Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Revelation 17:3 - 17:6
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Rev_17:3-6. The view of the harlot promised John, Rev_17:1 sq., is afforded after the angel has carried him away in the spirit into the wilderness.
ἀπήνεγκε -g0- με -g0-. Rev_21:10. De Wette explains the idea from Luk_16:22; but the ἐν πνεὑματι in this passage does not mention so much an actual abandonment of the body,[3806] as rather that this change of standpoint has been wrought to the ecstatic consciousness of the seer by an angel.[3807]
εἰς ἔρημον . The identification of this wilderness with that mentioned in Rev_12:6; Rev_12:14, impossible in a formal respect, because of the omission of the art., coincides in Auberlen with the view that the harlot, ch. 17, is identical with the woman, ch. 12.[3808] Why the harlot, with all her ostentation, is beheld in a wilderness, the text itself indicates, Rev_17:16 :[3809] for complete desolation is impending over her.[3810] Incorrect, therefore, are the explanations of the wilderness by Beda: “The absence of divinity;” Coccej.: “That part of the world wherein, at John’s time, idolatry and persecution prevailed;” Bengel: “Europe, especially Italy.” Incorrect also Vitr.: “Deserted of nations;” yet Vitr. has felt that the seeming contradiction between Rev_17:1 ( καθημ . ἐπὶ ὑδάτων πολλ .) and Rev_17:3, in the sense of the passage already compared by him, Isa_21:1, with which he improperly combines Eze_20:35 ( ἔρημος τῶν λαῶν ), is explained, of course, not by the allegorical exposition that the wilderness, like the waters, designates many nations, but so that the sitting on the waters, i.e., the dominion over the nations (Rev_17:15) does not exclude the impending devastation.
θηρίον κόκκινον . That now, since the form of the harlot, i.e., of the metropolis, is so expressly distinguished from that of the beast, i e., of the empire, this beast appears in some features different from in ch. 13, in no way destroys the identity of both beasts, clearly designated by the similarity of the chief features.[3811] This identity is not definitely marked; it was just the partial change in form of manifestation that did not permit John to write ἐπὶ τὸ θηρ ., but he reports his vision which revealed to him figures in a form such as in fact they had not yet appeared: He saw a woman seated upon a scarlet-colored beast. The κόκκινον designates not the color of a covering which is to be ascribed to the beast,[3812] but the color of the beast itself. It is, like the fiery-red color of the dragon whom the beast serves,[3813] a sign of the blood shed by it.[3814] The difference from the representation, Rev_13:2, is, therefore, not a proof of an actual difference of beasts, because in both forms the same thing is brought to sight; only this passage points more definitely to the blood actually shed, while in Rev_13:2, in the form of the O. T. types, the dreadful power of the fierce beast, as that of a monstrous beast of prey, was first symbolized.
γέμον τὰ ὀνόματα βλασφ . This also, as well as the succeeding description ἔχον κεφαλὰς ἑπτὰ , κ . τ . λ ., agrees in essentials with Rev_13:1; not all of the heads of the beast, however, bear a name of blasphemy, but that the whole beast is covered with that name of blasphemy is what is now stated. The art. τὰ ὀν ., which has been omitted through a misunderstanding,[3815] refers back to Rev_13:1. The accus. ὀνόυατα stands here with γέμον , for the same reason as possibly with πεπληρωμένον ;[3816] yet this construction remains remarkable, since elsewhere in the Apoc. the gen. stands with γέμον .[3817]
The woman herself (Rev_17:4) appears “arrayed” ( περιβεβλ . Rev_12:1) “in purple and scarlet-colored” garments.[3818] The first garment[3819] indicates royal sovereignty. Even the κόκκινον could in itself[3820] have this meaning; but it is, on the one hand, superfluous by two emblems to designate the same thing; on the other hand, from the reference to Rev_17:3 ( θηρ . κόκκ .), another significant interpretation of the scarlet, i.e., blood-colored, garment of the woman, excellently agreeing with Rev_17:6, results: both are indicated; viz., the royal dominion,[3821] and the being stained with the blood of the saints.[3822] Beda errs in a twofold way: “The purple of feigned dominion.”
