of the vine, John xv. 4-6, to the words of Rev. ii. 5,
16, 22, 23, hi 3, 16; and, for example, that in John x. 28 to
Eev. i 16, ii. 1. For1 further remarks, I refer to the sections on
the Spirit and 'the coming of Christ.
8.. The Spirit.
Apart from the meaning — breath or wind, John iii. 8, the
spirit is to the evangelist the opposite of flesh. The flesh is to
him first the external, that which is bound by the conditions of
time and space, the sensual, then that which is in itself lifeless
matter. Agreeably with, this, the spirit designates, first, that
whichis inward, the soul, John xi. 23 (comp. ver. 38) ; then that
which is independent of time and space, the non-sensible, the
immaterial, John iv. 23, 24; finally, that which animates, or the
hfe, John xix. 30, vi. 63. In this meaning the spirit is parallel
with the " spirit of life " and " the spirit," of Rev. xi. 1 1 and xiii
15. More frequently the flesh means, with the evangelist, the mere
natural, or the fallen natural life of sin and death. Corresponding
to this, the spiritdescribes with him the principle which influences,
changes, and intensifies, which is not natural, — it may be the
principle of the supernatural, holy, divine ; or it may be the prin
ciple of the sub- or anti-natural, hellish, or devilish life. In the
sense of the non-natural generally, without distinction of divine or
Satanic, the spirit appears with the evangehst only in isolated
manifestations, when it is said : " Beheve not every spirit, but
try the spiritSi" 1 John iv. 1. The evangehst means the principle
of the subnatural,. hellish, devilish, life, when he speaks of "Anti-
z

354 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
christ," 1 John iv. 3 ; of the " spirit of error," 1 John iv. 6 ; and
of " every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in
the flesh," 1 John iv. 3. The unmistakeable parallel to this pre
sents itself in Rev. xvi. 13, 14. More frequently, however, the
evangehst understands by the spirit the principle of the super
natural, holy, and divine life, in which sense he speaks of it some
times expressly as the Holy Spirit of God, John i 33, vii. 39,
xiv. 26, xx. 22 ; the Spirit of God, 1 John iv. 2 ; the Spirit of
truth, John xiv. 17, xv. 26, xvi 13 ; 1 John iv. 6 ; and in the
mouth of Jesus 'the Spirit is the Comforter, John xiv. 16, 26,
xv. 26, xvi. 7. In this sense the seer uses the word spirit in
every place except those before quoted. That the spirit is with
the evangelist the life, and not the revealing principle, clearly
follows from his general representations, as well as from many
particular statements; for example, John iii 5-8, iv. 10-14, vii.
38, 39, xiv. 16-19. Naturally, the evangelist does not speak
of " the seven spirits ; " but when we find that the seer always
uses this representation when he 'wishes to . describe the Spirit
of God in all the fulness of His nature, and as well when he
considers the spirit independently of God and Christ, Rev. i. 4,
iv. 5, as when he speaks of Him as the spirit which Christ has,
Rev. iii. 1, v. 6, there is at least an analogy to the latter in the
words of the Baptist : " for God giveth not the spirit by measure,"
John iii. 34; and in the words of the risen Jesus, "receive ye
Holy Ghost" — not "the" Holy Ghost, John xx. 22, both of
which may be correctly referred to the distinction of the fulness
from the partial, or from the first-fruits of the Spirit. It was
evidently permitted to the evangelist to describe the spirit
absolutely, as the seer often does, as the spirit of prophecy only
in such connections as 1 John iv. 1-3 ; " the spirits of the
prophets," Rev. xxii. 6, are included in the spirits which, accord
ing to 1 John iv. 1, Christians should prove whether they are of
God. The so-called personality or independence of the Spirit is
acknowledged by the evangelist : we have seen that, according
to such passages as Rev. i 5, iv. 5, xxii. 17, ii. 7, xiv. 13,
with the seer the Spirit stands over against God, and Christ, and
Christians, with full and independent distinctness. By the
evangehst there are presented at every point of the apocalyptic
relation of the Spirit to Christians, to Christ, and to God, the

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 355
most striking parallels. As in the Apocalypse the Spirit speaks
to the churches, ii. 7, etc., and is expressly distinguished from
the bride, xxii. 1 7 ; so the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost,
will teach the disciples, and bring all things to their remem-'
brance, John xiv. 2 6 ; and when He comes He will testify of
Christ, and the disciples also shall bear witness, John xv. 26, 27.
As the brethren of the prophets have the testimony of Jesus,
which is the spirit of prophecy, Rev. xix. 10 ; so the world
cannot receive the Spirit, John vii. 39, but the disciples of the
risen Christ do receive the Holy Ghost, xx. 22. In the Gospel
the Spirit appears in the same independence with regard to Christ
as in Rev, xxii. 17, and in the parting address especially, almost
throughout (comp. John xiv. 16, 17, 26). Still, God has not
given the Spirit unto him by measure, John iii. 34 (comp.
Rev. iii 1); and the exalted Christ sends the Spirit, John xv. 26,
xvi 7, vii. 39 (comp. Rev. v. 6); the Spirit will not speak of
Himself, but He will take of the things of Christ, John xvi.
13-15 (comp. Rev. xix. 10). With the evangehst also, each of
the prophets has a spirit, 1 John iv. 1-3 (comp. Rev. xx. 22) ;
Jesus has, and sends the Spirit. As in the Apocalypse the seven
eyes of the Lamb describe the Spirit as proper to Christ, and
essentially related to Him, Rev. v. 6 ; so the resting of the
Spirit on Christ, John i 32, expresses the same distinction
between Christ and the prophets. In the Gospel the Spirit
guides, teaches, and reminds Christians, and makes known what
He hears of Christ, John xvi. 13. It is almost the same to the
evangelist whether anything is spoken by Jesus during His
earthly life or by the Spirit. Jesus says : " I have yet many
things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit
when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all
truth," John xvi 12, 13. But why are they the same to Him?
Not only because the Spirit will not speak of Himself, but will
testify of all which He hears ; and will take of the things of
Christ, and reveal them, John xvi. 13, 14; but also because
Jesus will then no more speak in proverbs, but plainly of the
Father, John xvi. 25. As the spirit of prophecy is to the seer
the testimony of Jesus, Rev. xix. 10; so to the evangelist the
sayings, the testimony, the teaching, the monitions, and guidance
of the Spirit are the sayings, self-manifestations, and intercourse
of Jesus Himself with His people. — The distinction of Christ

356 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
from God in relation to the Spirit, we did not find in the Apoca
lypse to be that the Spirit is the divine, which Christ possesses
besides His humanity ; but rather in that Christ receives the
Spirit from God, while God has the same not as received, but
in Himself. The same distinction is made by the evangelist, not
merely through his christology generally, but it is also expressly
stated; for example, John i 32-34, iii. 34, xiv. 16, 26, xv. 26,
especially xvi. 15. The independent position of the Spirit in
relation to God appears also in the evangelist, in that the Father
sends the Spirit, John xiv. 26, and that He proceeds from the
Father, xv. 26. The last-mentioned passage at the same time
furnishes a most adequate parallel' to Rev. i. 4, 5 ; trinitarian
in sense as the seer has thought and spoken, so also has the
evangelist, and while not with a weaker, yet, at the same time,
not with a stronger emphasis. Kbstlin also finds, ut ante (p. 488),
that with the Apocalypse, " just as with John," the Spirit belongs
not only to God, but also to Christ, the Lord of the world, and
that He will abide in it through the latter.
Respecting the activity of the Spirit, we found in the Apocalypse
that the Spirit (comp. Rev. v. 6, 9) was sent forth into the
world by the exalted Jesus, or that since Christ's exaltation the
principle of the divine or spiritual hfe has become active amongst
men in the widest circles. The connection of the Spirit's work
in time and origin with the exaltation ' of Christ is clearly ex
pressed, John xvi. 7, 8. On the other hand, the evangehst does
not speak of the Spirit being sent into the whole world, but
Jesus predicts that if He be lifted up from the eaith, He will
draw all men unto Him, John xh. 32 (comp. xi. 52, also hi.
15-18, x. 16, and xvi. 8), — in which, according to what has been
said above, there is no material difference. But when, according
to the Apocalypse, men from all nations are made priest-kings
through the work of the Spirit, v. 9 (comp. ver. 6), it is remark
able that this Old Testament conception appears directly in the
evangelist when he writes, 1 John ii. 2 7, " the anointing
(XplapM) which ye have received of Him abideth im you." As
the seer refers the entire exalted position of the Christian in
relation to God and men to the Spirit, Rev. i 4, so also
he refers the whole Christian salvation to the same source;
and what else does the evangelist do when he speaks of the
baptism with the Holy Ghost, John i 33 ; of being born of

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 35.7
the Spirit, John iii. 5 (comp. vers. 6, 8); of the (living)
water which Jesus gives, iv. 14 ; and of the rivers of living
waters -which flow out from the believer, -vii. 38 (comp. ver.
39) ? The church as such is far from prominent with the
evangehst ; but of the seven Spirits and the seven stars, Rev.
hi 1, or of the church as the bearer or possessor of the divine
life principle, we are strongly reminded by the words : " the
Spirit of truth ; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth
Him not, neither knoweth Him: but ye know Him, for he
dwelleth with you, and shall be in you," xiv. 17. It is not
to be expected, without prejudice, that He will stand forth from
His universal activity in Christians and Christendom, with the
evangehst as He does with the seer, specially or exclusively
as the spirit of prophecy. We need not be surprised if the
evangelist should generally speak of the works of the Spirit
much more sparingly ; and it is very significant if, by both
writers, the work of the Spirit is so equally emphasized that
Kbstlin, p. 489, finds himself led to the remark: "we see that
the Spirit had even early in the Johannine cireles a special
importance, a very active- existence ; we owe to Him the
Apocalypse ; here was He formed into a personal Paraclete ; here
occurred not only a general advance of the dogma, but this
advance appears always with the assertion that it sprang from
direct divine .inspiration, and it had therefore a great interest in
giving to the principle of this inspiration a concrete form." But
far less could it arouse objection if, in the evangelist, we found
the teaching and the reminding, xiv. 26, the testimony, xv. 26,
and the reproof, xvi. 8-1.0, the guidance into all truth, xvi. 13,
strongly prominent, and, on the contrary, no mention of pro
phecy. Yet, behold, there Jesus says of the Spirit, xvi. 13,
" whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak : and He will show
you things to come ; " and hardly will there be found a better
interpretation for these words than the Apocalypse in its general
contents, and especially in all it says concerning the relation of
the Spirit to these contents. Indeed, I confess that it always
occurs to me in the reading of this passage, xvi. 13, that here
may be given the key to the solution of the question how one
man may have written both the Apocalypse and the Gospel;
or can all the sayings resulting from the different mental modes
of the two authors stand before a serious consideration of this

358 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
one statement, certainly at first sight foreign to the Gospel ? —
When the seven Spirits are sent into all the world, Rev. v. 6,
the seer regards the Spirit as operative upon the unbelieving;
from Rev. iv. 5 we concluded, further, that to -him this work
consisted in the everlasting gospel going forth with the seal,
and trumpet, and. vial visions, with its call to repentance, xiv. 6,
and therefore is an inner judging and condemning operation upon
the world. According to John xvi. 8-1 1, the Spirit will reprove
(eXeygei, comp. Rev. ih. 19) the world of sin, and of righteous
ness, and of judgment ; of sin, because they beheve not in Christ;
of righteousness, because He went to the Father, and His disciples
would see Him no more ; of judgment, because the prince of this
world is judged. But these are precisely the substantial convicting
contents of the apocalyptic everlasting gospel
9. The Gospel..
Apart from the superscription, which does not come into con
sideration here, there is neither in the Gospel nor the Epistles the
expression evangel, nor the word evangelize. In the Old Testament
and original Christian sense,, as the seer uses them, the evangehst
could not apply them, when, in undeniable distinction from the
seer, he had not to clothe Christianity in the sacred garments
of the Old Testament, and as it were to make a retranslation
of Christianity into Hebrew ; but to' clothe it in the drapery of
modern speculation, so to say, to carry it over from the Jewish form
of thought and language into that of the educated Gentile or
Gentile Christian world ; therefore to him the prophecy of the
Old Testament is not the jpyful message of God concerning His
mystery, Rev. x. 7, but the testimony of the Scriptures respect
ing Christ, John v. 39 (comp. ver. 46), or the Scripture which is
fulfilled in the history of Jesus, John ii. 22, vii. 38, 42, xih. 18,
xv. 25, xvh. 12, xix. 24, xxviii. 36, 37, xx. 9 ; and the procla
mation to the world is not the everlasting gospel, with its call to
repentance on account of the near approach of God's judgments,
Rev. xiv. 6, 7 ; but the witness of the Spirit, and of the disciples of
Jesus, John xv. 26, 27, or the publication of the eternal life
now manifested, 1 John i 2, 3, 5 (comp. 3 John 6-8). If the
evangelist did not use evangel and evangelize in their later New
Testament meaning, — in negative agreement with the seer, — it

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 359
may have its ground less in the destination of his writing, and in
regard for the reader, than in the fact that these expressions
retained for him, as for the seer, their Old Testament original
Christian sense.
The absence of the above-mentioned expressions will, moreover,
in no way prove that the evangelist has considered the publica
tion of Christianity only from one side, that of modern, specula
tion ; we find the Old Testament side presented by him as well as
by the seer. When, with the evangelist, the Samaritan woman
says : " I know that Messias cometh; which is called Christ ;
when He is come, He will tell us all things," iv. 25 ; when
Jesus says to His disciples : " The time cometh when I shall no
more speak unto you in proverbs,, but I shall! show you plainly of
the Father," xvi. 2 5 ; and when He says of the Spirit : " He
will show you things to come . . . He shall receive of mine, and
shall show (avayyeXXeiv) it unto you ; " when the evangelist writes,
1 John i 2, 3, 5 : " We show un^o you that eternal hfe which
was with the Father, and was manifested unto us ; that which we
have seen and have heard declare we unto you (d-n-ayyeXXeiv)
. . . this then is the message (dyyeXia) (comp. 1 John iii. 11)
which we have heard of Him, and declare unto you " (comp. also
1 John ii. 25), — who can deny that in all these places the pub
hcation of Christianity, though not by the name of evangel or
gospel, is yet described with a remarkably close similarity to it —
a similarity not springing from modern phraseology, but more
from Old Testament expression, corresponding to the Messiah
representation in christology ?
There occur also in the evangelist, as expressions corresponding
to the Logos doctrine, names for the pubhcation of Christianity,
— witness and bearing witness, — used of John the Baptist, John
i 7, 8, 15, 19, 32, 34, iii 26, v. 33 (comp. iii. 11); of Christ,
John ih. 11, 32, 33, iv. 44, v. 31, vii. 7, viii. 13, 14, 18,
xih. 21, xviii. 37 ; of the apostles, John xv. 27, xix. 35, xxi. 24 ;
1 John i 2, iv. 14 ; 3 John 12 ; of the Spirit, John xv. 26 ;
1 John v. 6, 7. They are thus favourite formal words of the
evangehst. Sometimes witness is changed for confession, John
ix. 22, xh. 42; 1 John i 9, ii. 23, iv. 2, 3, 15; 2 John 7.
Can it really be accidental that the same expression is an unde
niable favourite with the seer, who speaks of a witness in i 5, n.
13, ih. 14, xi 3, xvii. 6 ; of witness in i 2, 9, vi. 9, xi. 7, xix. 10,

360 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
xx. 4 ; and of bearing witness in i. -2, xxii 1-6, 18, 20 ? Can it be
seriously denied that here the evangehst and the seer remarkably
agree, and agree too in an expression whiehbearsits relation to the
Logos doctrine, especially in the case of the seer, distinctly upon it ?
10. The Christian Life.
The Gospel and the Epistles present parallels in John i 7, 9,
12, 13, v. 23, xi 51, 52, xii -32, 1 John ii 2, to Rev. v. 6,
xiv. 6, v. 9 (comp. vii. 9). Christianity has not a particular, but
an universal significance. That the universality, as well as the
absolute character of Christianity, is certainly not expressed by
the seer objectively, as with the evangehst, by light and truth,
but subjectively, as far as Christianity forms .for the one God and
His Chosen an election of worshippers out of the world, we the
more readily grant to Kbstlin (ut ante, p. 489), since he himself
adds that, with John, the latter •certainly appears by the side of the
former (comp. John xvii. 4, 1 0). But that relatively only a few had
already become Christians, which the seer gives us to understand
by his use of the expressions : " the whole earth," " the whole world,"
" men," " those who dwell on the earth ; " the evangehst also
says, partly by his use of the term " world " (see above, " the
earth " and " mankind "), and partly in such sentences as John
i 10, 11, iii 12, 19, 32, xii. 3-7, and many others. To the
evangehst, also, the number of Christians in relation to the mul
titude of the unbelieving is infinitesimally smalL — The evangehst,
as little as the seer, expects in tlie future the conversion of all
men (comp. John xv. 2 0, and the whole tenor of the Gospel and
the Epistles ; for example, John i 10, 11, iii. 19 ; 1 John v. 10) ;
one could never interpret John x. 16 (comp. xvii 21 and 1
John ii 8) in the sense of such an expectation. With the evan
gelist, as with the seer, universality has only the meaning that
Christianity is not bound by any national limits, and therefore
he has the promise that Christians will come more or less out of
various nations (comp. John xi 51, 52, xii. 32). The question
whether, according to the purpose of God, all men should become
Christians, the evangehst answers as differently as the seer. On
one side it is said : " The light shineth in the darkness ; and the
darkness comprehended it not," i. 5 ; " He was in the world, and
the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not : He

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 361
came unto His own, and His own received Him not," i 10, 11
(comp. ver. 12) ; " God so loved the world, that He gave His
only-begotten Son, that whosoever beheveth in Him should not
perish, but have eternal hfe," iii. 16 (comp. vers. 17, 19-21).
And many other passages might be brought to show that, accord
ing to the view of the evangehst as well as according to that of
the seer, God wills the salvation of all men, and offers it to them ;
but freely they either accept or reject it. On the other hand, we
meet in the evangelist neither the " chosen " of the seer, Rev.
xvii. 14, although election with him appears not only in the ex
pression where he represents Jesus speaking of His choice of the
disciples, John vi 70, xiii. 18, xv. 16, 19 (comp. xvii. 14, 16;
2 John 1), nor the book of life, though both image and sub
stance, in numberless references to life, undeniably relate to
eternal life ; but Jesus says, " All that the Father giveth me shall
come to me," -John vi 3/7 ; " No man can come to me, except
the Father, which hath sent me, draw him," vi. 44 ; " My Father,
which gave them me, is greater than all," x. 29; " Father, I will
that they also whom Thou hast given me be with me where I
am," xvii 24, 25 (comp. John xvii. 2, vi. 12). In a compre
hensive retrospect the evangehst says : " But though He had
done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on
Him : that the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled,
which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to
whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed ? Therefore they
could not believe, because that Esaias said again, He hath blinded
their eyes, and hardened their heart ; that they should not see
with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be con
verted, and I should heal them," xh. 37-40. There can be no
doubt that in the thought of the evangelist, as in that of the
seer, there existed, side by side with each other, the human
historical view, according to whieh God wills the salvation- of all
men, and offers it to them ; but they, freely deciding, believe or
become hardened ; and the divine absolute view, according to
which some men believe and attain salvation, because God wills
it, and others do not believe, and are lost, because God hardens
them, and has not appointed them to salvation.
As a condition or prerequisite of becoming a Christian, there
meets us in the Apocalypse, on the part of God, His will, or
that men in the full sense are called, Rev. xix. 9 ; in the weaker

362 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
sense of the word, called and chosen, xvii. 4, written in the book
of life. Instead of calling in the weaker sense, we find the
appearance of hght; for example, in John i 5, 12, 35, 36, the
testimony of the Baptist; i 7, 8, 32-34, the testimony of Jesus;
iii. 11, 32, xh. 49, 50, His works; xiv. 11, and generally, all
that whereby, in the evangelist, God requires faith from men.
Instead of calling in the pregnant sense of the word, we have the
calling and choice, and drawing of God to Christ, vi. 44; the
gift of God, vi. 37, x. 29, xvh. 12, 24; in a word, all that
wherein, with the evangehst, God realizes His purpose in the
salvation of individuals ; instead of being written in the book of
life, such a passage as : " My sheep hear my voice, and I know
them, and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal hfe;
and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them
out of my hand," x. 27,, 28. Thus we must say that, with the
evangelist, only in other words and images-, the same prerequisite
to becoming a Christian appears on the part of God as with the
seer. On the human side, we find in the Apocalypse the will
of man, an ear to hear, or a receptive sense for the truth of the
gospel ; for example, Rev. ii. 7 ; a thirsting for tbe fountain of
the water of hfe, xxi. 6, xxii. 17 ; the feeling that he is wretched
and miserable ; dissatisfaction with his subjective as well as with
his objective condition in the world, iii 17, 18. Is there not a
striking parallel to the " ear to hear " in those words from the
evangelist : " Why do ye not understand my speech ? even be
cause ye cannot hear my word," vhi 43 ; " He that is of God
heareth God's words : ye therefore hear them not, because ye are
not of God," viii 47; "My sheep hear my voice," x. 27;
" Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice," xviii. 37
(comp. v. 25) ; " The world heareth them. We are of God: he
that knoweth God heareth us," 1 John iv. 5, 6 ? The "thirst"
of the Apocalypse .has still more striking parallels (comp. xxi 6,
xxii. 1 7) in the words of Christ to the Samaritan woman : '' If
thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee,
Give me to drink ; thou wouldest have asked of Him, and He
would have given thee hving water," iv. 10; "Whosoever
drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst :
but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of
water springing up into everlasting life," iv. 14. Also the words
of Jesus at the feast of Tabernacles : " If any man thirst, let him

