Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Revelation 2:24 - 2:25
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Rev_2:24-25. In opposition ( δὲ ) to the Nicolaitans spoken of at the close of Rev_2:23, the Lord now addresses that part of the church not infected by such false doctrines; by the words οἵτινες , κ . τ . λ ., the rest are then expressly characterized as such as had not received this doctrine, this not godly, but satanic, gnosis. The reference to the so-called gnosis of the Nicolaitans is here clearly indicated by the expression τὰ βαθέα , even apart from the controverted formula ὡς λέγουσιν ; for to become acquainted with the depths (of divinity) was an essential pretence of the Gnostics.[1269] But it is a matter of controversy, whether the expression τ . βαθέα τ . σατ . should be conceived of as a self-chosen designation of Gnostic erroneous doctrine concerning the “rest,”[1270] so that οὐκ ἔγνωσαν and ὡς λέγουσιν have the same subject, or whether the Nicolaitan Gnostics are to be regarded as the subject to ὡς λέγουσιν , so that the expression τὰ βαθέα τ . σατ . is used either entirely as it sounds in the sense of these Gnostics,[1271] or according to the analogy of the designation συναγωγὴ τοῦ σατανᾶ , Rev_2:9, as a sarcastic transformation of the Gnostic expression concerning the depths; viz., as they say, of the Deity, but as it is rather in fact meant, of Satan.[1272] But if, in the former sense, the entire formula τὰ βαθέα τοῦ σατανᾶ were to be understood as one in itself peculiar to the Gnostics ( ὡς κεγ .), it must also be shown how it was used by them; but this does not occur. Hence the view commends itself, that the expression τὰ βαθέα τ . σατ . is to be conceived of from the Christian standpoint. At the same time it appears far more forcible if the Gnostics themselves be regarded as the subject to ὡς λέγουσιν with respect to the chief idea τὰ βαθέα , while the further determination of τοῦ σατανᾶ is made prominent, in that the question in fact is not concerning divine depths,[1273] nor divine mysteries,[1274] but the depths of Satan, as if this judgment were put in the mouths of believers at Thyatira who remained faithful, and they therefore are regarded as the subject to the ὡς λέγουσιν .
To the rest at Thyatira the Lord now says, οὐ βάλλω
ἥξω . The expression ἄλλο βάρος has been understood in two chief respects, but with very different modifications of exposition; viz., either of the burden of suffering and punishment, or of the burden of a law. The norm furnished by the context, for the explanation of an expression in itself ambiguous, lies in the words πλὴν ὃ εχ ., κ . τ . λ ., which in no way contain the condition of the promise οὐ βάλλω ἐρʼ ὑμ . ἄλλο βάρ [1275] but a certain limitation ( πλήν ) of the preceding promise, as the πλήν is correlate to ἄλλο . If now in the words Rev_2:25, the manifestation of Christian steadfastness in faith is required, and therefore a certain incessant legal determination is made or established, the result is that every ἄλλο βάρος must likewise be a burden of the law, which, just because it reaches farther than the limitation indicated in the closing words (Rev_2:25), should not be laid upon believers. If now it be considered that the question at issue was with respect to fornication and the eating of sacrifices made to idols, and that just in respect to this the ancient church at the Synod of Jerusalem, under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, made a definite decision, but declined all going beyond this as an intolerable burden,[1276] we could not recognize hence a clear allusion to that decree; and accordingly explain the ἄλλο βάρος of any sort of legal limitation of the holy freedom of believers, which proceeds beyond the commandment hitherto faithfully preserved by them.[1277] The ὃ ἔχετε , nevertheless, is not directly the formerly recognized and still faithfully observed prohibition to avoid fornication and the eating of what is sacrificed to idols; but the expression in its indefinite extent includes the idea that because believers have been faithful in opposition to the Nicolaitans, just in their obedience they have also had their reward, viz., the blessing of eternal life, and therefore should hold fast to this treasure,[1278] while they bear still further the burden of that commandment which was hitherto borne. If the ἄλλο βάρος , therefore, be understood of the burden of suffering, it can be explained only, with De Wette: “No other sorrow than you bear or have borne already.” For we must infer from the mention of the ὑπομονή , Rev_2:19, that suffering was already borne; while, in case this reference were to ἂλλο βάρος , a more definite allusion to suffering previously endured would be expected. Incorrectly, Heinr.: “Punishment because of another’s fault.” Incorrectly, Grot.: “They boast of the knowledge of many things; this I do not exact of you,” as though the gnosis were the ἄλλο βάρος . Incorrectly, Beng. (whom Klief. follows): “As they had borne the burden of Jezebel and her followers sufficiently.”
[1269] “If, in good faith, you ask them a question, they answer, with stern look and contracted brow, that ‘it is deep.’ ” Tertull., Adv. Valent., i.—“Who say that they have come to the depths of the depth.” Iren., Adv. Haer., ii. 38, 1. Pref.: βαθέα μυστήρια , “deep mysteries.”
[1270] Andr., Areth., Heinr., Züllig, Stern, Ebrard.
[1271] Neander, Apost. Zeitalt, 3d ed. ii. p. 532. Hengstenb., Gebhardt, Klief.
[1272] So Vitr.: “The ὡς λέγουσιν is to be referred absolutely to the τὰ βαθέα .” The word “of Satan” is added by the Lord himself.
[1273] Cf. 1Co_2:10; Rom_11:33.
[1274] Iren., Adv. Haer., i. 1, ii. 39, 48.
[1275] Ebrard.
[1276] Act_15:28.
[1277] Cf. Primas, N. de Lyra, C. a Lap., Stern, Hengstenb. Cf. also Ew. ii.
[1278] Cf. Rev_3:11.