Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Revelation 1:19 - 1:19
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Rev_1:19. It is impossible for the οὐν , without reference to Rev_1:17-18, to serve only to recall the command, Rev_1:11.[842] Hengstenb. better combines the reference to Rev_1:11 with that to Rev_1:17-18 : “When, therefore, this fear is removed, do what I have bidden thee.” But, apart from the fact that it is very doubtful whether, Rev_1:11, Christ himself has spoken, this reference to Rev_1:17-18, which even does not correspond to the meaning of these verses, is highly unsatisfactory. Grotius seems with greater correctness to remark, “Because you see that I am so powerful.” The Lord, therefore, bases upon the revelation of his own majesty (Rev_1:17-18) communicated to the prophet, the command to write, i.e., to give written witness to the churches (Rev_1:1 sqq.); since the contents of this revelation, which is to be communicated, is essentially nothing else than the full unfolding of what has been beheld by the prophet (Rev_1:12 sqq.), and the majesty of Christ disclosed by the Lord himself in significant words (Rev_1:17-18). For the Living One will come; who was dead (Rev_1:18), whom they have pierced (Rev_1:7), but who is alive in eternity, whom John beheld, and was commissioned by the Coming One himself to proclaim his advent.
This is also given by the sense of the following words, which more accurately designate the subjects to be written of: ἄ εἰδες , κ . τ . λ . There can be no doubt that the εἰδες refers to the vision above narrated. The καὶ ἅ εἰσὶν , moreover, after its reference to ἃ εἰδ ., or to κ . ἃ μελλ ., κ . τ . λ ., is fixed, means either “and what it is,” i.e., signifies;[843] or, “and what is,” i.e., the present relations.[844] The latter is far more natural, especially as the antithesis between ἃ εἰσὶν and ἃ μέλλει γεν . is marked particularly by the retrospection of the μετὰ ταῦτα to the ἃ εἰσὶν . Yet it must not be said that the ἃ εἶδες in ch. 1, ἃ εἰσὶν in chs. 2 and 3, and ἃ μελλ ., κ . τ . λ ., are comprised; but, rather, the epistles already contain the future, and the succeeding chapters the present; yea, the entire book bears the true prophetic stamp in this, that what is future is also prophesied of the present.[845] That in Rev_1:20 a point of the vision, Rev_1:12 sqq., is actually indicated,[846] can be decided concerning the meaning of the ἃ εἶδες the less, as by the ἃ εἶδες the entire vision, Rev_1:12 sqq., is meant.[847]
[842] Against Aretius, who immediately remarks, “ ἔκστασις injures the memory;” also against De Wette.
[843] Alcas., Aret., Eichh., Heinr., Herd., Ew., Bleek, De Wette; cf. Klief., “what they are.”
[844] Areth., N. de Lyra, C. a Lap., Grot., Calov., Vitr., Beng., Wolf, Züll., Hengstenb., Ebrard, Lücke p. 401, Volkm.
[845] Cf. Introduction, sec. 2.
[846] Cf. Rev_17:7 sqq., and elsewhere.
[847] Against De Wette; also against Kliefoth.