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 363
come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scrip
ture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water,"
vii 37, 38. The feeling of shame, poverty, and wretchedness,
as required by the seer, iii. 17, 18, the evangelist describes also,
at least indirectly, as prerequisites to Christianity (comp. John
v. 40-44, viii. 32-35, ix. 39-41, xii 43, also v. 6).
We have seen that the seer has nowhere denominated the process
of becoming a Christian by the term " faith ; " and we have seen
also the reason why he studiously avoids this expression. It cannot
therefore disturb us when we see the part which the word plays
in the language of the evangelist. On the other hand, we shall
not miss in the evangehst the Old Testament forms in which
the seer represents it as the " fear " of God, giving " glory " to
Him, and " repenting." We shall find it worthy of notice how
both writers agree in those representations which we have de
scribed as common, or, more correctly, as natural to the seer.
According to Rev. iii. 3, 10, vi. 9, xii. 17, a man in his view
becomes a Christian when the word of God and the testimony of
Jesus is made known and offered to him, and he, in the pregnant
sense, hears or receives the same, so that it becomes his own ; or
when he listens to the voice of Jesus. The Baptist says, John
iii. 31-33 (comp. ver. 11), " He that cometh from above is above
all ; . . . and what He hath seen and heard, that He testifieth ;
and no man receiveth His testimony. He that hath received His
testimony hath set to his seal that God is true" (comp. i 17, 18,
v. 24, viii. 31, 32, 43-47, xii. 47-50, xvh. 6-8, 14; 1 John
i. 2, 5, ii. 7, 24, iii. 11, v. 10 ; the hearing His voice, John
v. 25, x. 3, xvi. 27, xviii. 37, also viii. 43). Since Jesus is the
Word of God, the Light of the world, there belong to this place
also the words of the Gospel respecting the reception of Jesus ;
for example, John i 11, 12, v. 43, xiii. 20 (comp. xviii. 37,
viii. 43) ; and the recognition of Him, i 10, and many more.
According to Rev. iii. 17, 18, a man becomes a Christian when
he feels himself poor, etc., and comes to Christ, who offers to
make him rich, etc. ; and in the Gospel, Jesus says, " He that
cometh to me shall never hunger," vi. 35 ; "All that the Father
giveth me shall come to me : and him that cometh to me I will
in no wise cast out," vi 37 (comp. vers. 44, 45, 65, vii. 37, also
iii 20, 21).
We found the meaning of becoming a Christian pointed out in

364 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
the Apocalypse, in an entirely general way, as being deliverance
or salvation (comp. Rev. vii. 10, xii. 10). According to John
iii. 17, God has "not sent His Son into the world to condemn
the world, but that the world through Him might be saved"
(comp. v. 34, x. 9 ; also the negative, "not perish," John iii.
15, 16, vi. 39, xvh. 12, xviii. 9) : " We have seen and do testify
that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world,"
1 John iv. 14 (comp. .John iv. 22, 42). In particulars we dis
tinctly find the import of becoming a Christian, as represented
by the evangelist, just so far agreeing or disagreeing with
the statements of the Apocalypse, as his designations of the
condition without Christ, and of the work of Christ, agree or
disagree with the same. With .respect to the stricter definitions
of the Apocalypse, there is rthe .entire .absence of the Old Testa
ment turning away from all iniquity ; deliverance from falsehood
(comp. Rev. xxi. 26, 27, xxii. 15) is echoed in John viii 32,
44, 55 (comp. 1 John i 8, ii. 4, 21, 22) ; conversion from forni
cation (comp. Rev. ii. 21, 22) clearly meets us in the words,
" Every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even
as He is pure " (dyvos), 1 John iii. 3 ; the cleansing from former
impurity (comp. Rev. iii. 4, vii. 14, xxi 8, 2,7, xxii. 3, 11, 15), in
the passage, "The blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from
all sin," 1 John i 7 (comp. 1 John i 9, iii. 3 ; John xiii. 10, 11,
xv. 2, 3, xvii. 17) ; the change from wretchedness, etc. (comp. Rev.
iii. 17, 18), in the words of Jesus, John ix. 39 : "For judgment I
am come into this world ; that they which see not might see, and
that they which see might .be made blind;" and John vhi. 12 :
" He that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have
the light of life" (comp. xi. ,9, 10, xii. 35, 36, 46; 1 John
i 5, 6, ii. 8, 9, 11) ; the passing from death unto life (comp. Rev.
iii. 1-3), in the words : " He that heareth my word, and believeth
on Him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come
into condemnation, but is passed from death unto hfe," John
v. 24 (comp. John v. 25; 1 John hi 14); deliverance from
bondage (comp. Rev. i 5, v. 9, xiv. 3,4), in the words of John
viii. 31, 36. With the evangehst, when a man becomes a
Christian, he passes from a state of ahenation from God into
one of closest union with Him (comp. Rev. xxi. 3, 4, xxii. 1, 2,
with John i 12, 13, viii. 41, 42, xx. 17 ; 1 John i 3, hi 1,
iv. 12, 15, 16, v. 1, 19, etc.); from the misery of the present,

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 365
with death as its climax, to the possession of eternal life ; for
example, John v. 25, 40, vi 51, 57, x. 10, 28, xi. 25, xii. 25 ;
1 John iv. 9, v. 11-13.. If, regarding the same thing from the
standpoint of Christ's work, according' to Rev. iii. 3, vi. 9, xii. 17
(comp. xix. 10), the Christian has the word of God and the testi
mony of Jesus ; so- the evangelist has written to Christian young
men because they are strong, and the word of God abideth in
them, 1 John ii. 14 (comp. John xvii. 6-8). As the Christian,
according to Rev. iii. 21, v. 5, xii. 9—11, is a sharer in Christ's
victory over the devil; so also, according to 1 John, ii. 13, 14,
Christian young men have overcome the wicked one (comp. John
xvi. 33, xii. 31). As in the Apocalypse he is redeemed by God
from the earth, v. 9, xiv. 3, 4 ; so the disciples- are not of the
world, John xv. 19, xvii: 14, 16 (comp. xvh. 6; 1 John iv. 5).
As he- has washed his robes and made them white in the blood of
the Lamb ; so,, according to 1 John i 7, the blood of Jesus Christ
cleanseth from all sin. As, according to Rev. iii. 5', i 9, he has
experienced the love of Christ, and has been saved by Him ; so
also we find it according to John xiii. 1, 34, xv. 9, 12 (comp.
iii. 16, xvii 23), 1 John ii. 9. As in Rev. i. 5, 17, 18> ii. 8,
he is allied to the Risen Oner and through Him is made a par
taker of eternal life; so it is also in John iii. 36, v. 21, 24,
vi. 39, 40, 44, 47, 50, 51, 54, 57, 58, viii. 12,x..28, xi 25,26,
xii. 25,, xvii. 2, 1 John v. 11-13. As in Rev. iii. 21, xi. 8,
xiv. 4, Christ has become in every respect a type ; so also in John
xiii. 15, 34, xv. 9, 10, 12, xvii. 11, 14, 16,18, 21-23,. xx. 21 ;
1 John ii. 6, iii. 3, 7, iv. 17 ; John xiii. 16, xv. 18, 20. When
we find that with the seer. aE that is implied in becoming a
Christian is associated with baptism (comp. iii. 4, 5, 18, vii. 9,-
13, 14), and that at the same time he unites the baptismal robes
and the priestly garments, so John ih. 3~5> 1 John v. 6-8
(comp. ii. 27), show not merely that the. evangelist conceived the
Christian profession and baptism as essentially connected; but
also that as, with the seer, the Old Testament representation of
washing and making white the garments is mixed with the other,
that of receiving garments, so the evangelist associates with the
corresponding New Testament representation of the higher birth,
the being born of God, of the Spirit, the other of becoming priests.
Of the names and predicates by which the Apocalypse describes
the meaning of becoming a Christian, that of " saints" is wholly

366 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
wanting with the evangelist, — incomprehensible if the seer used
this name entirely in the sense of the Acts of the Apostles and of
Paul ; but very conceivable and very significant if the seer, as we
have seen, used the term strictly after the manner of the Old
Testament ; and the evangehst, as he must, expressed himself in
the style of the New Testament. When the Apocalypse, with
the unquestionable purpose of honouring them, calls Christians
servants of God or of Christ, and in their collective capacity the
people of God, it appears at the first glance, apart from the last-
mentioned expression, that the Gospel has a very different view
on this point ; for Christ says to His disciples, " I call you not
servants ; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth : but I
have called you friends ; for all things that I have heard of my
Father I have made known unto you," John xv. 15. But it seems
to us that the evangelist here takes the name of servant in con
trast with freedom and friendship, just as he (John viii. 34) repre
sents the Jews as replying to -the saying of Christ, ver. 33, "the
truth shall make you free," " We be Abraham's seed, and were
never in bondage to any man. How sayest thou, Ye shall be
made free ? " To which Jesus answered, " Verily, verily, I say
unto you, whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin," vers.
34, 35. In this sense the seer uses the word, as his enumeration
of the individual classes of men shows ; for example, Rev. vi. 15,
xix. 18. When Christ says, John xiii. 16, "The servant is not
greater than his lord ; neither he that is sent greater than be that
sent him," the servant is there not the antithesis to the free, but
to the lord ; yet it has not the honourable signification of the
apocalyptic servant of God or Christ. It would not have been
surprising if the evangelist had altogether avoided this Old Testa
ment name of honour; but it appears in John xii. 26, in the
words of Jesus, " If any man serve me, let him follow me ; and
where I am, there shall also my servant be. If any man serve
me, him will my Father honour" (comp. John xviii 36). The
servants of God who serve Him (as priests), xxii. 3, correspond to
the true worshippers who worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
John iv. 23. — To the people of God who are exhorted, Rev. xviii. 4,
to come out of Babylon, and not to be partakers of her sins and
judgments, correspond, apart from xi 1, " His own which were in
the world," John xm. 1 (comp. xv. 19, xvh. 6, 9), who "love not
the things that are in the world," 1 John ii. 1 5-1 7 (comp. v. 1 9). —

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 367
Naturally we do not find any trace in the evangehst of the descrip
tion of Gentile Christians as fearing God, Rev. xi. 18, xix. 5. 
The evangelist nowhere calls Christians priests and kings, as in
Rev. i 6, v. 10 (comp. i 9) ; but when he writes : "As many as
received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God,
even to them that believe on His name : which were born, not of
blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of
God," John i 12, 13 (comp. Rev. v. 9, 10) ; when Jesus says, " The
hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship
the Father in spirit and in truth," iv. 23; when He promises :
" Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, He will give it
you : hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name ; ask, and ye
shall receive, that your joy may be full," xvi. 23, 24 ; and " at that
day ye shall ask in my name : and I say not unto you, that I will
pray the Father for you : for the Father Himself loveth you," xvi.
26, 27; when the evangelist writes : "This is the confidence that
we have in Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will,
He heareth us : and if we know that He hear us, whatsoever we
ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of Him,"
1 John v. 14, 15 (comp. Rev. v. 8, viii. 3-5); when he says:
" Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us,
that we should be called the sons of God," 1 John hi 1 (comp.
Rev. xxi. 7, xxii. 3-5 ; Matt. v. 9) ; and "the anointing which
ye have received of Him abideth in you," 1 John ii. 27 (comp.
Bev. xiv. 1-5, 6 XpiaTo<;, and John xviii. 37), — it would be diffi
cult to find another expression, irepresenting in Old Testament
form, such fulness of thought, namely as sonship to God, going
as it does beyond all natural limits, than that of priests and
kings redeemed from the whole natural human race unto God. —
We need expect to hear nothing from the evangehst of first-fruits
redeemed from the world unto God and the Lamb, Rev. xiv. 4 ;
and yet in the words, " The Father seeketh such to worship Him,"
iv. 23 (comp. the beginning of the verse), there is obviously the
same sense as that expressed by the seer, in harmony with his
style, as first-fruits. — In describing the relation of Christians to
each other, the evangelist never uses the word "fellow-servant."
Not to mention John xxi. 23, the name "brother" meets us in
the first Epistle with extraordinary frequency ; for example, 1 John
h. 9, 10, 11, hi 10, 12-17, iv. 20, 21, v. 16, also 3 John 3,
5, 10. When the evangelist writes, 1 John i. 3, " That which we

368 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have
fellowship with us : and truly our fellowship is with the Father,
and with His Son Jesus Christ;" and 1 John i 7 (comp. ver. 6):
" If we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship
one with another," — it corresponds to- the companionship " in tribu
lation and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ," Rev. i 9,
When, in the Apocalypse; the heavenly inhabitants, the angels,
appear as the fellow-servants of Christians, and the latter as their
brethren, Rev. xii. 10; 11, xix. 10; xxii. 9 ; so in the evangelist
the risen Jesus says- to Mary Magdalene, " Go to my brethren, and
say unto them,. I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to
my God, and your God," xx.. 1 7 (comp. 1 John i 3).
In the opinion of Kbstlin, ut ante, p. 490, Christian life in the
Apocalypse presents from various standpoints many noteworthy
resemblances to the Johannine ideas. Let us look at them. The
works of which the Apocalypse so frequently speaks form, accord
ing to this. and many other expositors,, the chief evidence- of the
Judaic character; of- its doctrine. It is singular that the Gospel
and the Epistles use the expression in question with tolerably
equal frequency. As the Apocalypse mentions the works of God,
xv. 3 ; so the Gospel speaks of His work, and His works; iv. 34,
vi. 28, 2:9,,ix.,3, 4, x. 37, xvii. 4 (comp. v. 20). As the Apocalypse
speaks of the works of Christ, ii. 25 ; so does tbe Gospel, v. 20, 36,
vii 3, 21,,x..25, 32, 33, 38-, xiv. 10i-12, xv. 24. As in the Apoca
lypse, the works of the Nicolaitanes, ii. 6 ; of Jezebel, ii. 22 ; of
men, in an evil, sense, xvi. 11 (comp. ix. 10) ; of Babylon, xviii 6,
— so. in, the Gospel are mentioned the evil works of men, iii. 1 9
(comp. ver. 20), vii 7, 2 John 11 ; the works of the devil, 1 John
ih. 8, John. viii. 41 ; the works of Cain,. 1 John hi 11 ; also- works
wrought in God, John iii. 21 ; and the- works of Abraham; John
viii. 3.9. Certainly the passages here quoted from, the seer and
the evangelist are by no means completely parallel ; still, the great
and wonderful works of God in the Apocalypse,, and the works, or
the work of. God, in- the Gospel — obviously apart from John vi.
28, 29 — are essentially the. same ; and though the works, of Christ
in the Gospel scarcely come into contact with the - same in the
Apocalypse; there is, with, regard to the latter, and the works of the
devil,— still more, the works of Abraham as well as the works of
God, John vi 2.8, 29, — in the evangelist an essential similarity of
view. The works of men evidently in both writings have the same

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 369
meaning. But it may be objected that the evangehst nowhere
speaks of the works of Christians, and also that it is not said by
him that men shall be rewarded according to their works. I think
that he who wrote John iii. 19-21, vii. 7, 1 John ih. 11, 2 John
8 (comp. 3 John 8), cannot possibly have been dogmatically
hindered from speaking of the works of Christians ; if he has not,
the reason is that he had no occasion to do so. Nor could much
be said of reward according to works by an author who has to
say concerning reward generally almost nothing at all. An un
prejudiced comparison shows that the evangehst, as well as the
seer, describes the activity of each life principle — be it divine,
Christian, good ; or be it devihsh, worldly, evil — by the name of
, works ; and that certainly he has, in harmony with the seer, laid
remarkably great emphasis upon the activity of the life principle.
Especially do the proper works of God, John vi. 28; of " your
father," John viii. 41 (comp. 1 John iii. 8) ; of Abraham, John viii
39, compared with those of Christ, Rev. ii. 26 ; of the Nicolaitanes,
Rev. ii. 6 ; of Jezebel, ii. 22, — throw upon the personal relation of
the evangelist and the seer a very strong light.
The activity of the Christian life principle in general we found to
be expressed in the Apocalypse by the words : " he that is righteous,
let him be righteous still ; and he that is holy, let him be holy
still," xxii. 11 (comp. Rev. xxii. 14, vii. 14). The evangehst
writes : " every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself,
even as He is pure," 1 John iii. 3 ; "if ye know that He is
righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is
born of Him," 1 John ii. 29 ; and "he that doeth righteousness is
righteous, even as He is righteous," 1 John hi. 7 (comp. ver. 10).
It is to be observed also that in the same connection it is said,
" Whosoever committeth sin, transgresseth also the law : for sin
is the transgression of the law," 1 John iii. 4. The Old Testa
ment description of individual acts, by which the practice of up
rightness perfects itself as "righteousness," Rev. xix. 8, is not
found in the evangehst. Also of increase, as in Rev. ii. 19; of
inner wealth, as in Rev. ii 9 ; of perfection, as in Rev. iii. 2,
there is in the Gospel and Epistles hardly any other indication
than the saying in the parable of the vine : " Every branch that
beareth fruit, He purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit;"
and in ver. 5, " he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same
bringeth forth much fruit : for without me ye can do nothing ; "
2 A

370 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF TnE APOCALYPSE
or in 1 John i 7, " If we walk in the light, as He is in the light,
we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus
Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin ; " and in ver. 9, " If we
confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins,
and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness " (comp. ih. 2). When,
however, many expositors take strong objection to " the stand
point of judgment according to an absolute standard which the
Christian should reach" (comp. Rev. iii. 2), other passages, if
they are measured by the same rule, such as, " whosoever abideth
in Him sinneth not," 1 John iii. 6 ; " whosoever is born of God
doth not commit sin," ver. 9 ; also the walking in hght as He is
in the light, 1 John i 7 ; the purifying himself, as He is pure,
1 John iii. 3 (comp. TeXewvv, John xvii. 23 ; 1 John ii. 5, iv. 12,
17, 18), — must present to them similar difficulty. But is not the
Christian life judged according to an absolute standard which it
should reach ?
Of the individual aspects of the unaggressive activity of the
Christian life principle there meets us in the Apocalypse only
one, though certainly all-comprehensive, namely, that of love, to
which at one time reference is made more in its relation to God
and Christ, at another more in its relation to the brethren ; or it
is love to God and Christ, which shows itself in love to the
brethren, Rev. ii. 4, 19. Instead of in two places, like the seer,
the evangelist may be said to have spoken of love in twenty.
But has he at any time done so in a different sense ? Is it not
with him the same love conceived at one time more in its relation
to God and Christ, 1 John iv. 19, 20, for example, and at others
more in relation to the brethren, 1 John ii. 10, iii. 14, etc.?
And is not love to the brethren with him evidence of love to God
and Christ, 1 John iv. 11, 12, xvi. 20, 21 ? Love to the world
— the world understood in an ungodly and unchristian sense — is,
to the annoyance of several expositors, wanting to the seer from
his " theocratic standpoint," nor is it to be found in the evangelist.
I refer to John xvii. 9 : " I pray for them : I pray not for the
world;" and to 1 John v. 16, "There is a sin unto death: I do
not say that he shall pray for it" (comp. 2 John 10). That love
in the Gospel and in the Epistles is mentioned so very much more
frequently can be a difficulty only if the seer had, like the evan
gehst, the task of giving the testimony of Jesus and its applica
tion to life in general.

