v.6 “In the historical context of a proud and powerful Roman Empire, for John to call God ‘the Almighty’ is an act of extreme confidence.  Domitian had conferred upon himself the title ‘Our Lord and God’ (Duetonius, Dom. 13).  Literally the word means one who holds all things in his control.  Nine times in Revelation the Seer uses it of God, while only once is it found elsewhere in the NT.  The multitude declares that this all-powerful being who has entered into his reign is a personal God – he is the Lord our God.”[2]

v.7 “The bride is the heavenly city, the New Jerusalem (21:2, 9), which is the symbol of the church, the bride of Christ the community of those redeemed by Christ’s blood. The wedding imagery, including the wedding supper, was for the Jews a familiar image of the kingdom of God. Jesus used wedding and banquet imagery in his parables of the kingdom (Matt 22:2 ff.; 25:1-13; Luke 14:15-24). The OT used the figure for the bride of Israel (Ezek 16:1 ff.; Hos 2:19), and NT writers have applied it to the church (2Cor 11:2; Eph 5:25 ff.). Heaven’s rejoicing has signaled the defeat of all the enemies of God. The time of betrothal has ended. Now it is the time for the church, prepared by loyalty, and suffering, to enter into her full experience of salvation and glory with her beloved spouse, Christ.”[3]

v.8 “The bride is attired in fine linen, bright and pure.  In contrast, the harlot was arrayed in purple and scarlet, adorned with gold, jewels, and pearls.  The following clause explains that the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints.  The plural (‘acts’) may indicate that the bride’s garment is woven of the innumerable acts of faithful obedience by those who endure to the end.  This does not deny the Pauline doctrine of justification based on the righteous obedience of Christ (Rom. 5:18-19), but suggests that a transformed life is the proper response to the call of the heavenly bridegroom.  Note that it was given to her to array herself in righteous acts: believers are created for divinely prepared good words (Eph 2:10).”[4]

v.9 “This beatitude is the fourth of seven (1:3; 14:13; 16:15; 19:9; 20:6; 22:7, 14) in Revelation. In each beatitude there is a subtle contrast to those who are not loyal and faithful followers of the Lamb […] The wedding supper began toward evening on the wedding day, lasted for many days, and was a time of great jubilation. Here in Revelation, the wedding is the beginning of the earthly kingdom of God, the bride is the church in all her purity, and the invited guests are both the bride and people who have committed themselves to Jesus.  To assure John and his readers of the certainty of the end of the great prostitute and the announcement of the wedding supper of the Lamb, the angel adds, ‘These are the true words of God’ (cf. 1:2; 17:17; 21:5). A similar sentence later seems to give the same assurance for the whole book (22:6).”[5]

v.10 “The angel links himself with John by calling himself a fellow servant with you.  There are not unimportant differences between angels and men, but the really significant thing is that they are both ‘servants’ of their common Lord.”[6]

v.11 “The white horse reminds the hearer-reader of the first apocalyptic horseman of 6:2, the two images thus bracketing the intervening depiction of the last plagues, but the rider on the white horse of 19:11-16 is not to be identified with that of 6:1-2.  Here, there can be no doubt that the figure is Jesus: he has the same flaming eyes as in the vision of Christ in 1:14, the same sword of the word of God proceeds from his mouth (1:16; 2:12), he is named by the same names as in his messages to the churches (‘Faithful and True,’ 3:14; cf. 1:5), he bears the name of the definitive self-revelation of God, ‘Word of God.’”[7]

“Though John uses OT language descriptive of a warrior-Messiah, he does not depict Christ as a great military warrior battling against earth’s sovereigns. John reinterprets this OT imagery while at the same time inseparably linking Christ to its fulfillment. The close proximity in v. 11 of justice and war shows us that the kind of warfare Christ engages in is more the execution of justice than a military conflict. He who is the faithful and true witness will judge the rebellious nations.”[8]

vv.12, 16 “The first thing that John records about the Rider of the white horse is that his eyes are a flame of fire.  Nothing can be hidden from the penetrating gaze of Messiah.  Upon his head are many diadems (royal crown).  Here is an obvious contrast to the seven diadems of the dragon (12:3) and the ten diadems of the beast out of the sea (13:1).  Many crowns indicate unlimited sovereignty.  As King of kings all authority is his.”[9]

vv.13, 15 “This militaristic imagery has seemed to some Christians to be too alien to be applied to Jesus of Nazareth, the Prince of Peace (Isa. 9:6; cf. Matt. 21:1-9).  Yet, though not all of his interpreters have remembered, John has not forgotten the definitive picture of the nature of Christ’s conquest already given in 5:1-14.  The death by which he conquers is his own, the once-for-all offering of his life on the cross.  John uses all of the traditional messianic imagery, but he consistently asks the hearer-reader to interpret the Lion as the lamb, as he himself does, even in this bloody scene.  This conqueror destroys his enemies, not with a literal sword, but with the sword of this mouth; his only weapon is his word, the Word of God which he himself is (19:13).  The word for ‘rule’ (9:15), also means ‘shepherd,’ evoking both Psalm 23 and Rev. 7:17, ‘the Lamb will be their shepherd,’ which uses exactly the same word.  The conquering rider arrives wearing a garment dipped in blood.  Before the ‘last battle’ ever begins, his garments are already bloody with his sacrifice of himself (1:5; 5:9).  In contrast to the divine warrior of Isaiah 63:1-3, the source for this imagery, this blood is not the blood of his enemies but his own martyr blood in union with the martyr blood of his followers who, like him, have suffered/testified at the hands of Rome.  This is the meaning of the fact that he treads the winepress of God’s wrath.  This view that the eschatological Divine Warrior is red with his own blood rather than that of his enemies […] is analogous to the idea that Christians wash their garments and make them white in the blood of the Lamb (7:14).”[10]

vv.17-18 “The supper of God presents a grim contrast to the marriage feast of the Lamb.  It is the supper of God in the sense that God will provide it.  The ranks of the enemy are composed not only of kings and captains, but of all men, free and bond, small and great.  Beasley-Murray correctly observes that ‘all men’ here indicates ‘all kinds of men’.  In the final conflict no preference will be given to rank or station.  The bodies will lie on the field of battle to be devoured by birds of prey.  To remain unburied for the pleasure of predators was considered by the ancients to be an ignominious fate.  The scene is one of universal dishonor and destruction.”[11]

v.19-21 “Christ and his heavenly army are on the one side, opposed on the other side by two combined groups.  (1) Opposed to Christ are rebellious human beings – not just the ‘high and mighty,’ but also the little people, even slaves (19:18; cf. same motif in 6:15; 13:16).  Revelation’s protest is more than the sociological reality of oppressed people resenting their oppressors.  Though John and his community belong to the marginal, relatively powerless victims of injustice at the hands of the powerful, the conflict he pictures is not between haves and have-nots, first and second versus third world, oppressors versus oppressed but between rebellious humanity and its Creator and Lord.  (2) The primary opposition is not the historical, finite, this-worldly human community but the transpersonal powers of evil that have inspired and deceived them, as symbolized by the beast and false prophet.  Both groups are ‘defeated’ by Jesus the Conqueror, but in different ways.  No battle is described; there could be none in John’s theology.  The decisive battle was won long ago.  The End only makes that victory effective and manifest.  Without a struggle, in a manner reminiscent of the messianic king of Isaiah 11:1-5, the transcendent powers of evil are taken and cast into the transcendent place of destruction, the lake of fire (19:20).”[12]

[2] Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1977) 339.

[3] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for chapter 19.

[4] Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1977) 340.

[5] Frank E. Gaebelein. Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for chapter 19.

[6] Leon Morris, Revelation,  Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 222.

[7] M. Eugene Boring, Revelation, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville, KT: John Knox Press, 1989) 195.

[8] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for chapter 19.

[9] Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1977) 344.

[10] M. Eugene Boring, Revelation, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville, KT: John Knox Press, 1989) 196.

[11] Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1977) 349.

[12] M. Eugene Boring, Revelation, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville, KT: John Knox Press, 1989) 199-200.

v. 3 “Merchants in the Roman empire grew rich by exploiting the sinful pleasures of their society.”[2]

“Economic security would be removed from Babylon’s subjects if they did not cooperate with her idolatry.  Such security is too great a temptation to resist.  Therefore the verb ‘drank’ refers to the willingness of society in the Roman Empire to commit itself to idolatry in order to maintain economic security.  Once one imbibes, the intoxicating influence removes all desire to resist Babylon’s destructive influence, blinds one to Babylon’s own ultimate insecurity and to God as the source of real security, and numbs one against any fear of coming judgment.  Therefore Babylon will be judged because of her seduction of people into idolatry and false economic security.”[3]

vv. 4-7 “Come out of her, my people […] Even in its OT setting, this was no mere warning to leave the actual city of Babylon, much less here in Revelation […] Wherever there are idolatry, prostitution, self-glorification, self-sufficiency, pride, complacency, reliance on luxury and wealth, avoidance of suffering, violence against life (v.24), there is Babylon. Christians are to separate themselves ideologically and physically from all the forms of Babylon (chs. 2-3).[…]Babylon’s threefold web of sin is described as satiety (‘luxury’), pride (‘boasts, I sit as a queen’), and avoidance of suffering (‘I will never mourn’). These three may be interrelated. Luxury leads to boastful self-sufficiency (Eze 28:5), while the desire to avoid suffering leads to the dishonest pursuit of luxury (Eze 28:18).”[4]

vv. 4-5 “Persecuted and harried as they were, the people of God must have been sorely tempted to come to terms with the city. Then not only would their persecution cease, but the city would make them rich and comfortable… Compromise with worldliness is fatal. Gods people must, while playing their full role in the community, hold themselves aloof from what is involved in being worldly-minded.”[5]

v. 8 “Four plagues are singled out. Death, of course, should end everything. The meaning may be that, though some die in the city, the city continues for a time […] With this are linked mourning, famine, and fire. Together this means disaster for the city and this will certainly happen, for mighty is the Lord God who judges her.”[6]

v.9 “The close connection between idolatry and economic prosperity was a fact of life in Asia Minor of John’s time, where allegiance to both Caesar and the patron gods of the trade guilds was essential for people to maintain good standing in their trades….[The rulers] lament over Babylon’s desolation because it means their own loss of economic standing and power.”[7]

vv. 11-13 “The merchants wail. They have most to lose because Babylon the Great was built on luxury. The lists that follow are inventories of exotic items reminiscent of the great Oriental marketplaces. In v.13 bodies and souls of men requires special mention: Bodies is a Greek idiom for slaves, while souls means essentially persons. Thus the whole expression means ‘slaves, that is, human beings.’”[8]

“The vision (particularly 18:13) gives a reader a glimpse of how the wealth of Babylon has been gained at the expense of millions. Luxury items here gravitate to the center to supply an insatiable need. Those on the periphery become merely the means of supplying the needs of others. John’s vision is an evocation of the consequences of a narcissistic social order, in which everything revolves around the needs of a demanding upper class that makes itself the center of the universe and preserves that position by force, ideology, and demands for conformity.”[9]

v. 20 “Babylon has also persecuted the church of Jesus (saints, apostles, prophets). Regarding apostles, John may have had in mind Herod’s martyrdom of James (Ac 12:1-2) or Rome’s killing of Peter and Paul (cf. v.24).”[10]

“The call to rejoice at the destruction of the city appals [sic] some modern students. But we should notice in the first place that this is not a vindictive outcry. It is a longing that justice be done. And in the second, John and his readers were not armchair critics pedantically discussing rights and wrongs in an academic fashion. They were existentially committed. They had staked their lives on the truth of the Christian faith […] The words are a passionate cry uttered out of the deep conviction that right must triumph and which eagerly welcomes that triumph.[11]

v. 21. “The final lament over the fall of Babylon, spoken by an angel, is poignant and beautiful. A mighty angel picks up a huge stone like a giant millstone (four to five feet in diameter, one foot thick, and weighing thousands of pounds) and flings it into the sea. One quick gesture becomes a parable of the whole judgment on Babylon the Great! Suddenly she is gone forever (cf. Jer 51:64; Eze 26:21), leaving only melancholy behind.”[12]

v. 24 “the blood . . . of all who have been killed on the earth refers to all those who have been martyred because of their loyalty to the true God. Once again, in John’s mind, Babylon the Great encompasses all the persecution against the servants of God until his words are fulfilled (cf. 17:17).”[13]

“Possession of wealth is not the reason for God’s judgment of Babylon.  The cause lies, rather, in ‘the arrogant use of it’ and trust in the security that it brings, which is tantamount to idolatry.”[14]

[2] Life Application Study Bible, study notes (co-published by Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan; Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1991) 2326.

[3] G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 896.

[4] Frank E. Gaebelein,  Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for chapter 18.

[5] Leon Morris, Revelation,  Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 209.

[6] Leon Morris, Revelation,  Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 211.

[7] G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 905.

[8] Frank E. Gaebelein. Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for chapter 18.

[9] Christopher C. Rowland,  “The Book of Revelation”,  New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998) 696.

[10] Frank E. Gaebelein,  Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for chapter 18.

[11] Leon Morris,  Revelation,  Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 215-216.

[12] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for chapter 18.

[13] Frank E. Gaebelein,  Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for chapter 18.

[14] G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 925.

v.1 “The great prostitute ‘sits on many waters.’ This goes back to Jeremiah’s oracle against historical Babylon, situated along the waterways of the Euphrates, with many canals around the city, greatly multiplying its wealth by trade (Jer 51:13). This description has a deeper significance, as is explained in v.15 with ‘peoples, multitudes, nations and languages’–figurative for the vast influence of the prostitute on the peoples of the world.” [2]

v.4 “Dressed in queenly attire (Eze 16:13; cf. Rev 18:7), the woman rides the beast, swinging in her hand a golden cup full of her idolatrous abominations and wickedness. Note the contrast–beauty and gross wickedness. Her costly and attractive attire suggests the prostitute’s outward beauty and attraction (Jer 4:30). The golden cup filled with wine alludes to Jeremiah’s description of Babylon’s world-wide influence in idolatry (Jer 51:7). Her cup is filled with ‘abominable things’[…] –things most frequently associated with idolatry, which was abhorrent to Jews and Christians alike (21:27). Jesus used this word to refer to Daniel’s ‘abomination that causes desolation’ standing in the temple (Mk 13:14 cf. Da 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). ‘Filth’ (lit., ‘uncleannesses’; GK G176) is associated in the NT with evil (unclean) spirits (e.g., Mt 10:1; 12:43) and with idolatry (2Co 6:17), perhaps with cult prostitution (Eph 5:5).”

v.5 “The woman has a title written on her forehead, showing that in spite of all her royal [attire]  she is nothing but a prostitute. It was customary for Roman prostitutes to wear their names in the fillet that encircled their brows.”[3]

v.6 “Throughout history, people have been killed for their faith.  Over the last century, millions have been killed by oppressive governments, and many of those victims were believers.  The woman’s drunkenness shows her pleasure in her evil accomplishments and her false feeling of triumph over the church.  But every martyr who has fallen before her sword has only served to strengthen the faith of the church.”[4]

v.8 “Much difficulty in interpreting this section has resulted from incorrectly applying John’s words either to the Roman emperor succession (the seven heads), to the Nero redivivus[5] myth, or to a succession of world empires. None of these views is satisfactory. John’s description is theological, not political. He describes a reality behind earth’s sovereigns, not the successive manifestations in history.  The beast is the monster from the Abyss–i.e., the satanic incarnation of idolatrous power that is mentioned in 11:7 and described in 13:1ff., and whose destruction is seen in 19:19-20. John is told that the beast ‘once was, now is not, and will come up out of the Abyss.’ This seems clearly to be a paraphrase of the earlier idea of the sword-wounded beast who was healed (13:3, 14); the language is similar, the astonishment of the world’s inhabitants is identical, and the threefold emphasis on this spectacular feature is repeated (13:3, 12, 14; 17:8 bis, 11).”[6]

v.9 “This and the following verses form the key of the Roman emperor view of the Apocalypse. Most scholars consider the seven hills to refer to the seven hills of Rome and the seven kings to seven successive emperors of that nation. Yet there is good reason to doubt that this is the interpretation John intended. In the first place, the seven hills belong to the monster, not the woman. It is the woman (i.e., the city [v.18]) who sits upon (i.e., has mastery over) the seven heads (or seven hills) of the monster. If the woman is the city of Rome, it is obvious that she did not exercise mastery over seven successive Roman emperors that are also seven traditional hills of Rome. Also, how could the seven hills of Rome have any real importance to the diabolical nature of the beast or the woman? Finally, nowhere in the NT is Rome described as the enemy of the church.  This interpretation also explains the meaning of John’s call ‘for a mind with wisdom.’ The call for divine ‘wisdom’ requires theological and symbolical discernment, not mere geographical or numerical insight (cf. comment on 13:18).  In the seven other instances in Revelation of the word translated ‘hills’ here, it is always rendered ‘mountain.’ Mountains allegorically refer to world powers in the Prophets (Isa 2:2; Jer 51:25; Da 2:35; Zec 4:7). It seems better, then, to interpret the seven mountains as a reference to the seven heads or kings, which describe not the city but the beast. In addition, the expression ‘they are also seven kings’ requires strict identification of the seven mountains with seven kings.”[7]

v.10 “A convincing interpretation of the seven kings must do justice to three considerations: (1) Since the heads belong to the beast, the interpretation must relate their significance to this beast, not to Babylon. (2) Since the primary imagery of kingship in Revelation is a feature of the power conflict between the Lamb and the beast and between those who share the rule of these two enemies (cf. 17:14; 19:19), the kind of sovereignty expressed in v.10 must be the true antithesis to the kind of sovereignty exercised by Christ and his followers. (3) Since the kings are closely related to the seven mountains and to the prostitute, the nature of the relationship between these must be clarified by the interpretation. If we can see that the seven heads do not represent a quantitative measure but show qualitatively the fullness of evil power residing in the beast, then the falling of five heads conveys the message of a significant victory over the beast. The image of a sovereignty falling is better related to God’s judgment on a power than to a succession of kings (kingdoms) (cf. Jer 50:32; 51:8, 49; Rev 14:8; 18:2). The imagery of the seven heads presented in 12:3 and 13:1 must be restudied. An ancient seal showing a seven-headed chaos monster being slain well illustrates John’s imagery here. In that ancient scene, the seven-headed monster is being slain by a progressive killing of its seven heads. Four of the heads are dead, killed apparently by the spear of a divine figure who is attacking the monster. His defeat seems imminent. Yet the chaos monster is still active because three heads still live. Similarly, John’s message is that five of the monster’s seven heads are already defeated by the power of the Lamb’s death and by the identification in that death of the martyrs of Jesus (12:11). One head is now active, thus showing the reality of the beast’s contemporary agents who afflict the saints; and one head remains, indicating that the battle will soon be over but not with the defeat of the contemporary evil agents. This last manifestation of the beast’s blasphemous power will be short—‘he must remain for a little while.’ This statement seems to go with the function of the ten horns (kings) who for ‘one hour’ (v. 12) will rule with the beast. The seventh king (head) represents the final short display of satanic evil before the divine blow falls on the beast (cf. 12:12c; 20:3 c).”[8]

v.11 “This verse presents all interpreters with a real difficulty. One interpretation refers the language to the Nero redivivus myth (see comments on 13:1-18)–namely, that a revived Nero will be the reincarnation of the evil genius of the whole Roman Empire. Furthermore, among futurist interpreters there is no agreement as to whether the seventh or the eighth king is the Antichrist. […] we note the strange (to us) manner in which the sequence of seven kings gives way to the eighth, which is really the whole beast. This pattern of seven-to-eight-equals-one was familiar to the early church. The eighth day was the day of the resurrection of Christ, Sunday. It was also the beginning of a new week. The seventh day, the Jewish Sabbath, is held over, to be replaced by the first of a new series, namely Sunday. In fact, the whole theme of the Apocalypse is integrally related to this idea. Sunday is the day of the Resurrection. Revelation deals with one week, extending from Christ’s resurrection to the general resurrection, when death is destroyed.  Each of the series of sevens in the book, except for the seven churches, follows a pattern of the seventh in the series becoming the first of a new series; thus seven to eight equals one. The eighth was the day of the Messiah, the day of the new age and the sign of the victory over the forces of evil. But does this provide a key to interpret the symbolism of the chaos monster? Of the three stages of the beast–was, is not, will come–only the last is related to his coming ‘up out of the Abyss’ (v.8). These words appear to be the equivalent of the beast’s healed wound (plague) mentioned in 13:3, 14. While, on the one hand, Christ has [overcome]  the monster by his death (Ge 3:15; Rev 12:7-9) and for believers he ‘is not’ (has no power), yet, on the other hand, the beast still has life (‘one is’ [v.10]) and will attempt one final battle against the Lamb and his followers (‘the other has not yet come . . . he must remain for a little while’). In order to recruit as many as possible for his side of the war, the beast will imitate the resurrection of Christ (he ‘is an eighth king’ [v.11]) and will give the appearance that he is alive and in control of the world (cf. Lk 4:5-7). But John quickly adds, for the pastoral comfort of God’s people, that the beast belongs to the seven, i.e., qualitatively not numerically (as if he were a former king revived); he is in reality not a new beginning of life (such as the resurrected Christ) but a part of the seven-headed monster that has been slain by Christ and, therefore, he goes ‘to his destruction.’”[9]

v.12 “The number ten should–like most of John’s numbers–be understood symbolically. Ten symbolizes a repeated number of times or an indefinite number. It is perhaps another number like seven, indicating fullness (Ne 4:12; Da 1:12; Rev 2:10). Thus the number should not be understood as referring specifically to ten kings (kingdoms) but as indicating the multiplicity of sovereignties in confederacy that enhance the power of the beast.  Since these kings enter into a power conflict with the Lamb and his followers (v.14), the kind of sovereignty they exercise must be the true antithesis of the kind of sovereignty the Lamb and his followers exercise. These rulers as well as the beast with which they are allied can be no other than the principalities and powers, the rulers of the darkness of this world, the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms that Paul describes as the true enemies of Jesus’ followers (Eph 6:12).”[10]

v.14 “The ten kings are said to receive authority for ‘one hour’ along with the beast. This corresponds to the ‘little while’ of the seventh king. From the viewpoint of the saints, who will be greatly persecuted, this promise of brevity brings comfort. These kings have ‘one purpose’ : they agree to oppose the Lamb. But the Lamb will overcome them because he is Lord of lords and King of kings (cf. Dt 10:17; Da 2:47; Rev 19:16). He conquers by his death, and those who are with him also aid in the defeat of the beast by their loyalty to the Lamb even to death (cf. 5:5, 9; 12:11).”[11]

vv.16-17 “What is being taught by the attack on the prostitute is that in the final judgment the kingdom of Satan will be divided against itself. The references to the prostitute being hated by her former lovers, stripped naked, and burned with fire are reminiscent of the OT prophets’ descriptions of the divine judgment falling on the harlot cities of Jerusalem and Tyre (e.g., Eze 16:39-40; 23:25-27; 28:18). The description of the punishment of convicted prostitutes who are priests’ daughters (cf. Lev 21:9) is combined with the picture of judgment against rebellious cities (18:8).  In the declaration ‘God has put it into their hearts to accomplish his purpose,’ there is another indication of God’s use of the forces of evil as instruments of his own purposes of judgment (Jer 25:9-14; cf. Lk 20:18). Nothing will distract them from their united effort to destroy the prostitute until God’s purposes given through the prophets are fulfilled (cf. 10:7; 11:18).”[12]

v.18 “The ‘woman’ and ‘the great city’ are one. Yet this city is not just a historical one; it is the great city, the mother city, the archetype of every evil system opposed to God in history (see comments on 17:1-18). Her kingdom holds sway over the powers of the earth. The cities in Revelation are communities, of which there are only two: the city of God, the New Jerusalem (3:12; 21:2, 10; 22:2ff.), and the city of Satan, Babylon the Great (11:8; 14:8; 16:19; 18:4, 20; et al.). The meaning cannot be confined to any earthly cities. Instead, John describes the real trans-historical system of satanic evil that infuses them all.”[13]

[2] Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994) notes for Revelation 17:1.

