Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Revelation 10:8 - 10:11
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Rev_10:8-11. At the command of the heavenly voice (Rev_10:4), John eats the little book given him by the angel, and receives the instruction that he must once again prophesy.
ἡ φωνὴ , ἣν ἤκουσα
καὶ -g0- λέγουσαν -g0-. The construction in this correct reading[2752] is like that of Rev_4:1, but yet unsymmetrical, as here not only the ΛΈΓΩΝ in the mind of the author is received into the relative clause by attraction, but also the ΠΆΛΙΝ is placed before ΛΑΛΟῦΣΑΝ because of the connection of the declaration just repeated with that mentioned, Rev_10:4. If the sentence in which, in any case, the aor. ἬΚΟΥΣΑ is intended as a plusquam-perfect, were altogether symmetrical in its reference to Rev_10:4 (cf. Rev_4:1), its construction in accord with the nom. Ἡ ΦΩΝΉ would run: Κ . Ἡ ΦΩΝ ., ἫΝ ἬΚ . ἘΚ Τ . ΟὐΡ . ΛΑΛΟῦΣΑΝ ΜΕΤʼ ἘΜΟῦ , ΠΆΛΙΝ ἘΛΆΛΗΣΕΝ ΜΕΤʼ ἘΜΟῦ ΛΈΓΟΥΣΑ ( ΛΈΓΩΝ ). Likewise De Wette, Ebrard.
ὝΠΑΓΕ . As in Rev_16:1, Mat_5:24; Mat_8:4, etc.,[2753] an actual going is represented, accordingly in Rev_10:9 it is said ἈΠῆΛΘΑ .
ΛΆΒΕ , cf. Rev_5:7. John is to take this book to himself (Rev_10:9).
ΑΠῆΛΘΑ ΠΡῸς ΤῸΝ ἌΓΓ . How John, who continues to have his standpoint in heaven (cf. Rev_10:1), could go to the angel who stands on the earth and sea, is not made perceptible to sober view, because in the vision the question is only concerning the act of going. But even if one, like De Wette, consider that John, even prior to ch. 10, “had occupied the standpoint of Zechariah, Ezekiel, and Daniel,” the difficulty of the ἈΠῆΛΘΑ remains essentially the same; hence De Wette has properly reached no conclusion from this expression concerning the standpoint of John.
δοῦναι . Concerning this inf.,[2754] dependent on the ΛΈΓΩΝ , cf. Winer, p. 296.
ΚΑΤΆΦΑΓΕ ΑὐΤΌ . The eating of the book[2755] is within the entire visionary scene not to be regarded an expression intended allegorically, but as a real act of John; just as Ezekiel (Rev_2:9 sqq.) by eating a book receives the contents of its prophetic discourses. The meaning of the visionary fact is correctly given already by Beda: “Take into your inward parts, and contain within the space of thy heart.” What Jer_15:16 in figurative language calls an eating of the words of divine revelation, which must be converted by the prophet into marrow and blood,[2756] we find here, as in Ezekiel, represented in an actual visionary transaction.[2757]
καὶ πικρανεῖ
μέλι . From the fact that the angel speaks first of the bitter effect and then of the sweet taste of the little book, but John himself (Rev_10:10) the reverse, it does not follow that “both vigorously struggled for priority.”[2758] According to the context, the “priority” belongs—not only as to order, but also as to minor dignity—to the sweetness, because the book comes first into the mouth and last into the belly. According to this most simple order, John himself reports, Rev_10:10. The angel looks at it differently, since he speaks,—as the combination of the two expressions into one antithesis shows,—not according to the mere consequences, but with respect to the inner nature and effect. The angel intends first to prepare John for the bitter effect, but then he also says that the book will be in his mouth sweet as honey. This is also against Beng., who, by a comparison of Rev_10:9-10, immediately infers two kinds of sweetness, one before and one after the bitterness.