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 371
At the point of transition to the aggressive activity of the
Christian hfe principle stands prayer. To the thanksgiving of
Christians, as we find it in the Apocalypse, though mostly in
directly,™ 10, 11, v. 8-10, 16-18, v. 12, vii. 10, xv. 3, 4, xii. 10,
11, xix. 1-7, every parallel is wanting in the evangelist. Suppli
cations, which are expressed in part directly and in part indirectly,
Eev. vi. 10, viii 3-5, xxii. 16, agree at best only partially with
what appears in John xiv. 13, 14, xvi. 23, 25, 1 John v. 14, 15,
as the contents of Christian supplication. If, in the Apocalypse,
the prayers of Christians are addressed sometimes to God, some
times to the Lamb, and sometimes to both in one, so I may point
to the " Him," 1 John v. 1 4, with its reference to " the name of the
Son of God," ver. 1 3 ; to the " Advocate," 1 John ii. 1 ; and to the
"Lord" and " God " of Thomas, John xx. 28, and to the position
of Christ in the Gospel generally. The symbol of incense, which
is referred to the prayers of saints, and which ascends with them
before God, Rev. viii. 3-5, and which Rev. v. 8 explains as being
the prayers of saints themselves, we cannot expect to find in the
Gospel or the Epistles. But how the prayers of Christians become
acceptable to God, and that they are so, the Lord tells us, " Verily,
verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my
name, He will give it you. Hitherto have ye asked nothing in
my name : ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be full,"
John xvi. 23, 24 (comp. ver. 26) ; and the evangelist says, 1 John
iii. 22, "Whatsoever we ask, we receive of Him, because we keep
His commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in His
sight;" and 1 John v. 14, " This is the confidence that we have in
Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He heareth
us. And if we know that He heareth us, whatsoever we ask, we
know that we have the petitions that we desired of Him " (comp.
ver. 16). Incense represents the prayer of Christians ; incense is
given to them, and ascends with them, according to the seer ;
because, as he expressly says, they are prayers of saints ; that is,
they are offered in the name of Christ, or because they seek that
which God wills, — that is, they are offered according to the will of
God. The evangelist writes, " we know that we have the petitions."
How otherwise could the seer symbolize the same thought than
when he represents the angel as casting fire from the altar of
sacrifice upon the earth, and voices, and thunderings, and lightnings,
and an earthquake following, Rev. viii. 5 ? We found that in the

372 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
Apocalypse neither the elders nor the angels have a real mediatorial
part in the prayers of saints ; but that Christians, having them
selves become kings and priests through the Lamb, need no other
mediator, and that even through their prayers they veiy truly
show their kingly priesthood. So the words : " At that day ye
shall ask in my name : and I say not unto you, that I will pray
the Father for you : for the Father Himself loveth you, because
ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God,"
John xvi. 26, 27, can have no more suitable sense than that
Christians, reconciled to God through the eternal mediator, have
no further need of a mediator ; and, indeed, the evangelist states,
as distinctly and decidedly as John xiv. 12-14, xvi. 24, 1 John
v. 14, 15 can express it, that Christians, through their prayers,
exemplify precisely that which the seer calls their kingly priesthood.
Much richer results than those relating to the unaggressive
activities of the Christian hfe principle are afforded by the
Apocalypse concerning the development of the same against its
opposite ; if this is founded in the design of the book, so in the
purpose of both writings we see the explanation of the fact that
in the Gospel and the Epistles the relation is nearly reversed.
Certainly the same dangers and difficulties which, according to the
representations of the Apocalypse, meet and ensnare the Christian,
have also prominence in the Gospel. If we look at the temptations
which come from His own flesh, we find that the rebuke given by
the Lord to the church at Ephesus, because they had left their first
love, Rev. ii. 4, and had fallen from their former high stand
point, Rev. i 5, corresponds to the words, " As the Father bath
loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. If ye keep
my commandments, ye shall abide in my love," etc., John xv. 9, 10 ;
"He that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him,"
I John iv. 16; " Whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his
brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion
from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him ? " 1 John iii. 1 7
(comp. 1 John ii. 15, 16, and further). Who can deny that the
evangelist everywhere, in his first Epistle, has contested with the
Christian his departure from his first love, or his sinking from his
earlier standpoint ? Does the Lord say to the church at Sardis,
" thou hast a name that thou livest and art dead " ? Rev. iii. 1, 2 ;
so also the evangelist writes, and certainly with a view to the
condition of his readers, " he that loveth not his brother abideth

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 373
in death," 1 John iii. 14 (comp. 1 John v. 16). The same church
has only " a few names which have not defiled their garments,"
Bev. iii 4, and we compare with it the whole connection and
background of the words, " every man that hath this hope in him
purifieth himself, even as He is pure," 1 John iii 3 ; also ver. 6,
"whoso abideth in Him sinneth not!" The strong condemnation
of the church in Laodicea, Rev. iii. 15, 17, finds its theoretic
confirmation in 1 John i. 8 : " if we say that we have no sin, we
deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us " (comp. 1 John ii.
4, 9; John ix. 39-41). In the Apocalypse the Lord rebukes
the church at Pergamos, because it had "them that hold the
doctrine of Balaam," ii. 14, 15 ; and the church at Thyatira,
because it " suffered that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a
prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornica
tion, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols," ii. 20 (comp. ver. 22);
and that the danger of false doctrine threatened the readers of the
first Epistle is shown especially in 1 John ii. 18-27, iv. 1-6, and
not much less distinctly in other passages (comp. also 2 John
7-9), With the words of the Apocalypse respecting the trials
which should come upon Christians through the enmity of the
world, for example, in Rev. ii. 10 (comp. iii. 10), those of the
Lord, John xih. 16, xv. 18-21, xvi. 1-4, 33, xvii. 14, and
those of the evangelist, 1 John iii. 13, run parallel. And
as there Christians, if they do not stand in the trial, but fear
those things which they shall suffer, Rev. ii. 10, and do not
hold fast the name of Christ, but deny His faith, ii. 13, iii. 8,
and worship the beast, xiii. 8, xv. 16, xx. 4, are fearful and un
believing, xxi. 8; so here the Lord exhorts His disciples : " Let
not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid," John xiv. 27
(SeikidTto, comp. SeiAofc, Rev. xxi. 8); says to Peter, John xih. 38
(comp. xii. 25): "Wilt thou lay down thy life for my sake?
Verily, verily, I say unto thee,, The cock shall not crow till thou
hast denied me thrice" (dpveiadai, comp. John xviii 25-27 and
Rev. ii. 13, iii 8) ; and to the disciples generally: "Behold, the
hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every
man to his own, and shall leave me alone," xvi 32; and the
evangehst writes, " Who is a liar, but he that denieth (apvotyevos)
that Jesus is the Christ ? He is Antichrist, that denieth the
Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath
not the Father," 1 John ii. 22, 23.

374 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOGALYPSE
In the Apocalypse the Lord gives to the fallen space for repent
ance (comp. ii. 21) ; and where this is not used He comes with
His punishment. Kbstlin (ut ante, p. 492) finds the chief differ
ence between tbe evangehst and the seer with regard to the
Christian life to be, that with the latter fidelity to the faith is so
far a work that it will be subject to the measuring rod of the
approving or condemning judge ; while the former, in the violation
of the true confession, gives prominence to its opposition to God,
to the truth, to the idea of the Christian, and refers not to a
subject- for judgment, but to the nature of the case. So far as
this distinction really exists, it is explained by the different purpose
and form of the two writings. But that the distinction is not uni
versal, and that the seer, by tbe violation of the true confession,
also points to the nature of the case, and the evangelist also to a
subject of judgment, is, from such passages as Rev. ii. 4, 15,
20-23, hi. 1, 2, iv. 17, and 1 John ii. 28, iv. 17, to the unpre
judiced, clear as the day. — That there is hardly any correspond
ence to the manifold calls to repentance addressed to those who
have fallen in temptation, as they meet us in the Apocalypse,
besides 1 John i. 9, " If we confess our sins, He is faithful and
just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unright
eousness" (comp. John xxi. 15 — 17; Rev. iii. 15-19), arises
chiefly from the fact that the seer, in his prophetic character, has
to do with the churches as a whole; the evangehst, on the contrary,
has undeniably individuals in his eye, who, once fallen, are beyond
the reach of his words. A soft echo of the apocalyptic admoni
tion, Rev. hi. 1, 2, "I know thy works, that thou hast a name
that thou livest, and art dead. Be watchful, and strengthen the
things which remain, that are ready to die," is found in the words
of the evangehst, " If any man see his brother sin a sin which
is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him hfe," 1 John
v. 16. We may compare also Rev. ii. 5, 16, 22, 23, hi. 3, 16;
John xv. 6 ; I John ii. 5, ih. 14, v. 12, and many others.
But as, with the seer, the work of the Christian is not to give
way before any temptation, but rather to overcome ; so, in highly
significant parallelism, it is with the evangelist. The heavenly
inhabitants say : " The accuser of our brethren is cast down, which
accused them before our God day and night. And they overcame
him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testi
mony; and they loved not their lives unto death," Rev. xii. 10, 11

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 375
(comp. the conclusion of the seven letters, and xxi. 7) ; and the
evangehst says : " I write unto you, httle children, because your
sins are forgiven you for His name's sake. I write unto you,
fathers, because ye have known Him that is from the beginning.
I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the
wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have
known the Father. I have written unto you, fathers, because ye
have known Him that is from the beginning. I have written
unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of
God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one,"
• 1 John ii 12-14. "Ye are of God, httle children, and have
overcome them; because greater is He that is in you, than he that
is in the world," 1 John iv. 4 ; and " whatsoever is born of God
overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the
world, even our faith. Who is he that overcometh the world, but
he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God ?" 1 John v. 4, 5.
Kbsthn says (p. 491) : "We find here that, in a' similar manner
as with John, faith must fight against external and internal
hindrances, against human and devilish devices, and maintain
itself victorious ; but the Apocalypse has only one side in common
with John, the conception of the whole as epyov ; the other, that
the victory is already achieved, because the divine Spirit poured
down upon believers is wanting ; the victory is only completed
with the successful conflict even unto death; the hfe is consi
dered from death, and from the result which this shows is judged;
only he who has passed safely over has conquered, although pro
bably in xii. 11 there is mentioned the strengthening power of
the victorious death of Jesus" (comp. John xvi. 33). But we
have already shown, against Dusterdieck, that not only according
to representations of their having overcome, otherwise inexplicable,
but also according to universal analogy of the apocalyptic concep
tions, the passage in question, xii 11, must be so understood that
even in becoming Christians they have overcome the devil in ideal
reahty, and that this victory is completed from stage to stage until
it has reached perfection. To the veviKi)KaTe, 1 John ii. 15, 16,
and viKva-aa-a, 1 John iv. 4, corresponds the ivUrio-av.'Rev. xii. 11;
to the vikwv of the Apocalypse, the viica and vikwv of 1 John v.
4, 5. Those who compare without prejudice cannot help
recognising identity in an entirely peculiar and exceedingly
important particular. Certainly the seer does not speak, and

376 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
cannot as such speak, of "the victory which overcometh the
world, even our faith," 1 John v. 4 ; but is not Rev. xii 11, in
connection with what immediately precedes, wholly the same
thought, though in apocalyptic form ? Nor does the seer say
either "ye have overcome them," 1 John iv. 4, or "who is he
that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is
the Son of God ? " 1 John v. 5 ; but in several of the letters, are
not the false teachers, the world, undeniably the objects for
Christian conquest ? The passages, Rev. xii. 1 1 and 1 John
ii. 13, 14, are perfectly equal in sense and expression; and is it
not significant that there the blood of the Lamb, and here the
forgiveness of sins for His name's sake ; there, the word of their
testimony, and here the knowledge of Him and of the Father
from the beginning, as well as the remaining in them of the
word of God ; there, not loving life unto death; here, being strong,
and not loving the world, — are the subject of discourse? According
to Rev. iii. 21, the overcoming of the Christian has its type in
that of Christ; and in John xvi. 33, Christ says the same thing,
" Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world;" and the evangelist
writes, "As He is, so are we in this world," 1 John iv. 17 (comp.
1 John ii. 6, iii. 3).
Of the individual phases of tlie conquest, and, first, over temp
tations by false teachers, we find again the not fainting in trial,
and the enduring for Christ's sake, the not bearing the evil,
and the condemnation of falsehood, Rev. ii 2, 3, at least
partially, in the words concerning Diotrephes, 3 John 9, 10 ; and
in those of 1 John ii. 24, " If that which ye have heard from
the beginning shall remain in you," etc. (p,iveiv, Rev. virop.ov^,
comp. 2 John 6, 9) ; and also in the admonition, " Believe not
every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God ; because
many false prophets are gone out into the world," 1 Jonh iv. 1
(comp. the expressions "lie" and "liar," 1 John ii. 21, 22).
To the not bearing false teachers, and hatred of the deeds of
the Nicolaitanes, Rev. ii. 6, corresponds the assurance, " If there
come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him
not into your house, neither bid him God-speed. For he that
biddeth him God-speed is partaker of his evil deeds," 2 John
10, 11. When, in the Apocalypse, Christians are also warned
against false teachers, and exhorted to hold fast what they have,
and to keep the work of Christ, Rev. ii. 24-26 ; so the evangelist

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 377
in view of the same says to his readers, " Look to yourselves, that
we lose not those things which we have wrought, that we receive
a full reward," 2 John 8 (comp. Rev. iii. 11): the keeping His
commandments, 1 John ii. 4; the so walking as He walked,
1 John ii. 6 ; the self-purifying as He is pure, 1 John iii. 6 ; the
remaining in Him, and not sinning, 1 John iii. 6 ; the practice
of righteousness, and being righteous as He is righteous, 1 John
iii 7 (comp. hi 6, 24, iv. 17, v. 18), — are all only the apocalyptic
keeping the works of Jesus. — In the Apocalypse, Christians are
warned against persecutions, — not to fear what they shall suffer,
but to be faithful unto death, ii. 10; they are praised when they
hold fast the name of the Lord, and do not deny His faith,
ii. 1 3, 1 9 ; when they keep His word, and do not deny His name,
ih. 8 ; when they keep the word of His patience, iii. 1 0 ; and hold
fast what they have received, ih. 11 (comp. xiii. 10, xiv. 10-12,
xii. 11, vi 9, xx. 4); so the Lord exhorts His disciples not to
fear nor be troubled, John xiv. 2 7. To faithfulness and stedfast-
ness against all persecutions, corresponds continuing in the word
of Jesus, John viii. 31, and in Jesus, John vi. 56, xv. 4-10 ;
1 John ii. 24-26 ; to not denying Him, 1 John ii. 23, iv. 2, 3,
iv. 15; 2 John 7 ; John i 20, ix. 22, xii. 42, and to keeping
(njpeiv) the word and the commandments, correspond, even in
name, the statements of John vhi. 51, 52, xiv. 15, 21, 23, 24,
xv. 10, 20, xvii. 6 ; 1 John ii. 3-5, hi 22, 24, v. 2-4, v. 18 ; for
as the Tripeiv presents itself both here and there in every shade of
meaning (comp. also Rev. xvi. 15 ; 1 John v. 18), it can with
difficulty be explained by " the similarity of the times " alone ;
finally, the not loving life, meets us in John xii. 25. — Those who
overcome, watch against the temptations of the flesh, and keep
their garments, Rev. xvi. 15 (comp. iii. 3, 4, 17, 18); and the
evangelist writes : " keep yourselves from idols," 1 John v. 2 1 ;
and " he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked
one toucheth him not," 1 John v. 18 (comp. ii. 28). God's
people must come out of Babylon, tbat they may not be partakers
of her sins, Rev. xviii. 4 ; with this we may compare 2 John 2
(comp. 3 John 8). Keeping the words of prophecy, Rev. i 3,
xxii. 9, 18, 19, has at least relationship with "heareth us," in
1 John iv. 6 (comp. ii. 24-27).
In the representation of the seer, the activity of the Christian
hfe, though he does not present it in aU its aspects, consists in the

378 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE'
imitation of Christ. The "love" and the "service," Rev. ii. 19,
in the highest probability, belong to the " works '' of Christ, which
should be kept until the end, Rev. ii. 26 ; and thus Jesus exhorts
His disciples, John xiii. 34, xv. 12, to love each other, as He has
loved them ; and in washing their feet He gave them an example
that they might do as He had done to them, John xiii. 15. Per
secution there, as here, falls upon the disciples as upon their
Master (comp. Rev. xi. 3-8 ; John xv. 18, 20). As Christ hath
borne witness, so also His disciples, John xv. 27 ; as He gives
His life for His friends, John xv. 13, 1 John iii. 16, so do they
(comp. Rev. v. 9, vi. 9) ; as He is not of the world, neither are
they, John xvii. 14, 16 ; as He walks, so do they, 1 John ii. 6 ;
as He is holy, so are they in this world, 1 John iv. 17 (comp.
Rev. iii 3, 4). Here also is the place to point out the circum
stance that with the evangelist, as with the seer, the relation of
Christ to God is the type of the relation of the Christian to Christ,
only with the former it is also the type of the relation of Chris
tians to each other (for example, John xvii. 11, 21, 22) ; we may
compare Rev. iii. 21 with John x. 14, 15, xx. 21, 22, xvii. 18,
21, 22.
That between the promises of the Apocalypse on the one hand,
and those of the Gospel and Epistles on the other, there exists a
surprising similarity, has been acknowledged, even by expositors
who separate by a long period of time the various writings from
each other (comp. Kbstlin, ut ante, p. 497). Let us look at some
particular features of this similarity. In the Apocalypse is pro
mised nearness to and personal fellowship with God, Rev. iii. 12,
- — nearness, that is, life and love, even fellowship in nature and
dignity with Christ, Rev. iii. 5, xii. 20, 21. To this corresponds
dwelling in God, and God in men, 1 John iv. 12-16 (comp.
iii. 24) ; also the words of Jesus, John vi. 37, " Him that cometh
to me, I will in no wise cast out;" and John x. 28, "neither
shall any man pluck them out of my hand" (comp. ver. 29) ;
also the intercessory prayer, with its acknowledgment of the dis
ciples — for example, xvh. 8, 14, 16 ; and the promise to come to
His people, John xiv. 18-23. The promise of eternal life in the
Apocalypse, ii. 7, 10, 11, 17, iii. 5, 12, has numberless paraUels
in the Gospel and the Epistles. The divine dignity, glory, blessed
ness, and power, which the Apocalypse promises to the victors,
ii. 7, 27, iii. 5, 12, 20, 21, have their analogies in the freedom

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 379
which comes through the truth, and in remaining as a son in the
house for ever, John viii. 32-36 ; in the saying respecting the
greater works which believers shall do, John xiv. 12; and the
fulfilment of their petitions, John xiv. 13, xvi. 23-25 ; 1 John
iii. 22, v. 14, 15 ; and in their sonship, 1 John hi 1. Especially
has the harmony between the promise of the hidden manna, Rev.
ii. 17, and the discourse on the manna or bread from heaven,
John vi. 31-35, 41, 48, 51, been more or less recognised. Un
deniably from the same hand are the promises of the coming of
Jesus, and His supping with true Christians, and of true Chris
tians with Him, Rev. iii. 20 ; and of the love of Jesus, and His
appearance with those who have loved Him ; of His coming, and
that of His Father, to make their abode with them, John xiv. 21,
23. When Christ promises to the victor that He will make him
a pillar in the temple of his God, and that he shall go no more
out, Rev. iii. 1 2 ; so also in John viii. 3 5 He says, " The servant
abideth not in the house for ever, but the Son abideth ever"
(comp. vi. 37). The promise, "To him that overcometh will I
grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and
am set down with my Father in His throne," iii. 21 (comp.
ii. 26, 27), comes into close contact with the words of Jesus, " If
any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall
also my servant be : if any man serve me, him will my Father
honour," John xii. 2 6 ; and also with the prayer, " Father, I will
that they also whom Thou hast given me be with me where I
am, that they may behold my glory which Thou hast given me,"
John xvii. 24 (comp. John xvii. 22, xiv. 3). Jesus says, " He
that overcometh shall not Is hurt of the second death," Rev.
ii. 11 ; and in the Gospel He says, " He that heareth my word,
and believeth on Him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and
shall not come into condemnation ; but is passed from death unto
hfe," John v. 24 (comp. vi. 39, 40, xi. 25, 26). That the pro
mises of the Gospel and the Epistles are, just as those of the
Apocalypse, essentially nothing else than the Christian life in the
form of promise ; that, with the evangehst, the Christian, even in
his becoming a Christian, has already what the promises represent
as future,— needs no proof (comp., for example, 1 John iii. 1, 2).
Naturally, to those expositors who " hitherto have not in the least
regarded themselves as on Johannine ground," must " the many
parallels which present the glory of the eternal life be all the more

380 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
surprising;" to us they bring no surprise, but only a heavily
preponderating confirmation of the identity which we have traced,
even in the more subtle connections.
11. Christendom.
Of the names and symbols of Christendom — the individual
church appears with the evangelist only in 3 John 9, 10 — occur
ring in the Apocalypse, we can expect to find the candlesticks and
the stars in the Gospel, as little as the twelve tribes of Israel and
the New Jerusalem The people of God, the woman, and the
bride, belong so exclusively to the Old Testament, that if they
were absent in the evangehst we should not miss them; and should
they be present, we could regard them only as marks of relation
ship with the seer. But if we do not claim the saying concerning
the travailing woman, John xvi. 21 (comp. Rev. xii 1—3), though
it can hardly have been uttered without relation to Messianic woes,
there at least meets us undeniably the bride of the Apocalypse in
the words of the Baptist, " He that hath the bride is the bride
groom : but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and
heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice.
This my joy therefore is fulfilled,'' John iii 29. The bride of
which the Baptist speaks is the same Messianic church which is
described as the bride by the seer, Rev. xix. 7-9, xxi 9, xxii 17.
But as Jesus in Matt. ix. 1 5 speaks of the bridegroom as present,
and in Matt. xxv. 1—3 as future ; so to tbe evangehst John the
Messianic church is the bride more according to the Old Testa
ment side — the wedding beginning with the already accomplished
appearance of Christ ; but, on the other hand, to the apocalyptic
John the same church is the bride more according to the New
Testament side — the wedding imminent with the future appear
ance of Christ. But how stands the statement of Kbsthn (ut
ante, p. 49 0) with respect to such an appearance, " above ally —
in the Apocalypse, — Christianity in its monotheistic character
common to it with Judaism is against heathenism ; but still not,
as with John, — the evangehst, — in its trinitarianism against
Judaism ?" Surely, when the same expositor says (ut ante, p. 489),
" The woman who is the subject of Rev. xh. 1, 2 is the Jewish and
Christian church in one person ; Christianity is therefore nothing
different from Judaism, and can at the most be only a new form

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 381
of the same," must he not in justice also conclude from John
ih. 29 that Christianity was to the evangelist nothing different
from Judaism ? We rather say, that to the evangelist, as well as
to the seer, every ideal was already present typically, or in actual
prediction in the Old Covenant, and found its historical realization
or fulfilment through the appearance of Christ in Israel, and will
find it in a more perfect manner on the appearance of Christ at
the last day, but that the evangehst as such must give prominence
far more to the historical, the seer as such to the future realiza
tion. But if the evangelist is not more Jewish than the seer,
because he describes the Messianic church in the Old Testament
form as the bride of the Messiah, why must the seer be held to
be more Jewish than the evangelist, because he mostly treats
of eternal life as future ? That Christ has already come to the
bride, is as directly associated with the gift of eternal life already
bestowed, as that Christ will come to her is connected with the
promise of eternal hfe ; the former is the evangelistic, the latter
the apocalyptic conception of one and the same thing.
Reserving the evangelic symbol of " the sheep " for future
consideration, since the Apocalypse has it only in a later place,
we inquire how the evangelist regards the two constituent elements,
Jewish and Gentile Christians, in their relation to each other.
That, according to the Gospel, just as with the Apocalypse, men,
not only from the Jews, but from the various nations, had become
Christians, and could and should do so in the future, follows not
only from such passages as John i. 12, 13, xi. 52, xii. 32, but
undoubtedly from the whole tenor of the Gospel, and is universally
admitted. The idea, according to which the seer either distinguishes
the Gentile Christians as dependants of the Jewish converts, the
pecuhar people of God, or prefers the latter, through the sealing,
as belonging to them alone, or considers Gentile Christians under
the name oT Israel, only as allies and citizens of the Messianic
kingdom, appears to us entirely without foundation. On the
other side, we cannot agree with the opinion that the seer makes
no distinction between Jewish and Gentile Christians ; we have
found rather that he distinguishes Christians at one time, Rev.
xi. 18, xix. 5, according to their origin, bringing over the pre-
Christian relation of Jews and proselytes in the "servants" of
God, and "them that fear" His name; at another, Rev. xii.
17, symbolizing, agreeably with the connection, the Gentile