[3] Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994) notes for Revelation 17:5.

[4] The NIV Study Bible, study notes  (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1985)  1927.

[5] redivivus: brought back to life (Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary v.2.5 software)

[6] Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994) notes for Revelation 17:8.

[7] Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994) notes for Revelation 17:9.

[8] Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994) notes for Revelation 17:10.

[9] Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994) notes for Revelation 17:11.

[10] Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994) notes for Revelation 17:12.

[11] Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994) notes for Revelation 17:14.

[12] Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994) notes for Revelation 17:16-17.

[13] Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994) notes for Revelation 17:18.

“Chapters 15 and 16 are one unit; preaching and teaching from any text in this unit should consider the function of the unit as a whole. The seven last plagues are announced in 15:1, and the last plague is referred to in 16:21. Although the action proceeds by pouring out the ‘bowls/plagues’ on the earth, God in his wrath/justice is the theologically operative image. When the last plague occurs, this time there is no ‘canceled conclusion.’ The ‘It is over’ of 16:17 (NEB) is final. This series concludes with the fall of Babylon/Rome, which is the end of history; the next scene will introduce eschaton itself.”

“This text, like the rest of Revelation, provides a graphic model of spiritual warfare for us: we overcome by being physically defeated, by enduring the world’s suffering. The conquerors provide us a model of unwavering faithfulness to God and to his purposes. ‘The Beast has conquered them in martyrdom but in that same martyrdom they had conquered the Beast, for he had been utterly unable to make them deny Christ. This is their victory: loyalty to Christ in tribulation.’

“For Christians struggling against the imperial cult in John’s day or subsequent forces of the Antichrist in history, ‘this song affords great encouragement. The last word of history is not with Satan and his Antichrist, but with the Lord and his Christ.’ The Church has nothing to fear, in this age as well as the age to come, for God reigns forever (or, over all peoples, depending on which variant reading one prefers). As Ladd puts it, ‘Even when evil is strongest on the earth, when God’s people are most violently attacked by Satan, God is still the ‘King of the ages’ (Rev. 15:3).’

“Like Israel in the Exodus, God’s people will again triumph; the certainty of the new redemption is rooted in our confidence in the old one. For John, the songs of Moses and the Lamb were not two separate songs, as if Old Testament redemption and New Testament redemption were discontinuous and incompatible ideas. Jesus as the Lamb has provided the climatic act of redemption, akin to the paschal lamb of the first Exodus, so the song of Moses is also the song of the Lamb. That the overcomers stand on the sea (15:2) may indicate afresh the triumph of the Exodus that subdued even the sea (Ex. 15:8; Ps. 78:13; 89:9-10).”

v.1 “The bowls, like the seals and the trumpets, are administered by angels. But John makes it clear that what he sees is a symbolic portrayal of judgments; like the woman and the dragon, this scene of angels preparing to pour out bowls is a ‘sign’ in the heavens (12:1, 3; 15:1). Thus when he declares that these seven plagues are the ‘last plagues,’ completing God’s anger, he probably does not imply that Revelation arranges all judgments in literal chronological sequence (though this book does emphasize completion of God’s purposes; 10:7; 11:7). Rather, ‘last’ implies that these bowls begin John’s final sequence of judgments. They are the last in terms of John’s narrative – based on the sequence of his visions rather than on the sequence of history. Note that in 15:1, 8, the completion of these plagues forms an inclusio around the entire scene of heaven in 15:1-8, thereby framing this section with an emphasis on the plagues.”

v.2 “A ‘sea’ appears in John’s vision, the same heavenly sea as 4:6. Beside the sea stands the congregation of those who have conquered, the victorious martyr church of 7:1-8 and 14:1-5 (identified by their rejecting the mark of the beast and by their harps). As the congregation is the 144,000 of the new Israel, so the sea is the sea of the transcendent world before God’s throne and also the Red Sea of biblical memory. As Israel once stood on the banks of the Red Sea and celebrated God’s liberating act of the exodus, the church will stand on the shore of the heavenly sea and sing the song of Moses and the Lamb.”

vv. 3-4 “At the Red sea, God’s people celebrated after the fact; in Revelation, the final victory is not yet realized (on earth) but is already accomplished and celebrated in heaven, the ultimately real world, and can thus already be celebrated in this world, where the worship of the earthly church participates in the worship of the heavenly sanctuary. The juxtaposition of songs of celebration with scenes of terrible judgment is thus not gleeful gloating, but neither is it merely a promise of future celebration. The message is not that ‘now is the time of trouble, but someday we will be able to celebrate.’ Rather, Christian worship anticipates the eschatological victory and celebrates it in the present. Christian worship, especially its eucharistic dimension, points ‘backward’ to the past and understands the present in its light (the ‘new exodus’), points ‘forward’ to the future victory and celebrates its reality in the present, and points ‘upward’ to the transcendent reality of God’s world, participating in the worship of the heavenly sanctuary that unites past, future, and present.”

v. 3 “Their song is the ‘song of Moses…and the song of the Lamb,’ recalling the Exodus both in terms of Moses’ leading out of Egypt (cf. 11:8) and deliverance from God’s plagues by the blood of the Passover lamb. Some compare the song with Moses’ song in Deuteronomy 31:30-32:43, which may in fact originate some of the imagery employed by later prophets and Revelation. […] Israel sang this song, led by Moses and summarized antiphonally by Miriam (Ex. 15:21), when God brought his people through the Red Sea and destroyed their enemies, the Egyptians. As God conquered Egypt in the sea, there figuratively slaying the primeval dragon (Ps. 74:13-14; Isa. 51:9), so here the 144,000 are the people of the new exodus, delivered and standing as conquerors on the sea of glass and fire. This song proved a fitting climax for the plagues on Egypt of old or Revelations equivalent (11:8), from which the righteous were shielded (7:1-8).”

vv.5-8 “The tabernacle of Testimony is a Greek translation for the Hebrew ‘Tent of Meeting’ (see Exodus 40:34, 35). The imagery brings us back to the time of the exodus in the desert when the ark of the covenant (the symbol of God’s presence among his people) resided in the tabernacle. The angels coming out of the temple are clothed in clean, shining linen with golden sashes around their chests. Their garments, reminiscent of the high priest’s clothing, show that they are free from corruption, immorality, and injustice. The smoke that fills the temple is the manifestation of God’s glory and power. There is no escape from this judgment.”

vv.5-8 “As with the judgments of the seals (5:1-2) and the trumpets (8:2), the plagues from the bowls (16:1-17) are introduced with a scene in heaven (15:5-8), reminding us that earthly disasters are not merely accidents, but methodically arranged events determined by God’s sovereign vindication of his saints. These angels of judgment, in contrast to destroying angels in some strands of Jewish tradition, are willingly obedient servants of God (cf. 17:1, 21:9); it is a throne angel that hands them the judgments to pour out on humankind (15:7).

“That this scene takes place in the heavenly temple is significant. The angels’ linen clothing (15:6) may simply reflect the tradition that angels normally wore white or linen (1 En. 71:1; Ps-Philo 9:10; John 20:12), but alongside the mention of golden breastplates (cf. Ex. 39:8; probably Rev. 1:13) undoubtedly reminds the reader that these angels fulfill priestly acts in the heavenly temple (15:5-6). Worshipers in temples normally wore linen or white, and this was required for service in the Most Holy Place (Lev. 16:4). The prerequisite for such service was righteousness (Rev. 19:8). Priests in the heavenly temple respond to the earthly priests (1:6) of the oppressed earthly temple (11:1-2), whose prayers (6:9-11; 8:3-6) have invited the judgments about to begin.

“That ‘smoke’ filled the heavenly temple (15:8, note contrast with the smoke of the world’s torment in 14:11) alludes to God’s glory filling his house in some Old Testament theophanies (Isa. 6:4; Ezek. 10:3-4). Under these circumstances the priests could not minister in the temple (1 Kings 8:10-12; 2 Chron. 7:2), nor could even Moses enter the tabernacle (Ex. 40:35); the glory exceeded human ability to withstand. God had filled the earthly tabernacle with his glory at this dedication and a time of celebration (Ex. 40; cf. 1 Kings 8); now he fills the temple with glory in response to the worship of his martyred conquerors through history, and responds with systematic judgments (probably also poured out throughout history). Judgment, as well as mercy, reveals God’s great glory.”

v.7 “The word used for the ‘bowls’ of divine anger (phiale, 15:7; 16:1-17:1; 21:9) is also used for the bowls that contained the prayers of the saints (5:8), suggesting a connection between the saints’ intercession and their vindication through the world’s judgments, as with the trumpet plagues (8:3-5). Probably these bowls, like those in 5:8, contain incense representing the prayers of the saints; it is also possible that the image here implies cups of judgment leading up to the final judgment of the wine cup of God’s anger (14:10, 19-20). That the judgments in this passage issue from God’s presence and follow worship by the conquering martyrs (15:2-4) probably implies that God has chosen to release his acts in history in response to the worship of faithful saints.”

vv.1-5 Who are the 144,000? “That the 144,000 are those ‘redeemed’ (14:3) and ‘purchased’ (14:4; both forms of the same Greek word, agorazo) from the earth and from among humanity reminds us that they stand for all believers (5:9). That the Lamb bought them more than makes up for the fact that, a few verses earlier, they could neither buy nor sell (13:17). That they are the ones who ‘follow the Lamb’ (14:4) supports the position that they represent all believers’ (7:17); in this life they are the people led by the Spirit (John 16:13; Rom. 8:14). John’s audience will also understand that following the Lamb may mean following him to his sacrificial death (John 13:36-37; 21:19-22; Rev. 6:9).”[1]

v.1 “There is an obvious contrast with the previous vision, where those who worship the beast are marked (13:16).  But a name is written on the foreheads of the 144,000 – not just a mark.  What is written is important, even sacred, not only because it is the means of signifying that which is of God, but also because it is the name of God (cf. 22:4).”[2]

v.3 “Why do the 144,000 sing this ‘new song’? They are probably portrayed as God’s end-time army and have just overcome the world. It was customary for victors to celebrate after holy war (2 Chron. 20:27-28). Here, however, the saints praise God for the victory of the Lamb (as in Rev. 5:6-14; 7:9-12), just as the Israelites praised God when he overthrew their enemies in the Red Sea (Ex. 15:1-21; cf. comment on Rev. 15:2-4). This new song is their unique experience shared by no one else in creation (14:3), just as believers have a new name known to no one else (2:17; 3:12).”[3]

vv.4-5 “Just as biblical prophets often portrayed Israel as either an unfaithful prostitute or as a pure virgin or bride for God, so Revelation portrays unrepentant humanity as a prostitute (Rev. 17:1-5) and those faithful to Christ as his pure spouse (19:7; 21:2, 9). These 144,000 have refused to commit immorality with Babylon, the prostitute (cf. 18:3). The symbolism thus makes a strong point: Christians must be pure and faithful to Christ if they wish to be prepared for and engage in the Lamb’s holy war. Unlike the world (13:17), believers cannot indulge in divided interests.”[4]

vv.6-13 “First, a warning of judgment to the unbelieving world is announced (vv 6-7). The warning will not be heeded by the world system and its followers, resulting in their final judgment at the end of history (v 8).  This final historical judgment is the precursor to the final, eternal judgment (vv 9-11).  But the warning is intended to influence true believers to remain faithful to Christ so that they might receive an eternal reward (vv 12-13).”[5]

v.6 “The focus now shifts from the redeemed to the unredeemed (vv 6-11) in order to contrast the destiny of the two. […] The angel announces not a different gospel, but one that carries dire consequences if it is rejected […] The dual nature of the gospel […] was also symbolized by the sweetness and bitterness of the book that John consumed.”[6]

v.7 “The theme of the verse is judgment […] This is ‘good news’ to the saints because it means the downfall of the ungodly system headed by the beast and ultimately Satan and hence is an effect of the doom of Satan set in motion by Christ’s resurrection and announced in 12:7-10.  The coming consummate establishment of God’s sovereignty over evil is good news.  […] Christians can be encouraged because God will defend his reputation after all.  The appropriate response to the gospel is to ‘fear God and give him glory.’ The response is stated in a command.”[7]

“The angel utters a demand to worship the Creator rather than the creature (cf. Acts 17:24; 1 Thess 1:9-10) in the light of the imminence of the hour of judgment (cf. 3:3; 18:10). The message of this gospel is not far removed from the summary in Mark 1:15: ‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news’ (NRSV). In Revelation, the command is to fear God; in Mark, the command is to repent. In both passages, the presence of a time of crisis is stressed, and in both that crisis is set in the context of a struggle with the powers of the cosmos as the coming of the gospel provokes the possibility of rejection and judgment (cf. Matt 10:7, 15).”[8]

v.8 “Babylon’s offense was having caused all the nations to ‘drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication’ (cf. Jer 51:7).  This awkward phrase can be interpreted as Babylon’s having intoxicated the people and caused wrath as the result of the forgetfulness of the true vocation to worship God and keep God’s commandments (cf. 16:19, 17:2, 18:3, 19:15).”[9]

v.9 “Worshipers of the beast who have received his mark will face judgment (14:9-10).  […] Receiving that mark is, however, a symbolic act that does not make one incapable of repentance.  The world (9:20-21; 16:9-11) and even false prophets (2:16, 21-22) are invited to repent, and many of those who ridiculed the witnesses will repent (11:13).”[10]

“The present tenses ‘worship’ and ‘receives’ connote continued worship of the beast and allegiance to him despite the warning of judgment in vv 6-8 and warrant the penalty stated in vv 10-11 […] Those who express greater devotion to the beast than to Christ in order to maintain economic security will be punished.  […] Therefore, since the nations have willingly drunk ’from the wine of passion’ for Babylon, so God will make them ‘drink from the wine of [his] wrath’”[11]

v.10 “Those tormented will be able to look on the Lamb and the holy angels they despised (14:10), now unable to evade the reality they once ignored […] The emphasis here is ‘the inescapability and finality of judgment, not the satisfaction it could afford to those who witness it.’”[12]

v.12 “[..] we are offered in detail the inventory of preparations necessary for the fight between the sons of light and the sons of darkness.  This is conventional battle in that weapons of war are used.  But like Revelation, it is apparent that this battle is not between humans alone but between angelic forces who fight alongside humans (cf. Josh 5:13-14).  But in the war that takes place in heaven in Rev 12:7, the elect do not fight. That does not mean, however, that their endurance and witness contribute nothing to the eschatological process.  As in Eph 6:10, we are offered a picture of a battle conducted without weapons and rooted in the triumph of the Lamb (14:1), who (like Messiah in the contemporary apocalypse 4 Ezra 13:10, 27) stands as a conqueror without indulging in any military action.  The warfare of the elect is conducted with other weapons: endurance, witness, prophecy, obedience to God, and remaining loyal to Jesus (14:12).”[13]

v.13 “The rest from toil echoes 6:9, where the agony of waiting and nakedness is resolved by the granting of white robes.  The deeds of the dead are not forgotten, however, for ‘their deeds follow them’.   The deeds of all persons have been written down, to be opened up to public gaze when the books are opened (20:12). […] The prerequisite for humanity is to repent of their evil deeds (9:20; 16:11).”[14]

vv.14-16 “This is an image of judgment: Christ is separating the faithful from the unfaithful like a farmer harvesting his crops. This is a time of joy for the Christians who have been persecuted and martyred – they will receive their long-awaited reward. Christians should not fear the Last Judgment. Jesus said, ‘I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life’ (John 5:24).”[15]

vv.18-20 “A winepress was a large vat or trough where grapes were collected and then smashed. The juice flowed out of a duct that led into a large holding vat. The winepress is often used in the Bible as a symbol of God’s wrath and judgment against sin (Isaiah 63:3-6; Lamentations 1:15; Joel 3:12, 13).”[16]

“It portrays the wicked as gathered grapes now crushed into wine in God’s winepress, responding to the cup of the wine of God’s anger poured out on them.  […] God had already promised that he would go out and trample the blood of the wicked like wine in a winepress until his garments were stained with their blood (Isa. 63:1-6); in Revelation Jesus assumes this divine role (Rev. 19:13,15).”[17]

[2] Leander E. Keck, “Revelations” New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1999) 664.

[3] Craig S. Keener, Revelation, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1960) 370-371.

[4] Craig S. Keener, Revelation, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1960) 371.

[5] G. K. Beale , The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 747.

[6] G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 747-748.

[7] G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 750-751.

[8] Leander E. Keck, “Revelations” New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1999) 666.

[9] Leander E. Keck, “Revelations” New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1999) 666.

[10] Craig S. Keener, Revelation, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1960) 373-374.

[11] G. K. Beale., The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 758-759.

[12] Craig S. Keener, Revelation, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1960) 374.

[13]Leander E. Keck, “Revelations” New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1999) 665.

[14] Leander E. Keck, “Revelations” New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1999) 667.

[15] Life Application Bible, study notes (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1991) 2322.

[16] Life Application Bible, study notes (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1991) 2322.

[17] Craig S. Keener, Revelation, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1960) 377.

vv. 1-10 “Now the dragon’s seven heads and ten horns showed that power was of his very essence.  Of all the attributes of God, his omnipotence is what Satan aspires most to have.  And the beasts of Daniel 7 are actually explained as being four great kings, or empires:  there also power is of the essence.  In fact it is the very word we use to describe them–the ‘great powers’.  So when we are shown a beast whose power is not that of wealth or of influence, but that of government (‘diadems’ and a ‘throne’), who combines all the powers of Daniel 7, and whose authority is worldwide (verse 7), we see in him the principle of power politics:  in a word, the state.  For John this meant, of course, the Roman Empire; but every succeeding generation of Christian people knows some equivalent of it.  To use a phrase which the Authorized Version has fed into common English usage, the beast from the sea represents ‘the powers that be’ (Rom. 13:1, AV).

“But are we not told by Paul that the state is ordained by God?  How then can its authority come from the devil, and be indeed so devilish that it actually begins to look like him (verses 1, 2; 12:3)?

“Paul, of course, is right.  ‘There is no authority except from God’ (Rom. 13:1); it was God who created the institution of human government.  The devil never created anything.  He could only pervert what was already there.  As prince of this world, he took what God had instituted for mankind’s welfare and made it an instrument of oppression.  It is God’s will that there should so often be bad law and tyrannical order.  He puts blasphemies in the mouth of the state, so that it proclaims ‘I am God’ by demanding from its subjects a total, unconditional allegiance, such as those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life will never give to any but Christ.  They will uphold the principle of law and order at all costs, to whatever repressive ends it may be perverted:  ‘If any one is to be taken captive,’ well then, ‘to captivity he goes’; they will not take up the sword to overthrow it; this is ‘the endurance and faith of the saints’ (verse 10).  But neither will they worship at its shrine, and be swayed by its talk of ‘patriotism’, and give it ‘the clerical blessing it so much desires’.”[1]

“It is accepted throughout the New Testament that in the last days there will be a special outbreak of the powers of evil.  Sometimes this is associated with an individual who may be called the antichrist (1 Jn. 2:18) or ‘the man of lawlessness’ (2 Thes. 2:3).  It is this figure who is behind the opening vision of this chapter.  John does not name him but calls him ‘the beast.’  A wealth of picturesque detail brings out the horror associated with him.  He is closely linked with Satan, and indeed is something like an incarnation of the evil one.  Many see in the beast a reference to the Roman Empire but this seems to be too simple.  We may well see in the Empire a preliminary manifestation of the evil that will one day be realized to the full in the antichrist.  But there is much more to the beast than ancient Rome.”[2]

vv. 1-2 “The ‘ten horns’ and ‘seven heads’ (13:1) connect this beast with its superhuman mentor, another beast, namely, the serpent (12:3); this image in Revelation fits the Bible’s use of images from the ancient myth of the superhuman enemy (Ps. 74:14).  The ‘blasphemous name’ (Rev. 13:1) probably evokes the arrogant boasts of Daniel 7:8, 20, as do his blasphemies or slanders against God and the saints in Revelation 13:6.  These would prove especially relevant to John’s audience:  Roman coins in the Easter Mediterranean announced that the emperor was ‘son of God’ and ‘God’; Domitian even demanded the title ‘Lord and God.’”[3]

v. 1 “The dragon stands on the seashore as John sees his henchman, the beast, emerge from the sea […]  The ancient world often associated evil with the sea.  Who could tell what existed in its mysterious depths?”[4]

“The chapter says little about the dragon.  He remains very much in the background.  He does his work not openly, but through people.  John is talking about a more than human evil, but it is an evil that reveals itself in human deeds.  The modern world, like the ancient, furnishes us with illustrations.  Hendriksen sees the beast as signifying ‘worldly government directed against the church’, and he takes the multiplicity of heads to indicate that this has various forms, as Babylon, Assyria, Rome, etc.