The relation of ΠΙΚΡΑΝΕῖ ΣΟΥ ΤῊΝ ΚΟΙΛΊΑΝ ( ἘΠΙΚΡΆΝΘΗ Ἡ ΚΟΙΛ . Μ ., Rev_10:10; cf. Rev_8:11) and ΓΛΥΚῪ Ὡς ΜΈΛΙ is, in accordance with the context, to be determined according to both norms: that one and the same book is sweet and bitter according as it enters the mouth or the belly; then, that the distinction between the mouth and the belly is understood only with reference to the eating. Incorrect, therefore, are both the explanation which refers the sweetness and bitterness to the difference between the joyful and the sad contents of the book,[2759]—in connection with which a further error is readily intruded, that, with a result contrary to the context, speaks of “bitter-sweet” contents, indicating that only after a sad visitation could glorious joy enter;[2760] and also that which—in connection with a false interpretation of the little book itself, of the ΠΆΛΙΝ ΠΡΟΦΗΤ ., Rev_10:11, yea even of the angel, Rev_10:1; Rev_10:8—regards the mouth of John not as the organ of eating (receiving), but of speaking, and then refers the bitterness to the persecutions and all the hinderances with which the evangelical preaching of John or the entire Church met.[2761] With correctness, Vitr., C. a Lap., De Wette, Stern, Hengstenb., etc., have interpreted, that, as the mouth refers to the receiving of the revelation given in the little book, so the ΚΟΙΛΊΑ —not ΚΑΡΔΊΑ , as Cod. A reads, and Andr. explains, disturbing the clearness of the idea of the text by mingling therewith a rash interpretation—is directed to the comprehension, i.e., the further scrutiny[2762] and perception, of the revelation received. [See Note LXVI., p. 309.] How little the sweetness of the reception, as such, was hindered by the bitterness of the contents of revelation, is shown by the symbol of Ezekiel, in whose mouth the book written with mourning and woe is Ὡς ΜΈΛΙ ΓΛΥΚΆΖΟΝ .[2763] But he also went bitterly, after he had filled his belly therewith,[2764] in the heat of his spirit.[2765]
By eating the book, John is made able to proclaim its contents. Therefore Rev_10:11 follows: καὶ λἐγουσῖν μοι , κ . τ . λ . The plur.[2766] makes the speaking subject entirely indefinite; the modified var. points to the angel.
δεῖ σε πάλιν προφ . The δεῖ designates not the inner, subjective necessity, that John now cannot help prophesying, because by eating the book he has been capacitated for prophesying,[2767] but the objective necessity depending upon the will of God, who accordingly gives his revelation.[2768] The πάλιν does not contrast John’s prophecy with that of the ancient prophets,[2769] but designates a second προφητεῦσαι of John himself, yet not a preaching after a return from exile,[2770] but the new prophecy for which the eaten book has fitted him in its relation to the prophesying practised upon the ground of previous visions. This πάλιν προφητεῦσαι occurs therefore in the succeeding part of the Apoc.[2771]
ἐπὶ λαοῖς