382 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
Christians as the " remnant " of the woman's seed, a tacit time
distinction of the Jewish Christians as the earlier born. And
the evangehst does this precisely in the same way. Not to men
tion the passage in the intercessory prayer, John xvii. 20-23,
which, in our judgment, certainly refers to Gentile Christians,
the words of Jesus, " And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will
draw all men unto me," John xh. 32, stand in undeniable con
nection with the request of the Greeks, John xii. 21-32, and
form in that connection a parallel to the fearers of God in the
Apocalypse ; as also the saying of Jesus concerning the other sheep
which He has, and which are not of this fold, but which He
must bring, and which will hearken to His voice, and there shall
be one fold and one Shepherd, John x. 16, runs parallel with the-
apocalyptic description of Gentile Christians as the remnant of
the woman's seed.
We have seen, however, that the seer distinguishes Christians, .
not merely according to descent and time, but also according to
their importance. Amongst the servants of God, some are so in
an eminent sense ; the prophets divide . again, into- prophets in a
narrower sense, and into apostles. From those who have the
testimony of Jesus there come into prominence those who have it
in an emphatic sense, namely, the martyrs. But we have already
shown, in the section on the Spirit, how the evangelist, 1 John
ii. 27, recognises the anointing of all Christians ; and yet, for
example in 1 John iv. 1—3, clearly distinguishes the prophets of
the Apocalypse from other Christians ; and how in the parting
address, for example in John xiv. 25, 26, xvi. 13, on the one side he
comprehends apostles and prophets, and on the other distinguishes
them, John xv. 26, 27. Indeed, the distinction which the seer
makes between prophets, and to some extent apostles, and ordinary
Christians, cannot be more forcibly expressed than in the words
of Jesus : " Neither pray I for these alone, but for them* also which
shall believe on me through their word," John xvh. 20. Aud in
order to see martyrdom distinguished in the Gospel froin the com
mon Christian testimony, we need only read in connection John
xv. 26 to xvi 4 ; or is it only accidental that testimony and
excommunication and death stand so closely together ?
In their common though only scanty indications respecting
the organization of the universal or of individual churches, the
Apocalypse and the Gospel hardly touch each other. That the

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 383
evangehst, not less than the seer, regards the universal Christian
church as a great living unity, is emphatically expressed in the
"one fold and one shepherd," John x. 16 (comp. xvii 21-23,
xi. 52); but that which the Gospel contains respecting the office
of the apostles, John xx. 21-23 (comp. xiii. 16), and the third
Epistle, vers. 5-8, respecting the office of evangelists, and pro
bably also, vers. 9-11, respecting that of the presbytery, has no
parallel in the Apocalypse ; as, on the other hand, nothing corre
sponding to the indications of the latter concerning the Lord's
day, and the statements with respect to it, are to be found in the
Gospel and Epistles.
In the history of Christendom the two representations do not
at the first glance appear to harmonize. Certainly the contents
of Rev. xii. 1—9, especially ver. 12, or the description of the con
flict of Christ with the devil, have, as we have seen in the work of
Christ, an undeniable and highly significant relation to a view of
His work often expressed by the evangelic Christ Himself. But
of the history of Christendom after Christ, given in the Apoca
lypse, xii. 13-17, in its Jewish Christian period, in its transition
to the Gentiles, and in its, ver. 1 7, summarily indicated promul
gation among them, there is hardly anything in the Gospel or
the Epistles to remind us. In the Epistles, or, more correctly,
in the Epistle, where the history of the church generally is not
in question, this need not surprise us. It is otherwise with the
Gospel, which, though in the form of prophecy, treats frequently
of the time of Rev. xii. 13-17, but in a very anomalous manner.
If we compare such passages as John x. 16, xi. 52, xii. 24, 32,
xvii. 20-23, there meets us as a prediction of Christ with refer
ence to the side involved in this question — this : Christ in death,
apparently defeated and overcome, but in truth voluntarily sacri
ficing Himself (comp. John x. 17, 18, xvii 19) and raising Him
self to glory (comp. John xii 23, 32, xvii 5, etc.) ; but through
death unfolding a far more comprehensive activity, John xii. 24,
extending from the Jews to all nations, or to the whole of man
kind, John xh. 32, and gathering from Jews and Gentiles one
united church, John .x. 16. How differently does this sound
from the flight of the woman into the wilderness, there to con
tinue during the time of tribulation ! But do not the elders in
the Apocalypse sing of those who have been redeemed by the
blood of the Lamb out of every people and nation, v. 9 (comp.

384 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
xiv. 4) ? and does not Jesus in the Gospel say to His disciples,
" They shall put you out of the synagogues ; yea, the time
cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God
service," John xvi. 2 ; and, " If the world hate you, ye know that
it hated me before it hated you," xv. 18: " If they have perse
cuted me, they will also persecute you," xv. 2 0 ? — all which,
partly from the expression and partly from the connection, refers
to the persecutions of the Jews, and predicts just that which is
narrated in Rev. xii 1 3 : the dragon " persecuted the woman
which brought forth the man-child." We must therefore say,
that when, corresponding with the aim of the two writings in the
Apocalypse, the history of Christendom is represented more pro
minently as persecution through the unbelief of the Jewish
world, and in the Gospel not less prominently as the saving
work of the crucified and Risen One in the needy Gentile world,
there is still not wanting in either of the two the evidence that
the other conception was known, and familiar to it.
Respecting the history of Christendom in the Gentile Christian,
or in the period present to the seer, the seven letters furnished us
with tolerably exact information. We observe at once that anti
christian Judaism, as well- as heathenism, has already persecuted
the Christians to the uttermost ; the former by its calumnies, the
latter by open violence, though not in all places with equal
vigour. The Gospel offers to this no parallel, and thus directly
proves its historical character in that, in its predictions of the
hatred and persecutions of the world, it does not pass the breadth
of a finger beyond the circle of the historical vision of Jesus, the
Jewish Christian period, (comp. John xv. 18, xvi. 4). But in the
first Epistle we read : " Marvel not, my brethren, if the world
hate you," iii. 13 ; therefore the readers of the evangelist, hke
those of the seer, have already experienced the hatred of the
world. But whether the hating world of the Epistle included
Jews and Gentiles, or only Gentiles, cannot by reason of the.
universality of the expression be decided by it alone ; stiU the
whole tenor of the Epistle, and especially its conclusion, v. 19-21,
speaks more in favour of the latter view ; and that, after what
happened between the authorship of the Apocalypse and that
of the Epistle, the synagogue of Satan, with its calumnies, was
silenced at the time of the latter, is at least not improbable.
The same terrible catastrophe makes it also perfectly explic-

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 385
able that Judaistic error, which appears in the Apocalypse already
overcome, expelled, and, as belonging essentially to the past, is
not mentioned at all in the Epistles of John. When, on the other
hand, ethnistic error in the apocalyptic churches impresses us with
the feeling that it is still powerful, and, indeed, still threatens to
be dangerous, we must, with our belief in the identity of the two
writers, fully expect 'that in the letters of the same man, though
written a series of years later, should they occupy themselves
with false doctrine in general, the same ethnistic error, be it still
in the apocalyptic or in the succeeding stage of development,
will meet us. That the three Epistles contend against doctrinal
error, and that it is ethnistic in its nature, needs no proof. But
a continuity, much less a parallelism with the errors of the
Apocalypse, is certainly not discoverable in the errors spoken of
in the Epistles by a superficial examination. If we lotik closely,
however, we find that the false doctrines contested in the
Epistles were in practice antinomian, like those of the Nicolai
tanes : " Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law :
for sin is the transgression of the law," 1 John iii. 4 (comp.
v. 17); indeed, the whole Epistle is full of evidence that a pro
fession of Christianity and sin are at variance with eaCh other,
and is therefore a prolonged proof that his opponents, just as the
false teachers of the Apocalypse, desired to unite that profession
and immoral conduct with each other. But, since the first Epistle
does not, like the Apocalypse, contend against the temptation
to eat of sacrifices offered to idols and to fornication, we must
take into account that antinomianism may, in the course of a
few years, have become generalized ; and we must further con
sider that the seer had before him a pretty well 'developed anti
nomianism, and yet for the sake of the Old Testament prophetic
form has mentioned only two sides of it, namely, eating of idola
trous sacrifices and whoredom. And is it not, then, all the more
significant when the first Epistle gives the warning against immo
rality in a form so strongly suggestive of these two evils, ii
12-17 (comp. iii. 7-10) ? when he contests the distinction —
after the knowledge of the depths of Satan— obviously current
with the apocalyptic teachers of error, between " sin " and that
"forbidden of God," iii -4? when he again and again presents
as an example, ii. 6, iii. 5, 7-9, iv. 17, the apocalyptic "works "
of Christ, that is, the evident fulfilment of the law in Christ, in
2 B

386 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
contrast with the deliverance from the same contended for by
false teachers, Rev. ii. 26 (comp. Matt. v. 17-19)? when He
says of the commandments of God that they are not " grievous "
(fiapeiat), v. 3, as the seer speaks ironically of the burden
(/3a/ao?) of the same, ii. 24 ? when, with undoubted reference to
false doctrine, he speaks of " sin unto death," v. 16 (comp. ii. 16,
32, iii. 1, 2) ? and when he concludes with the admonition re
markable to every unprejudiced reader, " Little children, keep
yourselves from idols " ? With the antinomian practice there is
associated another very important parallel feature, namely, that
the false teachers in the Epistles, just as those in the Apocalypse,
are represented as claiming inspiration ; they were false prophets
(comp. Rev. ii.. 20, 14 ; 1 John iv. 1-3). The knowledge
which the- apocalyptic false- teachers claim to have gained in this
way is criticised by the seer only in one place, ii. 24, but in a
manner which clearly shows the part which " to know " played
in their words and deeds. But we may venture to take as
granted that the " knowledge," so often occurring in the' Gospel
and in the first Epistle, had its polemical occasion in the gnosis
claimed and glorified by these impostors. While the gnosis of
the apocalyptic false teachers was a knowledge of the depths or
mysteries which served as a theoretic foundation for Antinomi-
anism, and the gnosis of the false teachers of the Epistle separated
the man Jesus and the Christ, or the Son of God, 1 John ii. 22,
iv. 15, or denied that Jesus who had appeared in the flesh was
Christ, 1 John iv. 2, 3, 2 John 7, and by this docetism also
laid a theoretic foundation for antinomianism, the Apocalypse
has still no express statement against docetism. But, even apart
from the ever-striking coincidence that the Lord rebukes the
church at Thyatira as " the Son of God," ii. 1 8, there needs only
a single glance at the first Epistle in order to find again the
" knowledge of the depths ;" for example, ii. 3, 4, 13, 14, iii. 1,
iv. 6, 12-14, and many others ; and we need only read 1 John
ii. 18-20 to perceive the newness of the form in which the
gnosis is contested by the first Epistle ; and instead of entering
into an hypothesis as to the manner in which the apocalyptic
gnosis may have developed into the gnosis of the epistolary form,
we point rather to the preceding stage of the former, which,
according to 1 Cor. xv. 12 (comp. 33, 34), already denied the
resurrection of the dead.

and of the gospel and epistles of john. 387
12. Antichrist.
The evangelist writes : " Little children, it is the last time : and
as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there
many antichrists ; whereby we know that it is the last time,',' 1 John
ii. 1 8 ; " Who is a liar, but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ ?
He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son," 1 John ii 22 ;
" Many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know
we the Spirit of God : Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus
Christ is come in the flesh is of God : and every spirit that con
fesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is- not of God :
and this is that spirit of antichrist of whom — according to the correct
reading 8 — ye have heard that he should come ; and even now
alre'ady is he in the- world," 1 John iv. 1-3'; "Many deceivers
are entered into the world, who confess not thate Jesus Christ is
come in the flesh : this is a deceiver and antichrist;," 2 John 7.
In the first of these passages the evangelist' refers the reader
to an earlier announcement of the coming of antichrist ; in the
third to an announcement of the coming of the spirit of anti
christ; and of both he says that they now fulfil; or begin to
fulfil, themselves. If we compare with this on the one side the
prediction of false Christs and false prophets. Matt. xxiv. 24,
as well as that of "the man of sin," "the son of perdition,"
2 Thess. ii. 3, 4, and on the other tlie apocalyptic narrative of
the beast and the false prophet, Rev. xiii. ; if we notice, moreover,
how, in the account of false doctrine, " a deceiver and an anti
christ," 2 John 7, are classed together, but at the same time
are also distinguished; and " read exactly like an allusion to the
closely associated picture of Rev. xiii." (Ewald, ut ante, p. 364 ;
compare also the "deceiver " with Rev. xiii. 14, as well as the
" of (out of) the world," 1 John iv. 5, and the ascent " out of the
earth," Rev. xiii. 11), we must agree with those expositors
who think the evangelist refers in the passages quoted, not to
Christian teaching respecting the future development, or the
future of antichrist in general, but to the prediction of the two
beasts in the Apocalypse, as to one well known to his readers.
The denial of the identity between that which is predicted
and that which is accepted may, however, be consistent with this
view; for then, according to Kbstlin (p. 496), the evangehst has
not passed by the prediction of the Apocalypse, but has referred

388 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
antichrist to the false teachers who in his time were tbe chief foes
of Christianity, so that it has lost the external form, which cor
responded to the theocratic view of the world (compare also Weiss,
bibl. Theol. p. 758). But is 'there not some misunderstanding
here ? When we closely examine the related passages of the
first and second Epistles, the result -is this : the evangelist has by
no means explained the prediction of the two beasts in the
Apoealypse in the sense of the false teaehers of his time, as if it
were already completely fulfilled in them ; 'much rather the lying
prophets are to him antichrist so far as they are the organs
(comp. John vi. 70),;the precursors, manifesting themselves in
various ways, of the yet future individual personality of anti
christ, in whom all will culminate, and, indeed, not so much on
the side of persecution — -the beast — as on the side of temptation
— the false prophets. Far be it from me to wish to deny the
difference between the expectation of the Apocalypse and the
-Epistles on this point. But it cannot be doubted that as the
doctrine of the advent remainingin itself- essentially the same, has
according to the circumstances, in the view of the Christian
-prophets, taken manifoldly various forms ; so also the expectation
-of the coming of antichrist in its concrete features must follow
the ' development of history within and without the church.
Nothing more natural than that John, after he, in 'the year 68,
¦under the impressions of the Neronic persecution of the' Christians,
and its subsequent effects, had seen in the Roman empire, especially
in Nero, the antichrist,, and in the 'heathen magic and divination
the ally of the same, as it were the antipneuma, -should, a few
years later, subsequent to the destruction of Jerusalem, no more,
f expect antichrist in its earlier form; it is very obvious also that,
under the impression of the false doctrine which 'began to work
¦fundamental disaster in the churches, -when it denied the his
torical Christ, he now saw in these false teaehers, which earlier he
had not associated with false prophets, the future antichrist chiefly
on. the side of lying and deception; or also, and >more definitely, the
future antipneuma either come or preparing the way ; and is it
not in harmony with the peuvading peculiarity of the seer and
the evangelist, when he describes the. false teachers as the pre
cursors, the germs, the manifold connections of antichrist, at one
time as many antichrists, at another as many false prophets,
now as the antichrist, and then as the spirit of antichrist itself?

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 389
Had the evangelist perceived, in false prophecy or in false doc
trine, as it is affirmed, the present complete fulfilment of the
expectation of antichrist, he could not have written, "as ye have
heard," "of whom ye have heard;" but he could have written
thus if he was the seer to whom earher the individual phases of
the Roman empire were the beast, and to whom now the anti
christ and the antipneuma began to manifest themselves in the
many antichrists and false prophets.
But it is asked, Why, then, is the Gospel wholly silent respecting
antichrist, when the same, according to Matt. xxiv. 24, was
included in the predictions of Jesus ? I reply by asking the
opposite question : Is there really nothing to be found respecting
antichrist in the Gospel ? If we compare John viii 4:0^44, espe
cially ver. 44, with Rev. xiii, where murder and falsehood, the
two works of the devil, are ascribed to the two beasts ; if we
compare John vi 7j0, 71, xiii. 2, 10, 11, xviii: 27, xvii. 12,
especially the last mentioned, with Rev. xvii. 8,11; if, also, we
read John x. 8-10; v. 43, and especially x. 5, in its true
meaning, — we shall, on the assumption of some connection between
the fourth Gospel and the teaching of Christ and the apostles,
and in view of the words- of John v. 28, 29; not to be ex
plained away, find estabhshed what was to be expected, namely,
that the representation of antichrist was not at all strange to
him. Certainly, on a superficial consideration, the difference
between the Gospel and the Apocalypse on this point appears
exceedingly great. But we have now several times made
acquaintance with the peculiar genius manifesting itself in both,
to which the future is already present, and the present is yet
future. The nature of antichrist had already for John revealed
itself in Cain (comp. John viii. 44 ; 1 John iii. 12). Cain is evi
dently to him an incarnation, or an instrument of the devil.
Antichrist reached its relative perfection in the Jews, the children
of the devil, and in the individual personality of Judas, the
" devil," the " son of perdition.!' And this revelation of anti
christ, or of the hostile contrast to Christ, the Gospel presents
almost exclusively, similarly as it emphasizes almost exclusively
Christ as having already appeared, and the present holiness and
blessedness'of Christians. But little as it denies or overlooks the
future Christ, and the future perfection of the Christian, just as
little do&it denv or overlook the future revelation of antichrist.

390 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
It only keeps itself entirely within Christ's historical circle of
vision when it represents Him as saying to the Jews : " I am
come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not ; if another
shall come in his own name, him ye will receive," John v. 43.
Or have we not in these words (comp. x. 8), Matt. xxiv. 24, in its
— for non-Jewish readers — whole extent of meaning, and therefore
the same prediction, the application of which to definite time re
lations, the Apoealypse gives in the picture of the two beasts ?
13. The Last Time.
Though the first Epistle sees antichrist in the denial of the
historical Christ, and the spirit of antichrist in its false prophecy,
we shall not expect to meet there the kind of warning and alarm
ing portents and signs of the end which the Apocalypse places before
us. Indeed, as the statements of the Epistle concerning anti
christ do not exclude the expectation of its progress to a still
greater similarity with the apocalyptic picture ; so its conception of
the warning preliminaries to the end do not exclude the prospect
of yet other and more apocalyptic portents ; and he who wrote of
the "coming," 1 John ii. 28, and of "the whole World" that
"lie thin wickedness," 1 John v. 19, may well have expected,
and even seen, avenging judgments hanging over it. But he ex
pressly says only that the appearance of many antichrists is the
sigh that it is the last time, which corresponds closely with his
description of antichrist. The Gospel does not mention the last
time, but Jesus says to the Jews : " Yet a little while is the
hght with you. Walk while ye have the light, lest darkness come
upon you : for he that walketh in darkness knoweth not whither
he goeth," John xii. 35. Even if he who wrote this did not
directly think of Rev. xiv. 10, xv. 1, and xvi. 10, must he not
have expected and seen intimations of wrath coming upon the
unbelieving, and following the darkness in which they walked ?
14. The Call to the World to Repent.
It was shown in the sections on the Spirit and the Gospel that
the evangelist has the contents of that which the seer describes
by the name of the everlasting gospel, in the ' testimony of the
Spirit and of the disciples, John xv. 26, 27 ; in the proclamation

and of the gospel and epistles of JOHN. 391
of eternal life by the disciples, 1 John ii 4; and, above all, in the
conviction of the world by the Spirit, John xvi. 8-11. Though
he gives less prominence to its publication through the world as
a call to repentance, and as a persuasive premonition of the end,
it is at once explained from the subordination of eschatology
with him, and from the consideration that he gives prominence
to the positive side of conversion ; moreover, in the Epistles he has
only to do with those already converted. There can be no doubt
with respect to the question, whether he regarded the Gospel to the
Gentiles as a serious friendly call to repentance, and therefore an
alluring preliminary to the advent (comp. John iii. 19-21).
15. The Consolation >of Christians.
The great tribulation of Christians in the Apocalypse corre
sponds with the climax of antichristianity predicted by it. As
tbe latter, so also the former is naturally wanting in the Gospel.
As in the doctrine of the Apocalypse we had largely to supple
ment the section on the saints and their works, with respect to
their sufferings, their vocation, and their hope, from what related
to the great tribulation; so in the corresponding section of the
comparison we have brought together what relates to it from the
Gospel and the Epistles. We might, indeed, have reserved for
this' place the exhortations and warnings of the first Epistle
against error ; its parallel, however, is given in the seven letters,
not in the admonitions of the Apocalypse, which reach the
future form of antichrist.
The earlier comparison must be extended only to two particulars.
First, we find the promise, which with the seer is given expressly
only for the great tribulation, that true Christians really enter at
death into the unseen ideal world, or heaven, to which ideally
they always belonged, also with the evangelist ; not, indeed, in
the Epistle, but in the Gospel. This distinction is important, as
it confirms our idea of the promise. It is the eternal life, 1 John
ii. 25, which is present at the moment of conversion, which at
death is continued in a higher degree in heaven, and is perfected
at the resurrection. On writing the Epistle, the evangehst sees
the last time come, and the advent is near, therefore the promise
has the form of 1 John iii. 2— -heaven is not mentioned; on
writing the Gospel he does not see the advent directly imminent,