“The beast hast ten crowns on his horns, which is a curious place for them (Satan has them on the heads, 12:3).  But it is a way of stressing that his dominion (diad?mata are crowns of royalty; […]) rests on force, while leaving the heads free for the blasphemous name.”[5]

v. 2 “The beast is likened to a leopard (or ‘panther’ as some understand pardalis).  The feet are those of a bear and the mouth like that of a lion.  Since the animal has seven heads the singular, mouth, is curious.  We should be clear that John’s interest is in symbolism.  He is not going into detail to help his readers visualize the beast.  In fact it seems impossible to put together all the features John mentions to make up one animal.  But that is not his intention.  He is making use of a variety of the features of the animals mentioned in Daniel 7.  His composite beast then becomes indescribably horrible.  He combines in one terrible feature hitherto associated with different beasts.  The beasts of Daniel 7 are to be understood of the various world empires and it may well be that this is in mind with John’s beast.  In that case he stands for a final empire in which will be concentrated the frightfulness of all its predecessors.  But John does not see the beast as having any power of its own.  The dragon gave its power, its throne, and great authority.  The combination adds up to a formidable foe.”[6]

v. 3 “He does not say how the beast received its wound (in v.14 we find it was ‘by the sword’).  He does not even say whether it received the wound after it come to land or how it come to be healed.  His interest is in the fact that a wound that appeared to be mortal had been healed.  Two points receive emphasis:  the deadliness of the wound and the fact of recovery.  He uses the expression […] ‘as though slain’, which he used of the Lamb in 5:6, and as the recovery of the beast is clear there may possibly be the thought of death followed by resurrection.  This is one of several places in which the evil one is pictured as parodying Christianity.”[7]

v. 4 “Verse 4 repeats the fact of the transfer of the dragon’s authority to the beast and the deception involved in worshiping the beast.  The amazed question, ‘Who is like the beast?’ (reminiscent of similar sentiments expressed about God in Exod 15:11), is followed by ‘Who can make war against him?’  In other words, their amazement is a combination of a sense of awe at the beast’s military power and a sense of despair:  There is no alternative to capitulation.”[8]

v. 5 “The verb was given shows that the beast’s power is derived; he has no power of his own.  It is given him by his master, the dragon.  But John’s readers will reflect that ultimately it is God who determines the limits within which he operates, a point brought out by the use of was given four times in verses 5-7 (NIV omits it before authority in verse 5).  It is further emphasized by the limit of his authority to forty-two months (for this period see on 11:2).  Even the horrible and irresistible beast can exercise authority only during the time that God permits.  The saints are encouraged by the thought that the duration of their suffering has already been determined by God.  It is not the beast who decides this point.  His power is limited though he speaks proud words and blasphemies.”[9]

vv. 5-6 “The beast’s arrogant speech echoes that of the horn of the fourth beast in Dan 7:8, 11, 20.  It blasphemes not only the name of God (cf. Lev 24:15-16), but also God’s dwelling, which may refer to the heavenly temple (cf. 21:2) or be used, in a transferred sense, to indicate the holy people (7:15; cf. 21:3).”[10]

vv. 5-7 “And how long is this to continue?  The beast is ‘allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months’, the same ‘three and a half years’ during which God’s city and the outer courts of his temple are trodden underfoot by the nations, which the church nevertheless survives despite attacks on her members (verse 7), and continues to preach.  Throughout the history of the church, then, the beast from the sea will be active, and Christian people will always have the dragon-manipulated state to take into account in their daily conflict.”[11]

v. 6 “The blasphemies are particularized.  To blaspheme the name of God is much the same as to blaspheme God […] for the name sums up the whole person […] The blasphemy is then directed against God and those in whom God dwells.  To regard the state as supreme (and offer divine honours to the emperor as was demanded in the first century) was not a permissible opinion but the supreme blasphemy.  John’s word must have come to his readers with tremendous force.”[12]

v. 7 “Here, to ‘make war,’ as elsewhere in the Apocalypse, does not mean to wage a military campaign but refers to hostility to and destruction of the people of God in whatever manner and through whatever means the beast may choose (study carefully 2:16; 11:7; 12:7, 17; 16:14; 17:14; 19:11, 19; 20:8; 2Cor 10:4).  ‘To conquer’ them refers not to the subversion of their faith but to the destruction of their physical lives (cf. Matt 10:28). […] their apparent defeat by the beast and his victory turns out in reality to be the victory of the saints and the defeat of the beast (15:2). Messiah-like universal dominion was given the beast by the dragon (Luke 4:4-7; 1John 5:19).”[13]

vv. 7-8 “The apparent universality of worship offered to the beast is qualified, however, by the reference to the Lamb’s book of life.  Until the books are opened (20:12; cf. Dan 12:1) and judgment takes place, the names contained in it are unknown.  […] The criterion for inclusion in the book of life is to resist worshiping the beast.”[14]

vv. 11-13 “Verses 11 to 13 make clear what the beast from the earth is.  Its looks are lamb-like but its voice dragon-like; it stands before the first beast–another reminiscence of Elijah, who stood before God (1 Ki. 17:1) waiting on his bidding, ready to act at his command and speak with his authority; it is concerned with worship, the religious aspect of human life; and it works miracles, like bringing fire from heaven (Elijah yet again, 1 Ki. 18).  The coupling of Christlike appearance and Satanic message, the status of prophet, the concern with worship, and the appeal to the magical, all add up to one thing:  false religion.  The relationships between man and man, and between man and God, are both provided for in the divine plan.  The beast from the sea is Satan’s perversion of society, the first; and the beast from the earth is his perversion of Christianity, the second.”[15]

vv. 16-18 “This mark of the beast is designed to mock the seal that God places on his followers (Rev. 7:2-3). Just as God marks his people to save them, so Satan’s beast marks his people to save them from the persecution that Satan will inflict upon God’s followers. Identifying this particular mark is not as important as identifying the purpose of the mark. Those who accept it show their allegiance to Satan, their willingness to operate within the economic system he promotes, and their rebellion against God. To refuse the mark means to commit oneself entirely to God, preferring death to compromising one’s faith in Christ.”[16]

v. 16 “He now caused a mark to be set on all people on the right hand or forehead.  The listing of various classes, small and great […] etc., is a way of stressing totality.  No-one was exempt.  The choice of right hand or forehead is presumably for conspicuousness.  It could not be hidden.  It may also be meant as a travesty of the Jewish custom of wearing phylacteries (little boxes containing extracts from the Bible) on the left hand (or forearm) and on the head.  It is probably also a parody of God’s seal (7:3; 14:1).  The precise significance of the mark is uncertain.”[17]

v. 17 “The purpose […] of the mark is that no-one should engage in trade without it.  Could (dyn?tai) is stronger than ‘hinder’ or the like.  It points to a total prohibition, which would make it impossible for people without the mark to buy even necessities like food.  It is thus impossible for those who oppose the beast even to live.  The mark is explained as the name of the beast or the number of his name; this leads into the next verse.”[18]

v. 18 “What does 666 mean? Some have seen in this number a reference to Nero, the first emperor to persecute Christians.  Others have seen a reference to some evil person of their day, such as Adolf Hitler, but efforts to identify a specific person have been unsatisfactory.  If the number seven symbolizes the fullness of God (3:1; 5:6), perhaps six is associated with evil, falling one short of completeness.  The threefold six, then, would emphasize how completely evil this beast it.  Essentially, John exhorts all Christians to discern evil.”[19]

[2] Leon Morris, Revelation, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 160.

[3] Craig S. Keener , Revelation, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2003) 336.

[4] Leon Morris, Revelation, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 161.

[5] Leon Morris, Revelation, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 161.

[6] Leon Morris, Revelation, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 161-162.

[7] Leon Morris, Revelation, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 162.

[8] Christopher C. Rowland , “The Book of Revelation”, New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998) 657.

[9] Leon Morris, Revelation, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 163.

[10] Christopher C. Rowland , “The Book of Revelation”, New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998) 657.

[11] Michael Wilcock, The Message of Revelation, The Bible Speaks Today (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity, 1975) 125-126.

[12] Leon Morris, Revelation, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 163-164.

[13] Alan F. Johnson, Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for verse 7.

[14] Christopher C. Rowland , “The Book of Revelation”, New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998) 657.

[15] Michael Wilcock, The Message of Revelation, The Bible Speaks Today (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity, 1975) 126.

[16] Life Application Study Bible, study notes (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers and Zondervan, 1991) 2320.

[17] Leon Morris, Revelation, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 167-168.

[18] Leon Morris, Revelation, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity, 2000) 168.

[19] Quest Study Bible, study notes (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan, 1994) 1724.

“Although the themes of persecution and vindication pick up where they left off in the vision of the two witnesses, the beginning of chap. 12 is one of the most abrupt transitions in Revelation.  Two visions occur in this chapter: a woman pursued by a dragon and the heavenly war between the hosts of the angel Michael and Satan.  This leads to the latter’s ejection from heaven, paving the way for an immediate threat to the world’s inhabitants.”[1]

vv.1-2 “This woman is in labour to bear a child who is undoubtedly the Messiah, Christ, cp. verse 5 where he is said to be destined to rule the nations with a rod of iron.  That is a quotation from Psalm 2:9 and was an accepted description of the Messiah.”[2]

“If the woman is the ‘mother’ of the Messiah, an obvious suggestion is that she should be identified with Mary; but she is so clearly a superhuman figure that she can hardly be identified with any single human being.

“The persecution of the woman by the dragon suggests that she might be identified with the Christian Church.  The objection is that the Christian Church could hardly be called the mother of the Messiah.

“In the Old Testament, the chosen people, the ideal Israel, the community of the people of God, is often called the Bride of God.  ‘Your Maker is your husband’ (Isaiah 54:5).  It is Jeremiah’s sad complaint that Israel has played the harlot in disloyalty to God (Jeremiah 3:6-10).  Hosea hears God say: ‘I will betroth you to me for ever’ (Hosea 2:19, 20).  In the Revelation itself we hear of the marriage feast of the Lamb and the Bride of the Lamb (Revelation 19:7; 21:9).  ‘I betrothed you to Christ,’ writes Paul to the Corinthian Church, ‘to present you as a pure bride to her one husband.’ (2 Corinthians 11:2).”[3]

“This will give us a line of approach.  It was from the chosen people that Jesus Christ sprang in his human lineage.  It is for the ideal community of the chosen ones of God that the woman stands.  Out of that community Christ came and it was that community which underwent such terrible suffering at the hands of the hostile world.  We may indeed call this the Church, if we remember that the Church is the community of God’s people in every age.

“From this picture we learn three great things about this community of God.  First, it was out of it that Christ came; and out of it Christ has still to come for those who have never known him.  Second, there are forces of evil, spiritual and human, which are set on the destruction of the community of God.  Third, however strong the opposition against it and however sore its sufferings, the community of God is under the protection of God and, therefore, it can never be ultimately destroyed.”[4]

vv.3-4 “The dragon has seven heads and ten horns.  This signifies its mighty power.  It has seven royal diadems.  This signifies its complete power over the kingdoms of this world as opposed to the kingdom of God.  The picture of the dragon sweeping the stars from the sky with its tail comes from the picture in Daniel of the little horn who cast the stars to the ground and trampled on them (Daniel 8:10).  The picture of the dragon waiting to devour the child comes from Jeremiah, in which it is said of Nebuchadnezzar that ‘he has swallowed me like a monster’ (Jeremiah 51:34).

“H.B. Swete finds in this picture the symbolism of an eternal truth about the human situation.  In the human situation, as Christian history sees it, there are two figures who occupy the centre of the scene.  There is man, fallen, always under attack of the powers of evil but always struggling towards the birth of a higher life.  And there is always the power of evil, watching for its opportunity to frustrate the upward reach of man.  That struggle had its culmination on the Cross.”[5]

v.5 “In this scene that blends two worlds, God’s agent of salvation, the One who shall shepherd all nations with absolute authority, is represented by the innocence and vulnerability of a baby.  As the dragon waits to devour the newborn child, all the forces of evil, in this world and beyond, are concentrated against this saving act of God.  The child is born and taken up to God – so quickly does the story move from the Messiah’s birth to death and resurrection.  There can be no doubt that, although the dragon does not ‘get’ the child, who is safe at God’s throne, the way to God’s presence was not by escaping death.  Precisely by dying, Jesus defeated the dragon and was exalted to God’s right hand.”[6]

v.6 “The woman flees to the desert (‘wilderness,’ NRSV), the place where John will later be taken to see Babylon (17:3).  Just as in chap. 17, where the desert gives John a different perspective, so here, too, the desert should not be seen as a harsh and forbidding place.  It is the place that God has prepared for the woman, where she will be nourished (v. 6).  As the Gospels indicate, the desert is the place where the voice cries out and the Messiah emerges, on the very margins of life (Matt 3:3ff.).  It is unclear who will take care of the woman (if it is angels, then this is a parallel to the care Jesus received during his trial in the desert, according to Mark 1:13).  The period of her nurture is 1,260 days, roughly the same amount of time the nations will ‘trample over the holy city’ in 11:2 (1,260 days are roughly equivalent to 42 months).  The situation of the woman contrasts with that of the dragon, which will have no place in heaven (12:8, 14).  The woman’s flight is reminiscent of that of the parents of Jesus when they fled to Egypt with the infant Jesus (Matt 2:13), to a place ‘prepared’ by God in the prophetic scriptures (Matt 2:15).”[7]

vv.7-9 “Here, however, Michael and his forces cast down Satan’s forces, because Michael and his allies represent the heavenly victory won by Christ on earth. God not only rules the world through events in the heavens; he also fits these events to his acts on earth. John perceives not only the fallen angels but even the activity of Michael through his focus on our Lord’s triumph.

“Satan’s being hurled to the earth ends his position of privilege in God’s court. Ironically, Satan’s loss of ‘place’ (topos, 12:8) contrasts starkly with the ‘place’ (topos) of refuge God provides his own people persecuted by Satan (12:6, 14). The Bible already declared that Satan functioned as an accuser (Zech. 3:1), including directly before God’s throne (Job 1:6; 2:1). Jewish tradition amplified this idea, so that in later texts he was said to accuse Israel day and night, except on the Day of Atonement. Here, however, his accusations against the saints have been silenced, for Christ’s victory is sufficient to silence all objections of the once-heavenly prosecutor (12:10). The opposite of a prosecutor was an advocate, and John’s audience is probably already familiar with the idea that Jesus is our sufficient advocate (1 John 2:1; also John 14:16, where ‘Counselor’ translates ‘advocate’). Satan’s activity here is ‘day and night’; like the torment of his followers (14:11; 20:10), this contrasts with the unceasing role of God’s worshipers in 4:8; 7:15.”[8]

v.10 “This anonymous hymn, which interprets the great battle of the preceding verses, has three stanzas: the first (v. 10) focuses on the victorious inauguration of God’s kingdom and Christ’s kingly authority; the second (v. 11) calls attention to the earthly victory of the saints as they confirm the victory of Christ by their own identification with Jesus in his witness and death; the third (v. 12) announces the martyrs’ victory and the final woe to the earth because of the devil’s ejection and impending demise.

“In the first stanza (v. 10), the triumph of Christ is described as the arrival of three divine realities in history: God’s “salvation” or victory (7:10; 19:1), God’s “power,” and God’s “kingdom.” This latter reality is further identified as Christ’s assumption of his ‘authority.’ The historic event of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection has challenged the dominion of Satan and provoked the crisis of history. At the time of Christ’s death on earth, Satan was being defeated in heaven by Michael. As Caird has said, ‘Michael … is not the field officer who does the actual fighting, but the staff officer in the heavenly room, who is able to remove Satan’s flag from the heavenly map because the real victory has been won on Calvary’ (p. 154).

‘In times past, Satan’s chief role as adversary was directed toward accusing God’s people of disobedience to God. The justice of these accusations was recognized by God, and therefore Satan’s presence in heaven was tolerated. But now the presence of the crucified Savior in God’s presence provides the required satisfaction of God’s justice with reference to our sins (1 John 2:1-2; 4:10). Therefore, Satan’s accusations are no longer valid and he is cast out. What strong consolation this provides for God’s faltering people!”[9]

v.11 “This stanza is both a statement and an appeal. It announces that the followers of the Lamb also become victors over the dragon because they participate in the “blood of the Lamb,” the weapon that defeated Satan, and because they have confirmed their loyalty to the Lamb by their witness even to death. The blood of the martyrs, rather than signaling the triumph of Satan, shows instead that they have gained the victory over the dragon by their acceptance of Jesus’ Cross and their obedient suffering with him. This is one of John’s chief themes (1:9; 6:9; 14:12; 20:4).

Verses 12 and 17 lead to the conclusion that only a portion of the martyrs are in view (cf. 6:11). Thus this hymn of victory also becomes an appeal to the rest of the saints to do likewise and confirm their testimony to Christ even if doing so means death. This seems to suggest that in some mysterious sense the sufferings of the people of God are linked to the sufferings of Jesus in his triumph over Satan and evil (John 12:31; Rom 16:20; Col 1:24). Since the martyrs have gotten the victory over the dragon because of the Cross of Jesus (i.e., they can no longer be accused of damning sin, since Jesus has paid sin’s penalty [1:5b]), they are now free even to give up their lives in loyalty to their Redeemer (John 12:25; Rev 15:2).”[10]

v.12 “Satan has failed. Therefore, the heavens and all who are in them should be glad. But Satan does not accept defeat without a bitter struggle. His final death throes are directed exclusively toward “the earth and the sea.” Therefore their inhabitants will mourn, for the devil will now redouble his wrathful effort in one last futile attempt to make the most of an opportunity he knows will be brief (three and one-half years; cf. vv. 6, 14).”[11]

vv.13-14 “The narrative is resumed after the flight of the woman into the wilderness (v. 6). Why? Because she is under attack from the defeated but still vicious dragon (vv. 7-12). No longer able to attack the male child who is in heaven or to accuse the saints because of the victory of Jesus on the Cross, and banned from heaven, the devil now pursues the woman, who flees into the desert. The word ‘pursue’ was no doubt carefully chosen by John because it is also the NT word for ‘persecute’ (dioko, Matt 5:10 et al.). Since the woman has already given birth to the child, the time of the pursuit by the dragon follows the earthly career of Jesus.

“The reference to eagle’s wings once again introduces imagery borrowed from the Exodus account where Israel was pursued by the dragon in the person of Pharaoh: “You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself” (Exod 19:4). As God’s people were delivered from the enemy by their journey into the Sinai desert, so God’s present people will be preserved miraculously from destruction (cf. Deut 32:10-12; Isa 40:31).”[12]

vv.15-16 “The serpent spews a floodlike river of water out of his mouth to engulf and drown the woman. The water imagery seems clear enough. It symbolizes destruction by an enemy (Pss 32:6; 69:1-2; 124:2-5; Nah 1:8) or calamity (Ps 18:4). As the desert earth absorbs the torrent, so the covenant people will be helped by God and preserved from utter destruction (Isa 26:20; 42:15; 43:2; 50:2). The dragon-inspired Egyptians of old were swallowed by the earth: “You stretched out your right hand and the earth swallowed them” (Exod 15:12). In similar fashion, the messianic community will be delivered by God’s power. Whatever specific events were happening to Christians in Asia in John’s day would not exhaust the continuing significance of the passage.”[13]

v.17 “This attack of Satan against ‘the rest’ of the woman’s offspring seems to involve the final attempt to destroy the messianic people of God. Having failed in previous attempts to eliminate them as a whole, the dragon now strikes at individuals who ‘obey God’s commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus.’ To ‘make war’ (poiesai polemon) is the identical expression used of the beast’s attack on the two witnesses in 11:7 and on the saints in 13:7. Could this possibly correlate the three groups and indicate their common identity under different figures?

Those attacked are called ‘the rest of her [the woman's] offspring.’ Some identify this group as Gentile Christians in distinction from the Jewish mother church (Glasson). Others who identify the mother as the nation of Israel see the ‘rest’ as the believing remnant in the Jewish nation who turn to Christ (Walvoord)-view that depends on the prior identification of the woman with the whole nation of Israel. Others have suggested that the woman represents the believing community as a whole, the universal or ideal church composed of both Jews and Gentiles, whereas the ‘offspring’ of the woman represent individuals of the community (Jews and Gentiles) who suffer persecution and martyrdom from the dragon in the pattern of Christ (Swete, Caird, Kiddle). The close identification of the seed of the woman as first of all Jesus and then also those who have become his brethren through faith agrees with other NT teaching (Matt 25:40; Heb 2:11-12). While Satan cannot prevail against the Christian community itself, he can wage war on certain of its members who are called on to witness to their Lord by obedience even unto death, i.e., ‘those who obey God’s commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus’ (Matt 16:18; Rev 11:7; 13:7, 15). The church, then, is paradoxically both invulnerable (the woman) and vulnerable (her children) (cf. Luke 21:16-18).”[14]

[2]William Barclay, The Revelation of John, Vol. II, Daily Study Bible Commentary (Philadelphia, PN: Westminster Press, 1976) 75-76.

[3]William Barclay, The Revelation of John, Vol. II, Daily Study Bible Commentary (Philadelphia, PN: Westminster Press, 1976) 76.

[4] William Barclay, The Revelation of John, Vol. II, Daily Study Bible Commentary (Philadelphia, PN: Westminster Press, 1976) 76.

[5] William Barclay, The Revelation of John, Vol. II, Daily Study Bible Commentary (Philadelphia, PN: Westminster Press, 1976) 77-78.

[6] Boring, M. Eugene, Interpretation, Revelation (Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press, 1989) 158.

[7] Christopher C. Rowland , “The Book of Revelation”, New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998) 649.

[8] Craig S. Keener, Revelation, NIV Application Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2000).

[9] Alan F. Johnson, Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 12:1-17.

[10] Alan F. Johnson, Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 12:1-17.

[11] Alan F. Johnson, Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 12:1-17.

[12] Alan F. Johnson, Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 12:1-17.

[13] Alan F. Johnson, Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 12:1-17.