πολλοῖς . Incorrectly, Beng: “To nations—beyond,” in the sense that there are still many nations, etc., which are, meantime, to come before that is fulfilled which is here described prior to the transition to the second woe. Ἐπί has this meaning neither in Heb_9:17, 1Co_14:26, nor elsewhere. Likewise incorrectly, Ebrard: “Before nations,” i.e., so that “the nations have it declared to them.” The ἐπὶ with the dat. designates, precisely as in Joh_12:16, the object which the prophecy grasps, i.e., concerning which the prophecy is made. The grammatical relation is precisely the same as in the construction of ἐπί with the dative accompanying verbs designating joy, astonishment, etc., concerning any thing.[2772] The occasion for the false construction of the ἐπὶ lies, in Ebrard, in the view of the contents of the book, and the range of the prophecy conditioned thereby. If the πάλιν προφητεῦσαι is completed with Rev_11:13, and is intended for the Church, it cannot be said here, Rev_10:11, that John is to prophesy concerning nations and kings; and if Hengstenb., who likewise[2773] finds in Rev_11:1-13 the prophecy announced in Rev_10:11, and refers it to the degenerate churches, yet explains correctly the ἐπὶ λαοῖς , κ . τ . λ ., and compares therewith what is said of kings, chs. 16, 17, 19, this is inconsistent with his view of the little book and the πάλ . προφ ., just to the extent that it is correct according to the context. Ewald—who agrees formally with Hengstenb. and Ebrard, since he also finds in Rev_11:1-13 the contents of the eaten book, but interprets this new prophecy as referring to the destruction of Jerusalem—refers the ἐπὶ λαοῖς , κ . τ . λ ., to Rev_11:2; Rev_11:7; Rev_11:9; but since the prophecy Rev_11:1-13 is actually one concerning Jerusalem, it cannot well be called at Rev_10:11 a prophecy concerning peoples, nations, languages, and many kings.[2774] Besides, Ew. has understood the significant position of the angel, Rev_10:2, with relation to Rome as capital of the world. The result, therefore, is not that the ἘΠῚ is explained ungrammatically, but that we must seek the correct reference of the ΠΆΛΙΝ ΠΡΟΦΗΤΕῦΣΑΙ , which must concur with the correct view of the contents of the little book eaten. Upon this depends the ultimate determination of the view of the entire transaction in ch. 10.
[2752] See Critical Notes.
[2753] Cf. the ἦλθε , Rev_5:7; also the ἕρχου , Rev_6:4-5; Rev_6:7.
[2754] Act_21:21.
[2755] Cf. Rev_10:10, where the command is fulfilled by John.
[2756] Cf., besides, Psa_40:9.
[2757] Ew., etc. Cf. Knobel, Proph., I. p. 373.
[2758] Hengstenb.
[2759] Heinr., Ewald.
[2760] Herd., Rinck.
[2761] Beda, Aret., Par., etc.
[2762] Cf. 1Pe_1:10 sq.
[2763] Eze_3:3; cf. Eze_2:10.
[2764] Rev_10:3 : ἠ κοιλία σου πλησθήσεται .
[2765] Rev_10:4 : îÇø , which the LXX. do not at all translate.
[2766] Cf. Rev_12:6.
[2767] Beng., Hengstenb.
[2768] Cf., in general, Rev_1:1 sqq.
[2769] Beng.
[2770] Primas, Beda, Vieg.
[2771] Grot., Alcas., De Wette, Hengstenb., Ebrard, etc., who, in the more accurate determination, vary much in other respects from one another.
[2772] Winer, p. 368.
[2773] Cf. also Klief.
[2774] i.e., all the world, those κατοικοῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς . Cf. Rev_5:9.
