Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Revelation 12:5 - 12:6
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Rev_12:5-6. The child is born, but rescued; the woman also flees.
υἱὸν ἄρσεν . The expression, without regard to its peculiar incorrectness,[3062] reminds us of the áÌÅæ æÈëÈø , Jer_20:15,[3063] but is still more emphatic in the prominence given the male sex of the child, since the grammatical reason, rendering possible the harsh agreement of the masc. ΥἹΌΝ and the neut. ἌΡΣΕΝ , lies in the fact that the ἌΡΣΕΝ appears as a sort of apposition: “a son, a male.” The intention of this emphasis, which De Wette improperly denies, is not that of designating the child as victor over the dragon,[3064] but[3065] points to what is added concerning the child immediately afterwards; Ὃς ΜΈΛΛΕΙ ΠΟΙΜ ., Κ . Τ . Λ . These words taken from Psa_2:9 (LXX.), which are referred also to Christ in Rev_19:15, make it indubitable that the child born of the woman is the Messiah;[3066] but the designation of Christ by these words of the Messianic Psalm is in this passage[3067] the most appropriate and significant, since the fact is made prominent that this child just born is the one who with irresistible power will visit in judgment the antichristian heathen. By the words of the Psalm, John, therefore, designates the Lord as the ἘΡΧΌΜΕΝΟΝ , who, as is especially kept in view by ch. 12, will also come with his iron rod upon the Gentile-Roman antichrist. As, therefore, John by the words of the Psalm designates the child in a way completely corresponding to the fundamental idea of the entire Apoc., and points to the ultimate end in the Messianic judgment, he at the same time discloses the reason why Satan lays snares chiefly for the child, and then also for the woman and believers; and why especially the Gentile-Roman empire—whose insignia the dragon wears, and which is the means of his wrath—persecutes believers in Christ in the manner depicted further in what follows.[3068] Thus the designation of the child shows the significance of the entire vision, ch. 12, in its relation to what follows. The result, however, is also that all the expositors who regard the child born of the woman as any thing else than the Messiah, and that, too, in his concrete personality, miss the surest standpoint for the exposition of the entire ch. 12, and with this the correct standpoint for the comprehension of ch. 13 sqq. This applies especially in opposition to all those who, however much they diverge in details, yet agree in the fundamental error that they regard the child as Christ, only in a certain metonymical sense, by understanding it properly, speaking of Christ living in believers, and thus of believers themselves. Thus Beda: “The Church is always, though the dragon opposes, bringing forth Christ.”—“The Church daily gives birth to a church, ruling in Christ the world.” Cf. C. a Lap., Aret., Calov., who gives the more specific definition: “The bearing of the woman” refers to the “profession of the Nicene faith, and the sons born to God by the Church in the midst of the persecutions of the Gentiles,” Beng., Stern., etc. Grot., also: “The dispersed from Judaea, among whom were Aquila and Apollos, instruments of the catholic Church, brought forth many of the Roman people unto Christ.” Eichh., Heinr., Herd., etc., who regard the child as a symbol of the Christian Church, proceeding from the Jewish, belong here.
ΚΑῚ ἩΡΠΆΣΘΗ . The expression makes clear how, by a sudden withdrawal,[3069] the child is delivered from the immediately threatening danger.[3070]
ΠΡῸς ΤῸΝ ΘΕῸΝ ΚΑῚ ΠΡῸς ΤῸΝ ΘΡΌΝΟΝ ΑὐΤΟῦ . It is made emphatic not only that the child is drawn up to God for preservation, but also that this is the surest, and at the same time most exalted, place of refuge. The allegorical interpretation of the second half of Rev_12:5, by those who do not acknowledge in the child the Messiah himself, must have an entirely reverse result. N. de Lyra[3071] contents himself with the idea of the “deliverance of the Church;” even to him Beda’s interpretation[3072] may have been too perplexing. The rationalistic expositors also, who share with these churchly expositors the fundamental error concerning the ΤΈΚΝΟΝ , uselessly amend one another.[3073] De Wette, Hengstenb., Ebrard, etc., have referred the ἩΡΠΆΣΘΗ , Κ . Τ . Λ ., to the Lord’s ascension, and, according to this, understand by the persecution on the part of the dragon[3074] “all that was done on the part of the Jews against Christ until his death,”[3075] the entire state of humiliation, to which the state of exaltation even to God’s throne has succeeded.[3076] But the feeling concerning this, that this conception does not correspond with the character of the statement in the text, has asserted itself in Hengstenb. Before the ΚΑῚ ἩΡΠΆΣΘΗ , he says, it is to be remembered that the dragon continues his persecution, as, according to the gospel history, it has occurred from the temptation until the death on the cross.