[14] Alan F. Johnson, Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 12:1-17.

v.4 “The elders have been variously identified as (1) stars (from an astrological background), (2) angels, (3) OT saints, (4) angelic, heavenly representatives of all saints, (5) patriarchs and apostles representing the OT and NT saints together, and (6) representatives of the prophetic revelation of the twenty-four books of the Old Testament [We have 39 books in our OT; back then books like 1 & 2 Samuel were originally written as one book].  The elders certainly include reference to OT and NT saints.  They are either angels representing all saints or the heads of the twelve tribes together with the twelve apostles, representing thus all the people of God.”[2]

“The elders are always associated with the ‘four living creatures’ (4:6 ff.) and engage in acts of worship of God and the Lamb. […] In the Bible twelve appears to be the number of divine government–twelve months in a lunar year, twelve tribes of Israel, twelve apostles, twelve gates in the New Jerusalem, twelve angels at each gate, twelve foundations, twelve thousand sealed from each tribe, twelve thousand stadia (the length of the New Jerusalem), etc.  Multiples of twelve–such as twenty-four, etc.-probably have a similar significance. Thrones are related to the heavenly powers in Colossians 1:16.  In Revelation ‘white’ clothing generally belongs to the saints but relates to angelic beings elsewhere in the NT (e.g., John 20:12). While the ‘crowns of gold’ are likewise usually related to the redeemed, here they refer to the royal dignity of those so closely associated with the throne of God (cf. 1 Kings 22:19; Ps 89:7). Golden crowns are referred to in 4:4, 10; 9:7; 14:14.”[3]

v. 5 “‘Flashes of lightning, rumblings and peals of thunder’ coming from the throne are symbolic of God’s awesome presence and the vindication of the saints and occur with slight variation four times in Revelation (4:5; 8:5; 11:19; 16:18, cf. Exod 19:16, Ezek 1:13; Ps 18:13-15).”[4]

v. 6  “‘A sea of glass, clear as crystal’ simply adds to the magnificence of the scene (15:2). […] The mirror-like [sic] reflecting quality could symbolize the fact that before the sight of God all is revealed; i.e., ‘Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eves of him to whom we must give account’ (Heb 4:13).”[5]

vv. 6-8  “The ‘four living creatures’ should be linked with Isaiah’s seraphim and Ezekiel’s cherubim (cf. Isa 6:3; Ezek 1:5-25; 10:1-22). They, like the elders and angels, are heavenly creatures of the highest order involved with the worship and government of God. ‘Covered with eyes’ may give the impression of their exceeding knowledge of God, while the faces of a ‘lion,’ ‘ox,’ ‘man,’ and a ‘flying eagle’ suggest qualities that belong to God, such as royal power, strength, spirituality, and swiftness of action. Each of the creatures mentioned is the chief of its species. Together they embody the reflection of God’s nature as the fullness of life and power. Their six wings (cf. Isa 6:2) give the impression of unlimited mobility in fulfilling God’s commands. Their position ‘in the center, around the throne’ suggests that one might be before and one behind the throne with one on either side (Beckwith). The four living creatures appear throughout Revelation (cf. 5:6, 8, 14; 6:1 ff.; 7:11; 14:3; 15:7; 19:4).”[6]

“The four living creatures ceaselessly proclaim the holiness of God: ‘Holy, holy, holy’ (v. 8; Isa 6:3). In Hebrew, the double repetition of a word adds emphasis, while the rare threefold repetition designates the superlative and calls attention to the infinite holiness of God–the quality of God felt by creatures in his presence as awesomeness or fearfulness (Ps 111:9: ‘Holy and awesome is his name’). The living creatures celebrate God’s holiness and power as manifested in his past, present, and future activity. Such holiness cannot tolerate the presence of evil (21:27). […] The trisagion (‘Holy, holy, holy’) is a liturgical expression used in both ancient Jewish and Christian worship.”[7]

[2] G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 322.

[3] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 4:4.

[4] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 4:5.

[5] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 4:6-8.

[6] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 4:6-8.

“Asia was a common designation for the Roman province of western Asia Minor (modern western Turkey), where Christianity was flourishing by the end of the first century.  A governor of Bithynia (in northern Turkey) early in the second century even complained to the emperor that the pagan temples were being forsaken because Christians were spreading so quickly.  But other strengths of the churches did not exempt them from the need for a message from God, whether warning them of further suffering or summoning them to deeper holiness.  Churches had spread throughout the province of Asia and were not limited to the cities mentioned in Revelation (Acts 19:10).  But John writes to the most prominent and strategic seven cities in the region, from which word would quickly spread to outlying areas.”[2]

“[The seven spirits are] likely a figurative designation of the effective working of the Holy Spirit, since this is the characteristic identification of [Spirit] in the NT when found in conjunction with or as part of an apparent formula with God and Christ.  […] The Spirit is the means by which God effects ‘grace and peace’ and by which the church is encouraged to obedience and witness (cf. v. 3).  Indeed, the wording ‘seven spirits’ is part of a paraphrased allusion to Zech. 4:2-7 (as is evident from Rev. 4:5 and 5:6), which identifies the ‘seven lamps’ as God’s one Sprit, whose role is to bring about God’s grace (cf. Zech. 4:7:‘Grace, Grace’) in Israel through the successful completion of the rebuilding of the temple (see further on 1:12; 4:5; 5:6).  That the sevenfold Spirit is ‘before the throne’ highlights its role as an emissary to carry out the bidding of God (4:5) and Christ (5:6) on behalf of their subjects” [3]

v.5 “the unique mention of Christ as ‘the faithful witness’ suits the particular situation of these Asian churches.   The following chapters reveal that they were tempted to compromise their witness because of threatening persecution (even to death).  They needed further ‘grace and peace’ to overcome this temptation by modeling their lives on that of Christ”[4]
“The titles given Jesus by John are not speculative but appropriate to the particular situation of his hearer-readers.  For faith, the identity of Jesus is never an abstract question; it is always ‘Who is for us?’ The three new titles directly address the situation of John’s readers. [...] The word ‘witness’ here, martus in John’s Greek, is already on the way to becoming the technical term ‘martyr.’ Jesus as the first-born of the dead is likewise not speculative or abstract; it is directed to the situation of John’s readers, who were being asked to witness to the lordship of Christ by giving their own lives.  What future did such a one have? Christ as the ‘first-born of the dead’ is revealed as the one who gives the Christian martyr a future even beyond death [...] The phrase ‘ruler of kings on earth’ attributes to Jesus the title claimed by the Roman Caesars, whose claim to sovereignty John wants his readers to see as a false caricature of the real lordship of Christ.[5]

vv.7-8 “John’s introductory words climax in a promise before concluding with another affirmation of God’s eternality: Jesus is coming.  That Jesus would return in the clouds reflects Daniel 7:13; that those who pierced him would see him and mourn reflects Zechariah 12:10 [...] No assurance could better encourage suffering believers than the knowledge that Jesus will come to set matters right, and the church’s oppressors will have to acknowledge the wrong they have done to God’s servants.”[6]

v.8 “Alpha” and “Omega” are the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet, respectively.  This statement is a merism (a merism states polar opposites in order to highlight everything between the opposites.  ‘Similar merisms are […] ‘the Beginning and the End,’ 21:6; 22:13) and […] ‘the First and the last,’ 22:13; cf. 1:17).  These merisms express God’s control of all history, especially by bringing it to an end in salvation and judgment.  The use of the first and last letters of the alphabet was typical of the ancients in expressing merisms […]  The God who transcends time guides the entire course of history because he stands as sovereign over its beginning and its end.”[7]

“God not only is Lord over time, but he rules the entire universe: he is ‘Almighty’, a common title for God in this book (1:8; 4:8; 11:17; 15:3; 16:7; 14; 19:6; 15; 21:22; elsewhere in the N.T. only at 2 Cor 6:18) [...] For Christians suffering under Caesar, the emperor, knowing that they served the ‘Almighty’ must have provided strength.  Caesar might rule citizens of an empire in limited ways, but God rules the cosmos; and God, who is the beginning and the end, will guide the course of history long after Caesar’s death.”[8]

v.10 “The introduction of the commission uses the language of the prophet Ezekiel’s repeated rapture in the Spirit, thus giving John’s revelation prophetic authority like that of the OT prophets (cf. Ezek. 2:2; 3:12, 14, 24; 11:1; 43:5).  This identification with prophetic authority is enforced by the description of the voice that John hears as ‘a great voice as a trumpet,’ evoking the voice that Moses heard when Yahweh revealed himself on Mount Sinai (Exod. 19:16, 19-20; the voice in Rev. 1:11 could be that of an angel who functions to introduce the Son of man vision.  And this idea is emphasized further by the command to ‘write in a book’ which likewise reflects the charge given by Yahweh to his prophetic servants to communicate to Israel the revelation they receive.”[9]

vv.12-13 “One of Revelation’s most important declarations is that Jesus appears among the lamp stands (1:12;2:1), which represent the seven churches (1:20).  One need only skim the letters to these churches in chapters 2 and 3 to realize that five of them needed serious correction.  Nonetheless, until a church has gone so far as to be withdrawn from its place (2:5), it remains in the place where Christ’s presence is found.”[10]

“the church is pictured as having a mission, to be the bearer of God’s light to the nations (cf. Matt. 5:14-16).  The church is not abandoned to carry out this mission alone; Christ walks among the lamp stands.”[11]

“An analysis of OT allusions in vv 13-15 shows that the predominant features of the Son of man are drawn from Daniel 7 and especially Daniel 10, with other texts contributing secondarily to the depiction.  Most commentators agree that the significance of this is that Christ is portrayed as a kingly and priestly figure, since the figure in the two Daniel texts has the same features.  Part of Christ’s priestly role is to tend the lamp stands.  The OT priest would trim the lamps, remove the wick and old oil, refill the lamps with fresh oil, and relight those that had gone out.  Likewise, Christ tends the ecclesial lamp stands by commending, correcting, exhorting, and warning (see chs. 2-3) in order to secure the churches’ fitness for service as light bearers in a dark world.”[12]

“‘Dressed in a robe’ begins the sevenfold description of the Son of Man. The vision creates an impression of the whole rather than of particular abstract concepts. John saw Christ as the divine Son of God in the fullest sense of that term. He also saw him as fulfilling the OT descriptions of the coming Messiah by using terms drawn from the OT imagery of divine wisdom, power, steadfastness, and penetrating vision. The long robe and golden sash were worn by the priests in the OT (Exod 28:4) and may here signify Christ as the great High Priest to the churches in fulfillment of the OT Aaronic priesthood or, less specifically, may indicate his dignity and divine authority (Ezek 9:2, 11). In Ecclesiastes 45:8, Aaron is mentioned as having the symbols of authority: ‘the linen breeches, the long robe, and the ephod.’”[13]

“In an apparent allusion to Daniel, Christ’s head and hair are described as ‘white like wool, as white as snow’ (Dan 7:9; cf. 10:5). For John, the same functions of ruler and judge ascribed to the ‘Ancient of Days’ in Daniel’s vision relate to Jesus. In Eastern countries, white hair commands respect and indicates the wisdom of years. This part of the vision may have shown John something of the deity and wisdom of Christ (cf. Col 2:3). Christ’s eyes were like a ‘blazing fire,’ a detail not found in Daniel s vision of the Son of man (Dan 7) but occurring in Daniel 10:6. This simile is repeated in the letter to Thyatira (2:18) and in the vision of Christ’s triumphant return and defeat of his enemies (19:12). It may portray either his penetrating scrutiny or fierce judgment.”[14]

“Christ’s feet are described ‘like bronze as having been fired in a furnace,’ which suggests his moral purity and will become the basis for his demand that those among whom he walks must reflect this purity in the midst of moral turpitude (cf. 3:18, where ‘fired’ is used in this manner.)”[15]

vv.14-18 “It is easy to miss seeing how carefully wrought the Revelation is. It is not a book which was flung together in a hurry; it is a closely integrated and artistic literary whole. In this passage we have a whole series of descriptions of the Risen Christ; and the interesting thing is that each of the letters to the seven Churches, which follow in the next two chapters, with the exception of the letter to Laodicea, opens with a description of the Risen Christ taken from this chapter. It is as if this chapter sounded a series of themes which were later to become the texts for the letters to the Churches.”[16]

v.16 “‘In his right hand he held seven stars.’ The right hand is the place of power and safety, and the ‘seven stars’ Christ held in it are identified with the seven angels of the seven churches in Asia (v. 20). This is the only detail in the vision that is identified. Why the symbolism of stars? This probably relates to the use of ‘angels’ as those to whom the letters to the seven churches are addressed (chs. 2-3). Stars are associated in the OT and in Revelation with angels (Job 38:7, Rev 9:1) or faithful witnesses to God (Dan 12:3). The first letter (that to Ephesus) includes in its introduction a reference to the seven stars (2:1), and in 3:1 they are associated closely with the ‘seven spirits of God.’” [17]

“The sword referred to was not long and narrow like a fencer’s blade; it was a short, tongue-shaped sword for close fighting. Again the seer has gone here and there in the Old Testament for his picture. Isaiah says of God: ‘He shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth’ (Isaiah 11:4); and of himself: ‘He made my mouth like a sharp sword’ (Isaiah 49:2). The symbolism tells us of the penetrating quality of the word of God. If we listen to it, no shield of self-deception can withstand it; it strips away our self-deludings, lays bare our sin and leads to pardon. ‘The word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword’ (Hebrews 4:12). ‘The Lord will slay the wicked with the breath of his mouth’ (2 Thessalonians 2:8).”[18]

v.18 “The One who calls them to be faithful even at the cost of their lives (2:10) is the one who embraces all, who will be there at the End to vindicate and receive them […] Christians are not promised that if they are faithful they will be acquitted in the Roman courts and spared from the injustice of death; in and through death they are met by the One who has conquered death and abides as the living one.”[19]

“The Rabbis had a saying that there were three keys which belonged to God and which he would share with no other—of birth, rain and raising the dead.

“Nothing could better show the reverence in which John holds Jesus Christ. He holds him so high that he can give him nothing less than the titles which in the Old Testament belong to God.”[20]

[2] Craig Keener, Revelation, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2000) 67.

[3] G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 189.

[4] G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 190.

[5] Eugene Boring, Revelation, Interpretation (Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1989) 76.

[6] Craig Keener, Revelation, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2000) 72-73.

[7] G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 199.

[8] Craig Keener, Revelation, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2000) 73-74.

[9] G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 203.

[10] Craig S. Keener, Revelation, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1960) 92.

[11] M. Eugene Boring, Revelation, Interpretation, a Bible commentary for teaching and preaching (Louisville, KT: John Knox Press, 1989) 85.

[12] G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 208-9.

[13] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 1:13.

[14] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 1:14.

[15] G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999) 209-210.

[16] William Barclay, The Revelation of John: Volume 1, Daily Study Bible Series Rev. Ed. (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 2000)  47.

[17] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) notes for Revelation 1:16.

[18] William Barclay, The Revelation of John: Volume 1, Daily Study Bible Series Rev. Ed. (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 2000)  50-51.

[19] M. Eugene Boring, Revelation, Interpretation, a Bible commentary for teaching and preaching (Louisville, KT: John Knox Press, 1989) 84.

[20] William Barclay, The Revelation of John: Volume 1, Daily Study Bible Series Rev. Ed. (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 2000)  48.

[…]

Third John suggests that the Johannine community was made up of scattered congregations (tradition suggests that they were all in western Asia Minor, near Ephesus). As they grew, they brought in converts who had no knowledge of the history of the church or the importance of apostolic tradition. Imagine young Christians believing in Jesus and not knowing much about his followers or their teachings! The names given in 3 John (Gaius, Diotrephes, and Demetrius) are all Greek; this fact suggests a cultural context far removed from Judea and Galilee. Thus when a traditional source of authority steps forward — an apostolic elder — some chafed at the thought of submission. “Our religion is working for us! It feels right! Why should we conform to a foreigner, someone who represents traditions and people we don’t even know?”

Therefore, 3 John raises some interesting questions about conflict resolution and pastoral leadership in the church that have an immediate value for us today. John knows he has a problem here. This letter is evidence of his strategy to solve it.

[…]

(1) John’s first strategy. I am intrigued by the way John did not let go of this situation. He persisted, first by sending a letter (that was tossed out) and then by sending emissaries (who were rejected). But he did not allow this to discourage him. Third John is his second letter, sent with another emissary, Demetrius. I sense that John is determined not to let this church — or Diotrephes — go.

John’s first strategy for resolving this conflict, therefore, is not to retreat but to remain in contact. This should be our strategy too. All too often our impulse when we must confront people of strong will and ambition is to retreat. The prospect of losing or of being shamed is so apparent that it seems better to “wait and see” what will happen, to stay on the sidelines, or to keep away from the perpetrators. Others will muster support against someone like Diotrephes and be passive-aggressive, sabotaging him at every turn and discrediting his standing in the church. Those to take this approach use the very tools criticized in 3 John 10: “I will call attention to what he is doing, gossiping maliciously about us.”

Of course, the chief reason for remaining connected to the “Diotrepheses” of our world is to save the church! Many times they are confusing zeal for the body of Christ with personal ambition, and as their power grows, the church itself is harmed. But there is another reason for not giving up. Diotrephes needs to be saved from himself. Diotrephes needs John. For John to show weakness by retreating is to posture himself in a way that makes it impossible for Diotrephes to respect him. Diotrephes needs John to be strong and persistent because that is the only strategy that can penetrate his heart. This courageous role is one way in which John can love Diotrephes.

This first strategy seems clear enough, but in today’s church it also may seem idealistic. When pastoral leadership is challenged by a confrontive, aggressive Diotrephes, there is a great deal of risk involved.

(2) John’s second strategy. But there is more. John has found an ally in Gaius. This man is not called to manipulate the situation or to confront Diotrephes. Gaius knows Diotrephes well and could, of course, play this role. But John chooses not to work indirectly. Gaius is simply an objective foothold in the situation, someone who lives neither in John’s camp nor in that of Diotrephes. Gaius knows the situation but is not embroiled in the crisis and certainly is not infected with Diotrephes’s peculiar form of rebellion.

[…]

Gaius becomes a point of reference that gives John pastoral objectivity in this remote congregation. Gaius no doubt could correct the apostle’s notions of the severity of the crisis, much like Titus counseled Paul during his conflict with the Corinthian church (2 Cor. 7:5 – 13).

(3) John’s third strategy. The final striking dimension of this letter is John’s willingness to talk personally with Diotrephes. When he cannot be there, he sends a letter. But when he has opportunity, he will come personally. This pattern is striking because the situation is clearly dangerous. Paul took this same risk when he went to Corinth on his “painful visit” (2 Cor. 2:1). And as the evidence of 2 Corinthians suggests, he was asked to leave the church against his will. Those in charge decided that Paul was not welcome. Fortunately, through the efforts of mediators such as Titus, the church repented and Paul returned. Nevertheless, such confrontations incur high risk.

The temptation to avoid Diotrephes and fall silent must have occurred to John. It is one thing to write a letter or even send a messenger. But it is altogether another matter to go personally and confront your opponent. We can successfully rationalize conflict avoidance in countless ways. I know Christian leaders who as children grew up with so much conflict that confronting a potentially hostile situation is virtually impossible. I know others who have an inherent sense of powerlessness that has been born through the destructive work of tyrannical parents. Such powerlessness often masquerades as Christian piety and meekness, but it is neither of these.

John is confident that he can enter this situation successfully because he is prepared. He has continued to communicate with those in the church; he has counseled with his couriers; he will talk deeply with Gaius when he gets there; and he knows that God is with him and that God’s desire is for the truth to win and for his people to walk in its freedom and joy. God wants his church — the Johannine churches and our churches — to grow in love and truth. If all parties — John and Diotrephes alike, pastors and lay leaders alike — fail to stand for the truth and to act in sincere, courageous love, the vigor of the church will be compromised.

[…]

Note how in 1 Corinthians 5 Paul suggested such a tactic regarding an immoral man in that congregation. Should today’s church have similar resolve and courage? Are we in theory ready to reject an unrepentant Diotrephes? And would we in practice be able to do it?

*All commentaries drawn from: Burge, Gary M. “3 John” In The NIV Application Commentary: The Letters of John. By Gary M. Burge, 243-221. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, © 1996.

vv.3-6: “Now comes a test by which we can know whether, in spite of our failures, we are in right relationship with God, and this test is whether we obey his commands (again in v 4; 3:22, 24; 5:3; cf. 5:2). If we really know God, this will have a powerful effect on our daily lives. Knowledge is an important theme in this letter; the verb ‘to know’ (Gk. gin?sk?) occurs twenty-five times (and oida, another verb meaning ‘to know’, fifteen times). The knowledge of God is not some mystic vision or intellectual insight; it is manifested when we obey his commandments. Obedience is not spectacular, but it is at the basis of all true Christian service. Anyone who claims to have this knowledge but does not do what he commands, John says forthrightly, is a liar. He underlines this by adding, the truth is not in him.”^[2]

vv.7-8: “John speaks about a commandment which is at one and the same time old and new. Some would take this as referring to the implied commandment in verse 6 that he who abides in Jesus Christ must live the same kind of life as his Master lived. But almost certainly John is thinking of the words of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel: ‘A new commandment I give to you, That you love one another; even as I have loved you, that you also love one another’ (John 13:34). In what sense was that commandment both old and new?

“(i) It was old in the sense that it was already there in the Old Testament. Did not the Law say, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself’? (Leviticus 19:18). It was old in the sense that this was not the first time that John’s hearers had heard it. From the very first day of their entry into the Christian life they had been taught that the law of love must be the law of their lives. This commandment went a long way back in history and a long way back in the lives of those to whom John was speaking.

“(ii) It was new in that it had been raised to a completely new standard in the life of Jesus—and it was as Jesus had loved men that men were now to love each other. It could well be said that men did not really know what love was until they saw it in him. In every sphere of life it is possible for a thing to be old in the sense that it has for long existed and yet to reach a completely new standard in someone’s performance of it. A game may become a new game to a man when he has seen some master play it. A piece of music may become a new thing to a man when he has heard some great orchestra play it under the baton of some master conductor. Even a dish of food can become a new thing to a man when he tastes it after it has been prepared by someone with a genius for cooking. An old thing can become a new experience in the hands of a master. In Jesus love became new in two directions.

“(a) It became new in the extent to which it reached. In Jesus love reached out to the sinner. To the orthodox Jewish Rabbi the sinner was a person whom God wished to destroy. ‘There is joy in heaven,’ they said, ‘when one sinner is obliterated from the earth.’ But Jesus was the friend of outcast men and women and of sinners, and he was sure that there was joy in heaven when one sinner came home. In Jesus love reached out to the Gentile. As the Rabbis saw it: ‘The Gentiles were created by God to be fuel for the fires of Hell.’ But in Jesus God so loved the world that he gave his Son. Love became new in Jesus because he widened its boundaries until there were none outside its embrace.

“(b) It became new in the length to which it would go. No lack of response, nothing that men could ever do to him, could turn Jesus’s love to hate. He could even pray for God’s mercy on those who were nailing him to his Cross.

“The commandment to love was old in the sense that men had known of it for long; but it was new because in Jesus Christ love had reached a standard which it had never reached before and it was by that standard that men were bidden to love.”^[3]

vv.9-11: “John has something further to say. As he sees it, our attitude to our brother man has an effect not only on him but also on ourselves.

“(i) If we love our brother, we are walking in the light and there is nothing in us which causes us to stumble. The Greek could mean that, if we love our brother, there is nothing in us which causes others to stumble and, of course, that would be perfectly true. But it is much more likely that John is saying that, if we love our brother, there is nothing in us which causes ourselves to stumble. That is to say, love enables us to make progress in the spiritual life and hatred makes progress impossible. When we think of it, that is perfectly obvious. If God is love and if the new commandment of Christ is love, then love brings us nearer to men and to God and hatred separates us from men and from God. We ought always to remember that he who has in his heart hatred, resentment and the unforgiving spirit, can never grow up in the spiritual life.