392 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
therefore, as the already present possession of eternal life, s6
heaven- also appears in. the foreground — fully corresponding to the
different forms of the promise in the seven letters, in the predic
tion of antichrist, and at the close of the Apocalypse. " He that
loveth his life," says Christ, " shall lose it ; and he that hateth
his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal. If any
man. serve me, let him follow me-; and where I am, there shall
also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my Father
honour," John xii. 25—26. But Christ goes to the Father, and is
in His exaltation, with the Father in heaven. " Little children, yet
a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek. me : and as I said unto
the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come ; so now I say to you,"
John xiii. 33 (comp. vii, 34, viii. 21). Evidently (comp. ver. 36)
the inability of the disciples is to be understood of the time then
present. " Lord, whither goest Thou ? " asked Peter ; and " Jesus
answered him. Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now ; but
thou shalt follow me afterwards," John xiii. 36. That this refers
to Peter's martyrdom, we learn, from the connection and the ex
pression ; but. the. going away of the Lord, as well as the following
of the disciple, equally contain the promise of heaven (comp. xii.
26). "In my Father's house are many mansions," Christ says:
" if it were not so; I would have told you. I go to prepare a place
for you. And if I go and prepare a plaoe for you, I will come
again, and receive you unto- myself; that where I am, there ye
may be also," John xiv, 2, 3. The coming of Christ can here
only be in the death of the individual; He goes before to heaven,
and comes again to take His people to Himself. " Father," He
prays, " I will that they also whom Thou hast given me be with
me where I am ; that they may behold my glory, which Thou hast
given me : for Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world,"
John xvn. 24. It corresponds only to the difference between the
apocalyptic and the evangelic if the state in heaven is generally
represented by. the evangelist as being with Christ, as being where
He is,. but by the- seer more in- Old Testament imagery. While
we at once reeognise in those who hate their lives the Christians
of the Apocalypse; who' "loved not their lives unto the death,"
xii 11 (comp. vi. 9, xx. 4, xv. 2, ii. 10) ; so on the one side there
is not wanting with the seer the being with Christ, Rev. xiv. 1, 4
(comp. vii. 17), and on the other, the being honoured of the
Father, and seeing the glory of Christ, etc., found in the evange-

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 3931!
list, only more comprehensively, is seen also by the seer, Rev. vii.
9-15 (comp. xiv. 1-4, iii. 21). The rest of the blessed dead
from their labours, cannot have been a strange idea to him who
wrote John ix. 4. As with the seer the Lamb in heaven feeds
His people, and leads them to living fountains of water, Rev. vii.
1 7 ; so Jesus is represented by the evangelist as here below
declaring Himself the shepherd whose voice they hear ; as calling
them by name, and leading them forth, etc., John x. 3, 4 ; and
when Jesus offers to the Samaritan woman living water, John
iv. 10-12 (comp. vii. 37, 38), it is only a new proof that John,
to whom the future was already present, and the present was
still future, used, one and the same image to represent, now the
present, and now the future stage.
We must further extend our earlier comparison to another
particular. As the seer, xiv 1-5, describes Christians in their
exaltation above the world, the sphere of antichristianity ; so also
they appear with the evangelist as delivered from the world, and
superior to it. It is true neither Gospel nor Epistle represents
believers as ideally present in heaven ; but the joy of Christ ful
filled in His disciples- corresponds to singing the new song before
the throne, John xvh. 13. As Christians, according to Rev. xiv. 3,
are redeemed from the earth ; so the disciples of Christ, according
to John xv. 19, are not of the world, but Christ has chosen them
out of the world, and out of the world God has given them to Him,
John xvii. 6, 9 ; they are not of the world, as Christ is not of the
world, John xvii. 16 (comp..ii. 1.5); they know that they have
passed from death unto. life, 1 John iii 14 ; as Christ is, so are
they in the world, 1 John iv. 17. That they have not, accord
ing to the Apocalypse,, defiled, themselves with women, we are
reminded by 1 John iii. 3 ; that they follow the Lamb whither
soever He goeth, by John x. 3,, 4* (comp. ver. 9, xiv. 27, 28, xii
26, xiii. 36-39) ; that in their, mouth is found no guile, by 1 John
ii. 21, 22, 27; and of the absolute statements: "they are
virgins," "they are without fault," by such passages as 1 John
iii. 6, " Whosoever abideth in Him sinneth not ; " 1 John hi. 9,
" Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin ; for his seed
remaineth in him : and he cannot sin, because he is born of God ;"
1 John v. 18, "We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth
not : but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that
wicked one toucheth him not." A careful consideration will

394 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
show that this coincidence between the objects of comparison in
the representation of the ideal Christian nature as a timeless
condition is neither accidental nor unimportant.
16. The Future of Israel.
In the Epistles of John there is hardly any reference to be
found to the Jewish nation. Certainly in the Gospel Christendom
is nowhere expressly described as the true Israel. But when it
is said that Moses, in the law and the prophets, wrote of Jesus,
John i. 45; that Jews would believe in Jesus if they beheved
what Moses had written of Him, John v. 45, 46 ; that they would
do Abraham's works if they were his children, John viii. 39 ;
that they would love Jesus if God were their Father, John viii.
42 ; that the Old Testament types and prophecies are fulfilled in
Jesus, for example, in John iii. 14, 15, xii. 37-39, xix. 36-39,
— there needs no special statement to show that to the evangehst
Christendom was the true Israel (comp. John ill with iii. 1 1).
That those Jews who hate and persecute Christ are not Jews,
and that they falsely claim the name, and really belong to the
synagogue of Satan, Rev. ii. 9, iii. 9, has a close and almost
literal parallel in the words of' Christ, John viii. 37—41, especially
in vers. 39—41, 44, according to which the Jews, because they
sought to slay Him, were not Abraham's children, but tbe children
of their father the devil (comp. also John i 48, " Behold an
Israelite indeed, in whom there is no guile "). But it may be
objected here, that with the seer the term " Jew " is a name of
honour, falsely assumed by the enemies of Christ ; but that on the
contrary, with the evangelist, the haters of Christ bear, the name.
True ; but there is no contradiction involved in this. In the
Apocalypse it would be impossible to use the name in any but a
theocratic sense ; in the Gospel, on the other hand, while it can
be applied as an ethnographic designation (comp. John ii. 6, iv.
22, v. 1, vi. 4, xix. 42), it can be used also as a generalizing
description of the representatives of that spirit which really
animated the Jews, as a whole, against Jesus, — namely, the spirit
of unbelief, as well as of hatred and persecution, which grew out of
it. That which the evangelist expresses by his use of the name,
the seer gives us to understand in a manner equally clear, when,
having mentioned the " holy city," which the Gentiles shall tread

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 395
under foot forty and two months, Rev. xi 2, he soon after speaks
of it as the " great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and
Egypt," Rev. xi. 8 (comp. vers. 9, 10). What John in the Apoca
lypse calls by the name of Jew, he calls in the Gospel " Israel "
and "Israelite," John i. 31, 47, 49, iii. 10 (comp. 1 Thess. ii. 14,
15, and Phil. iii. 5). That to the seer the temple at Jerusalem
is still the temple of God, and will be preserved from desolation,
Rev. xi 1, should not in conjunction with John iv. 21 have been
adduced by Kbstlin, ut ante, p. 489, as a proof of the wholly
different standpoint of the two writers, when on the one side we
have shown in the section on the holy city during the forty-two
months that the temple of God and its preservation must be
understood symbolically, and on the other side that John iv. 2 1
combined with ver. 23 and John ii. 16, etc., gives a view which,
after the separation of Jewish Christians from the Jewish com
monwealth, introduced by the Jewish war, must have been self-
evident, from his idea of the priestly kingdom of Christians, to
the seer.
What does the seer hold respecting the future of the Jewish
people ? The evangelist represents Jesus as referring only infre
quently, and then only generally and slightly, to the judgment
of Jerusalem, which, in his idea, had already been pronounced,
v. 43, vii. 34-36, viii. 21, 50, x. 1-3, xii. 35, 36; and there is
not the slightest indication of the more distant fate of the
Jewish people. The former circumstance furnishes us with a
striking proof that, from the silence or cursory reference of the
evangelist to any subject, we cannot conclude that his personal
position was one of indifference or careless avoidance, but rather
that, with a view to a definite circle of subjects, he limited himself
in the Gospel to the material he had chosen. The absence of all
indications respecting the future of the Jews simply leaves it
undecided whether, after the experience realized since 68 A.D.,
he had given up the hope of Israel's conversion; or whether,
with changed relations, it had become modified, in a similar
manner as his expectation of antichrist. Merely by the way, I
throw out the question, whether it is wholly accidental that the
seer represents the two witnesses-^-Moses and Elias — as preced
ing the advent of Him who had already once appeared, Rev. xi.
3-6 ; and that the evangehst represents the witness — the Baptist
—of Him who should appear (John i. 7, 8, 15) as being asked

396 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
whether he were Elias, or that prophet (vi. 14, vii. 10; comp.
Deut. xviii. 18), John i. 21-25 ?
17. The World in Wickedness.
Just as, in the Apocalypse, the inhabitants of the world devote
themselves to the two beasts ; so Jesus predicts that the Jews,
in the sense which the evangelist attaohes to that term, woidd
receive another if he came in his own name, John v. 43 ; the
evangehst also says of the false prophets, " They are of the world ;
therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them,"
1 John iv. 5. But does the evangelist expect its conversion ?
We have already seen how far he is from that in the section on
Christian life; yet we may remark that in the last time he says,
" The whole world lietli in wickedness," 1 John v. 18. As a
whole, he expects nothing from it
18. The End of the. World.
The evangelist does not speak- of the fall of Babylon. But, as in
the Apocalypse, a voice from heaven exhorts the people of God
to come out of her, that they may not be partakers of her sin
and her plagues ; her sins having reached to heaven, and her
iniquities having been remembered by God, Rev. xviii. 4, 5 ; so
the evangelist writes, " The whole world lieth in wickedness "
(comp. 1 John v. 18); " Love not the world, neither the things
that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of
the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust
of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not
of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth
away, and the lust thereof; but he that doeth the will of God
abideth for ever," 1 John ii. 15-17 (comp. especially 1 John ii.
17 and Rev. xviii. 14).
19. The Coming of the Lord.
We found that in one series of places in the Apocalypse the
coming of the Lord is intended in the ordinary sense ; that in
another it can be interpreted only in the sense of His coming at
the advent with power ; and that, according to a comparison of

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 397
the passages generally relating to His coming, any personal
manifestation or energetic self-affirmation of the exalted Christ,
whether provisional or final, whether to judge or to bless, may be
understood; indeed, we could not conceal from ourselves that
if the seer had had occasion to speak of it, he would certainly
have described Christ's entrance into the world, at His birth
as well as at His public appearance, as he does the advent,
as a coming of Christ (comp. Rev. xii. 2, 4, 5). The evangelist
uses the word irapovala, 1 John ii. 28, which does not occur in
the Apocalypse. The coming of the Lord, in the usual sense, is
undisputed, except in John xxi. 22, 23, a place not directly
belonging to the author of the Gospel. The passages in the parting
address are very variously interpreted. " In my Father's house
are many mansions : if it were not so, I would have told you.
I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place
for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself ; that
where I am, ye may be also," John xiv. 2, 3 ; "I will not leave
you comfortless; I -will come 'to you. Yet a little while, and the
world seeth me .no more ; but ye see me : because I hve, ye
shall hve also," John xiv. 18, 19 ; "He that loveth me shall be
loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself
to him," John xiv. 21 ; " If a man love me, he will keep my
words : and my Father will love him, and we will come unto
him, and make our abode with him," John xiv. 23 ; "A little
while, and ye shall not see me : and again a little while, and
ye shall see me, because I go to my Father," John xvi, 16
(comp. vers. 17—19) ; " And ye now therefore have sorrow ; but
I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy
no man taketh from you," John xvi. 22 (comp. vers. 23, 25, 26).
While the first has been mostly regarded as the calling home of
the individual in death, and the remainder have been understood
sometimes of the resurrection; on one side, indeed, of the resur
rection of the body, and on the other of a resurrection in the
sense of a spiritual body ; sometimes of the gift of the Holy
Spirit, and .sometimes of continued spiritual fellowship with the
disciples, — such expositors as Hofmann, Luthardt, Lechler, p. 224,
have recently referred all these places to the advent, and suppose
that John xvi. 23-25, by its introductory formula, "Verily, verily,
I say unto you," separates between what has gone before, and
relates to the time following. Weiss, on the contrary, bibl. Theol.

398 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
p. 752, understands John xiv. 2, 3 of Christ's second coming and
subsequent gathering of tbe elect to Him ; but all the following
passages of the reappearance of Christ after death, and the con
tinuance of His gracious presence. To me, none of these expositions
are satisfactory ; an unprejudiced consideration will show tbat it
is fully as one-sided when most expositors miss the promise of the
advent in these passages (we need only compare, for example,
John xiv. 2, 3, with Luke xvi. 9 ; 2 Cor. v. 1-3, Matt. xxiv.
31, 1 Thess. iv. 17, John xiv. 18-20, with Luke xvii. 22;
John xvi. 22 with Matt. xxv. 1-3 ; John xvi. 25 with 1- Cor. xiii.
9-11), as when the others overlook in one or in several of them,
a relation to the next coming (comp. again, for example, John xvi.
22 with John xx. 20 ; John xiv. 2, 3, with John xiii. 36-38);
that only can be a correct exposition which gives to both aspects
what is justly due. We remember here that we have found only
recently that the evangelist speaks of antichrist, and yet describes
the false teachers, through whom it reached its full realization, as
antichrists ; we remember also that, generally, he thinks and
speaks of the realization, and of each of the steps leading to it, as
one and the same. We cannot therefore remain in doubt for a
moment how he conceived the coming of the Lord. He under
stood by it the advent, the revelation (comp. 1 John ii. 28), the
J appearance and manifestation of Christ, and in Christ of God, as
[ of a judge and deliverer, for the accomplishment of purposes
I concerning the world ; in other words, precisely the same thing
as other New Testament writers mean by the coming of Christ.
But as, for example, to him eternal life and judgment are not
merely future, but also already present ; so in like manner he sees
the coming of the Lord, not as imminent solely on the last day,
but as an event then perfected, which has been advancing through
1 manifold preliminary stages ; and thus he considers the coming
of the Lord at every one of these stages essentially as he does the
last, and calls it by the same name. Indeed, as in all other rela
tions the already present stands to him in the foreground, and
the future completion of the same falls much into the background;
as, for example, he brings forward with such emphasis the fihal
relation to God, the possession of eternal life, in all its phases,
as given at conversion, that many expositors have regarded
him as the precursor of a doctrine to which he is altogether
strange — namely, the doctrine of immanence ; so he gives such

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 399
strong prominence in the Gospel to the coming of Christ already
accomphshed, and continuing to be accomplished, that many
expositors have entirely mistaken the relation of his words to
the positive coming of the Lord. In the intention of the evan
gelist, we have without doubt to understand the expression " to
come," which he so often uses of the pre-existent and of the
historical Christ (comp. for example, John 1 9, iii. 19, xii 46,
iv. 25, vii 27, 28, 31, 41, 42, xii. 15, vi. 14, xi 27, i 15, 27,
29, 30, iii. 31, vi 38, 42, 50, 58, viii. 42, xiii. 3, xiv. 28 ; 2 John
7 ; 1 John iv. 2, v. 6 ; John v. 43, xii. 47, x. 10, xviii. 37), in
the meaning of the advent, as the coming, which at the first stage
is consubstantial with the last. But while it describes the coming
simply and unequivocally as having already ensued, it has also,
as it appears in the parting address, a manifold sense as future.
In each of the places quoted from that address, Christ promises
His coming, as it anticipates and is perfected in the advent ; in
other words, He speaks there everywhere in a double sense. It
is for Him — no matter here whether really so, or only according
to the representation of the evangehst — the same coming again
in which He takes His people to heaven, and in which He
gathers them to Himself in the advent.; the same reunion, as \
the same seeing again in the spirit and in the advent ; the same j
revelation of His person ; the same coming and dwelling appear j
in the mystic life-union and in the advent ; the same joy after /
sorrow in His resurrection and in His second coming — it is one '
and the same thing, the nearest and the most distant ; and as the
future is at the same time already present, so the present is at
the Same time only future. \ That this explanation throws hght
simply and uniformly upon the words- of Christ concerning His
coming, will be as little disputed! , as its homogeneity with one of
the chief characteristics of the evangelist. It certainly has also
great significance for our comparison ; for just as according to it
the evangelist sees the coming of the Lord, so also according to
our earlier exposition it is regarded by the seer. A comparison
of particulars is hardly needed, still the inner relation of Rev.
iii. 20 and John xiv. 21, 23 is at ah times striking; Rev. i 17
and xiv. 19 harmonize in a very remarkable manner; of that
which John xiv. 18-20, 21, xvi. 16-18, 25 promises, we have
an example in Rev. i. 9, 20 ; and that in the evangelist we
find no instance of the magisterial coming of the Lord, has an

400 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
analogy in its almost entire silence respecting the reverse side of
Christianity. The seer has not stated particularly the time of the advent,
or calculated the day and the hour ; his statements with regard
to it are first typical, but from the signs of the times he had
inferred the certainty of the Lord's speedy coming. The evan
gelist writes, " And now, little children, abide in Him ; that when
He shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed
before Him at His coming," 1 John ii. 28; he therefore expected
that he and his readers would see the advent. In 1 John ii. 18
He writes, " Little children, it is the last time : and as ye have
heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many
antichrists ; whereby we know that it is the last time," — the last
time can only be that immediately preceding the advent, the end
of the day then present, the termination of the current period by
the appearance of antichrist ; and this is also 'the view of the
seer. That, according to 1 Johnii 8, "the darkness is past, and
the true light now shineth," should not have been quoted by
Kbstlin (p. 495) as a proof that for the evangelist in contrast
with the seer spiritual darkness was gradually passing away ; did
he, according to 1 John ii. 17, regard the world as gradually
passing away ?
Of the threefold representation of the. advent in the Apocalypse,
we need not expect to find the one in the evangelist which gives
the concrete ideas of the seer, because for him the premises have
taken another form. The symbolic pictures of the advent are
also wanting with him ; at the most, a shght contact between the
prediction of the harvest, John iv. 35-38, and Rev. xiv. 14-16,
as well as between the parable of the vine, John xv. 1-8, and "
Rev. xiv. 17—20, on the basis of the apocalyptic evangelical
conception of the advent — as present, and still at the same time
future — is discoverable. But that the evangelist also, xix. 37,
has the words of Zechariah, with which the seer prefaces his
prediction as it were with a motto, Rev. i 7, we have already
mentioned. When the evangelist places the chief emphasis on
the fulfilment of that prediction in the piercing of Him who
was to be the world's judge, the seer on the other hand empha
sizes the fulfilment of the same prediction, in the appearance in
that capacity of Him who was pierced ; and though there is a
little difference in expression, it is fully explained by the neces-

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 401
sary distinction of Apocalypse and Gospel; the- representation
itseK is here as there — they shall see Him. coming as a- judge
whom they pierced on the cross.
That to the seer the advent of Christ is the coming- of God
Himself, we have recognised from several indications ; for instance,
from the difference between Rev. i 4 and xi. 17; and in several
sections, and also in that on the advent, it- has been expressly
noticed. Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 7-52, remarks that when the
evangelist speaks of God, 1 John ii. 29, as if He had been the
subject of preceding observations, it appears that he thought of
the advent wholly after the manner of the Old Testament, as
the proper coming of the Messiah, in whom God Himself comes
to His people. 20. The Resurrection of Believers.
It is evident that we cannot expect to find the name thousand
years' reign in the evangelist ; yet the thing itself, though pro
bably falling back much toward the absolute, and still more to
the already present realization of the Christian ideal, we must
certainly expect to find as far as he is identical with the author
of the Apocalypse ; and we are not deceived. The passages
relating to this subject are 1 John ii. 28, iv. 17; John v. 25,
28, 29, vi. 39, 40, 44, 54, xi. 23, 24, xii. 48. Without enter
ing into the various views of expositors respecting some of these
texts, I affirm that when Christ says, " This is the Father's will
who hath sent me, that of all which He hath given me I should
lose nothing, but should raise it up again at- the last day. And
this is the will of Him that sent me, that every one which seeth
the Son, and believeth on Him, may have everlasting hfe : and I
will raise him up at the last day," vi 39, 40 ; " No man can come
to me, except the Father, which hath sent me, draw him : and I will
raise him up at the last day," vi. 44 ; " Whoso eateth my flesh,
and drinketh my blood, hath eternal hfe : and I will raise him up
at the last day," vi. 54,— it is evident at a glance that the resus
citation or resurrection cannot be that of the judgment of the
world. When, on the other hand, Christ says, "The hour is
coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His —
the Son's — voice, and shall come forth ; they that have done good,
unto the resurrection of life ; and they that have done evil, unto
2 c

402 relation between the doctrine of the apocalypse
the resurrection of damnation," v. 28, 29 (comp. the words of
Martha, " I know that He shall rise again in the resurrection at
the last day," John xi. 24), there undoubtedly lies before us in a
passage recently pronounced an interpolation, the last judgment.
But then can — as, for example, Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 754, etc.,
thinks — the resurrection to life, John v. 29, and the resurrection
of John vi. 39, 40, 44, 54, be one and the same, the advent and
the judgment of the world together ? We have still another
passage to eompare. Christ says, " The hour is coming, and now
is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God ; and
they that hear shall live," John v. 25. Very unnecessarily there
has been much controversy about the meaning of this passage :
it can mean nothing else than the first resurrection, in distinction
from the general resurrection to judgment ; the difficulty is only
in the words " now is ; " but it is solved at once if we compare,
for example, John iv. 23, xii. 23, 28, 30, xiii. 31, and the
peculiarity of the evangelist, so often mentioned, in virtue of
which, hearing the voice of Christ by the dead at His coming,
and hearing the words of Christ by the spiritually dead now, are
to him essentially the same thing as the resurrection of believers
there, and the passing from death unto life here. The former
is the completion, the latter is the beginning or the germ. But
if, in John v. 25, the first resurrection, the resurrection of the
just, and in John v. 28, 29, the general resurrection to judgment,
is meant, can the two be conceived of as externally one or
connected in time ? What, then, can be the sense of Christ's
words, "marvel not at this," John v. 28? But if the two
resurrections do not externally come together in relation to time,
then the last day, when Christ will raise His people, John vi. 39,
40, 44, 54, and when the word which He speaks will judge
those who reject Him, and do not receive His words, John xii. 48,
of which John v. 25 and v. 28, 29 equally speak, the day of
judgment, 1 John iv. 17, cannot possibly be anything else than
the great day of the wrath of God, Rev. vi. 1 7 ; the wrath of God
and the time of the dead, Rev. xi. 18 ; "that great day of God
Almighty," Rev. xvi. 14 ; in a word, the great final catastrophe in
its twofold degree or realization, the advent, and what it brings
with it — the judgment of the world and what depends upon it —
both one and the same in nature, but in time and in degree of
actual realization different. When the evangelist uses the name

and of the gospel and epistles of JOHN. 403
" last day " for this duahty, he still intends, in harmony with the
view carried out to its consequences, — that the contents of the
eschatology in their beginning are realized on every side by the
appearance of Jesus Christ, — essentially nothing different from
that which is meant by the words of Christ concerning " His
day," which Abraham saw afar off, and was glad, John vhi. 56 ;
and tbe comparison of these words fully explains how he could
say, " The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the
voice of the Son of God ; and they that hear shall live," John v. 25.
According to this, the course of things at the advent, the mil
lennium of the seer, in the representation of the evangelist briefly
forms itself in the following manner : Christ will soon appear, or
be manifested, even during the lifetime of the evangelist and his
readers, 1 John ii. 28. Those then living who have not remained
in Him "will be ashamed before" or from " Him," 1 John ii. 28
(comp. Rev. i. 7, xvi. 15) ; but if they have continued in Him,
they will have confidence and joy, 1 John ii 28, iv. 17 (comp.
Rev. xxii. 12, ii. 26, 27, hi. 11), will not have lost that for which
they have laboured, but will receive the full reward thereof in
its first potency, the beginning of the consummation, according to
2 John 8 (comp. Rev. xxii. 12, p.iado<;, xi. 18); Christ will then
awake believers who have died, or have been slain ; they hear
His voice and live, John v. 25, vi. 39, 40, 44, 54, xi 23, 24
(comp. Rev. xx. 4-6) ; but this resurrection is to be distinguished
from the general awakening of the dead, Rev. v. 29, 30 (comp.
Rev. xx. 5). That the Apocalypse does not expressly mention
Christ in the description of the first resurrection, as is done by
the Gospel, can have, according to Rev. i 1 7, no dogmatic foun
dation. But when the evangehst, in the description of the
provisional state, perfect within earthly limits, employs not
nearly so many features as the seer, it is easily explained by
the circumstance that with him almost all emphasis hes on the
present possession of eternal hfe through Christ; and that so far
as with him its perfection is still future, his hopes, as essentially
do those of the seer, go out mainly to the absolute fulfilment
(comp. 1 John iii 2, 3). Our exposition has, I trust, shown that
in this important point also evangehst and seer hold essen
tially the same views, and are one in the behef according to
which the advent and the world-judgment of the great or the
last day have a twofold significance.