κεχρυσωμένη
μαρλαρίταις . Further description of royal and most rich display.[3823] The κεχρυς . stands zeugmatically to λίθ . τιμ . and μαργ .
ἔχουσα ποτήριον χρυσοὺν , κ . τ . λ . The precipitate allegoristics, which could find indicated in the words κεχρυσ ., κ . τ . λ ., “the enticements of feigned truth,”[3824] results here in arbitrary explanations: The golden cup, with its abominable contents,[3825] is regarded as hypocrisy,[3826] “worldly happiness, the majesty of government,”[3827] “the body of words which are read in Scripture, but distorted by wicked interpretations,”[3828] “the system of papal doctrine,” “the cup of the mass.”[3829] The text allows us to think only that the harlot who renders all kings and nations drunk with the wine of her fornication[3830] has a cup in her hand which is golden, just as she herself is adorned with gold and precious jewellery, but is full “of abominations,” because the wine of her fornication is therein. With γέμον the accusat. Κ . ΤᾺ ἈΚΆΘΑΡΤΑ is construed[3831] in the same sense[3832] as the genitive ΒΔΕΛ .; but this harshness, which is the more remarkable as the genitive limitation is given in a single word, can scarcely be explained by the fact[3833] that the threefold genit. ΤῶΝ ἈΚΆΘΑΡΤΩΝ Τῆς ΠΟΡΝ . ΑὐΤ . was to be avoided. It appears, accordingly, more correct[3834] to regard the accusat. ΚΑῚ ΤᾺ ἈΚ . parallel with the accusat. ΠΟΤΉΡΙΟΝ , Κ . Τ . Λ ., and to make it depend upon the ἜΧΟΥΣΑ in such a way that the words ΚΑῚ ΤᾺ ἈΚ ., Κ . Τ . Λ ., themselves bring later an interpretation of the ΠΟΤΉΡ . ΧΡΥΣ . ΓΈΜ . ΒΔΕΛ .
More expressly still than the corresponding appearance does the name, which stands written on the forehead of the woman,[3835] designate her lewd, abominable nature. The name runs: ΒΑΒΥΛῺΝ Ἡ ΜΕΓΆΛΗ , Ἡ ΜῆΤΗΡ , Κ . Τ . Λ . The name ΜΥΣΤΉΡΙΟΝ is not the first constituent of the proper name,[3836] but designates with a certain parenthetical independence, like a premised “Nota bene,” that the name now to be mentioned is meant spiritually,[3837] or in a manner accordant with revelation, not without the covering; that beneath the external brilliancy the secret nature, and, in spite of the secular dominion presented to the eyes, the unmistakable corruption of the woman, are asserted.[3838] Nevertheless, the word ΜΥΣΤΉΡΙΟΝ dare not be regarded precisely as an adjective attribute to ὈΝΟΜΑ [3839]
The mysterious proper name βαβ . ἡ μεγ . is expressly the same as has already designated in Rev_14:8, Rev_16:9, the chief city as the concrete representative of the entire empire. The further designation expresses appellatively, by another change of figure, essentially what was delineated in the manifestation itself (Rev_17:4, ἜΧ . ΠΟΤ . ΧΡΥς .), to which the significant name also is to correspond. As “the mother of harlots,” etc., this great Babylon has shown herself by the circumstance that she has made her daughters, i.e., the cities of the Gentiles,[3840] harlots, given them to drink of her own cup of abominations, and filled the whole world with her own abominations.[3841]
Finally, John beholds, Rev_17:6, the woman in a condition to which the scarlet color of her garment, and of the beast whereon she sits, corresponds: “Drunken with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.” On the expression, cf. Plin., H. N., xiv. 28: “Drunken with the blood of citizens, and thirsting the more for it;”[3842] on the subject itself, cf. Rev_16:6, Rev_18:24.
ἘΚ Τ . ΑἸΜ . Cf. Rev_16:10, Rev_8:11.