“(ii) John goes on to say that he who hates his brother walks in darkness and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded him. That is to say, hatred makes a man blind and this, too, is perfectly obvious. When a man has hatred in his heart, his powers of judgment are obscured; he cannot see an issue clearly. It is no uncommon sight to see a man opposing a good proposal simply because he dislikes, or has quarrelled with, the man who made it. Again and again progress in some scheme of a church or an association is held up because of personal animosities. No man is fit to give a verdict on anything while he has hatred in his heart; and no man can rightly direct his own life when hatred dominates him.

“Love enables a man to walk in the light; hatred leaves him in the dark—even if he does not realise that it is so.”^[4]

vv.12-14: “John has been warning his people of the perils of the dark and the necessity of walking in the light and now he says that in every case their best defence is to remember what they are and what has been done for them. No matter who they are, their sins have been forgiven; no matter who they are, they know him who is from the beginning; no matter who they are, they have the strength which can face and overcome the Evil One. […]

“For John it was of supreme importance that the Christian should remember the status and the benefits he has in Jesus Christ, for these would be his defence against error and against sin.”^[5]

vv.15-17: “John has two things to say about the man who loves the world and compromises with it.

“First, he sets out three sins which are typical of the world.

“(i) There is the flesh’s desire. This means far more than what we mean by sins of the flesh. To us that expression has to do exclusively with sexual sin. But in the New Testament the flesh is that part of our nature which, when it is without the grace of Jesus Christ, offers a bridgehead to sin. It includes the sins of the flesh but also all worldly ambitions and selfish aims. To be subject to the flesh’s desire is to judge everything in this world by purely material standards. It is to live a life dominated by the senses. It is to be gluttonous in food; effeminate in luxury; slavish in pleasure; lustful and lax in morals; selfish in the use of possessions; regardless of all the spiritual values; extravagant in the gratification of material desires. The flesh’s desire is regardless of the commandments of God, the judgment of God, the standards of God and the very existence of God. We need not think of this as the sin of the gross sinner. Anyone who demands a pleasure which may be the ruin of someone else, anyone who has no respect for the personalities of other people in the gratification of his own desires, anyone who lives in luxury while others live in want, anyone who has made a god of his own comfort and of his own ambition in any part of life, is the servant of the flesh’s desire.

“(ii) There is the eye’s desire. This, as C. H. Dodd puts it is ‘tendency to be captivated by outward show.’ It is the spirit which identifies lavish ostentation with real prosperity. It is the spirit which can see nothing without wishing to acquire it and which, having acquired it, flaunts it. It is the spirit which believes that happiness is to be found in the things which money can buy and the eye can see; it has no values other than the material.

“(ii) There is life’s empty pride. Here John uses a most vivid Greek word, alazoneia. To the ancient moralists the alaz?n was the man who laid claims to possessions and to achievements which did not belong to him in order to exalt himself. […] His conversation is a continual boasting about things which he does not possess and all his life is spent in an attempt to impress everyone he meets with his own non-existent importance.

“As John sees him, the man of the world is the man who judges everything by his appetites, the man who is the slave of lavish ostentation, the boastful braggart who tries to make himself out a far bigger man than he is.

“Then comes John’s second warning. The man who attaches himself to the world’s aims and the world’s ways is giving his life to things which literally have no future. All these things are passing away and none has any permanency. But the man who has taken God as the centre of his life has given himself to the things which last for ever. The man of the world is doomed to disappointment; the man of God is certain of lasting joy.”^[6]

vv.18-19: “There is no article with hour. John is saying ‘this is last hour’, by which he probably means ‘this is a last hour’. Human history proceeds by periods of slow unfolding until a crisis is reached, an age is ended, a new age begins, and we say, ‘It can never be the same again.’ John is affirming that such a last hour has come. He sees evidence in the appearance not simply of the antichrist, but of many antichrists. The early church clearly expected that a mighty figure of evil, the antichrist, would appear at the end of time (cf. ‘the man of lawlessness’, 2 Thes. 2:3). John uses the term four times (and once in 2 John) but he is not interested in the future evil individual. His concern is for his readers, and he stresses for them the fact that the spirit of antichrist is already abroad. The situation is the same today.

“These many antichrists had been members of the church. They had belonged to the visible organization, but John is quick to say they did not really belong to us. Their membership had been purely outward. This surely implies the doctrine of ‘the church invisible’ though that terminology is centuries later.”^[7]

vv.22-23: “They denied that Jesus is the Christ and this is fundamental. The person who goes wrong here is not to be depended on anywhere; that person is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son. The evidence that in Jesus of Nazareth God and humanity are indissolubly united is so strong that anyone who will not accept it is fundamentally astray and is guilty of the radical lie. 23 Without a right view of the Son we cannot have a right view of the Father. If Jesus is not the very Son of God and one with the Father, then it is not the love of God that we see revealed in his life and death; in that case it would be only the love of a good man that is seen. It is only as we receive Christ that we become children of God (Jn. 1:12), so that if we reject him we are not members of the family of God. We then have no right to call God our Father.”^[8]

[1]Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (1 Jn 2:1–2). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

[2] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (1 Jn 2:3–6). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

[3] The letters of John and Jude. 2000 (W. Barclay, lecturer in the University of Glasgow, Ed.). Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

[4] The letters of John and Jude. 2000 (W. Barclay, lecturer in the University of Glasgow, Ed.). Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

[5] The letters of John and Jude. 2000 (W. Barclay, lecturer in the University of Glasgow, Ed.). Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

[6] The letters of John and Jude. 2000 (W. Barclay, lecturer in the University of Glasgow, Ed.). Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

[7]Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (1 Jn 2:18–19). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

[8]Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (1 Jn 2:22–23). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

The idea of fellowship is one of the most important ideas in this letter of John’s. It is the ancient Greek word koinonia, which speaks of a sharing, a communion, a common bond and life. It speaks of a living, breathing, sharing, loving relationship with another person.

Fellowship . . . with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ: This simple and bold statement means that one can have a relationship with God. This idea would astound to many of John’s readers, and it should be astounding to us. The Greek mind-set highly prized the idea of fellowship, but restricted to men among men – the idea of such an intimate relationship with God was revolutionary.[2]

v.5 It tells us of the revealing quality in the presence of God. Light is the great revealer. Flaws and stains which are hidden in the shade are obvious in the light. Light reveals the imperfections in any piece of workmanship or material. So the imperfections of life are seen in the presence of God. […] We can never know either the depth to which life has fallen or the height to which it may rise until we see it in the revealing light of God.[3]

vv.6-7 He insists that to have fellowship with the God who is light a man must walk in the light and that, if he is still walking in the moral and ethical darkness of the Christless life, he can not have that fellowship. […] This does not mean that a man must be perfect before he can have fellowship with God; if that were the case, all of us would be shut out. But it does mean that he will spend his whole life in the awareness of his obligations, in the effort to fulfill them and in penitence when he fails. It will mean that he will never think that sin does not matter; it will mean that the nearer he comes to God, the more terrible sin will be to him.[4]

v.7 Truth is the creator of fellowship. If men are really walking in the light, they have fellowship one with another. No belief can be fully Christian if it separates a man from his fellow-men.^[5]

v.8 The false teachers not only denied that sin breaks our fellowship with God (1:6) and they had a sinful nature (1:8), but they also denied that their conduct involved any sin at all (1:10).  That was a lie that ignored one basic truth: all people are sinners by nature and by practice.  At conversion all our sins are forgiven – past, present, and future.  Yet even after we become Christians, we still sin and still need to confess.  This kind of confession is not offered to gain God’s acceptance, but to remove the barrier to fellowship that our sin has put between us and him.[6]

v.9 If God has forgiven us for our sins because of Christ’s death, why must we confess our sins? In admitting our sins and receiving Christ’s cleansing, we are: (1) agreeing with God that our sin truly is sin and that we are willing to turn from it, (2) ensuring that we don’t conceal our sins from him and consequently from ourselves, and (3) recognizing our tendency to sin and relying on his power to overcome it.[7]

To confess means, “to say the same as.” When we confess our sin, we are willing to say (and believe) the same thing about our sin that God says about it.[8]

Confess is a verb in the present tense; the meaning is that we should keep on confessing our sin – instead of referring to a “once-for-all’ confession of sin at our conversion.[9]

However, confession is still vital to maintain relationship with God, and this is the context John speaks from. As God convicts us of sin that is hindering our fellowship with Him, we must confess it and receive forgiveness and cleansing for our relationship with God to continue without hindrance.[10]

[2] David Guzik, http://www.enduringword.com/commentaries/6201.htm

[3] William Barclay, The Letters of John and Jude, Daily Study Bible Series CD (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 2000).

[4] William Barclay, The Letters of John and Jude, Daily Study Bible Series CD (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 2000).

[5]The Letters of John and Jude ( ed. William Barclay, lecturer in the University of Glasgow;Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 2000).

[6]Life Application Study Bible, study notes (co-published by Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan; Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1991) 2275.

[7] Life Application Study Bible, study notes (co-published by Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan; Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1991) 2276.

[8] David Guzik, http://www.enduringword.com/commentaries/6201.htm

[9] David Guzik, http://www.enduringword.com/commentaries/6201.htm

[10] David Guzik, http://www.enduringword.com/commentaries/6201.htm

v.2 “The ‘words spoken in the past’ are the prophetic oracles with special reference here to the day of the Lord. The “command” is a way of referring to the moral demands of the Christian faith and primarily to the command of love. These prophecies and commands were given to the early Christians by the NT prophets and apostles (cf. Eph 2:20).”[1]

v.3 “Peter next states a primary thing to be remembered from the prophetic and apostolic deposit: the appearance of scoffers in the last days, who deny biblical truths and live in an ungodly way (cf. Da 7:25; 11:36-39; Mt 24:3-5, 11, 23-26; 1Ti 4:1ff.; 2Ti 3:1-7; Jude 17-18). The “last days” are the days that come between the first coming of the Messiah and his second coming. The “scoffers” are the false teachers of ch. 2 who deny a future eschatology.”[2]

vv.3-4 “The “scoffer” or “mocker” is certainly not a new phenomenon in the history of God’s people. The psalmist pronounced a blessing on the person of God who does not “sit in the seat of mockers” (Ps. 1:1). And three times Proverbs presents the mocker as someone whose ways are to be avoided by the righteous (Prov. 1:22; 9:7 – 8; 13:1). Mocking is one all-too-typical response to the truth of God’s revelation. Mockers do not so much reason against the truth of God as they disdain and belittle it. Rather than standing under God’s Word, mockers, as Peter points out, follow “their own evil desires.” “Evil desires” translates a single Greek word (epithymia) that Peter uses to encapsulate the ungodly orientation of such people (see 1:4; 2:10, 18). These scoffers, Peter says, insist on “going” their own way rather than following the will of God.

Mockery is a general response to the truth of God. But the mockers or scoffers that Peter is particularly concerned about were not, apparently, mocking the faith generally. Indeed, they claimed to be following the faith (e.g., 2:18 – 22). Rather they were scoffing at one particular teaching of the faith: the belief that Christ will return in glory at the end of history. “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised?” they kept asking. By putting “coming” in quotation marks and adding the word “this,” the NIV rightly suggests that the word has a special reference here. The Greek word is parousia, used throughout the New Testament as a technical term referring to the “coming” of Christ in the last day.”[3]

v.4 “Part of the early church proclamation was the announcement of the return of Jesus to complete the work of salvation and to punish the wicked (e.g., Mt 24:3ff.; Jn 14:1-3; Ac 1:11; 17:31; Ro 13:11; 1Co 15:23; 1Th 4:13-5:11; 2Th 1:7-10; Heb 9:28; Rev 1:7). The false teachers ask, “Where is this `coming’ he promised?” Mocking the faith of Christians, they support their own position by claiming, “Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” “Our fathers” most likely means the OT fathers (see Jn 6:31; Ac 3:13; Ro 9:5; Heb 1:1). “Died” (lit., “fell asleep”) is a lovely metaphor for the death of believers (cf. Ac 7:60; 1Th 4:13-14). The argument of the false teachers is essentially a naturalistic one–a kind of uniformitarianism that rules out any divine intervention in history.”[4]

v.5-6 “But they ‘deliberately [lit., willingly] forget’ the great Flood, when God intervened in history by destroying the world. What they forget is not only the Flood but also God’s prior activity by his word–the existence of the heavens and the watery formation of the earth (Ge 1:2-10). It seems unlikely that Peter is seeking to affirm that water was the basic material of creation. He does not use the verb “create” but says that the earth “was formed out of water and with water.” In Genesis the sky separates the waters from the waters by the word of God, and the land appears out of the water by the same word.

At the beginning of v. 6, the phrase “by these waters” (lit., “through these”) probably refers to both water and the word as the agents used by God for destroying the former world (v. 6), just as word and fire will be the destructive agents in the future (v. 7). “The world of that time” obviously means that the inhabitants of the earth were destroyed (the world itself was not destroyed).”[5]

“What Peter is reminding these false teachers about, then, is the creation of the entire universe. Both the world we can experience through our senses (“the earth”) and the unseen spiritual realm (“heavens,” or better, “heaven”) were brought into being “by God’s word.” As Genesis 1 repeatedly makes clear, all of creation is the effect of God’s powerful word. He spoke, and it came to pass. “By the word of the LORD were the heavens made” (Ps. 33:6); “the universe was formed at God’s command” (Heb. 11:3).”[6]

v.7 “Peter’s reference to a future conflagration to destroy the present cosmos is highly unusual. The OT speaks of fire in the day of the Lord (Ps 97:3; Isa 66:15-16; Da 7:9-10; Mic 1:4; Mal 4:1). And Mt 3:11-12 speaks of the future baptism of fire by the Messiah in which he will destroy the “chaff” (cf. 2Th 1:7). Peter argues that just as in the past God purged the then-existing world by his word and by waters, so in the future he will purge the world by his word and by fire. Whether this will take place before the Millennium or after, Peter does not say. Matthew 3:11-12 supports the former, while the sequence of Rev 20-21 puts the new heaven and new earth after the thousand years (cf. 2Pe 3:13).”[7]

v.9 “The third argument against the scoffers grows out of the second one. God’s delay is gracious; it is not caused by inability or indifference. The scoffers argued that God was slow to keep his promise of the new age, and evidently some Christians were influenced by this thinking. God’s time plan is influenced by his being “patient”an attribute of God prominent in Scripture (cf. Ex 34:6; Nu 14:18; Ps 86:15; Jer 15:15; Ro 2:4; 9:22). In Ro 9:22 Paul says that God “bore with great patience the objects of his wrath.” Here in v. 9 that patience is directed “to you.”

v.10 “Peter’s fourth argument against the false teachers reaffirms the early church’s teaching that the day of the Lord will come suddenly. Jesus taught that his coming would be as unexpected as the coming of a thief (Mt 24:42-44), an analogy often repeated in the NT (cf. Lk 12:39; 1Th 5:2; Rev 3:3; 16:15). The “Lord” in these texts is Jesus in his exaltation and should be so understood here. In that catastrophic day “the heavens will disappear” with a loud noise made by something passing swiftly through the air. The sky will recede “like a scroll, rolling up” (Rev 6:14), and the earth and sky will flee from the presence of God (Rev 20:11).

“The elements”could be the basic materials that make up the world; those commonly thought of in NT times were air, earth, fire, and water. But it is also possible that Peter is looking at three realms (the heavens, that of the heavenly bodies, and the earth), and that the “the elements” refers to “heavenly bodies,” those mentioned in other eschatological passages (Joel 2:10; Mk 13:24-26; Rev 6:12-13). The phrase “the earth and everything in it” probably refers to all human products that will be destroyed.”[8]

v.11 “Peter now makes the impending disintegration of the universe the ground for a personal challenge to his readers.  In view of what is in store for the world, Peter asks his readers, “What kind of people ought you to be?” Since the day of the Lord will soon come to punish the wicked and reward the righteous, believers should live “holy and godly lives.” Holiness entails separation from evil and dedication to God; godliness relates to piety and worship.”[9]

v.13 “New heaven and a new earth. The place God has prepared for his people for eternity.  Though this language may be somewhat figurative, we know this will be a place without sin where God will live with his saints forever.”[10]

vv.15-16 “[...] “Just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you” is significant in the light of Paul’s rebuke of Peter (Gal 2:11-14).  Peter had recognized the ministry of Paul and Barnabas to the Gentiles.  What had Paul written to the recipients of 2 Peter? We cannot answer that question. Nor is it necessary to do so in view of Peter’s general statement: “He [Paul] writes the same way in all his letters.” In Ro 2:4 Paul says that “God’s kindness leads you toward repentance.” Peter goes on to affirm that Paul’s letters contain “some things that are hard to understand.” The difficulty in Paul’s letters stems from the profundity of the God-given wisdom they contain. Apparently false teachers were seeking to use Pauline support for their opposition to Peter. Paul’s letters contain things–e.g., slogans and arguments–that can be given meanings far beyond what Paul intended.

The unlearned (NIV, “ignorant”) are those who have not learned the apostolic teaching (Ac 2:42), nor have they been taught by the Father (Jn 6:45). They are “unstable” because they are without a foundation (cf. comment on 2:14). They “distort” the things in Paul’s letters as they do the “other Scriptures.” Like Satan, the false teachers and their followers can quote Scripture out of context for their purpose (cf. Mt 4:6). Does Peter’s expression “the other Scriptures” imply that Paul’s writings were already considered Scripture by this time (c. A.D. 64)? This is the normal understanding of the Greek. That Paul’s writings should be considered “Scripture”–i.e., authoritative writing–is not surprising, for from the moment of composition they had the authority of commands of the Lord through his apostle (Ro 1:1; 1Co 14:37; Gal 1:1).

Twisting the Scriptures leads to “destruction” because it is the rejection of God’s way and the setting up of one’s own way in opposition to God (cf. Ro 8:7). In a time when the Christian church is plagued by heretical cults and false teaching, Peter’s warning about the irresponsible use of Scripture is important. Correct exegesis must be a continuing concern of the church.”[11]

vv.17-18 “With the word “therefore” and an affectionate reference to his readers, Peter begins his conclusion. These two verses touch on the main themes of the letter and summarize its contents. First, there is the reminder for his readers to watch out lest the false teachers lead them astray. Second, there is the exhortation to grow in Christ. The dominant motivation for writing this letter was Peter’s love and concern for the flock (cf. the repeated use of “dear friends”). Since he has told the believers beforehand about the false teachers, they are able to be on guard.

The “lawless men” will attempt by their error to shift the believers off their spiritual foundation. The word translated “secure position” occurs only here in the NT, but the related verb and adjective are important in Peter’s life (cf. Lk 22:32 of Jesus’ command to Peter) and also in this letter. The Christians’ guarding against false teachers includes (1) prior knowledge of their activities, (2) warning against their immoral lives (ch. 2; cf. Mt 7:16), (3) reminders of the historicity of the apostolic message (1:16-18), (4) the prophetic teaching of the past (1:19; 3:1-2), and (5) the warning of judgment (e.g., the Flood).

Now Peter speaks positively: “But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” In 1:3-11 he has already stressed the necessity for progress in Christian living. If Christians do not keep moving forward, they will regress or fall back. As Paul says, Christians never in this life attain all there is in Christ; so their goal is to know Christ in a fuller, more intimate way (Php 3:10-13; cf. Eph 1:17).

The closing doxology is notable for its direct ascription of “glory” to Christ. For a Jew who has learned the great words in Isa 42:8–”I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another”–this doxology is a clear confession of Christ (cf. Jn 5:23: “that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father”). This supreme honor belongs to Jesus Christ today (“now”) and “forever.” So Peter finally points his readers to the new age, “the day of the Lord,” when Christ will be manifested in all his glory.”[12]

[2] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 3:3.

[3] Douglas J. Moo, 2 Peter, Jude, The NIV Application Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996) 166.

[4] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 3:4.

[5] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 3:5-6.

[6] Douglas J. Moo, 2 Peter, Jude, The NIV Application Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996) 169.

[7] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 3:7.

[8] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 3:10.

[9] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 3:11.

[10] Quest Study Bible, study notes (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan, 2003) 1695.

[11] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 3:15-16.

[12] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 3:17-18.

‘Bringing swift destruction on themselves’ refers to the everlasting state of torment and death. It will be ‘swift’ because it will descend on them suddenly, either at their death or at the return of the Lord.”[1]

v.4 “When did God send fallen angels to hell? We don’t know.  This may have happened after they joined Satan’s rebellion against God, before the creation of man.  For reasons unknown to us, however, not all fallen angels were banished to hell.  Vast numbers were allowed to influence this world, presumably as demons or spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms (Eph 6:12).”[2]

“Peter uses the verb tartaroo (lit., ‘to hold captive in Tartarus’) to tell where the sinning angels were sent. ‘Tartarus,’ considered by the Greeks as a place under the earth that was lower than Hades where divine punishment was meted out, was also regarded this way in non-biblical Jewish literature. The usual translation of this verb as ‘sent them to hell’ only approximates the idea of a special place of confinement until the final judgment. Though ‘gloomy dungeons’ may be correct, ‘chains of darkness’ is an equally possible translation (cf. Jude 6).”[3]

“Peter probably does not want us to think of the angels as literally confined in dark caves or dungeons. The language is metaphorical; he is using a popular ancient conception of the afterlife to denote God’s judgment. Perhaps the metaphor is intended to suggest that God has restricted the scope of the (evil) angels’ activity as a result of their sin.”[4]

v.5 “Peter’s second example is the Flood. He has referred to this in his first letter (1Pe 3:18-22) and will do so again in the next chapter of this one (3:6). With Noah seven others were saved (his wife, his three sons, and his three daughters-in-law). They were guarded or protected by God during the Flood that wiped out the ungodly pre-Flood civilization. Noah was a ‘preacher of righteousness.’ This could refer to his preaching activity not recorded in the OT or to the fact that his lifestyle condemned sin and proclaimed righteousness to his contemporaries (Ge 6:9).”[5]

vv.7-8 “In the midst of God’s judgment of the cities of the plain, he delivered Lot, whom Peter calls ‘righteous.’ This is puzzling because in Genesis Lot is hardly notable for his righteousness. He seems worldly and weak and had to be dragged out of Sodom (Ge 19:16). Yet Abraham’s intercession in Ge 18:16-33 may imply that Lot was righteous. Furthermore, Peter may have inferred Lot’s righteousness from his deliverance from the destruction of Sodom and from his being ‘tormented’ and ‘distressed by the filthy lives’ of his fellow citizens. The contemporary application is plain. To what extent are Christians who are living today in a godless society ‘tormented’ by what they see?”[6]

v.9 “Peter now states the main point. It is one of abiding comfort: ‘The Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials.’ Suffering Christians anywhere and at any time can find consolation in the fact that their Lord knows all about their plight. Moreover, ‘the Lord knows how . . . to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment’. Immediate judgment of sinners is only the beginning. Temporal judgments, death, and ‘being in torment’ in Hades (Lk 16:23) do not exhaust the divine wrath. A great Judgment is yet future (Rev 20:11-15), followed by the ‘second death’ of fire (Rev 20:14).”[7]

v.10 “God’s wrath is especially certain to fall on the false teachers of Peter’s day. He characterizes them as “those who follow the corrupt desire of the sinful nature”–a reference to sexual profligacy. They also “despise authority.” ‘Authority’ may refer to the rejection of angelic powers (cf. Eph 1:21; Col 1:16), but more likely it refers to their rejection of the rule of the Lord Jesus Christ over them.  The false teachers are “bold and arrogant”–i.e., presumptuous and self-willed. They respect no one, and nothing restrains them. ‘They are not afraid to slander celestial beings’–probably referring to fallen angels. As to when they slandered or what kind of slander was involved, one can only surmise. Perhaps the false teachers were accused of being in league with Satan, and their reply was to disparage and mock him (cf. Jude 8-9).”[8]

v.13 “Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight.” “Pleasure” can, of course, be a neutral or even positive thing; God has himself created many things to give his people pleasure. But the Greek word here for “pleasure,” hedone, is the word from which we derive “hedonist,” one who lives for only pleasure. The Greeks numbered this kind of pleasure among their four “deadly sins,” sometimes contrasting it with reason (cf. “unreasoning animals” in v. 12). In Peter’s day, as in ours, indulgence of sinful pleasure usually took place under cover of darkness. Practicing such hedonistic activities “in broad daylight” is therefore a sign that the false teachers are completely shameless about their indulgence.”

“Reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you.” Peter creates a connection with the earlier part of the verse by using the verb “reveling,” which comes from the same Greek root as the word the NIV translates “carouse.” One of Jude’s descriptions of his false teachers makes an interesting comparison with this clause in 2 Peter: “These men are blemishes at your love feasts, eating with you without the slightest qualm — shepherds who feed only themselves” (Jude 12a).  Peter’s reference to the false teachers “feasting with” the Christians to whom he writes suggests the same scenario: the early Christian “love feast” held in conjunction with the celebration of the Lord’s Supper. This “love feast” was a regular part of the early Christian fellowship, and it is generally recognized that Paul’s rebuke of the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 11:17 – 34 presupposes this practice. While we cannot be sure, then, it is likely that Peter here rebukes the false teachers for indulging their own sinful pleasures even as they continue to join with other Christians in celebrating the atoning work of Christ at the church’s fellowship meals [...].”[9]

v.14 “[...] So the vivid phrase “with eyes full of adultery” (meaning to desire every woman they see) implies that the false teachers desired to turn church gatherings into times of dissipation. Their eyes unceasingly looked for sin.  They “seduce” (or “lure”) “unstable” persons, i.e., those with no foundation to their lives.  In 1:12 of this letter Peter has spoken of his readers as being “firmly established in the truth,” and in 3:16-17 he will warn them of “unstable people” and of the danger of falling “from [their] secure position”.  Deep within these false teachers are thoughts of “greed” and avarice. Of them Peter exclaims, “An accursed brood!” (lit., “children of a curse”), meaning that God’s curse is on them.”[10]

“With eyes full of adultery, they never stop sinning.” Peter’s language is more vivid than the NIV translation; he claims that the false teachers have eyes full of “adulterous women.” By this he means that the false teachers are so addicted to sex that they look at every woman as a potential partner in their lust. ¹⁴ The NIV also fails to make clear that the phrase “never stop sinning” also refers to “eyes”; cf. REB: “They have eyes for nothing but loose women, eyes never ceasing from sin.”[11]

“They are experts in greed.” Here again the NIV rendering is accurate but loses some of the force of the original, which, literally translated, is “having a heart that has been trained in greed.” “Train” is a word drawn from the realm of athletics; it suggests that long, hard, and disciplined struggle to become proficient in a sport. These false teachers, Peter implies, are so devoted and consistent in their greed that they must have worked very hard at it for a long time! And it is their “heart” — the very center of one’s being in biblical perspective — that has become so proficient in greed. The word “greed” is a broad term. In Ephesians 4:19, for instance, Paul writes about those who have “given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, with a continual lust [pleonexia] for more.” In other words, “greed” need not relate only to money; it can also denote the desire for more sexual pleasure, power, food, and so forth. Since Peter has already used this word to depict the false teachers’ love of money (2:3), the “greed” here is also probably mainly directed to financial gain. But we should probably not restrict the word to this sphere.”[12]

vv.15-16 “The false teachers resemble Balaam, the son of Beor, in that Balaam loved money and was willing to pursue it instead of obeying God (Nu 22:5-24:25). Balaam also taught immorality (Nu 31:16; Rev 2:14). So the false teachers have left the biblical way and have gone into Balaam’s error–mercenary greed and sexual impurity. As Balaam went to curse the children of Israel for money (if he could), “he was rebuked for his wrongdoing by a donkey–a beast without speech.” Actually, according to the account in Nu 22:27-35, the rebuke is twofold: first from the donkey, then from the angel of the Lord.   Ironically the mute animal had more spiritual perception than the prophet! The utterance “restrained” the prophet’s insanity.”[13]

v.17 “[...] Peter goes on to describe the false teachers as “springs without water.” Christ provides “a spring of water welling up to eternal life” (Jn 4:13-14), and from those who believe in him flow streams of living water (Jn 7:37-38). But the false teachers give nothing because they have nothing to give. They are “mists driven by a storm,” a metaphor of their instability. The “blackest darkness . . . reserved for them” may refer to hell.”[14]

v.19 “They promise “freedom,” perhaps from any law or restraint of the flesh. Paul ran into similar error–”Everything is permissible for me” (1Co 6:12-13)–among false teachers in Corinth and possibly in Galatia (cf. Gal 5:14). Yet, Peter says, the very ones who speak of freedom are “slaves of depravity–for a man is a slave to whatever has mastered him.” To this the best parallel is Jesus’ word: “Everyone who sins is a slave to sin” (Jn 8:34; cf. Ro 6:16). So though the false teachers talk of religion and freedom, they do not know the Son; for as Jesus said, “If the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed” (Jn 8:36).”[15]

v.20 “[...] Verse 20 mentions the possibility of reverting to the old paganism after having “escaped the corruptions of the world” through knowing Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.  Is it possible, then, for Christians to lose their salvation? Many would answer affirmatively on the basis of this and similar texts (e.g., Heb 6:4-6; 10:26).  But this verse asserts only that false teachers who have for a time escaped from worldly corruption through knowing Christ and then turn away from the light of the Christian faith are worse off than they were before knowing Christ.  It uses no terminology affirming that they were Christians in reality (e.g., “children of God,” “born again,” “regenerate,” “redeemed”). The NT makes a distinction between those who are in the churches and those who are regenerate (cf. 2Co 13:5; 2Ti 2:18-19; 1Jn 3:7-8; 2:19).  So when Peter says, “They are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning,” the reference is to a lost apostate.”[16]

[2] Quest Study Bible, study notes (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan, 2003) 1693.

[3] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 2:4.

[4] Moo, Douglas J. “Examples of God’s Judgment (vv. 4 – 8)” In NIV Application Commentary, New Testament: 2 Peter and Jude. By Douglas J. Moo, 102. Grand  Rapids: Zondervan, © 1996.

[5] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 2:5.

[6] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 2:7-8.

[7] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 2:9.

[8] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 2:10.

[9] Moo, Douglas J. “The False Teachers’ Sensuality (vv. 13b – 16)” In NIV Application Commentary, New Testament: 2 Peter and Jude. By Douglas J. Moo, 125-127. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, © 1996.

[10] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 2:14.

[11] Moo, Douglas J. “The False Teachers’ Sensuality (vv. 13b – 16)” In NIV Application Commentary, New Testament: 2 Peter and Jude. By Douglas J. Moo, 125-127. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, © 1996.

[12] Moo, Douglas J. “The False Teachers’ Sensuality (vv. 13b – 16)” In NIV Application Commentary, New Testament: 2 Peter and Jude. By Douglas J. Moo, 125-127. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, © 1996.

[13] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 2:15-16.

[14] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 2:17.

[15] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 2:19.

[16] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 2:20.

v.5 “Because of the new birth and the promises associated with it, Christians participate in the divine nature (v. 4). But the new birth does not rule out human activity. Sanctification is a work of God in which believers cooperate. This is why the Bible gives ethical imperatives based on dogmatic indicatives (cf. Ro 6:11-14; 12:1-2; Php 2:12-13; 1Pe 1:13-21); this principle is in accord with biblical statements of how God works (cf. Ro 8:13b; Php 2:13). So Peter urgently calls for a progressive, active Christianity. It is by faith alone that we are saved through grace, but this saving faith does not continue by itself (Eph 2:8-10). Peter’s chain of eight virtues (vv. 5-7) starts with ‘faith’ and ends in ‘love’(cf. 1Ti 1:5).

Christians are told to ‘make every effort to add to [their] faith.’ In NT times the word ‘add’was used of making a rich or lavish provision. To make every ‘effort’ requires both zeal and seriousness in the pursuit of holiness. ‘Goodness’ is an attribute of Christ himself (1:3) and therefore is to be sought by his people. It is excellence of achievement or mastery in a specific field–in this case virtue or moral excellence (cf. Php 4:8; 1Pe 2:9). The ‘knowledge’ that is to be added to faith is the advance into the will of God. The false teachers (eventually known as the Gnostics) claimed a superior knowledge. The apostles stressed that it was necessary for those who know God to live a godly life (cf. 1Jn 2:3-4; 5:18) and that Christ taught them the will of the Father (Jn 15:15).”[2]

v.6 “The next virtue in Peter’s chain is ‘self-control’.  The concept of self-control played a great role in the philosophical ethics of classical Greece and Hellenism. But in NT ethical discussions it is not generally used, perhaps because the normal biblical emphasis is on God at work in us by the Spirit rather than on human self-mastery. Self-control is the exact opposite of the excesses (2:3, 14) of the false teachers and the sexual abuses in the pagan world. The NT concept of self-control is instructive. Paul uses the verb ‘to control oneself’ of the unmarried (1Co 7:9; cf. Ac 24:25) and of his own self-discipline for the Gospel (1Co 9:25). In the only other use of the noun besides 2Pe 1:6, Paul lists it as one facet of the fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:23). So while the biblical ethic does include “self-control,” it sees it as the manifestation of the Spirit’s work in believers, resulting in the human activity Paul speaks of in Ro 8:13.

Following self-control is ‘perseverance’ or ‘patience’ This virtue views time with God’s eyes (3:8) while waiting for Christ’s return and for the punishment of sin. Perseverance is the ability to continue in the faith and resist the pressures of the world system (cf. Lk 8:15; Ro 5:3; Heb 12:2). ‘Godliness’ is piety or devotion to the person of God.”[3]

v.7 “The first word he uses is philadelphia, “love of the brother,” or, as NIV renders it, “brotherly kindness.” In distinction from the second word, the familiar agape, philadelphia probably refers to love expressed among fellow Christians. Agape, then, is not a completely different love, but embraces “love of the brethren” as one sphere of Christian love in its fullest scope — that Spirit-given act of the will by which we treat other people with active benevolence. Surely it is not by chance that love, the crown of Christian virtues (see 1 Cor. 13), comes at the climax of Peter’s staircase of Christian qualities. Note the parallel in Colossians 3:14: “And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity.” Love is not only the last and greatest Christian virtue; it is also the “glue” that holds all the rest of them together, the quality without which all the others will be less than they should be.”[4]

v.10 ““Calling” and “election,” words closely related in the Greek probably work together to emphasize the single concept Peter has in mind: God’s, or Christ’s, effective drawing of the sinner to himself for salvation (see v. 3). The Christian must earnestly seek to grow in Christian virtue in order to “validate” this calling of God.

Peter mentions two reasons why it is important for Christians to “make their calling and election sure,” one negative and one positive. Negatively, Christians are to respond in this way so that they “will never fall.” James uses the word translated “fall” here to mean “sin” (James 2:10; 3:2; NIV translates “stumble”). But it is unlikely that Peter is suggesting believers may attain the position of never sinning; James himself insists that “we all stumble in many ways” (3:2). What Peter may mean is that that the fruitful Christian “will be spared a disastrous coming to grief” — that no serious interruptions on the path to glory will occur. This meaning of the term is certainly possible, since Paul contrasts “stumbling” with “falling beyond recovery” in Romans 11:11. But most commentators think that the “stumbling” here is of a final nature, denoting a fall that prevents one from getting to heaven. They are probably correct. The “stumbling” here is the opposite of “receiving a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (v. 11) and seems to be equivalent to the “falling” that Jude contrasts with being presented faultless before the Lord in the last day (Jude 24).”[5]

Peter tells us that if we see spiritual growth taking place in our lives, we can be confident that we are Christians.  Those who encounter God’s grace will see evidence of that encounter – both internal and external signs that they have been (and continue to be) changed.”[6]

vv.13-14 “That Peter knows that he will not always live in ‘the tent of this body’ underlines what he has been saying. The word ‘tent’ was used of a body either living or dead (2Co 5:1, 4). Although it is possible that Peter was influenced by Paul’s usage, it is also possible that they shared a common linguistic and conceptual heritage. Peter knows that he will soon die and refers to a special revelation Jesus gave him (possibly Jn 21:18-19, where Jesus spoke of a violent death for Peter).

For Christians death should hold no terrors; it is like putting off old clothes or like exiting from old age. According to Paul, to die is to ‘be with Christ’ (Php 1:23) in a new way. So in view of his approaching death, Peter wants ‘to refresh [his readers' ] memory’—‘refresh’ means ‘to wake up’ or ‘arouse.’”[7]

vv.17-18 “These verses explain how and when Peter was an eyewitness of the majesty of Jesus Christ. God the Father gave honor and glory to Jesus. The ‘honor’ is the public acknowledgment of his sonship (cf. Ps 2:6-7; Mt 3:17; Lk 3:22), and the ‘glory’ is the transfiguration of the humiliated Son into his glorious splendor.

v.19 “By saying ‘And we have the word of the prophets made more certain,’ Peter indicates that the OT prophets spoke of the same things he did and that their words are made more certain because the Transfiguration was a foreview of their fulfillment. The Scriptures, in other words, confirm the apostolic witness. Peter is making an obvious comparison between the OT prophecies (which were accepted as God’s reliable word) and the apostles’ testimony or that of the Voice at the Transfiguration.

v.21 “Each prophecy originated in God, not in the will of a human being. No prophet wrote his own private ideas. This verse is notable for the light it sheds on how Scripture was produced. Peter’s statement ‘men spoke from God’ implies the dual authorship of Scripture–a teaching also implied in the OT (see 2Sa 23:2; Jer 1:7, 9). The human prophets spoke, but God so worked in them that what they said was his word. It was not through a process of dictation or through a state of ecstasy that the writers of Scripture spoke but through the control of the Spirit of God—‘as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.’”[8]

[2] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 1:5.

[3] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 1:6.

[4] Moo, Douglas J. “The Believer’s Responsibility (vv. 5 – 9)” In NIV Application Commentary, New Testament: 2 Peter and Jude. By Douglas J. Moo, 46. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, © 1996.

[5] Moo, Douglas J. “The Importance of Godliness (vv. 10 – 11)” In NIV Application Commentary, New Testament: 2 Peter and Jude. By Douglas J. Moo, 49. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, © 1996.

[6] Quest Study Bible, study notes (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan, 2003) 1692.

[7] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 1:13-14.

[8] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) note on 2 Peter 1:19.

“The elder has authority; he is called to exercise a shepherd’s oversight. Christ the Chief Shepherd has called him to exercise a shepherd’s care, but the undershepherd is not a stand-in for the Lord. He presents the word of the Lord, not his own decree; he enforces the revealed will of the Lord, not his own wishes.”[2]

v.5 “The advice to this group is to listen to the wisdom of the elders and live in accordance with their instruction; that is, they are ‘to submit.’  The term submission should be understood as ‘living according to some constituted order’ – here, the order established by the directives of the elders. And since they have already been instructed to lead, not by domination but by example, we can assume that submission here was not some onerous task. Rather, it was joyfully acceptable to those who wanted to live in accordance with God’s will. […]  Whether leader or laity, whether old or young, Christians are to develop a deferential and humble attitude toward one another. Peter hinted at this in 3:8-12 and 4:7-11; he now makes it more explicit. The elder is not to arrogate himself to the position of dominant partner, nor are the younger members to rebel against the authority of the elders; rather, they are to respect one another mutually. The elder’s service is by way of leadership while the younger members’ service is by way of conformity to the norm of the elders.”[3]

vv.6 “The Christian must humble himself under his mighty hand. The phrase the mighty hand of God is common in the Old Testament; and it is most often used in connection with the deliverance which God wrought for his people when he brought them out of Egypt. ‘With a strong hand,’ said Moses, ‘the Lord has brought you out of Egypt’ (Exodus 13:9). ‘Thou hast only begun to show thy servant thy greatness, and thy mighty hand’ (Deuteronomy 3:24). God brought his people forth out of Egypt with a mighty hand (Deuteronomy 9:26). The idea is that God’s mighty hand is on the destiny of his people, if they will humbly and faithfully accept his guidance. After all the varied experiences of life, Joseph could say to the brothers who had once sought to eliminate him: ‘As for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good’ (Genesis 50:20). The Christian never resents the experiences of life and never rebels against them, because he knows that the mighty hand of God is on the tiller of his life and that he has a destiny for him.”[4]

vv.8-9 “Peter has reminded us that the testings do not destroy our faith, but purify it. Since the peculiar nature of faith is its looking, not to oneself, but to the Lord, it is most strongly grounded when it is most dependent. ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.’ So the Lord said to Paul, and Paul could therefore say: ‘For when I am weak, then I am strong.’ In order to resist the devil we draw near to God.”[5]

“The exhortation to stand firm in v.8 now finds a new grounding and reason.  Not only has Christ suffered, but other Christians throughout the world are also suffering; the koinonia of persecution included Christ and the company of Christians throughout the world.”[6]

“Belief in the sovereignty of God and in his fatherly concern for us (vv. 6-7) does not permit us to sit back and do nothing. We are to ‘work out [our] salvation’ because ‘it is God who works in [us]’ (Philippians 2:12-13). So here Peter warns his flock of the danger of making the fact of God’s sovereign care an excuse for inactivity. ‘Be sober, be watchful’ perhaps reflects Peter’s own experience in which Satan had ‘sifted’ him (Luke 22:31) and he had failed to ‘watch’ (Matt 26:38; Mark 14:34). God’s sovereignty does not preclude peril to the Christian life. Peter calls Satan ‘your enemy the devil’ and likens him to a lion in search of prey. The word ‘enemy’ (antidikos, ‘adversary’) meant an opponent in a lawsuit (BAG, p. 73; cf. Job 1:6 ff.; Zech 3:1; Rev 12:10). ‘Devil’ (diabolos) is the Greek translation of the Hebrew ‘Satan’ (1 Chronicles 21:1; Job 2:1), which means `slanderer’ (cf. TDNT, 2:71-81; 7:151-65). According to Scripture, he has great power on earth, ‘being the prince of this world’ (John 14:30) and ‘the ruler of the kingdom of the air’ (Eph 2:2). But God has limited his activity. Through his captive subjects (Eph 2:2; 2Tim 2:25-26), the devil attempted to destroy the infant church by persecution.

“The Christian response to satanic opposition is not panic or flight but firm resistance in faith (v. 9). ‘Resist’ (antistete) is the same word as that found in Ephesians 6:11-13 and James 4:7 in contexts of struggle against hostile spiritual forces.”[7]

vv.12-14 “‘She who is in Babylon’ almost certainly refers to the church in Rome. Babylon became a code word for Rome for early Christians, as it was in some Jewish literature of the time. The use of the term here also reminds us that it is not just the Christians in Asia Minor who are aliens and exiles. Babylon was the place of Judah’s exile, and in Babylon as in Asia Minor, Christians are still outsiders, exiles, until Christ returns in glory.[8]

“Therefore, as we come to the end of a marvelous letter, we too are confronted with the same call to responsible living in our world. We are called to live honorably in our society so that there are no grounds of accusation against us and we can make the biggest possible impact on our world. We are called to live a holy life, abstaining from sin. We are called to live in light of God’s judgment, making sure that everything we do will be approved by God in that final hour. Our identity is not to be wrapped up in our social location, whether that be low or high, but in the fact that we are God’s family and are related to him as such, we are to serve one another with the gifts God has granted and live orderly and lovingly with one another. No matter how many adjustments we have to make as we read Peter’s letter in our world, we are anchored to his world by the fact of the common salvation that transforms our behavior (1:3-2:10), we are challenged to live circumspectly in our society (2:11-3:12), and we are expected to live as the family of God ought to live (3:13-5:11). When we live like this, people will glorify him on the day he visits us (2:12).”[9]

[2] Clowney, Edmund P., “The message of 1 Peter,” The Bible Speaks Today, (Downers Grove, Il: InterVarsity Press, 1988) 202.

[3] Scot McKnight, 1 Peter, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Intervarsity Press, 1996) 264.

[4] William Barclay, The Letters of James and Peter, Daily Study Bible Series (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1976) 314.

[5] Clowney, Edmund P., “The message of 1 Peter,” The Bible Speaks Today, (Downers Grove, Il: InterVarsity Press, 1988) 211.

[6] David L. Bartlett, “The First Letter of Peter,” New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998) 316.

[7] Edwin A Blum, Gen. Editor- Frank E. Gaebelein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 12 CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981).

[8] David L. Bartlett, “The First Letter of Peter,” New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998) 318.

[9] Scot McKnight, 1 Peter, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Intervarsity Press, 1996) 286.