404 relation between the doctrine of the apocalypse
2.1. The Judgment,
As in Rev; xx. 11 in is. said, " I saw a great white throne, and
Him that sat on it, before whose face the earth and the heaven
fled away ; and there was- found no place for them ; " so we read
in. 1 John ii. 1 7, " The world passeth away, and the lust thereof ;
but he that dbeth the will of God abideth fon ever " (comp. 1 John
ii. 8). According to the- representations of the seer, the sea and.
hades will then give up their dead : and all the dead without
distinction; will stand before the throne, and, after the opening
of the books; will be judged according to their works. And-
all whose names do- not stand in. the- open, book, as also death
itself,, will be cast into the lake of fire; In the Gospel, Jesus says,
" The hour is coming, and now is, in the which all that are in
the graves shall hear- His voice;, and1 shall come forth ; they that
have done good, unto the resurrection of life ; and they that have
done evil| unto the resurrection of damnation," John v. 28, 29.
To an unprejudiced reader there can. be no doubt that, according
to this,, the evangelist, in the most perfect. harmony with the seer,
expected that after the completion of the earthly kingdom of
Christ, and the last judgment upon. Satan (comp. John xii. 31),
and the passing away of the present world (comp. 1 John ii. 1 7),
the- judgment of the world would take place ; all the dead
who- until then remain in tlie grave willi arise to be judged:
one class will attain to life, that is, blessedness corresponding to
their works (Christians especially will receive their reward in
the highest degree, 2 John 8) ; the other, also- according to their
works, will be judged and condemned.- We have seen that when
it is expressly said in the Gospel that all the dead shall hear the
voice of the Son, the seer also regards- Christ as the executor
of the world-judgment,, and especially as the awaker of the dead.
' Nor does the fact that the evangehst expressly mentions how the
one class shall come forth to the resurrection of life make any
difference against the Apocalypse, when at this place only the
condemnation of the other is described; because the " life " of
the former was to be described in detail afterward. The judg
ment to which the guilty arise can, in contrast with " life," mean
only the sentence, or the magisterial decision, and giving over to
perdition (comp: for example, John hi. 15, 16). Notwithstanding
all this, several writers on the doctrine of John, such as From-

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 405
mann, Baur, Kbstlin, Reuss, Scholten, though in various ways,
have with equal decision denied to the evangelist any represen
tation of a final judgment of the world. Their special proof of
this is John hi. 17, 18. But when, without prejudice, we con
sider the numerous statements of the Gospel respecting judging
and judgment, the observation forces itself upon us, first, that
these expressions are used in a twofold sense, sometimes in the
sense of magisterial discrimination and decision respecting that
which in itself or in its nature is contradictory among mankind,
and then in the sense of condemnation and distribution of penalty
to the ungodly side of the contrast. We easily see, further, that,
as in so many other relations, so also with respect to the
judgment, for the evangelist the completion and the commencing
principle are one and the same. If we grasp these two points
firmly, we shall understand how the evangehst at one time
can say that Christ is not sent into the would to judge or con
demn the world, for example, hi 17, xii. 47, 48 ; and at another,
that He has come into the world for judgment — that is, to bring
into activity and reveal the inner or contrasting dispositions^ in
the world, John ix. 39 ; and that the Father has given into the
hands of the Son the whole judgment, not merely that which
begins with His appearance on earth, but also the final separation
and decision, as well with respect to those who awake at the
advent, as with respect to all the dead, John v. 22. Still less
hesitation can there be, after all the similar things which we
have already noticed, when, according to the statements of the
evangelist in one place, the unbeliever is by the fact already
condemned, and on the other hand, the believer is not con
demned, John iii 18-21 ; and according to his statements in
another, the judgment for both is yet> future, 1 John iv. 17 ;
2 John 8 ; John v. 29, 30, xii. 48. Being judged in the
present as httle excludes, but rather includes, future judgment, as
the passing from death unto hfe -does the future awakening from
death, or the future reception of eternal life; or as the first
advent of Christ, His second ; or as the being pure, the purifying.;
or the casting down of Satan, his future overthrow, etc. More
over, the seer also ascribes to ,the appearance of Christ in the
flesh, not a judging, condemning, but a saving, delivering signifi
cation ; and that which the evangehst intends when he says that
believers are not condemned, the seer also expresses when he

406 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
says that " he that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second
death," Rev. ii. 11, xx. 6.
22. The Final State.
The evangelist knows as little of restoration as the seer. And
though, agreeably with his manner, one side of the final condition
has very httle prominence, an agreement with the seer on this
point can be shown. Jesus describes the purpose of His coming
when He says, it was " that whosoever believeth in Him should
not perish, but have everlasting life," John iii 15, 16 ; and the
being lost — perdition (comp. John xii 25, xvii. 12) — is also with
the seer, Rev. xvii 8—11, tbe prominent name for the state of
eternal damnation. In the parable of the vine Jesus says, " If
a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is
withered ; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and
they are burned," John xv. 6; the eschatological meaning of
these words cannot be mistaken (comp. Matt, hi 10, vii. 19,
xih. 40-42), and as little their close relation to the lake of
fire and brimstone spoken of in the Apocalypse, Rev. xiv. 9-11,
xxi. 8.
The evangelist speaks rather more frequently of the opposite
side of the final state. He describes it as eternal life, which
with him, as with the seer, is entered upon at conversion, but,
as we have shown in the section on Christian life, is also the
subject of promise (comp. 1 John ii. 25). There needs no proof
that the " no more death," Rev. xxi. 4, " the fountain of the water
of life," Rev. xxi 6, the " river of the water of life," and the
" tree of life," Rev. xxii. 1, 2, of the Apocalypse, cannot be more
appropriately described than by the words " eternal hfe." Cer
tainly we do not find express mention in the Gospel and Epistles
of a new heaven and a new earth; but when Liicke (ut ante, II. p.
731) says that there is no trace of a representation of a change
in nature, he has overlooked the scope of the words, " the world
passeth away," 1 John ii 1 7, and, " it doth not yet appear what
we shall be," 1 John iii. 2. The marriage of the Lamb with the
bride we should expect to find in the evangelist as little as the
New Jerusalem. . .
But of the three chief pictures in which the seer represents
the final state of the blessed, there meet us in the evangelist's

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 407
description of this condition as such, only a few features; on
the other hand, we find almost every feature of the state imme
diately awaiting in heaven, or mainly of the already present <
Christian state, and indeed with such a coincidence as extorts
from Kbsthn (ut ante, p. 497) the remark already quoted:
" Hitherto we saw ourselves least of all on Johannine soil ; thus
the many parallels presented by the glory of the eternal hfe as
ascribed to the present are all the more surprising." "Behold,
the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them,"
Rev. xxi. 3. " And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt" — the same
expression o-Ki]vr\ and ctkvvovv — " among us," John i 14. " If any
man love me, he will keep my words : and my Father will love
him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with
him," John xiv. 23 (comp. John ii. 21). "God Himself shall
be with them, and be their God," Rev. xxi. 3. We may compare
the places just quoted in the Gospel, as well as John xvi. 26,
27, xx. 17, and the words concerning God dwelling in us,
recorded in 1 John iv. 12, 13, 15, 16. "There shall be no
more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any
more pain," Rev. xxi. 4 ; " He that heareth my word, and beheveth
... is passed from death unto hfe," John v. 24 (comp. 1 John iii.
14, v. 11, 12) ; " If a man keep my saying, he shall never see
death," John viii. 51; "he shall never taste of death," viii. 52
(comp. John xi. 25, 26) ; "ye shall weep and lament, but your
sorrow shall be turned into joy," xvi. 20; " your heart shall rejoice,
and your joy no man taketh from you," xvi 22. "I will give unto
him that is athirst of the water of life freely " (Scopedv), Rev.
xxi. 6 ; "If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He
that beheveth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly
shall flow rivers of living water," John vii. 37; "If thou knewest
the gift (Sapeti) of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me
to drink ; thou wouldest have asked of Him, and He would have
given thee living water," John iv. 10; "Whosoever drinketh of
the water that I shall give him shall never thirst ; but the water
that I shall give him shall be a well of water springing up into
everlasting life," John iv. 14. "I will be his God, and he shall
be my son," Rev. xxi. 7 ; " Behold what manner of love the
Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons
of God," 1 John iii. 1 (comp. John i 12, xiv. 23, xvi 26, 27,
xx. 1 7). " The fearful, and the unbeheving, and the abominable,

408 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters,
and all hars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with
fire and brimstone," Rev. xxi. 8 ; " There shall in no wise enter
into it anything that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomi
nation, or maketh a lie ; but they which are written in the
Lamb's book of life," Rev. xxi. 2'7 ; " And there shall be no more
curse," Rev. xxii. 3 ; " If a man abide not in me, he is ce.3
forth as a branch, and is withered ; and men gather them, and
cast them into the fire, and they are burned," John xv. 6 (comp.
John vi. 64, 66, also 1 John ii. 19); "Whosoever is born of
God doth not commit sin ; for his seed remaineth in him : and
he cannot sin, because he is born of God," 1 John iii. 9 (comp.
ver. 6) ; " We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not :
but he who is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked
one toucheth him not. And we know that we are of God, and
the whole world lieth in wickedness," 1 John v. 18, 19 (comp.
1 John ii. 5, 9—11, ih. 15, iv. 5, v. 12). The New Jerusalem
has " the glory of God : and her light was hke unto a stone most
precious," Rev. xxi. 11; " The city had no need of the sun,
neither of the moon, to shine in it; for the glory of God did lighten
it, and the Lamb is the light thereof," Rev. xxi 23;" There shall
be no night there ; and they need ;no candle, neither hght of
the sun, for the Lord God giveth them light," Rev. xxii. 5 (comp.
xxi. 25); "We beheld His glory, the glory as of the Only-
begotten of the Father," John i 14 (comp. ii 11), xii. 23, 41,
xiii. 31, xvh. 1, 4, 5, xxii. 24; "God is light, and in Him is
no darkness at all," 1 John i 5; "The life was the light of men,"
John i 4-9, iii. 19-21; "I am the light of the world," John
viii. 12, xii. 35, 36 ; "The darkness is past, and the true light
now shineth," 1 John ii 8. " The nations of them which are
saved shall walk in the light of it," Rev. xxi. 24; "the light
shineth in darkness," John i 5 ; " the true Light which lighteth
every man that cometh into the world," John i 5 ; " he that
followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the
light of life," John viii. 12 (comp. xii. 35, 36). "I saw no
temple therein, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are
the temple of it," Rev. xxi. 22; "Woman, believe me, the hour
cometh when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at
Jerusalem, worship the Father," John iv. 21 (comp. John ii. 21) ;
"The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 409
worship the Father in spirit and in truth," John iv. 23. The
angel showed the seer " a pure river of water of life, clear as
crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb,"
Rev. xxii. 1, with which we may compare John iv. 10, 14, vii.
37. " On either side of the river was there the tree of life,
which yielded her fruit every month," Rev. xxii. 3 ; " I am the
bread of life : he that cometh to me shall never hunger ; and he
that believeth on me shall never thirst," John vi. 35. Thus we
see almost every feature with which the seer represents eternal
blessedness, used by the evangelist to describe the state of
Christians here.
But some individual features he applies to the heavenly state.
" The tabernacle of God with men," Rev. xxi. 3, we find again in
the words of Jesus respecting His Father's house, in which are
many mansions, John xiv. 2, 3 ; the whole picture of Rev. xxii.
1-5, only more briefly, meets us in John xii. 25, 26 ; especially
may we compare the eternal life of John xii. 25, and the river
of the water of life, and the tree of hfe, of Rev. xxii. 1-3 ; as well
as the servant and his honour in John xii. 26, and the service
and the vision of His face and the inscription of His name on
their foreheads, and their reigning for ever, spoken of in Rev.
xxii. 3—5.
Only few but exceedingly important particulars in the
apocalyptic imagery of the final blessedness, are shared by the
evangehst. It is said, 1 John iii. 1, 2, " Behold what manner
of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be
called the sons of God ! Therefore the world knoweth us not,
because it knew Him not. Beloved, now are we the sons of God ;
and it doth not yet appear what we shall be ; but we know that,
when He shall appear, we shall be like Him ; for we shall see
Him as He is." The language and contents are against the
reference of the pronoun " Him " to Christ in distinction from
God, and of the " appearing" to the advent in distinction from
the absolute finality ; the reference to God in distinction from
Christ, and to the final consummation of all things, rather than
to the advent, is forbidden by what precedes and follows, 1 John
ii. 28, 29, iii. 3. We understand therefore by " Him," which
corresponds to 1 John ii. 29, the absolute God, provisionally
revealing Himself in the advent through Christ, and finally and
fully in the completion of all things ; but by the appearing, corre-

410 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
sponding to the " last day," the consummation coming in with
the advent and closing with the judgment of the world, and that
which belongs to it, still so that the latter here predominates.
Apart, however, from the circumstance that the pronoun " Him "
in such a sense cannot be more strikingly symbolized than by
the apocalyptic description of God as the Light, and the Lamb
as the Light-bearer, Rev. xxi. 23, of the temple, which is the
" Lord God Almighty and the Lamb," Rev. xxi. 22, of the throne
of God and of the Lamb, "and His servants shall serve Him,"
Rev. xxii. 3 (comp. xx 6, " They shall be priests of God and of
Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years"); and further,
apart from the fact that, to the seer, future blessedness in its
different stages is essentially the same, only now the prehminary
and now the final preponderating in its hopes and promises,
there can hardly be conceived more striking general paraUels
than between 1 John iii. 1, 2, and Rev. xxi. 1, xxii. 5 ; but in
particular, we may notice the parallel between the words, " what
manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us ! " and " he
that overcometh shall inherit all things, and I will be his God,
and he shall be my son," Rev. xxi. 7; also between the words of
the Epistle, " We shall be like Him : for we shall see Him as He
is," and those of Rev. xxii 3—5, especially the words, " and they
shall see His face." — The evangehst does not speak expressly of
the Christianized heathen nations, and their position in the
millennium, Rev. xxi. 24—26, nor of the eternal kingship of the
servants of God, Rev. xxii. 5 ; we need only, however, free our
selves from the folly which supposes that the writer of 1 John
v. 1 9 may by the " we " in another place understand all men ;
we need only understand correctly the extent of the " we," and
the being " like Him " (comp. Rev. xxii. 5), as well as the being
" sons of God," and the "seeing His face" (comp. Matt. v. 8, 9;
Gal. iv. 4-7; Rom. viii. 17), in the biblical concrete sense, and
there meets us in the evangelic picture of the final blessedness
the apocalyptic distinction between the citizens and the dwellers
around the New Jerusalem.
Since, now, it has appeared to us, on a consideration of apo
calyptic doctrine, that the seer makes no essential difference
between the promises with respect to the Christian condition
here, in heaven, during the thousand years' reign, and in the state
of eternal blessedness, but regards them as the same promises ful-

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 411
filled, according to the stage, in different modifications ; and since
we have found the views of the evangehst to be precisely the
same, — it mamfestly does not suffice, with Kbstlin (ut ante, p.
498), to say, " The apocalyptic future state, John has mostly in
the present ; partly in the person and work of Christ, partly in
the life of believers and the church ; and the harmony of ideas,
though conditioned by different standpoints, is so great that it
cannot be regarded as accidental ; '' and, to continue in the words
of the same writer, " the promises of the Apocalypse remained
treasured up in the consciousness of the church in Asia Minor,
and would not be thrown away by John, but spiritualized, and,
in a great measure, put into the mouth of Jesus Himself." It is
rather a proof of the identity of the two writers, not easily to be
shaken, that, with trifling exceptions, the same promises are to be
found in one as in the other ; and, indeed, as our comparison here
and in the section on Christian life will have shown, they pre
sent themselves in almost verbal harmony, or rather unsought,
force themselves upon us. But if any one is disposed, after all,
to think that the seer might have transcendently what to the
evangelist might have become immanent, let him compare not
only 1 John ii. 25, but also 1 John hi 1-2, and he will satisfy
himself that the evangelist really saw the same promises which
were fulfilling, or had fulfilled themselves here, as yet to be ful
filled in the future ; if he is still not convinced, let him explain
to us how John should have, in the Apocalypse, treated the pro
mises as mainly fulfilled, and in the Gospel, on the other hand,
as mainly delaying their fulfilment !

CONCLUSION.
We have endeavoured to represent the relation between the
doctrine of the Apocalypse and that of the Gospel and the
Epistles of John, at least in its chief points and its most im
portant aspects, upon the natural foundation of apocalyptic doc
trine, and the not less inteUigible exclusion of the evangelical
material lying outside the comparison. That we have thereby
not leveUed the ground, but compared, — though often minutely,
and somewhat after the manner of a thesis, stiU reaUy compared,
: — the candid reader wiU, I hope, generaUy admit. But what

412 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE'
is the result of the long and difficult inquiry in which he has
accompanied us ?
With regard to the compass of the Apocalypse on the one side,
and the Gospel and the Epistles on the other, we have in our
comparison certainly not found remarkably numerous points of
contact between the two. We have even, besides the many
differences which rest only upon the misunderstandings and inat
tention of expositors, perceived very few real differences between the
doctrine on both sides. But not a single point has met us in which
the silence of one or the speech of the other, or in which differ
ence of doctrine, cannot be fuUy explained by the interposition of
the catastrophe of Jewish history, or from the different hterary
character, or, finally, from the divergent aims of the writings.
But, on the other hand, our comparison has shown, first, that in
relation to the individuality of the writings on both sides, the
doctrinal contents of the Apocalypse on the one hand, and the
Gospel and the Epistles on the other, are in surprisingly many
particulars one and the same, only in different form, or even merely
in other words ; so that the representation in one writing appears
as an apt translation of the same into the mother. It further appears
from our comparison, that numerous most remarkable peculiarities
in viewing religious things, from the beginning to tlie end, equally
pervade the Apocalypse on the one side and the Gospel and the
Epistles on the other. FinaUy, our comparison has shown that
the manner of conception and representation, which in many places
appears through the artistic Old Testament rabbinical form of the
Apocalypse, is the mode of thought and expression of the evangelist ;
and that the evangehst, on his part, consciously and decidedly
as he uses his material in modern speculative style, yet on many
points uses the symbols and symbolical language of the seer. For
the explanation of this relation between the doctrine on both
sides, it is not sufficient to point to the Old Testament or rab
binical theology ; for the coincidence in each of the three categories
mentioned transcends the Old Testament rabbinism common to
all the writers of the New Testament, but does not reach in the
smallest degree to the individually and specifically Johannine.
The assumption of a spiritualizing of the apocalyptic doctrine by
the author of the Gospel, consciously or unconsciously, fails
before the consideration that the apocalypse itself is only the
artistic clothing of that which is understood by " the spiritual."