The allegorical explanations are to be rejected, as entirely in violation of the context, which betray their arbitrariness by their infinite diversity. The mighty angel, Rev_10:1, can as little stand for the Emperor Justin, the defender of the Church against the Arians, and the Emperor Justinian,[2775] or[2776] the evangelical preachers, as whose representative others, like Beda already, understand John, or indeed the Pope,[2777] as the little book eaten by John can be the Codex Justinianus,[2778] or the N. T.[2779] The most important interpreters[2780] are unanimous in regarding the contents of this little book, which is eaten, as prophecy which is written in the Apoc. itself, and that, too, in the part which follows ch. 10. But there is controversy both as to the more accurate determination of the section which is regarded as containing the prophecy proceeding from the book that is eaten, and also, which is essentially connected therewith, as to the relation between the book that is eaten, and the seal-book, ch. 5. The opinion that both books are identical[2781] is answered already by the fact that John, after having thus far prophesied upon the ground of the book of ch. 5, now is to prophesy anew upon the ground of the little book that is eaten. Accordingly, the directly opposite view is readily suggested, that both books have nothing whatever to do with one another, but that the little book, ch. 10, contains something entirely peculiar, viz., what is described in Rev_11:1-13 : i.e., according to Grot., Wetst., Eichh., Ew., the fate of Jerusalem; according to Hengstenb., the fate of the degenerate Church.[2782] But it is neither correct that the contents of the book of fate, ch. 5, are already fully settled in what has been hitherto given,[2783] nor is it conceivable that that book of fate should contain nothing of the fate of Jerusalem, the “degenerate Church,”[2784] which is not to be revealed to the prophet until by the little book, ch. 10;[2785] neither, if the contents of the book that is eaten be limited to Rev_11:1-13, whether in Ewald’s or Hengstenb.’s sense, does it agree with the statement of Rev_10:11, according to which John is to prophesy concerning peoples and many kings. The instance deduced from Rev_10:11[2786] applies also against Vitr., who, in the little book of ch. 10, finds a part of the book of ch. 5, limits its contents likewise to Rev_11:1-13, and interprets it as a prophecy concerning the calamities of the Western Church. The correct point in Vitr. is the view that the little book of ch. 10 comprises a part of all that which is to happen contained in the book of fate of ch. 5; viz., all that which has not, as yet, issued from the book of fate through the succession of seal- and trumpet-visions; in other words, all that from Rev_11:1 has been written by John in consequence of the δεῖ σε πάλιν προφητεῦσαι , κ . τ . λ .;[2787] therefore not in the false sense[2788] that “the book of completion” only substantially repeats, in its way, the contents already present in the preceding “book of declaration.” This follows from what in Rev_10:11 is said concerning the prophecy of John, which proceeds from the book which was eaten; but it admits the less a restriction to Rev_11:1-13 (where what is said is concerning Jerusalem), and rather requires the more certainly the further reference to what is written, ch. 12 sqq., as the discourse of the angel, Rev_10:6 sq., extending to the full end, stands in more significant parallel with the contents of the book brought by him. For it also agrees with this, that the ΠΆΛΙΝ ΠΡΟΦΗΤΕῦΣΑΙ of John in no way stands out of connection with the book of fate including of itself the entire prophecy concerning what was to occur; but rather not only does Rev_11:1-13 belong in the series of the woes, but also all that from Rev_11:15 succeeds the trumpets, which by means of the seals, from the last of which they have proceeded, belongs to the sphere of the book of fate. And when the angel, who brings the little book, looks towards Jerusalem, Rev_10:2, it agrees with this, that the most immediate object of the new prophecy, Rev_10:11, is in fact Jerusalem (Rev_11:1 sq.); but the perspective opened, Rev_10:7, extends to the ultimate end; so that from the little book, in the fulness corresponding to Rev_10:11, there follow also the prophecies of ch. 12 sqq. Thus the little book which was brought to John opened, and was eaten by him, appears to be an inner instruction and interpretation given the seer concerning visions still impending, and which are to continue until the full end. And the more important the subjects of the prophecy that now follow,—for we come now to the proper goal, while all that precedes is only preparatory,—the more natural appears the new special preparation of the prophet.
[2775] Rev_10:8. N. de Lyra.
[2776] According to the older Protestant expositors.
[2777] Luther.
[2778] N. de Lyra.
[2779] Aret., etc.
[2780] C. a Lap., Grot., Calov., Vitr., Beng., Ew., De Wette, Hengstenb., etc.
[2781] C. a Lap., Zeger, Calov.
[2782] Cf. also Ebrard.
[2783] Against Hengstenb.
[2784] Hengstenb.
[2785] Against Ewald, etc.
[2786] Cf. Rev_10:6 sqq.
[2787] Beng., De Wette.
[2788] Volkm.
LXVI. Rev_10:9. ποικρανεῖ τὴν κοιλίαν