“When the readers of the epistle are told to ‘arm’ themselves, it is presumably to do battle against those same fleshly powers that provided the context for Christ’s suffering. The metaphor is military and looks ahead to the battle against Satan, the roaring lion of 5:8. It seems plausible to suggest that the realm of the flesh is the realm where Satan can tempt and hurt the faithful, though it is not necessarily the realm under his control. The ‘same’ understanding presumably means the ‘same’ understanding that Christ had and corresponds to the intention or understanding of v.2, ‘the will of God.’”[2]

“Suffering in the flesh does not mean having bodily pain; it means doing fierce battle against the forces of human desire – the realm of the flesh – and bearing the suffering that comes with that battle.  When one does battle against the realm of flesh, one has already enlisted on the other side: the side of righteousness against sin; the side of the Spirit against the flesh.  Choosing life rather than death, the faithful Christian has ‘ceased from sin,’ moved from the realm of the old into the new.”[3]

v.6 “The vast majority of commentators today argue that Peter is referring to Christians in Asia Minor who heard the gospel while alive but are now physically dead.  Because this life is only a prelude to life after death, the gospel was preached to those who are (now) dead.  And because those people will have to give an account to God for their life, everyone must hear the gospel.  Finally, Peter expresses the ultimate purpose of preaching, that people, regardless of what happens to them in this life, might be able to live eternally (i.e., in ‘spirit’) with God.  The gospel is preached to all, including the (now) dead, because ultimately this life is only a prelude to a greater and endless world beyond.  Those who hear the gospel and respond, even if they are killed for their faith, will be vindicated ultimately before God.” [4]

v.8 “‘Above all’ (pro panton) reminds us of the primacy of agape love among fellow Christians. This love is to be ‘eager,’ ‘earnest’ (ektene, lit., ‘strained,’ BAG, p. 245; NIV, ‘deeply’). Agape love is capable of being commanded because it is not primarily an emotion but a decision of the will leading to action. (On the necessity of Christians’ loving one another, see Mark 12:30-33; John 13:34 f.; 15:12-17.) The reason for us to show love is that ‘love covers over a multitude of sins.’ This quotation from Proverbs 10:12 does not mean that our love covers or atones for our sins. In the proverb the meaning is that love does not ‘stir up’ sins or broadcast them. So the major idea is that love suffers in silence and bears all things (1Cor 13:5-7). Christians forgive faults in others because they know the forgiving grace of God in their own lives.”[5]

vv.10-11 “Hospitality is not a one-way virtue; every Christian is in some way capable of ministering to others. Every Christian has a gift (Rom 12:6-8; 1Cor 12:12-31) that he has received from God—whether at birth, rebirth, or sometime after is not stated. Since every Christian has a gift, his being equipped with it apparently takes place with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit at regeneration. That the Holy Spirit can take ‘natural’ talents and abilities and redirect them for Christ was most dramatically shown in Paul’s ministry. The believer is not only to view himself as gifted but also as a steward (oikonomos, ‘a responsible slave’; cf. TDNT, 5:149-51) and a minister (diakonountes). One of the longstanding misconceptions in church practice is the idea that only one person is to ‘minister’ in the local church. The biblical principle is that all can and should minister in one way or another.”[6]

vv.12-13 “(i) It is Peter’s view that persecution is inevitable. It is human nature to dislike and to regard with suspicion anyone who is different; the Christian is necessarily different from the man of the world. The particular impact of the Christian difference makes the matter more acute. To the world the Christian brings the standards of Jesus Christ. That is another way of saying that he inevitably is a kind of conscience to any society in which he moves; and many a man would gladly eliminate the trouble—some twinges of conscience. The very goodness of Christianity can be an offence to a world in which goodness is regarded as a handicap.

(ii) It is Peter’s view that persecution is a test. It is a test in a double sense. A man’s devotion to a principle can be measured by his willingness to suffer for it; therefore, any kind of persecution is a test of a man’s faith. But it is equally true that it is only the real Christian who will be persecuted. The Christian who compromises with the world will not be persecuted. In a double sense persecution is the test of the reality of a man’s faith.

(iii) Now we come to the uplifting things. Persecution is a sharing in the sufferings of Jesus Christ. When a man has to suffer for his Christianity he is walking the way his Master walked and sharing the Cross his Master carried. This is a favourite New Testament thought. If we suffer with him, we will be glorified with him (Romans 8:17). It is Paul’s desire to enter into the fellowship of the sufferings of Christ (Philippians 3:10). If we suffer with him, we shall reign with him (2 Timothy 2:12). If we remember that, anything we must suffer for the sake of Christ becomes a privilege and not a penalty.

(iv) Persecution is the way to glory. The Cross is the way to the crown. Jesus Christ is no man’s debtor and his joy and crown await the man who, through thick and thin, remains true to him.”[7]

vv.14-16 “Rather than taking these insults personally, Peter’s readers must take these insults as an occasion to see that they are blessed (4:14), for Jesus taught that way (Matt. 5:10, 11-12; cf. 10:24-25).  Peter therefore exhorts them to glorify God for their being identified with the name of Jesus (4:16); they are to wear his name proudly.  The reason they are to assume this stance against persecution is because ‘the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you’ (4:14).  That is, they are blessed by God and are to glorify him because of the presence of his Spirit on them [...]  This Spirit, especially when the saints are in stress, reveals the power, patience, and goodness of God to those who witness such events (cf. 1 Peter 2:12; 3:1, 16; cf. e.g., Acts 7:55).”[8]

v.19 “Finally, when facing suffering in the name of Christ, Christians must continue to do good works as an expression of their trust (4:19).  Obedience in the Bible is not an appendix to faith.  These two (obedience and faith) are so connected in the Bible that they are inseparable.  Believers are obedient, and the obedient ones believe.  Consequently, Peter exhorts his readers to hand over their lives to the faithful Creator by living a life of good deeds no matter what happens to them.”[9]

[2] David L. Bartlett, “The First Letter of Peter,” New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998) 300.

[3] David L. Bartlett, “The First Letter of Peter,” New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. XII (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998) 300.

[4] Scot McKnight, 1 Peter, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Intervarsity Press, 1996) 227-228.

[5] Edwin A Blum, Gen. Editor- Frank E. Gaebelein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 12 CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981).

[6] Edwin A Blum, Gen. Editor- Frank E. Gaebelein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 12 CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981).

[7] William Barclay, The Letters of James and Peter, Daily Study Bible Series (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1976) 297-298.

[8] Scot McKnight, 1 Peter, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Intervarsity Press, 1996) 250.

[9] Scot McKnight, 1 Peter, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Intervarsity Press, 1996) 256-257.

v.5 “And like living stones extends the ‘stone’ imagery in a remarkable way to Peter’s readers, now portraying not only Christ but also Christians as ‘stones’ that live (cf. Eph. 2:19-22; 1 Co. 3:10-15; Heb. 3:2-6, and Mt. 16:18, all of which in various ways liken the church to a building) […] The beauty of this new and living ‘temple made of people’ should no longer be expensive gold and precious jewels, but the imperishable beauty of holiness and faith in Christians’ lives, qualities which much more effectively reflect the glory of God (cf. 1 Pet 3:4; 2 Co. 3:18) […] Spiritual when applied to ‘house’ and ‘sacrifices’ does not mean ‘immaterial’, but rather influenced or dominated by the Holy Spirit; sharing the character of the Holy Spirit (Rom.1:11; 1 Cor. 2:13, 15; 12:1; Gal. 6:1; Col 3:16).  Christians are a new temple of God under the influence and power of the Holy Spirit.”[2]

v.6 “The quotation is from Isaiah 28:16, where God promises that he will reject the rebellious leaders in Jerusalem and establish as a ‘sure foundation’ a cornerstone chosen and precious.  The fact that it would be the cornerstone, the first stone laid as the corner of the ‘foundation’ (Is. 28:16), indicates that the original prophecy was a prediction of the beginning of a new work by him (Is. 28:14-5, 17-22).  The fact that the stone is laid as a foundation stone in Zion, the location of the Jerusalem temple, hints at the idea that this new work would in fact replace the Jerusalem temple, something Peter has already made explicit in verses 4 and 5.”[3]

v.8 “Peter now quotes Isaiah 8:14, which says not only that the Lord himself will become ‘a sanctuary’ for those who follow him, but also that he will prove to be ‘a stone of offence, and a rock of stumbling’ to the disobedient of ‘both houses of Israel.’  Since the Lord himself is said to be the stone in Isaiah 8, this verse is another instance of how readily the early Christians applied to Christ many Old Testament passages which spoke of ‘the Lord.’ […] Though disobey often means simply “not obey,” it sometimes has the connotation of active or entrenched opposition to God’s word…Thus, because they disobey the word means not just that they refuse to believe the gospel – though it certainly includes that – but that they are living lives of disobedience and rebellion against God generally.”[4]

v.9 “Peter now returns to his elaboration of the blessings which belong to his readers […] They are also a royal priesthood, and a holy nation, two phrases quoted exactly from the Septuagint of Exodus 19:6, where God promises this status to all in Israel who keep his covenant.  Just as believers are a new spiritual race and a new spiritual priesthood, so they are a new spiritual nation which is based now neither on ethnic identity nor geographical boundaries but rather on allegiance to their heavenly King, Jesus Christ, who is truly King of kings and Lord of lords.”[5]

vv.9-10 “The two verses make a stunning claim. To unbelievers it seems that the Christian believers have been rejected, as Christ was rejected; they are aliens and exiles, foolish and straying. To the eyes of faith it is clear that Christians are chosen exactly as Christ the cornerstone is chosen, precious and beloved of God. From the perspective of faith, the world is turned upside down. Pagan unbelievers, who seem secure in their position and their prestige, are stumbling and falling.  Christian believers, who seem foolish and useless, are God’s own people – holy, blessed, royal.”[6]

v.18 “It is difficult for twentieth-century Christians to understand the slavery of the ancient world. During the time of the NT writings, slavery was not as bad as that practiced in America before the Civil War. Ancient slaves had fairly normal marital lives. Often people sold themselves into slavery (for a period of time) as a way to get ahead in the world. Nevertheless the lot of a slave could be very hard if the master was unkind. Here ‘slaves’ (oiketai) means ‘house-servants’—i.e., domestic slaves. Their Christian duty was submission and loyalty to their master, even if he was’ harsh (skolios, ‘perverse’).”[7]

v.19 “Yet he does not say that it is pleasing to God merely to endure unjust suffering and the accompanying sorrow.  Rather, it is only such action endured while one is mindful of God, or, more accurately, ‘because he is conscious of God.’  It is not a stoic self-motivated tenacity which holds out against all opposition but rather the opposite, the trusting awareness of God’s presence and never-failing care, which is the key to righteous suffering.  It is the confidence that God will ultimately right all wrongs which enables a Christian to submit to an unjust master without resentment, rebelliousness, self-pity, or despair.”[8]

v.20 “Peter here makes explicit what he implied in verse 19, namely, that it is not just any kind of endurance through suffering that God approves, but endurance through unjust suffering […] This kind of endurance is something only made possible by being ‘conscious of God’ and continually trusting him to care for those rights which have been trampled underfoot by others.”[9]

v.21 “Peter’s exhortation for Christians to be submissive now receives a christological foundation. The ‘calling’ (kaleo) is God’s grace that brings them to salvation (cf. comments on 1:15) and includes the divine ordination in all aspects of their life (Rom 8:28-30), ‘because [hoti] Christ also [kai] suffered for you.’ The sufferings of Christ referred to here are exemplary as well as expiatory on behalf of Christians. ‘Leaving you an example’ (hypogrammon, lit., ‘model, pattern to be copied in writing or drawing,’ […]) shows that Christ is the pattern for believers to copy in their lives. Just as in his life Christ suffered unjustly for doing God’s will, so Christian slaves may have this calling. Servants are to follow their Master’s tracks (cf. Matt 10:38; Mark 8:34; John 13:15).”[10]

v.23 “The instinctive response of human beings when so abused is to try to get even, to hurt in return for being hurt.  Or if that is impossible people will threaten to get even later, trying to give their enemies at least the anxiety that revenge may be taken sometime in the future.  But these responses are natural only to people who depend on themselves and believe that God does not have control of the situation.  To the suffering person who trusts deeply in God and believes that God is indeed in control of every situation, there is another response, one perfectly exhibited by Jesus: he trusted to him who judges justly.  The word trust means ‘handed over, delivered, committed’, an idea better conveyed by the English word ‘entrusted.”[11]

“Throughout his earthly ministry, Jesus was reviled (cf. Matt 11:19; 26:67; 27:30, 39-44; Mark 3:22). In all these situations, he was ever the patient sufferer who was able to control his tongue. He committed his case to the heavenly Judge whom he trusted to give a just judgment. ‘Entrusted’ (paredidou) is an imperfect tense in Greek, describing continual activity in the past.”[12]

[2] Wayne Gruden, 1 Peter, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Intervarsity Press, 1988) 99-100.

[3] Wayne Gruden, 1 Peter, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Intervarsity Press, 1988) 100.

[4] Wayne Gruden, 1 Peter, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Intervarsity Press, 1988) 106-107.

[5] Wayne Gruden, 1 Peter, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Intervarsity Press, 1988) 111-112.

[6] David L. Bartlett, The New Interpreter’s Bible Volume XII, (Nashville, TN:Abingdon Press, 1998) 266.

[7] Edwin A Blum, Gen. Editor- Frank E. Gaebelein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 12 CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981).

[8] Wayne Gruden, 1 Peter, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Intervarsity Press, 1988) 126-127.

[9] Wayne Gruden, 1 Peter, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Intervarsity Press, 1988) 127.

[10] Edwin A Blum, Gen. Editor- Frank E. Gaebelein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 12 CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981).

[11] Wayne Gruden, 1 Peter, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Intervarsity Press, 1988) 128.

[12] Edwin A Blum, Gen. Editor- Frank E. Gaebelein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 12 CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981).

“But the nation of Israel failed in the purposes of God, for, when he sent his Son into the world, they rejected and crucified him. When Jesus spoke the Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen, he said that the inheritance of Israel was to be taken from them and given to others (Matthew 21: 41; Mark 12: 9; Luke 20: 16). That is the basis of the great New Testament conception of the Christian Church as the true Israel, the new Israel, the Israel of God (cp. Galatians 6:16). All the privileges which had once belonged to Israel now belonged to the Christian church.  The mercy of God has gone out to the ends of the earth, and all the nations have seen the glory and experienced the grace of God.”[1]

v.7 “Just as gold is refined through fire, so also genuine faith is refined through suffering (cf. Ps 66:10; Mal 3:3). Further, genuine faith is more precious than gold, because genuine faith is imperishable, while even the most precious gold will one day perish. Notice how often the epistle suggests that the gifts of the Christian life have two qualities that set faith apart from the values of the larger world. Christian gifts are immeasurably precious, and Christian gifts are unfading and imperishable. We recall from this verse, too, that genuine faith is absolutely essential, because through faith God’s power preserves the faithful – in their faith – until the last day.”[2]

vv.13-16 “The section begins with ‘therefore,’ indicating that the calls to hopeful life that follow are based precisely in the nature of the God who has been praised in 1:3-12. Because you are called by such a God, therefore…Further, in the immediate context of 1:12, because you have heard such good news, therefore…”[3]

“The point of these verses is to compare the one who calls to the Christians who are called. A holy God demands a holy people, just as a God of hope creates a hopeful people. The quotation is from Leviticus (see Lev 11:44-45; 20:7; 29:2). One of the dominant themes of Leviticus is the claim that the holy God demands holiness of God’s own people. Here 1 Peter, like much early Christian writing, takes the words that Moses addressed to the children of Israel and applies them unapologetically to the early Christians. It is significant, perhaps, that Moses spoke these words to Israelites still in the wilderness in exile, as they awaited the entrance to the promised land. So in the next verse we are reminded that these early Christians live in exile.”[4]

v.17 “The notion of God as Judge underlies many exhortations to obedience in the Bible. Furthermore, if there is a God, if the God of Israel and Jesus are the true one God, and if this God is altogether holy, it follows that this God must judge if he is to allow anyone in his presence. He cannot tolerate any sin, for sin is repulsive to his holiness. The God of the Bible is the Judge of all (cf. Gen. 18:25; Ps. 75:7; Acts 5:1-10; Heb. 12:23; Revelation), and, as Peter says, he is ‘ready to judge the living and the dead’ (4:17). This judgment is according to their works, because these works are the logical result of one’s relationship to God (Matt. 16:27; 25:31-46; Rom. 2:6-11; 14:9-12; 1 Cor. 3:10-15; 2 Cor. 5:10).”[5]

“Knowing that God is judge and that he judges with absolute fairness drives us to live in a healthy fear and awe of him (cf. 2:17, 18; 3:2, 15; see Prov. 1:7; Matt. 10:28; 2 Cor. 5:11; 7:1; Eph. 5:21; Phil. 2:12; 1 Tim. 5:20; Heb. 4:1; 10:31). This can only refer to the constant knowledge the child of God (1 Peter 1:14) has that whatever he or she is about to think or do is subject to the scrutiny of God’s penetrating holiness and love. And when his beautiful holy love checks our thoughts and our actions, we live in the light of his character and in the fear of him, regardless of social conditions. This fear is neither dread nor anxiety; rather, it is the healthy response of a human being before an altogether different kind of being, God, and is a sign of spiritual health and gratitude. This holy Judge we now call ‘Father,’ a term indicating intimacy and love but also respect and submission. That is, though we now call God ‘Father’ (cf. 1:14), as Jesus taught (Matt. 6:9), we must not let that familiarity with God degrade his holiness, for God is just and his judgment will be just.”[6]

vv.18-19 “The Greek word lytroo (‘redeem’) goes back to the institution of slavery in ancient Rome. Any representative first-century church would have three kinds of members: slaves, freemen, and freed men. People became slaves in various ways—through war, bankruptcy, sale by themselves, sale by parents, or by birth. Slaves normally could look forward to freedom after a certain period of service and often after the payment of a price. Money to buy his freedom could be earned by the slave in his spare time or by doing more than his owner required. Often the price could be provided by someone else. By the payment of a price (lytron, antilytron), a person could be set free from his bondage or servitude. A freed man was a person who formerly had been a slave but was now redeemed. (See A.A. Rupprecht, “The Cultural and Political Setting of the New Testament.”) Jesus described his ministry in Mark 10:45: “The Son of Man … [came] to serve, and to give his life as a ransom [Iytron] for [anti, `in the place of'] many.”[7]

“Verse 19 stresses the value of the purchase price of redemption and at the same time identifies the blood as that of a spotless lamb—the Messiah. When Israel was in bondage in Egypt, the Passover lamb was killed and the blood provided release from bondage and judgment. Because Jesus is without sin, he is unique and his life is of infinite value as the Sacrificial Lamb of the Passover (cf. Exod 12:46; John 19:36; 1Cor 5:7).”[8]

[2] David L. Bartlett, The New Interpreter’s Bible Volume XII, (Nashville, TN:Abingdon Press, 1998) 251.

[3] David L. Bartlett, The New Interpreter’s Bible Volume XII, (Nashville, TN:Abingdon Press, 1998) 257.

[4] David L. Bartlett, The New Interpreter’s Bible Volume XII, (Nashville, TN:Abingdon Press, 1998) 258.

[5] Scot Mcknight, 1 Peter, The NIV Application Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996) 88.

[6] Scot Mcknight, 1 Peter, The NIV Application Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996) 89.

[7] Edwin A Blum, Gen. Editor- Frank E. Gaebelein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 12 CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981).

[8] Edwin A Blum, Gen. Editor- Frank E. Gaebelein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Volume 12 CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981).

“If the Christian should live in anticipated joy, rejoicing despite testing because of the reward that is coming (1:2), the rich should live in anticipated wailing, for their judgment is just as sure as the reward is for the Christians. James looks at their wealth from the perspective of the future and sees their great stores of possessions rotted or corroded. If he were writing today, he might have added something about inflation. He is simply applying Jesus’ words of Mt. 6:19: worldly wealth is at best temporary.

“But is is not just that they will not have their wealth in eternity. The ‘corrosion’ of their wealth is evidence that they did not need it. It will eat your flesh like fire in that, like the rich man in Jesus’ parable in Lk. 16:19–31, they will be cast into the fire of hell because of their failure to obey God and share. They have stored up wealth for ‘a rainy day’, but these are the last days. The end of the age came in Jesus. Now the final judgment has been announced. It is time to put treasure in heaven, not store it on earth.

“Far from giving, these people have done even worse in that they have failed to pay the workmen who harvested their fields. It may be that they wanted to wait until grain prices rose or that they did not feel the workmen had done a good enough job. The OT says that workmen are to be paid each evening (Lv. 19:13; Dt. 24:14–15), but even in the OT employers found ways to avoid this rule (Je. 22:13; Mal. 3:5). This was certainly being done according to the law of the land, so no human judge would hear the complaints of the workers. The workers, however, appealed to heaven, and the heavenly judge heard their cry. The term Lord Almighty reminds the readers of Is. 5:9 and the action that God took against the wealthy there. God does not hear and then do nothing; he hears and acts with awesome power.

“Returning to the theme of Lk. 16:19–31, James comments on the luxury of the wealthy. For them, each day was like a day of slaughter (or feasting), for in places without refrigeration one eats one’s fill of fresh meat whenever an animal is slaughtered, since the rest will have to be dried or salted to be preserved. Underneath the picture is James’s dark implication that ‘the day of slaughter’ is their day of slaughter, God’s day of slaughtering his enemies (Is. 30:33; 34:5–8).

“Again James make a final comment. These rich have condemned and murdered innocent men (or the righteous). He is not speaking of literal murder, for the Greek term translated ‘condemned’ indicates that the courts are involved. Nor does he mean that the righteous were executed. He is probably thinking of lawsuits in which the rich took away the wages or land of the poor. Left without adequate resources, the poor Christians starved or, weakened by poor food, died of diseases. James point out that the poor were not opposing the rich. There was no cause for this action by the rich. Another, and probably better, interpretation is ‘and do they not oppose you?’ These victims of the rich oppressors may be dead, but like the souls of the martyrs in Rev. 6:10, they are now in the very presence of God calling out for justice. That justice will not be long-delayed.”^[1]

vv.7-11: “The Christians are being oppressed by the rich. What are they to do? They could act on God’s behalf and bring his justice by force of arms if necessary but James has already said that human anger does not produce God’s righteousness (1:20). The Christians are instead to be patient or ‘endure patiently’ until Christ returns. This is the same virtue which is called ‘perseverance’ in 1:2–3. Let that virtue mature in you, is what James is saying. Farmers, of course, have to have this virtue. In Israel they waited for the autumn rains before planting and then had to wait and hope that the spring rains would come and bring the grain to maturity before harvest.

“Christian waiting is not waiting for something, but for someone. Twice James mentions the Lord’s coming and once says the Judge is standing at the door. The NT frequently refers to Christ’s return as ‘near’ (Rom. 13:12; Heb. 10:25; 1 Pet. 4:7). While most of the writers probably expected this to happen within their lifetime, it is a tension that is always ‘in the air’, for no-one knows when it will be, next second or next century (Mk. 13:32).