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 413
If, therefore, the relation discovered by us to exist between the
doctrine of the two is not to remain an insoluble enigma, we
must acknowledge that the author of the Apocalypse is also the
author of the Gospel and the Epistles ; and, indeed, since the origin
of the former with the Apostle John is not inconsistent, either
with external or internal evidence, — at least the statement of
Georgios Hamartolos, brought into notice by Holtzmann and Keim,
according to which Papias, an eye-witness of John, reports his
death at the hands of the Jews, is more adverse to the residence of
the presbyter in Asia Minor.- than it is to that of John, and is
adapted partially to .call in question the doubts shared by us with
regard to Irenaeus, — that the author is the Apostle John ; a result
which agrees withi tradition, and is confirmed by it, as also on
its own side it confirms the tradition. But the acknowledgment,
— and I attach great weight to this, — according to the grounds
upon which for us it rests, does not need the limitation that the
apocalyptic doctrine must be referred to an earlier and lower, and
the evangelistic doctrine to a laten- and higher stage, in the inner
development of the Apostle John, — a limitation which, with the
relations involved, cannot seriously be made without giving up
the authenticity either of one writing or the other ; but it re
quires only, and that very obviously, as an essential correlative,
that we grant that the destruction ofi Jerusalem, happened between
the authorship, of the Apocalypse and that of the other writings.
But heavily as the jproof furnished by our comparison prepon
derates, that the Apostle John, who wrote the Apocalypse, was
also the author of the other writings bearing his name, has
not the result a much wider bearing- ? I undertook the labour
in the confident expectation that the comparison between the
apocalyptic and the evangehcal doctrine, in case it resulted in the
identity of the authors, and consequently in the Apostle John's
authorship of the fourth Gospel, would' also bring the solution
of the enigma how a disciple of Jesus, an eye- and ear-witness,
one of the trusted three, could have written this fourth Gospel,
no matter whether with his- own hand or by dictation, whether
alone or with help. And now at the close I do not find myself to
have been deceived in this expectation ; the "Johannine enigma"
appears to me in the main solved, and I wiU at least point out
wherein the solution consists.
Had critics, often in a prejudiced manner, not much preferred

414 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
the fourth Gospel to those of the Synoptists, and been blind,
often wilfully, to their importance, the synoptical histories and
doctrinal representations would long ago have been universally
regarded, in the best sense of the words, as traditional and anec
dotal. There would long since have been no doubt that the
Synoptists, except with regard to the baptism and the sufferings
of Christ, and other individual particulars, are innocent of all
chronology, and that they group the historical material at their
command, not according to time, but according to essential con
nection. Long since, also, it would have been recognised, and
it would have been- a great blessing, that in general they present
only original sayings of Christ, but by no means always His
original discourses ; far oftener, indeed, as a rule, individual
utterances and proverbial expressions from longer addresses, often
wholly without their original connection, loosely attached to each
other according to a theme, or grouped according to the nature of
the facts. Once so far, we should have, a priori, not merely
admitted the possibUity that the history and doctrine of Jesus
might in reality have reached beyond the synoptical setting ; but
we should not have hardened ourselves against the unconscious
indications of the synoptical writers, that Jesus wrought in
Judea, and especially in Jerusalem itself, more frequently and
for a longer time ; that His works have a stiU higher signifi- '
cance, and that here and there He may have spoken in other ways
than their representations affirm. If we had been so prepared to
enter upon the fourth Gospel, a multitude of difficulties would
have disappeared, and very many would have been changed into
evidence in its favour.
StiU the chief difficulty would have remained. For the un
prejudiced, it consists in the fact that, when all that has just been
said is fully admitted and taken into the account, the manner of
representation and expression of the Johannine Christ is mani
foldly, essentially, and generaUy different from that of the synopti
cal Christ ; moreover, a difference manifestly covering itself almost
throughout under the manner of representation and expression
of the fourth evangelist ; therefore historicalness, for the present
conceived in the common sense of the word as faithfulness in the
direct representation of what happened on the part of the synop
tical writers and the fourth evangelist, can be affirmed only of
either one or the other; and that he who without prejudice com-

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 415
pares the dual representation, cannot hesitate a moment to
recognise the historical, as above defined, in the synoptical Gospels
as a whole, and to the same extent to deny it to the fourth
Gospel. But is it not a perfect contradiction: the fourth in
distinction from the synoptical Gospels is unhistorical, and the
fourth evangelist in distinction from the synoptical writers is a
personal disciple of Jesus, the Apostle John ? Or can this con
tradiction be shown to be merely apparent, and the " unhistori-
calness " to accord with the authentic ?
I reply, " Yes ; " and I do so on the ground of my representa
tion of the apocalyptic doctrine, and the comparison between
it and the doctrine of the evangelist. We have found that the
Apostle John, even before the destruction of Jerusalem, thought
and spoke no longer in Old Testament rabbinical, but in modern
speculative, Judo-Hellenistic, rehgio-philosophical style. Briefly,
and more strictly, we may say that he thought and spoke as he
did afterwards in the Gospel and in the Epistles, or as, in
the former, he represents Jesus as thinking and speaking; but
that in the Apocalypse he has, as the apocalyptic required,
artisticaUy clothed such mode of thought and speech in an Old
Testament rabbinical garment. From this follows what is super
abundantly confirmed by the peculiarity common to the seer and
to the evangelist, constantly meeting us in our researches, of
looking at the beginning and the end together, and therefore of
describing the most different stages or degrees of development by
the same names ; that it was the special gift, the charisma, of the
Apostle John to distinguish the essence and the form of things; with
facility to retain the essence in a variety of forms ; to change
them, and to put his life into new ones ; to carry over the contents
of his religious consciousness from one form of representation into
another. But is there not given with this the key to the enigma ?
-The - Synoptists testify frequently enough, expressly and de
signedly, that the person, works, and discourses of Jesus were
often not understood in their true meaning, either by the people
or by His own disciples, and thereby candidly characterize the
tradition from which they come as not having perfectly grown
up to its subject. But the same synoptical writers, on the ground
of this fact, undeniably distinguish the trusted disciples from the
number of the Twelve, and continually mention as one of them
John, the son of Zebedee. With full right we may assume that

416 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
the . Apostle John had not only a richer, but a far loftier, and
therefore more correct, conception of Jesus than the majority of
the disciples and the original church, and consequently than the
fixed anecdotal traditions of the synoptical writers. The contrast
between the " Judaism " of John and the " Paulinism " of Paul,
on a candid examination of the related passages, especiaUy those
of the Apocalypse, is reduced to a wholly justifiable difference,
which could in no way hinder John from taking the place of
Paul at Ephesus, and in the province of Asia, as, according to a
tradition hitherto unrefuted, he did. But here met him, — if he
had not before been influenced by it in Palestine, — no matter
whether directly or indirectly, a Judo-HeUenistic mode of concep
tion and expression connected with Alexandria, which, for the
sake of brevity, we describe after its central point as the Logos
doctrine. That such a mode of thought really appeared in Asia,
and prominently in Ephesus, in the Jewish and Christian circles
of the apostle's time, cannot, from the statements of the Acts of
the Apostles respecting Apollos, and the indications of the Pauline
Epistles, be doubted. Indeed, a searching comparison of the
earliest and the later Epistles of the Apostle Paul would, accord
ing to our opinion, give the surprising result, that even he was
in that neighbourhood not- whoUy uninfluenced by the mode of
thought in question ; that his residence in, as weU as his relations
with, Ephesus and Asia Minor during the period between the
Epistles to the Thessalonians, and, for example, those to the
Corinthians, was not merely a matter of time. And could the
Apostle John, who was- peculiarly predisposed, as much through
his higher conceptions of Christ as through his formal gift, to
this Judo-Hellenistic mode of thought and speech, exclude him
self from its operation ? That John, as a Jewish Christian apostle,
in the Tiibingen sense of the words, " some time after the death of
Paul, or after the destruction of Jerusalem, with flying colours1
went over to Paulinism; that about the year 70 he was certainly
a man of sixty, with all the sacred principles of his youth, of his
manhood, and of his activities broken down ; that in the rending
of Jewish bonds he should have, against ' their law,' the hopeless
'law,' outbid even the Apostle Paul himself — standing alone,
regardless of consequences, the devout champion of freedom,
against the people and the law, with his opposition to the ' Jews
estranged from him and from God Himself,' " — even the proba-

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 417
bihty of such a thing is vainly sought, not only by the author
of Geschichte Jesu von Nazara, but others have never been able
to find " a greater mockery of all history and aU psychological
probabdity," than the idea of a " fickle transformation of an old
Judaist into an apostle of freedom, high above Paul  the one
historical man of unyielding principle." Only to many of the
others the Tubingen character of the Apostle John, to say nothing
of the Tubingen Paul, is not regarded as one of the irresistible
results of the scientific examination of apostohc times, but as a
wanton perversion of a matter of fact. An apostle who, according
to the statement of the rigidly " Judaistic " Apocalypse, considered
the GentUe Christians, fully as much as the Jewish Christians, to
be kingly priests or priestly kings of God, who wUl reign at the
advent, may perhaps, in the application of the principle, have
often differed in his views from Paul, — may, for example, untU
the destruction of Jerusalem, have thought the conversion of
Israel nearer and easier, and the number of the Gentiles to
be added to the true Israel to be less ; until then he may have
generally cherished a more favourable judgment of the Jews,
and a less favourable one of the Gentiles, — may even have carried
out the apostohc decrees respecting the relation of Jewish and
Gentile Christians more strictly and more in accordance with the
law than the Apostle Paul ; but a difference in principle between
him and Paul has been found by prejudice rather than science.
Is it, then, stUl the greatest mockery of all history and all
psychological probabdity, if we believe that the Apostle John had
a conception of the historical Christ superior to the manifold
and essentiaUy sublime portrait of the synoptical writers, hke
Paul, who, not less than he, must have drawn such conception
from sure sources, except he may have imagined it ? — if we
believe that an apostle with such a gift for entering into various
forms, as it has been shown that he had, in his fiftieth or
sixtieth year, — granting what is very improbable, that hitherto
he had not been affected by it, — brought to the same Alex
andrian Asia Minor form of thought, a sensibility as open as
the Apostle Paul did a httle earlier, and when somewhat
younger ? — if we believe that, like Paul, John also found in
the Logos the adequate Judo-HeUenistic, modern philosophic,
and scientific idea and expression for the Messiah as he ap
peared to him in Jesus; and that he, not first and alone, but
2 D

418 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
after abundant precedent, borne along by a previous current in
Asia Minor, from that central point carried over from the words
and works of Jesus, the whole Christ, out of Palestinian Judaism
into Jewish Hellenism ? It was indeed for him nothing more
than a change of form, which, if not already long undertaken and
entered upon, had yet long been prepared, and which, with his
views of the relation between the exalted Christ and the Spirit,
coming equally to the light in the Apocalypse and the Gospel,
appeared to him fully justified, and even required.
From this standpoint John wrote the Apocalypse in the year
68. That he could not be generally hindered by it in the con
ception of an Apocalypse, wiU not, in view of the eschatological
portions in the first Epistle, and the promise in the Gospel of
the revealing Spirit, be called in question. In its doctrine, as
our comparison has shown, the Apocalypse stands in harmony
with the Gospel and the Epistles. But if the representation of
the Apocalypse is declared to be irreconcilable with its composi
tion by the fourth evangelist, those who think so overlook in the
most inconceivable manner the fact that the apoealyptic has its
perfectly definite art form, and must appear in Old Testament
types, symbols, images, and expressions ; that an Apocalypse in
the form of thought and speech seen in the fourth Gospel is as
impossible as, for example, an ode in the style of the Kantian
philosophy. With high poetic, plastic power, and with the most
conscientious faithfulness, John has discharged his task as a seer.
Evidently he would at least not have succeeded in equal measure
if he had not started from Palestinian Judaism, and made its
original forms of representation and speech conformable to the
apocalyptic. Certainly he has at the same time — and how
could it be otherwise ? — not always been able to avoid the expres
sions and definitions of his Hellenistic doctrinal language. Here
and there they appear treacherously through the ancient and
sacred garment. The Old Testament forms often do not suffice
for the artistic contents they enclose, and the whole almost makes
the impression of a disguise, conceived and carried out in a
masterly manner.
From the same standpoint, the same John, after the destruction
of Jerusalem, possibly in the fourth or fifth year after the
Apocalypse, wrote the fourth Gospel, to which, again, the first
Epistle, no matter whether regarded as a companion letter to the

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 419
Gospel or not, stands in the very closest relation. We are,
however, concerned here only with the Gospel. That John
assumes the synoptical Gospels to be known to his readers, is
now universally admitted, though the significance of this assump
tion is stiU disputed. But what induced the apostle to add
another Gospel to those already existing, and manifestly recognised
by him, and in his circle ? A twofold reason presents itseK from
what has been said. First, the synoptical portrait of Christ was
in general, with regard to its contents nor its subject, neither
false nor distorted; but it was deficient, and its deficiency consisted
far less in the absence of the historical material than in keeping
back the meaning of that material. As a Paul would have felt,
if at his time the synoptical Gospels had existed and been recog
nised, so must it have been with John and the circles which by
him had been initiated into the evangelie history ; and in this
was given the occasion and the demand for the composition of a
new and more elevated -Gospel. Very nearly related to this is the
second reason. Also in its form .or representation, the synoptical
portrait of Christ was eertainly not false, but defective; and
this defect consisted not in that the writers had done too rnueh,
but more in that they had done too little to bring the history of
the Lord out of the Palestinian-Jewish form of representation and
speech, as it were out of the original idiom, to that corresponding
with the religious culture of the time, so to say, into a universal
Judo-HeUenistic form. But where would the necessity of a new
treatment of the evangelical material in the above formal sense
be felt more strongly than in the circle where, as in Ephesus and
Asia, the Gospel neither met a Palestinian-Judo form of thought,
nor by its contents eould impress the existing thought with its
original form, but must accommodate itself to the Judo-HeUenistic
mode of representation and expression ? — The execution corre
sponds to the double motive which led John to add a materiaUy
sublimer and formaUy more suitable Gospel to those already
existing. He does not even nearly reproduce in his Gospel the
material already brought together by the synoptical writers, but
only enriches and completes it by that which is similar, though
he has not a little in common with them ; as little does he furnish,
presupposing the labours of the synoptical authors, a mere glean
ing or supplement, though sometimes he gives a rectification or
more accurate definition of synoptical statements. Much rather

420 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
the peculiar contents of his book presuppose the synoptical narra
tive, and a choice, resting upon the usefulness of what was there
already known, as weU as of the many materials stiU existing
only in his own mind, of signs, or of such acts and discourses of
Jesus in which, as from lofty heights, the nature, the idea, the
glory of Christ, the Logos-Messiah, had, as through symbols,
manifested themselves in their chief aspects in word and work
But the representation of these altitudes does not follow simply
from the re-statement or reference to what has been done and
said, but from the recognition of all in its meaning as a revela
tion of the glory of Christ. AU that Christ did, and what
happened in connection with Him, is symbol, and is as such
interpreted either by Christ HimseK or by the evangelist — some
times expressly, at other times through the passages referred to
Him. But while the evangelist can interpret the history only
as symbol, he has the doctrine of Christ, which to him in its
original form is also symbol, to carry over into another form ; so
that Christ, and even John the Baptist, speak in this Gospel in
the language of the evangelist, or of the HeUenism of Asia Minor.
In several places the distinction between the sayings of Christ
and those of the evangehst is uncertain ; and in those of Christ
not merely a combination, but also a continuing or developing, as
it were a spinning out on the part of the evangelist, cannot be
mistaken. But the seer and the evangehst are one and the
same Apostle John ; as the future, so also the history appears
to him in symbols, and the " signs " of the Apocalypse and of the
evangelist, at first sight so different, are of essentially similar
import. But whde John sees, and forms the signs of the future,
after the manner of the Old Testament, he sees and shapes the
signs of the history heUenistically; he carries over — and thus only,
on the formal side, the relation between the Apocalypse on one
hand, and the Gospel and Epistles on the other, is brought to its
briefest expression, as, according to its nature, it is most correctly
estimated — there, the Gospel backward into the Hebrew; here,
forward into the Greek.
But bow does it stand with the historical character of the fourth
Gospel 1 In the sense in which we have used the words above,
the fourth Gospel is and remains unhistorical ; our brief character
of the same was on one side nothing else than a concrete
definition of this unhistoricalness. But then, is fidelity in the

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 421
direct rendering of one's own knowledge — in reahty always a
somewhat mediated rendering — of what transpires the only, or
even the highest sense of historicalness ? There is a meaning
of fidelity in which an art portrait, though a master-work, — -
without disparagement of photography, — follows relatively the
shadows, in which indeed we grant to the photograph the predi
cate "faithful," but deny it to the art portrait. And yet, so
far as we know, no connoisseur hesitates to declare the art
portrait, in another and higher, in the spiritual sense of the
word, truer than the photograph. A similar relation exists in
chronicle and written history in its higher style. Now, in some
measure this holds good of the historicalness of the synoptical
Gospels in comparison with that of John. It is true that the
narratives of the fourth Gospel have not in general, as on the
supposition of the author being an eye- and ear- witness we should
expect, more flesh and blood, or a greater intuitiveness ; they are,
on the contrary, apart from many lighter and deeper traces of
personal recoUections, less concrete, and the development, the
historical growth, is in them kept back far more than in the
synoptical narratives. But what we miss in John it was not his
purpose to give. So it is also an incidental matter, though of
greatest importance to us, that in the narratives of the trusted
disciple we possess such manifold confirmations and explana
tions, and on the other side emendations and additions to the
synoptical report. No; the chief thing is, that in the fourth
Gospel we have the authentic testimony to the glory of the Only-
begotten of the Father, fuU of grace and truth,— a testimony through
which also the synoptical picture of the hfe of Christ attains a
higher meaning, appears as it were in another light, and indeed
is first truly inteUigible. It is notorious that aU modern writers
on the evangelic history who have taken their stand within the
synoptical Gospels, must violently cut off not a smaU part of
the synoptical narratives as towering above the synoptical
measure of Jesus and His history; but we go from the Johannine
portrait of Christ, and, lo, the whole synoptical material organi
cally arranges itself under one leading idea ! For our part, we
do not hesitate a moment to acknowledge that the discourses of
Jesus, according to John, apart from many unmistakeably original
sayings, do not make the impression of verbal faithfulness, but
often°sound like variations of the evangelist after themes from

422 RELATION BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE
the Lord, often as discourses of the evangehst put into the mouth
of Christ. But he has not desired to give them after the manner
of stenographic reports, or noted reminiscences, or special points
stiU remembered. Nor does the historical value of his words of
the Lord consist chiefly in the addition which, though important,
they make to His synoptical sayings. Their characteristic ten
dency is rather to "glorify" Jesus in His original discourses;
that is, to bring to the understanding, in the Judo-HeUenistic
form of thought and speech, their meaning, in its height and
depth, in its extent and scope, in its spirit and contents, most
freely, and yet, as the evangelist is conscious, most truly, because
reproduction, arrangement, and transfer are wrought by the Spirit
of Christ Himself There are certainly synopticists who only
acknowledge the character of the synoptical collection of Christ's
sayings half-way, and notwithstanding know how to distinguish
the original words of the Lord, possibly by a wholly subjective
norm, or perhaps by caprice. On the other hand, those to whom
the synoptical collection of the Lord's words, from discourses
more or less original, have become not even original groups of
original words or sayings of Christ, and who thereby have freed
themselves from the bond of the connection, have then only a
great multitude of imperishably glorious but isolated words,
which in their isolation are to some extent incomprehensible or
difficult to understand. The favoured disciple of the Lord, who
in his words of Christ has borne witness to the Spirit from whom
all these words and sayings have flowed, comes to the help of
such, and, lo, they speak not only more plainly, but much more
significantly, — so significantly that we understand how the
Apostle Paul could know the Lord's words, without at any time
observing a contradiction between them and his Gospel.
This mainly, though, as desirable in last words, very briefly, is
my view of the solution of the Johannine question. Evidently
it does not consist with the prevailing prejudice in favour of the
synoptical writers. But it almost seems to me as if synopticism,
in its most recent and in every way most complete form, had
produced the impression, not on me only, that besides very many
positive results, it has realized the negative one, namely, that if
a " history," a " hfe," of Jesus is possible, which for my part
I strongly doubt, it is not to be reached in that way! Well,
we may take up again the plea of the witness dismissed a

AND OF THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES OF JOHN. 423
few years ago, the plea of the "condemned" fourth evangelist
and restore to him his rights when we have granted him a hearing
respecting the historical Christ !— only this should not be in such
a way that we are satisfied with a formal recognition of the fourth
Gospel, and, after a preliminary declaration in favour of its
apostolic origin in the exposition, lay it aside, and hold to the
synoptical Gospels alone. It concerns us to weigh with a just
balance, and with equal decision to maintain, that in the form of
the historical phenomena, the originality, the genuineness., the
truth, the fidelity preponderate on the side of the synoptical
writers, and on the other hand fully and seriously to admit that in
essence, in the significance, in the soul or spirit of the historical
phenomena, even the same predicates belong to John in a far
higher degree. Neither of these two sides excludes the other,—
John has not written against the synoptical Gospels, — each requires
the other for a perfect whole, and only together do they give the
true historical Christ. I speak expressly of two sides, for we
must avoid another fatal error — namely, that of desiring to unite
in a mechanical way John and the synoptical writers. We have
not therein fragments, torn-out portions, isolated parts of the
portrait of Christ, to which John would add the outward com
plement or filling up ; or other fragments from his recollections,
so that our task should consist in bringing the various elements
together, and by a synopsis in an external sense restore the
whole. No; there needs, resting upon historical intuition, a
united view, combination, and working into each other, of a
higher style, in order from the traditional anecdotal portrait
of Christ, given by the synoptical writers, and that given by
the Apostle John, — from the most peculiar personal experience,
and at the same time with the freest translation into the form of
HeUenistic culture, sketched in great general features, and accord
ing to a few chief points of vision, — as a necessary companion
picture to construct the historical image of the "Mediator!" It
would, moreover, be an unfortunate misunderstanding if any one
should attribute to me the expectation that in the way pointed
out we should suddenly find ourselves before the goal which the
" lives " or the " histories " of Jesus have hitherto striven after
in vain ; the knowledge of Christ will grow as long as Christen
dom exists. But I am firmly convinced that the normal solution
of the present theological crisis — namely, the issue of the present

424 THE APOCALYPSE, AND THE GOSPEL AND EPISTLES, OF JOHN.
comparatively justifiable contrariety and one-sidedness, in a sub
sequent higher unity, because in the central question of Christology
— is essentiaUy conditioned by a progressive inner reconciliation
between John and the synoptical writers, as on both sides faithful
witnesses of the evangelic history. To bring one of the indis
pensable prerequisites of this reconcihation to a final settlement,
namely, the acknowledgment of the fourth Gospel as the work
of the Apostle John, the foregoing comparison between the doctrine
of the Apocalypse and that of the Gospel and Epistles, or — once
more to define the actual contents — between the apocalyptic Old
Testamentary and the evangelic and epistolary Hellenistic repre
sentation of the Gospel by the Apostle John, would, as a diversion
in the Johannine controversy, contribute its humble share.