Τ . ΜΑΡΤΎΡΩΝ ἸΗΣ . Cf. Rev_2:13. The martyrs of Jesus are not in kind distinguished from the saints; but the former designation brings into prominence the fact as to how this testimony of Jesus, which the saints have given, becomes the cause of their death.[3843]
ΚΑῚ ἘΘΑΎΜΑΣΑ , Κ . Τ . Λ . The accus. ΘΑῦΜΑ ΜΕΓΑ with ἘΘΑΎΜ ., as Rev_16:9. The ground of John’s great astonishment is in general the just-described sight of the woman ( ἸΔῺΝ ΑὐΤΗΝ ); but in how far must this sight have occasioned such great astonishment? The most forcible reason would be that named by Auberlen, if he had the right to recognize again in the harlot the degenerate woman of Rev_12:1. This would, in fact, be something completely incomprehensible; but neither the angel (Rev_17:7 sqq.) attempts to explain this impossibility, neither does there exist anywhere else in the text an occasion for the egregious mistake of such a conception. Arbitrary, because not based upon Rev_17:7 sqq., are the explanations of Bengel: “John wondered, because so mighty a beast has to serve the woman in carrying her;” of Hengstenberg, who describes the astonishment of the seer as “unreasonable, foolish,”[3844] because the harlot, in spite of her dreadful guilt, still maintains her greatness; of Ebrard: because the beast appears to be entirely different from in ch. 13. The angel designates in Rev_17:7, entirely in agreement with the ἸΔῺΝ ΑὐΤῊΝ , Rev_17:6, the mystery of the woman, and the beast carrying her, as the cause, to be explained by interpretation, of the astonishment of John, who himself did not understand[3845] the ΣΗΜΕῖΟΝ ΘΑΥΜΑΣΤΌΝ [3846] thus beheld by him.
[3806] Cf. 2Co_12:2.
[3807] Cf. Luk_4:1 sqq., Luk_10:8 sqq., Luk_11:1, Luk_12:18; var. lect.
[3808] See on Rev_17:18.
[3809] Cf. Rev_18:2; Rev_18:16; Rev_18:19.
[3810] Andr., C. a Lap., Ewald, De Wette, Hofm., Hengstenb., etc.
[3811] Against Züll., Ebrard.
[3812] Züll., De Wette.
[3813] Rev_12:3; cf. Rev_6:4.
[3814] Cf. Rev_16:6, Rev_11:7.
[3815] See Critical Notes.
[3816] Php_1:11; Col_1:9. Winer, p. 215.
[3817] Rev_17:4; Rev_4:8; Rev_15:7.
[3818] Cf. Rev_18:16.
[3819] Cf. Joh_19:2.
[3820] Cf. Mat_27:28.
[3821] Cf. Rev_17:18.
[3822] Against Andr., Erasm., De Wette, Hengstenb., etc.
[3823] Cf. Eze_28:13.
[3824] Beda.
[3825] βδελυγμ . Cf. Lev_18:27.
[3826] Beda.
[3827] C. a Lap.
[3828] Coccej.
[3829] Calov.
[3830] Rev_17:2; Rev_14:8.
[3831] Ewald, De Wette, Bleek, Hengstenb., etc.
[3832] Cf. Rev_17:3.
[3833] Hengstenb.
[3834] Cf. Rev_18:12.
[3835] Cf. Rev_17:5.
[3836] Vitr., etc.
[3837] Cf. Rev_11:8.
[3838] Cf. C. a Lap., Beng., De Wette, Ewald, etc.
[3839] Cf. Hofm., O. S., 644.
[3840] Rev_16:19; Ew.
[3841] Cf. Rev_13:3 sqq., 14 sqq., Rev_14:8 sqq., 11.
[3842] More illustrations in Wetst.
[3843] Cf. Rev_11:3; Rev_11:8.
[3844] Cf. also on Rev_5:4 sqq.
[3845] Cf. De Wette.
[3846] Cf. Rev_15:1.