Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadJohn Bengel Commentary - Revelation 1:5 - 1:5
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Rev 1:5. Ἀπὸ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὁ μάρτυς, κ.τ.λ.) In this book apposition is frequently used between an oblique case and a nominative. We have collected examples in the App. p. 778 [Edit. ii. p. 488]. In this manner the Hebrews decline a nomenclature consisting of many words by only prefixing Mem, for instance: and in like manner the French, by the use of the preposition de, etc. Moreover Luke also has, ἐν τῷ αἵματί μου, τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἐκχυνόμενον, ch. Rev 22:20.-τῶν νεκρῶν) The editions read, ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν.[8] It is only in the Apocalypse that my text shows a reading sometimes different from the printed editions. I have stated the reason at full length in the App. p. 788 [Ed. ii. p. 498 and following], and in either Defence [App. Crit. Ed. ii. P. iv. N. iv. and bx.]-ἈΓΑΠῶΝΤΙ[9]) This is the reading of the most ancient Alex. and of six others, not to be despised, and probably of a greater number, who have been overlooked by ancient collators. Others read ἀγαπήσαντι, on account of the following words, λούσαντι and ἐποίησεν: and it is preferred by Wolf. But the present participle includes the force of the præter-imperfect also. Οἱ μισοῦντες, οἱ ̔ ἀγαπῶντες, οἱ φιλοῦντες, οἱ δοξάζοντες, they who hated, who esteemed, who loved, who honoured: 2Sa 19:6; Lam 1:2; Lam 1:8. Thus Mat 2:20, οἱ ζητοῦντες, they who were seeking; 2Pe 1:19, φαίνοντι denotes a light which WAS SHINING, for it is followed by Aorist 1st, διαυγάσῃ and ἀνατείλῃ. Thus θεωροῦντες and ὤν the imperfect, Joh 9:8; Joh 9:25, and repeatedly. And the use of the word ἀγαπῶντι in the present with the force of a præterite was so much easier, because two aorists follow. And so the present is used for the præterite, when the præterite follows, ch. Rev 13:12. But ἀγαπῶντι is strictly a present, and denotes perpetual love, as Joh 3:35, ὁ Πατὴρ ΑΙ ΑΠΑ τὸν Υἱὸν, καὶ πάντα ΔΕΔΩΚΕΝ ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ, The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into His hand: where the present and præterite are joined together. In the German translation of the Apocalypse I have designedly translated it, who loves us. And such passages, as I understand, displease many. But the style of John and the taste of the present day are as widely apart as the east and the west. In translating, I do not seek to gratify fastidious ears, but I scrupulously follow John, who wrote altogether in accordance with the sense of the Hebrew. This is a part of the reproach of Christ.[10]-αὐτοῦ) I have everywhere written ΑὐΤΟῦ, with a soft breathing,[11] even where it has a reflexive sense, following the example of Erasmus, who indeed, in his editions, almost indiscriminately edits αὐτοῦ, by way of concession to prejudices, as I imagine, and ΑὐΤΟῦ, even in a reflexive sense, from MSS. The reason has been mentioned once for all in the Appar. p. 453 [Ed. ii. p 93], (Buttigius agreeing with me in his preface to the New Testament); and it must be supposed to have been mentioned in each particular passage. Compare therefore on this passage also Appar. Crit. Ed. ii. p. 504. As with the Hebrews ך and other suffixes have both the relative and reciprocal force of the third person: so the writers of the new Testament use ΑὐΤΟῦ in either sense indiscriminately. And so in this passage, ch. Rev 1:5, ΑὐΤΟῦ altogether refers to Jesus Christ, who hath washed us in His own blood.
[8] ABCh Vulg. omit ἐκ. Rec. Text has no good authority for it.-E.
[9] So ABC: but Rec. Text with Vulg. ἀγαπήσαντι.-E.
[10] καὶ λούσαντι, and washed) In truth he who is not washed is unable to discharge the office of priest.-V. g.
[11] That indeed is done in Ed. maj. and min. of A. 1734, but in the Admonition prefixed to Ed. man. of A. 1753, my sainted father thus says:-In the pronunciation it is right to imitate the custom of the apostles in preference to that which is recent; but because in the reflexive use of αὐτοῦ, not only tiros, but even men of great learning, find a difficulty, I have caused αὑτοῦ to be printed in almost all those passages where the editions of the Stephens’ so read; and I wish the more prudent to remember that this is not to be taken as a rule of pronunciation, but rather as an aid to interpretation. You have a proof, reader, that Bengel was not one who did not know how to yield.-E. B.