THE END.

MURRAY AND GIBB, EDINBURGH,
PRINTERS TO HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE.

T. and T. Clark's Publications.

Just published, in crown 8vo, price 5s.,
THE
SYMBOLIC PARABLES
OF
THE CHUECH, THE WOELD, AND THE ANTICHRIST,
3Semg tbe Separate Prebicttottg of tbe ^pocalgpse,
VIEWED IN THEIR RELATION TO THE GENERAL TRUTHS OF SCRIPTURE.
By Mrs. STEVENSON.

' An excellent treatise, containing much clean- thought, and written as intelligibly as the
subject would permit To students of prophecy the bobk ought to be an attractive one ;
and to every one who desires to have a clearer understanding of his Bible, it will give
much valuable assistance.' — Glasgow Herald.
' TJhis is a sober, well-written, and instructive treatise on the Apocalypse. It is exceed
ingly suggestive, and the theory the Author expounds holds well together. The key
seems to fit every ward of the lock. This volume is worthy of the most serious con
sideration of all who take an interest in prophecy.' — Daily Review.
' It is quite refreshing to meet with a treatise on the Book of Eevelation like this,
marked by good sense and reverence. Brief as it is, it throws more light on a difficult
subject than many laboured tomes.'— Methodist Recorder.
' It deserves careful study from all to whom the Book of Eevelation has been regarded
as a mystic utterance not meant for them, for it has the great advantage of being com
prehensible by the most simple and unlearned.'— John Bull.
' Preachers will here find a mine of valuable hints on the spiritual bearing of the
symbols which John's Apocalypse contains.'— Dickinson's Quarterly.
' We recommend this volume to our readers' study; they will find it characterized by
common sense and ability as well as evangelical piety.'— British Messenger.
' We can sincerely recommend this volume as a thoughtful, trustworthy guide to the
elucidation of a confessedly mysterious book.'— London Quarterly Review.
'A book which every one ought to read who seriously and strenuously and, at the
same time, sensibly studies the deep but blessed words of this prophecy.'- Wesl-yan

' Students of prophecy will find this a book worthy of reading. ... We have no
hesitation in saying tlie author is a person of considerable learning, and that the work
manifests much research and ability.'— Courank

T. and T. Clark's Publications.

THE DEUTERONOMIC QUESTION.
Just published, in crown 8vo, price 5s.,
THE LEVITICAL PRIESTS.
A CONTRIBUTION TO THE CRITICISM OF THE
PENTATEUCH.
Br SAMUEL IVES CURTISS, Jr.,
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, LEIPZIG.

Chapter. I. Introduction.
,, II. The Ordination and Duties of Levi.
„ III. Th* Inheritance- of Levi.
„ IV. The Blessing of Levi.
„ V. The Modern Critic's Bridge.
„ VI. Joshua — 2 Kings.
„ VII. The Credibility of the Chronicler.
„ VIII. The Prophets and the Priests.
„ IX. The Authorship of Deuteronomy and the Middle- Bosks of the Pentateuch.
Extract from Preface by Dr. Delitzsch.
THE Author o-f the following work has made himself thoroughly acquainted with the
writings of the chief representatives of this theory, and seeks by means of sober
arguments to show (1) that the history of the people of Israel, as it lies before us in the
historical books, presupposes a distinction in rank between the- priests and the Levites,
which reaches back to the titneof Moses, and existed throughoutall the periods of Israehtish
history ; (2) that the post-exilic books are in no way favourable to the opinion that the
priestly hierarchy is- a product of the time of Ezra ; (3) that Deuteronomy, where it
treats of religious privileges, does indeed assign them to the tribe of Levi, but yet so
that these privileges — without contradicting the older legislation, which Deuteronomy
recapitulates in an abridged form, and accommodates to changed circumstances — may be
relatively distributed to the sons of Aaron and the Levites. He shows— and this
deserves special attention — that the post-exilic Chronicles contain passages which in a
Deuteronomic manner entirely obliterate the distinction between priests and Levites,
while other passages emphasize it.
'A critical and thorough discussion. . . . After long study and large research,
Dr. Curtiss comes well armed into tbe field. Cautiously, candidly, thoroughly, he
handles the assumptions, the canons, and arguments of these men, and shows that they
have failed to overthrow the authenticity of the Pentateuch, or to disprove its Mosaic
authorship. . . . While his criticism is elaborate and searching, it is also clear aDd
easily comprehensible.'— American Presbyterian.
' This is a small volume, charged with weighty matter. . . . Dr. Curtiss has
argued his thesis with conspicuous ability, candour, and learning.' — Evangelical Magazine.
1 This work is well fitted to show, by way of sample, how feeble are the grounds on
which the main positions of these interpreters rest, and how arbitrary their method of
procedure.' — United Presbyterian Magazine.
1 It is in such minute details that the most convincing evidences of truth are found.'
— Watchman. 'We give a cordial welcome to Dr. Curtiss' book, on the ground of its own merits.
. . . Dr. Curtiss has done the particular portion of work which he has set himself with
great pains and apparent success.' — Church Bells.
1 A fresh and forcible reply to the ingenious and subtle attacks of rationalist teachers
on the historic credibility of the Pentateuch.' — New Yoric Observer.
1 A thorough piece of criticism upon a nice point of internal evidence touching the
origin and authenticity of the Pentateuch.' — New York Independent.

T. and T. Clark's Publications.

Just published, in demy 8vo, price 12s.,
THE SCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE OF SACRIFICE.
INCLUDING INQUIRIES INTO THE ORIGIN OP SACRIFICE,
THE JEWISH RITUAL, THE ATONEMENT, AND THE LORD'S SDPPEE.
By ALFRED CAVE, B.A.

BOOK I.— PREPARATORY.
Part I. The Patriarchal Doctrine of Sacrifice.
Part II. The Mosaic Doctrine of Sacrifice.
Part III. The Post-Mosaic Doctrine of Sacrifice.
BOOK II.— PLEROMATIO.

' We have nothing but praise for its clearness, its method, its thoroughness, and its
tolerance. We most warmly commend Mr. Cave s book to the study of the clergy, who
will find it full of suggestiveness and instruction/ — English Churchman.
'A thoroughly able- and erudite book, from almost every page of which something
may be learned. The Author's- method is exact and logical, the style perspicuous
and forcible — sometimes, indeed, almost epigrammatic; and as a careful attempt to
ascertain the teaching of the Scripture oia an important subject, it cannot fail to be
interesting even to those whom it does not convince.' — Watchman.
' We wish to draw particular attention to this new work on the deeply-important
subject of sacrifice. . . . If we can induce our readers not only to glance through
the book, but to read every line with thoughtful care, as we have done, we shall have
earned their gratitude.' — Church Bells.
' It would be difficult to point to any modern theological work in English which
reveals more abundant and patient scholarship, a more -vigorous and comprehensive
view of a great question. The subject is large and the literature enormous, the lines of
investigation are numerous and intricate ; but the Author of the volume before us has
displayed a fine mastery of voluminous material, and, after examining the scriptural
phraseology in its historical development, positive declarations, and immediate infer
ences therefrom, he draws out his conclusions with great care, and contrasts them with
views-of -a more speculative kind which have been advanced by distinguished scholars
in Germany and England. The argument of the volume is sustained by logical com
pactness, lucidity of style, and considerable learning ; it is a guide to the opinions of
the principal writers on every part of the subject, and is pervaded by a fine spiritual
tone.' — Evangelical Review.
' Mr. Cave has given us in this large volume a very thorough examination of the great
doctrine of sacrifice. . . . And religious instructors' will find in this work a perfect
storehouse of information, and ample materials for expositions and defences. We
cannot be mistaken in predicting for the book a cordial welcome.'— Baptist Magazine.
' It is of supreme and imperative importance that the inspired writings should be con
sulted upon a doctrine which so tests and determines our creed. To the " Volume of
the Book " Mr. Cave appeals, resolved that, for the hour, its testimony respecting
" sacrifice " shall alone be heard. Incidentally he betrays wide and patient reading on
this theme: but all his reading is subordinated to his specific purpose of letting the
Bible speak in clear and unmingled tones, and with great felicity and critica ability
he enforces upon the attention everything the Scriptures have suggested and declared on
this crucial doctrine of controversy and faith. An appendix of scholarly notes, and an
index on Scripture passages referred to, and of subjects, etc. treated m this volume,
complete a book on the doctrine of sacrifice which is almost without a rival for com
prehensiveness and interest.'— Me Study and the Pulpit.

T. and T. Clark's Publications.

Just published, Second Edition, demy Srvo, 10s. 6d.,
The Training of the Twelve ;
OR,
EXPOSITION OF PASSAGES IN THE GOSPELS
EXHIBITING THE TWELVE DISCIPLES OF JESUS UNDER
DISCIPLINE FOR THE APOSTLESHIP.

A. B. BRUCE, D.D.,
PROFESSOR OV DIVINITY, FREE CHURCH COLLEGE, GLASGOW.

1 Here we have a really great book on an important, large, and attractive subject — a
book full of loving, wholesome, profound thoughts about the fundamentals of Christian
faith and practice.' — British ana Foreign Evangelical Review.
'It is some five or six years since this work first made its appearance, and now that a
second edition has been called for, the Author has taken the opportunity to make some
alterations which are likely to render it still more acceptable. Substantially, however,
the book remains the same, and the hearty commendation with which we noted its first
issue applies to it at least as much now.' — Rock.
' The value, the beauty of this volume is that it is a unique contribution to, because a
loving and cultured study of,the life of Christ, in the relation of the Master of the
Twelve.' — Edinburgh Daily Review.
'The volume is of permanent value, and we trust that its author may favour us with
others of like character.' — Freeman.
' It is of no mean order as a profoundly devout piece of practical divinity.' — Wesleyan
Methodist Magazine.
'It was by the first edition of this invaluable book that Dr. Bruce became known to
English students as a theological writer. A more scholarly, more helpful book has not
been published for many years past' — Baptist Magazine.
BY THE SAME AUTHOR.
In one volume, %vo, price 12s.,
THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST
IN ITS PHYSICAL, ETHICAL, AND
OFFICIAL ASPECTS.

(Sixth Series of Cunningham Lectures.)
' These lectures are able and deep-reaching to a degree not often found in the religious
literature of the day; withal, they are fresh and suggestive. . . . The learning and the
deep and sweet spirituality of this discussion will commend it to many faithful students
of the truth as it is in Jesus.' — Congregationalist.
' We have not for a long time met with a work so fresh and suggestive as this of
Professor Bruce. ... We do not know where to look at our English Universities for
a treatise so calm, logical and scholarly.'— English Independent.
'The title of the book gives but a faint conception of the value and wealth of its con
tents. ... Dr. Bruce's work is really one of exceptional value; and no one can read it
without perceptible gain in theological knowledge. '—English Churchman.
lhe writer gives evidence of extensive and accurate theological learning in the topics
nt. in w treatB> aud ^ shows that he has theological grasp as well as learning.'—
\jl\UrfCfl til llS.

T. and T. Clark's Publications.

Just published, in demy 8vo, price 9s.,
HIPPOLYTUS AND CALLISTUS;
OR,
THE CHURCH OF ROME IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE
THIRD CENTURY.
By J. J. Ign. von DOLLINGER.
JEransIatetj, fiaitfj Etttrotrttctwri, Notes, atrtj appetrtuctg,
By ALFRED PLUMMER, M.A.,
MASTER OF UNIVERSITY COLI.EGE, DURHAM.
' That this learned and laborious work is a valuable contribution to ecclesiastical
history, is a fact of which we need hardly assure our readers. The name of the writer is
a sufficient guarantee of this. It bears in all its pages the mark of that acuteness which,
even more than the unwearied industry of its venerated author, is a distinguishing
feature of whatever proceeds from the pen of Dr. DBllinger.' — John Bull.
' We are impressed with profound respect for the learning and ingenuity displayed in
this work. The book deserves perusal by all students of ecclesiastical history. It clears
up many points hitherto obscure, and reveals features in the Roman Church at the be
ginning of the third century which are highly instructive.' — Athenseum.
¦'Dr. Dijllinger's masterly volume  The translator has not only given us an
excellent version, in good and idiomatic English, but he has added notes, which are
terse, brief, and thoroughly to the point, and has discussed in some excellent appendices,
criticisms on writers who, having for the most part written since Dollinger, are not re
ferred to in the original work.' — Church Quarterly Review.
Just published, in two volumes, demy 8vo, price 12s. each,
A HISTORY OF THE COUNCILS OF THE CHURCH.
jFrom tfje ©rtsinal ©ocuments.
TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN OF
C. J. HEFELE, D.D., Bishop of Bottenburg.

VOL. I. (Second Edition), TO A.D. 325.
Ey Rev. PREBENDARY CLARK.
VOL. II., A.D. 326 TO 429.
By H. N. OXEN HAM, M.A.
' The second volume strikes us as scarcely if at all inferior in importance to the first.
The translation reads as if it were an original work.'— Church Quarterly Review.
' Of the thoroughness of Bishop Hefele's learning and eminent fairness as a historian
it is needless to speak. He is acknowledged to be unrivalled in his own country as a
scholar and a profound theologian.' — Pilot.
' This careful translation of Hefele's Councils.'— Dr. Pusey.
' A thorough and fair compendium, put in the most accessible and intelligent form.'—
Guardian. . .
1 A work of profound erudition, and written in a most candid spirit. The book will be
a standard work on the subject.' — Spectator.
\ The most learned historian of the Councils.'— Pere Gratry.
' We cordially commend Hefele's Councils to the English student.'— John Bull.

T. and T. Clark's Publications.

In three volumes 8vo, price 31s. 6d.,
A COMMENTARY
ON THE
GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN,
BY F. GODET, D.D.,
PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY, NEUCHATEL.
1 This work forms one of the battle-fields of modern inquiry, and is itself sp rich in
spiritual truth that it is impossible to examine it too closely ; and we welcome this treatise
from the pen of Dr. Gedet. We have no more competent exegete, and this new volume
shows all the learning and vivacity for which the author is distinguished.' — Freeman.
Just published, in two volumes &W, price 21s.,
A COMMENTARY ON THE
GOSPEL OF ST. LUKE..
BY F. GODET,
DOCTOK Xm> PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY, MEUCHATEL.
Translated from the Second French Edition.
1 We are indebted to the Publishers for an English translation of the admirable work
which stands at the head of this review. . . . It is a work of great ability, learning, and
research.' — Christian Observer.
1 Marked by clearness and good sense, it will be found to possess value and interest as
one of the most recent and copious works specially designed to illustrate this Gospel.' —
Guardian.
KEIL AND DELITZSCH'S COMMENTARIES
ON THE OLD TESTAMENT.
10s. (id. each volume.
PENTATEUCH, 3 Vols  (Keil.)
JOSHUA, JUDGES, and RUTH, 1 Vol  {Keil.)
SAMUEL, 1 Vol.  (Keil.)
KINGS, 1 Vol., and CHRONICLES, 1 Vol. . . . (Keil.)
EZRA, NEHEMIAH, and ESTHER, 1 Vol. . . . (Keil.)
JOB, 2 Vols  (Delitzsch.)
PSALMS, 3 Vols  (Delitzsch.)
PROVERBS, 2 Vols  (Delitzsch.)
ECCLESIASTES and SONG OF SOLOMON, 1 Vol. . . (Delitzsch.)
ISAIAH, 2 Vols  (Delitzsch.)
JEREMIAH and LAMENTATIONS, 2 Vols. . . . (Keil.)
EZEKIEL, 2 Vols  (Keil.)
DANIEL, 1 Vol  (Keil)
MINOR PROPHETS, 2 Vols  (Keil.)
'This series is one of great importance to the biblical scholar; and as regards its general
execution, it leaves little or nothing to be desired.' — Edinburgh Review.

T. and T. Clark's Pziblicatio7is.

In crown 8vo, Second Edition, price 4s.,
PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT
QUOTATION
Established and applied to Biblical Science, and specially to tbe Gospels
and Pentateuch.
BY REV. JAMES SCOTT, M.A., B.D.
' This admirable treatise does not .traverse in detail the forms and formulas of New
Testament quotation from the Old, nor enter with minuteness into the philological and
theological discussion arising around many groups of these quotations — the a.uthor con
fines his attention to the principles involved in them. . . . An interesting discussion
vindicating the method thus analyzed is followed by a very valuable summation of the
argument in its bearing on the Canom, the originality of the Gospels, the internal unity
of Scripture, and the permanence of Revelation.' — British Quarterly Review.
' In terse and well-ordered style the Author deals with a subject too little studied and
less understood. He shows himself to be, in the best sense of the word, rational in his
method and conclusions. . . . Strength, acuteness, sound judgment, and reason, chastened
by reverence, pervade this book, which, with pleasure, we commend to all students of
Holy Scripture.' — Record.
' The book is thoughtful, learned, conscientious, and painstaking, and performs a
service which ought to be heartily recognised.' — Baptist Magazine.
Recently published, in demy 8vo, price 9s.,
A CHRONOLOGICAL AM) GEOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION TO
THE LIFE OF CHRIST.
By C. E. CAS PAR I.
TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN, WITH ADDITIONAL NOTES, BY
M. J. EVANS, B.A.
-Reiusciji fog fyt gutljor.
' The work is handy and well suited for the use of the student. It gives him, in very
reasonable compass and in well-digested forms, a great deal of information respecting
the dates and outward circumstances of our Lord's life, and materials for forming a
judgment upon the various disputed points arising out of them.1 — Guardian.
' In this work the Author affords us the results of many-sided study on one of the most
important objects of theological inquiry, and on a knot of problems which have been so
often treated, and which are of so complex* nature. The Author is unquestionably right
in supposing that the so-called outworks of the life of Jesus have their value, by no
means to be lightly esteemed. Their examination must be returned to ever afresh, until
the historic or unhistoric character of the substance of the Gospel narrative has been
brought out as the result of scientific examination. ... In conclusion, we believe we
can with full conviction characterize . the whole work as a real gain to the scientific
literature of the question, and a great advance on previous investigations, not doubting
that the most important positions maintained by the Author will in all essential points
win the approbation of the student.'-^7oArJucAer/ii»- Deutsche Theologie.
1 An excellent and devout work. We can strongly recommend it— Church Quarterly
Review.

T. and T. Clark's Publications.

In two volumes, demy 8vo, price 21s.,
Growth of the Spirit of Christianity,
FROM THE FIRST CENTURY TO THE DAWN OF
THE LUTHERAN ERA
BY THE
REV. GEORGE MATHESON, M.A., B.D.,
AUTHOR OF ' AIDS TO THE STUDY OF GERMAN THEOLOGY.'

'Mr. Matheson's work is fresh, vigorous, learned, and eminently thoughtful.' —
Contemporary Review.
' A work remarkable for its originality, its lucidity of exposition, its graceful and
impressive style, here and there reminding one of Ruskin's, but more sober ; its widenesa
of research and very able analysis deserve, and no doubt will receive, unstinted praise.'
Clergyman's Magazine.
'These volumes are full of interest to the general reader, and certain to repay
careful study .... rich in the repressed eloquence which is born of overflowing
thought.' — Spectator. ,
'Mr. Matheson has written with very considerable ability, and sometimes eloquence.
a book which gives the results pf a thoughtful mind which thinks for itself, the fruits of
extensive reading, a clear judgment, and a catholic spirit, and often an original intelli
gence. All this iB no little praise to give, and we give it readily.' — Scotsman.
' This truly deserves to be called a great book, and will surely exert a powerful and
elevating influence on men of thought and culture.' — Watchman.
' The work is one of high and unusual merit.' — Literary Churchman.
_' We should like to summarize this great and subtle and suggestive work.' — Daily
Review. _ ' A brief notice of these two volumes can convey but little idea of their full and
varied learning, their fine historical insight, and their power of lucid exposition.'—
Baptist Magazine.
' This work is a contribution of real value to the popular study of Church History.'
— Pall Mall Gazette.

BY THE SAME AUTHOR.

In crown 8vo, Third Edition, price 4s. 6d.,
Aids to the Study of Germa,7i Theology.
'The Author has done his work well, and has given us a real help to the understandins
of German theology.' — Princeton Review.
' A work of much labour and learning, giving in a small compass an intelligent review
of a very large subject.'— Spectator. 6
' An excellent and modest book, which may be heartily recommended.'— A cademy.
'A helpful little volume: helpful to the student of German theology, and not less so
to the careful observer of the tendencies of English religious thought.'— Freeman.
'The writer or compiler deserves high praise for the clear manner in which he has in
a brief compass stated these opinions.' — Christian Observer.