[3077] “This addition is urged by Rev_12:4 : for how was the one, who, already before the birth, stood before the woman, in order to devour her child as soon as it was born, not to incessantly continue his persecution? and it is required by the ‘and it was caught up.’ ” But neither this addition, nor the exposition based thereon, is allowable in accordance with the text; for the textual idea is that the child immediately after birth is caught up to God’s throne. This ideal representation is related to the actual history of Christ, just as the ideal allusion to the judgment impending upon Jerusalem, Rev_11:1 sqq., to the actually future fact; the fact as such is as little prophesied there, as in this passage the proper history of Christ and its precise epochs are mentioned,[3078] but in both cases the historical reality serves only for the firm concrete basis of the idea, which is the main point of consideration. No historical fact corresponds to the prophetical-ideal representation of the dragon, which watches for the birth of the Messiah, in order to immediately devour the child; but the snares on the part of Herod, and the murder of the infants at Bethlehem, may have given an occasion for the conception of the view, whereby John figuratively represents the mortal enmity of Satan to the Messiah. No fact in the history of Christ corresponds to the ἡρπάσθη τὸ τέκνον , κ . τ . λ .; but the fact of the Lord’s ascension offers, as it were, the colors with which to paint the ideas as to how inexpressibly glorious is the preservation of the child from Satan, and how completely the latter, with his persecutions, is confounded. Both subjects under consideration here, Satan’s mortal hatred to the Lord (and, therefore to his saints, Rev_12:17, Rev_13:1 sqq.), and, in connection with this, Satan’s inability to touch the Lord (and, accordingly, the final judgment on every thing antichristian, and the glorification of believers), are here placed in view.
[3062] See Critical Notes.
[3063] LXX.: ἄρσην , without υἱός .
[3064] “Victor over the devil who had conquered the woman” (Beda).
[3065] Cf. Beng., Hengstenb., etc.
[3066] De Wette, Rinck, Hengstenb., Ebrard, etc.
[3067] As also Rev_19:15.
[3068] Rev_12:17, Rev_13:1 sqq.
[3069] Act_23:10; Jud_1:23.
[3070] Vitr., Hengstenb.
[3071] Cf. Aret., C. a Lap., etc.
[3072] “Godlessness cannot apprehend Christ spiritually born in the mind of hearers, for the reason that the same one reigns with the Father in heaven, who also has raised us, and made us sit in heavenly places with Christ.”
[3073] Cf. Eichh.: “The Christian Church having proceeded from Judaism received, under God’s protection, its growth and increase;” with Grot.: “Simon seduced so many at Rome that a Christian people no longer appeared there. They who do not appear with men are said to be with God.”
[3074] Cf. Joh_14:30.
[3075] De Wette.
[3076] Hengstenb., Ebrard.
[3077] Cf. Luk_4:13 : ἄχρι καιροῦ , and Joh_14:30.
[3078] Against Auberlen, p. 277, etc.
What, after the withdrawal of the child, is further attempted on the part of the dragon, or what now possibly occurs with it itself (cf. Rev_12:7. sqq.), cannot be properly stated (Rev_12:7 sqq.) without giving an account first of the fate of the woman. This occurs in Rev_12:6, which briefly anticipates[3079] what is described more minutely in Rev_12:14, and that too on the basis of Rev_12:7 sqq.;[3080] for not until the dragon, with his wrath directed above all things against the child itself, is completely confounded, does he turn against the woman, Rev_12:13 sqq., and when she flees, then against the rest of her seed, Rev_12:17, in order to vent against them, as believers in Christ, that rage with which he could not reach the Lord himself and the woman. But what instruments the dragon employs, in order to attack believers with the hatred which is, in fact, directed against the Lord himself, is shown immediately afterwards in Rev_13:1 sqq.
[3079] Vitr., Ewald, De Wette, Hofm., Hengstenb., Auberlen.
[3080] Against Ebrard. See on Rev_12:14.
ὅπου
ἐκεῖ . Cf. Rev_12:14; Rev_3:8; Rev_7:2.
ἡτοιμασμένον ἀπο τ . θ ., “on the part of God,” divinely. Cf. Winer, p. 347 sqq.
ἵνα ἐκεῖ τρέφωσιν αὐτὴν , κ . τ . λ . The final clause depends upon the ἡτοιμ . ἀπὸ τ . θ .; the ἐκεῖ refers, therefore, to the place in the wilderness; cf. the parallel words, Rev_12:14 ( εἰς τ . τόπον αὐτης , ὅπου τρέφεται ἐκεῖ , κ . τ . λ .), where also the personally fixed τρέφεται (sc. ἡ γυνή ) explains the meaning of the τρέφωσιν αὐτὴν taken without a definite subject.[3081] See, in general, also in reference to the schematic determination of time, on Rev_12:14.
[3081] Cf. Rev_10:11; Luk_12:20.