“The theme of the tongue is picked up again and summarized. The real issue is that they are not to grumble against each other. If they do, ignoring the instructions in 4:11–12, they will receive what they give (2:13). Referring to Christ as the Judge is an ominous warning, especially if he is standing at the door.

“The prophets who spoke in the name of the Lord, namely the OT prophets, also suffered at the hands of the wealthy and powerful. Yet now kings such as Ahab and Manasseh are forgotten or reviled, while prophets such as Elijah and Isaiah are honoured on earth (and even more so in heaven; cf. Mt. 5:11–12). There was in the case of the prophets something worth enduring for. The example of Job, not a prophet, but a righteous man, is tacked on to this. In the OT story Job is not very patient, for he complains a lot, but in the Jewish stories that were circulating in James’s day, Job is represented as a perfect example of patient endurance. In fact, one of these stories The Testament of Job, uses perseverance as the theme for the whole book. James’s readers would have recognized the story.

“The point is that God has not forgotten the Christians James is writing to. He cites Pss. 103:8 or 111:4, noting God’s compassion and mercy. God is not trying to make life hard for his believers, but is instead showing his mercy in assisting them to develop character and put their investments in heaven, where they will last forever.”^[2]

v.12: “The summary is finished. In a Greek letter one would now expect an oath certifying that what had been said in the letter was true. Instead James quotes Jesus (Mt. 5:33–37) and argues that Christians ought not to take oaths. It is not that the oath is in itself wrong, but that it divides speech into two levels. Some statements are sworn to and thus must be true, while others are just normal speech and may not be. Jesus said that people would be judged for every word (Mt. 12:36). All words are to be true. Everything is to be open and honest. Since God hears all words, it should be for the Christian as if all statements were an oath sworn before God.”^[3]

vv.13-18: “The next topic in the conclusion of a Greek letter was normally to wish, by the gods, that the recipients would be in good health. James does something better. He reminds the Christians of the provision God has made for their healing. This is not new teaching to his readers, but a reminder of standard Christian practice.

“Like all Christian teachers, James divides the evil a person may experience into two categories. The first includes the term ‘suffer’ and means those unpleasant experiences that come from outside, either the hardships experienced in spreading the gospel or persecution by evil people. These are what James has been discussing under the heading of ‘tests’ or ‘trials’ and has concluded in 5:7–11. Those suffering in this way should pray, not necessarily for deliverance, but for the ability to endure patiently. Those who are having a good life should also pray, but their prayer should be songs of praise. This leaves the second group of people experiencing evil, the sick.

“The sick are to call the elders of the church. When a person is so ill that he or she cannot go to church, they want the people with the most faith in the church to come and pray. Normally, when the illness is not major, the rule is ‘pray for each other’. The elders will act just like the disciples in Mk. 6:13 who must have learned it from Jesus, and anoint the sick person with oil as they pray, so their prayer is not only heard, but physically felt. The important fact is that the prayer is to the Lord and the anointing is done in the name of the Lord. It is the Lord, not the power of the prayer or the oil, who will raise him up. And that is just how James promises that the Lord will respond to the prayer offered in faith. This is not a ‘hope so’ or ‘maybe’ prayer, but a prayer which shows secure confidence that God will heal because the elders have first listened to God and have received this confidence in their hearts. It is close to Paul’s gift of faith in 1 Cor. 12:9. Such prayers take time; they are not a quick ritual or routine.

“James discusses the connection that sometimes exists between sickness and sin. All sickness does not have to do with sin (Jn. 9:3), but sin can cause sickness (1 Cor. 11:30). If sin is involved, then this root needs to be dealt with before moving on to the fruit of the root, the sickness itself. James assures his readers that such sins will be forgiven. God will not withhold forgiveness to prolong the sickness. In fact, James argues that it would be better to take care of sin before it causes severe illness. Confess your sins to each other. No elder is needed for this as each believer is a priest. There is value in confessing sin out loud and receiving from another believer the assurance that it is forgiven.

“It may be that a reader of the letter will say, ‘That is fine for elders, but I am just an ordinary Christian. How can I pray for anyone’s healing? How can I hear their confessions?’ Yet as believers we are righteous, so our prayers are powerful and effective. Elijah, James notes, was also an ordinary man but, like the believers here, he had an extraordinary God who heard and answered prayer. Elijah was an important figure, not only in the OT, but also in Jewish legends. In those legends he is often associated with prayer. That is why even though prayer for rain is not mentioned explicitly in 1 Ki. 17:1 or 18:16–46, James, along with the Jews of his day, assumes that it was involved.”^[4]

vv.19-20: “James closes by stating exactly why he has written this letter. The principle he states is the one he is following. Some of his readers had indeed wandered from the truth, as we have seen from the problems in the church. This phrase is used for serious departures from the faith (cf. Is. 9:16), not an occasional slip into sin. If it happens to a believer, someone should bring them back, as the ‘spiritual’ are supposed to do in Gal. 6:1. Rather than condemnation, restoration is the goal. And that is what James hopes will happen.

“Such restoration has a wonderful result. It is not just that a sinner is turned from the error of his way and so there is less sin in the world, but that the person is also saved from death, meaning eternal death (1 Jn. 5:16–17; Jude 22–23), although physical death could, of course, also result (Acts 5:1–11). A multitude of sins are covered over. Pr. 10:12, quoted in 1 Pet. 4:8, says that ‘love covers over all wrongs’ or ‘love covers a multitude of sins’. By ‘cover’ these authors presumably mean ‘atone for’, since a frequent OT image is that of the blood of an offering ‘covering’ sin. The opposite of love is hatred which spreads rumours and stirs up strife. For James love acts through bringing the person as gently as possible back to repentance. That repentance will be accepted by God, who will forgive the sins. Then the forgiven person can continue on the right way, rejoicing in their tests, for they know that their reward is coming.”^[5]

^[1] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 5:1–6). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

^[2] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 5:7–11). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

^[3] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 5:12). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

^[4] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 5:13–18). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

^[5] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 5:19–20). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

“James paints a picture of the church as he saw it: fights and quarrels, battle, kill and covet. The ‘kill’ probably refers to killing with words rather than literal murder, but the whole picture is familiar to anyone who knows the modern church. All of these fights and battles were certainly justified by those involved, perhaps as ‘striving for the truth’. But James writes of them just as they are in God’s eyes. He traces the origin of these conflicts, not to his readers’ love of God, but to your desires, the evil impulse that we have already learned about in 1:14–15.

“All of their arguing is fruitless: they do not get what they want, because you do not ask God. ‘But we do pray!’ might be their response. ‘You pray, but it is not effective, for your motives are wrong.’ They are not seeking God’s will or God’s wisdom, but their will: ‘God bless my plans.’ Their motive is their desires or pleasures. God’s goal is not to give human beings what their own impulses demand; his goal is that human beings will learn to love what he loves. It is not that God does not want people to have pleasure, but that he wants to train them to take pleasure in what he knows is truly good. As with Christ, crucifixion comes before resurrection for God’s people (Gal. 5:24).

“In claiming to trust in God and yet living according to their own desires these people are adulterous. The term is literally ‘adulteresses’, not that they were all women, but that the church is the bride of Christ (2 Cor. 11:2; Rev. 19, 21) as Israel was God’s bride (Is. 1:21; Je. 3; Ho. 1–3). To go after another lover is to be unfaithful to God, so friendship with the world is hatred towards God (cf. Mt. 6:24; 1 Jn. 3:15). It is not that it is hard or painful to serve both God and ‘desire’ or ‘the world’; it is impossible. The person who tries to become a friend of the world is actually God’s enemy. They may be an orthodox-believing and church-going enemy, but they are nonetheless an enemy.

“At this point James cites Scripture, but there is no known occurrence of this saying. He must either be citing the general sense of Scripture, or else a book he knows about but which is now lost. The niv says, the spirit he caused to live in us envies intensely which seems to refer to the human spirit and its tendency to envy. While this is true enough, it does not seem to fit the context. Better is the translation, ‘God jealously longs for the spirit he made to live in us’. That means that God gave to each person their spirit. He jealously longs for pure love in return (cf. Ex. 20:5–6). Scripture does not speak emptily about this jealousy of God, as Israel found out from painful experience when she tried to serve both God and Baal.

“James’s argument might drive people to despair because of their sin. James claims, however, that God offers more grace rather than condemnation, to the believer who repents. To back this up James quotes Pr. 3:34, also quoted in 1 Pet. 5:5: God does give grace to the humble (i.e. the repentant).

“James next shows us what such humility looks like. Submit yourselves, then, to God. The main part of repentance is to stop doing what one was doing and start obeying God. Resist the devil. The devil is the ultimate source of testing or temptation (Mt. 4:1–11; Mk. 8:28–34; Lk. 22:31; Jn. 13:2, 27), and to refuse the call of desire is to resist him. When resisted he flees; he may threaten disaster, but it is all a lie. It only has power if believed. Come near to God says James. This sound like Mal. 3:7 and Zc. 1:3. The picture is that of a person coming to offer sacrifice in the temple and coming near to God in the ceremony. Wash your hands. This is another OT picture (Ex. 30:19–21), illustrating the removal of sinful practices. Purify your hearts. Purification is mentioned in the OT (Ex. 19:10), but this is the making of the heart pure. The double-minded is the person who tries to serve both God and the world (see 1:8). To purify the heart is to be devoted to God alone. These actions should be accompanied by a mourning for one’s sinful state. Repentance consists of sorrow for sin plus a turning from sin and, where possible, making restitution for the damage caused by one’s sin. Finally, James include promises within his call to repentance. God will come near to you. He will lift you up. God will not leave a humble heart mourning. He will accept the repentance and respond with his love, raising the person up from their mourning into the warmth of his love.”^[1]

vv.11-12: “Having called for repentance, James concludes his section on the tongue and community harmony with another appeal. Christians are not to slander one another. A better translation might be ‘speak evil about’ or ‘say bad things against’ because ‘slander’ often implies in English that the things said are untrue and the Greek word does not imply this. As far as James is concerned, whether the things said are true or not, critical words divide the community and are not in order.”^[2]

vv.13-17: “The first group addressed consists of wealthier Christians. As usual, James carefully avoids calling them rich, but it is obvious that they have some possessions, for they can engage in foreign trade. Their plans are normal plans: travel to a certain city, sell the goods they brought with them and perhaps purchase others, and make money. Is this not the way business is done?

“James’s criticism is that they are in fact carrying on business just the way every other merchant does. As Christians they should be well aware of not only the uncertainties of the future, but also who controls it. While the picture of the brevity of life is drawn from the OT (e.g. Jb. 7:7, 9; Ps. 39:5–6), the idea of the foolishness of planning without taking God’s values into account is Jesus’ teaching in Lk. 12:16–21. James’s point is not simply that they ought to preface all of their plans with, If it is the Lord’s will. That would be a lip-service to God. Instead, he wants them to seek God’s plan and follow God’s will in their use of money. This appears in his comment that they boast and brag, or, better translated, ‘boast in their pride’. What type of pride is this? 1 Jn. 2:16 uses the same term for ‘the boasting of [or pride in] what [a person] has and does’. They are laying plans that God did not make, claiming an ability to control life which they do not have, and boasting about the good deals they will make. This is no more and no less than love of the world.

“A one-line proverb drives the point home. These people are in the church and certainly each one knows the good he ought to do. Why not consult God and ask him what ought to be done with the money? Perhaps they do not do this out of fear that God would ask them to share it with others. They do not do that good, so they are sinning. There is no theft or immorality or other crime staining their hands. They are just honest businessmen, but they sin just as much in failing to do the good they could as if they actually committed evil acts. In either case God’s teaching is being ignored.”^[3]

^[1] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 4:1–10). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

^[2] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 4:11–12). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

^[3] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 4:13–17). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

“The tongue is the chief tool of the teacher, so that is where James begins. Not many of you should presume to be teachers means more accurately ‘not many should become teachers’. Many want to be teachers and leaders of the Christian community. That, James argues, is a dangerous impulse which can lead to conflict within the church. One reason is that even if the desire to become a teacher is motivated by the best of reasons, the teacher will be judged more strictly. James includes himself among the teachers here, and he reminds us of Jesus, who condemned Jewish teachers (Mt. 23:1–33; Mk. 12:40; Lk. 20:47) and said that even our casual words would be judged (Mt. 12:36). Furthermore, Jesus taught that people are responsible for what they know (Lk. 12:47–48). The teacher claims to know and set himself or herself up as an example for the church, since in NT times the teacher taught by life and example more than by word. How responsible must such people be on the day of judgment!

“Everyone sins or stumbles, and the easiest place to stumble is in the use of the tongue. How easy it is to let a critical word slip out! If a person really has their tongue totally controlled so that they do not sin in that area, they are in fact so self-controlled as to be perfect, since the tongue is the last part of the body to get under control.

“James gives a series of examples that illustrate this fact. A horse (one of the most powerful ‘machines’ of James’s day) is controlled by a bit in its mouth. A ship, the largest moving vehicle of his day, is controlled by a rudder, which in those times was shaped like a tongue. The tongue is also powerful, as its boasting illustrates.

“James shifts his direction of argument at this point and compares the tongue to a spark which can set a forest on fire. The source of such a spark is hell itself. James is not speaking of the tongue as the God-given source of language. He is thinking, rather, of the tongue as something corrupted by the fall. Many, if not all, sins begin with a word. It may be spoken outwardly or silently ‘spoken’ inwardly.

“Unfortunately, powerful as it is, the tongue is hard to tame. James states the general truth about the ability of people to tame animals and compares it to their inability to tame the tongue. (He is not implying a scientific observation that all species of animals have been tamed.) Yet with all of this skill there is no human being who can control his or her own tongue. Even the most perfect saint experiences times when he or she wishes they could take back into their mouths words they have just spoken.

“The tongue, then, is restless. Restlessness is a characteristic of the demonic world and evil, while peace is a characteristic of God and his good kingdom. The tongue is always wanting to say something; often poison that produces death. The murders committed on behalf of a tyrant come about when he issues orders. We experience something similar on the personal level when we speak evil and realize that it has brought death to us rather than life.

“James adds some more examples. In church (and he is writing to believers) we use our tongues to praise God. But then we speak evil of (‘curse’ in his words—any speaking against a person can be in effect a curse) other people, and they are made in God’s image (Gn. 1:26–27; 9:6). In James’s day the king or emperor would set up his statue in the cities of his realm. If anyone insulted or cursed the statue, they were treated as if they had cursed the emperor to his face, for the statue was the image of the emperor. Therefore the insulting of a person, made in God’s image, is like insulting God himself. This duality, two different and contradictory words coming out of the same mouth, is a type of hypocrisy.

“James gives two examples to drive his point home. The first is drawn from the land of Israel where in the dry Jordan Valley one might see, in the distance, a stream flowing down the valley wall on the east side. One journeys to it hoping for water. Sometimes the water is fresh and good. Sometimes it is full of minerals (salt) and is undrinkable. But one thing is sure, the two types of water will not flow out of the same spring. Likewise one does not get a different type of fruit from a tree or vine than that which grows according to its nature. The implication of this argument is that if we are speaking insults or curses, that is our nature. Our praises of God are a coverup, a type of hypocrisy.”^[1]

vv.13-18: “James has left us in a desperate place. Who can control his or her tongue? How will we get free from this terrible power and come to perfection? That is the same cry that we may have felt at the end of 1:4. James’s answer is the same as it was there: we need not our own power, but God’s divine wisdom.

“James begins his discussion by showing the difference between a person who has divine wisdom and one who does not. The truly wise person is characterized by a good life, meaning a way of life that is good according to the teaching of Jesus. That person will also show the humility that comes from wisdom. A better translation here would be ‘meekness’. One of the problems in the churches which James knew was that teachers were attacking one another and being aggressively defensive. Meekness is the opposite of this aggression.

“The only true protection against this false wisdom and the evil in the tongue is God’s wisdom. James gives a list of the characteristics of this true wisdom which is very similar to the one that Paul gives for the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23). It is pure, which means that the person is sincere in obeying God, not having any twisted motives in their desire for holiness. It is peace-loving (Pr. 3:17; Heb. 12:11), meaning that it produces peace in the church. It is considerate or ‘gentle’ (Phil. 4:5; 1 Tim. 3:3), which means that it is non-combative. It is submissive, which speaks of a person who is willing to learn, be corrected, or will otherwise gladly respond to godly leadership. It is full of mercy and good fruit, which refers to the charitable giving that is so important to James. God, of course, is always merciful and giving, so those filled with his wisdom will be that way as well. Finally, it is impartial and sincere, which means that the person has a heart which is set solely on following God, unlike the ‘double-minded’ person of 1:8. The term sincere means that there is no falseness or play-acting in the person’s actions. As the person is to one’s face, so they are when one’s back is turned.”^[2]

^[1] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 3:1–12). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

^[2] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 3:13–18). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

“The Church must be the one place where all distinctions are wiped out. There can be no distinctions of rank and prestige when men meet in the presence of the King of glory. There can be no distinctions of merit when men meet in the presence of the supreme holiness of God. In his presence all earthly distinctions are less than the dust and all earthly righteousness is as filthy rags. In the presence of God all men are one.”^[1]

v.6: “In the society which James inhabited the rich oppressed the poor. They dragged them to the law-courts. No doubt this was for debt. At the bottom end of the social scale men were so poor that they could hardly live and moneylenders were plentiful and extortionate. In the ancient world there was a custom of summary arrest. If a creditor met a debtor on the street, he could seize him by the neck of his robe, nearly throttling him, and literally drag him to the law-courts. That is what the rich did to the poor. They had no sympathy; all they wanted was the uttermost farthing. It is not riches that James is condemning; it is the conduct of riches without sympathy.”^[2]

vv.8-11: “James goes on to lay down a great principle about the law of God. To break any part of it is to become a transgressor. The Jew was very apt to regard the law as a series of detached injunctions. To keep one was to gain credit; to break one was to incur debt. A man could add up the ones he kept and subtract the ones he broke and so emerge with a credit or a debit balance. There was a Rabbinic saying, “Whoever fulfills only one law, good is appointed to him; his days are prolonged and he will inherit the land.” Again many of the Rabbis held that “the Sabbath weighs against all precepts,” and to keep it was to keep the law.

“As James saw it, the whole law was the will of God; to break any part of it was to infringe that will and therefore to be guilty of sin. That is perfectly true. To break any part of the law is to become a transgressor in principle. Even under human justice a man becomes a criminal when he has broken one law. So James argues: “No matter how good you may be in other directions, if you treat people with respect of persons, you have acted against the will of God and you are a transgressor.”

“There is a great truth here which is both relevant and practical. We may put it much more simply. A man may be in nearly all respects a good man; and yet he may spoil himself by one fault. He may be moral in his action, pure in his speech, meticulous in his devotion. But he may be hard and self-righteous; rigid and unsympathetic; and, if so, his goodness is spoiled.”^[3]

v.14 “James first states his proposition in two questions, both of which declare that faith not accompanied by good deeds is of no saving value. The two questions set up the hypothetical case of a person who “claims to have” genuine saving faith. James does not say that the person actually has faith. The question “Can such faith save him?” is so structured in the Greek text that it expects a negative answer: “This faith [i.e., faith not accompanied by deeds] can’t save him, can it?” Faith that saves requires faith that proves itself in the deeds it produces. These deeds do not earn merit before God; rather, genuine faith is a concomitant of regeneration and therefore affects the believer’s behavior. Faith that does not issue in regenerate actions is superficial and spurious.”[4]

“There is belief which is purely intellectual.  For instance, I believe that the square on the hypotenuse of a right-angled triangle equals the sum of the squares on the other two sides; and if I had to, I could prove it – but it makes no difference to my life and living.  I accept it, but it has no effect upon me.  There is another kind of belief.  I believe that five and five make ten, and therefore, I will resolutely refuse to pay more than ten pence for two five penny bars of chocolate.  I take that fact, not only into my mind, but into my life and action.  What James is arguing against is the first kind of belief, the acceptance of a fact without allowing it to have any influence upon life.  The devils are intellectually convinced of the existence of God; they, in fact, tremble before him; but their belief does not alter them in the slightest.  What Paul held was the second kind of belief.  For him to believe in Jesus meant to take that belief into every section of life and to live by it.”[5]

vv.14-26: “Many skeptics argue that a contradiction exists between Paul’s statement that “a man is justified by faith apart from works” (Rm 3:28; cp. 4:5–6; Gl 2:16) and the teaching of James that “a man is justified by works and not by faith alone” (Jms 2:24). However, these positions actually complement one other.

“First, Paul and James addressed different situations. On the one hand, Paul refuted a Jewish legalism holding that one must observe the law’s requirements in order to be saved. On the other hand, James opposed an antinomianism that was twisting faith in Christ so much that no expression of works was necessary.

“Second, when Paul used the word “justified,” he meant “saved” or “declared righteous,” whereas James meant “vindicated” or “authenticated.” By “works,” Paul meant “works of the law,” whereas James meant works that faith produces.

“In the light of the above, Paul was saying that one is declared righteous by God apart from the works of the law. James, by contrast, was saying that a person’s faith produces works that vindicate his faith in Christ as genuine. James used Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice Isaac (vv. 21–23; cp. Gn 22:9) and Rahab’s protection of the spies (Jms 2:25; cp. Jos 2) as examples to show that their works authenticated the reality of their faith in God. For James, faith without works was clearly worthless; it must be more than words (Jms 2:14–19, 26). Authentic faith will bear the fruit of good works.”^[6]

^[2] The letters of James and Peter. 2000 (W. Barclay, lecturer in the University of Glasgow, Ed.). The Daily study Bible series, Rev. ed. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

^[3] The letters of James and Peter. 2000 (W. Barclay, lecturer in the University of Glasgow, Ed.). The Daily study Bible series, Rev. ed. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

[4] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed. Expositor’s Bible Commentary CD (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992) 2:14.

[5] William Barclay, The Letters of James and Peter, The Daily Study Bible Series (Philadelphia, PA:  The Westminster Press, 1976) 73.

^[6] Cabal, T., Brand, C. O., Clendenen, E. R., Copan, P., Moreland, J., & Powell, D. (2007). The Apologetics Study Bible: Real Questions, Straight Answers, Stronger Faith (1843). Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.

The letter is addressed to ‘the twelve tribes,’ a designation intended to identify the readers as Jews. They were not residents of Palestine but were ‘scattered among the nations’ as part of the Jewish Dispersion. James’s later designation of his readers as ‘believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ’ (2:1) makes it clear that he means Christian Jews.”[1]

vv.2-4: “The Christians James was addressing were facing trials of many kinds. These trials were not severe persecution (and certainly not illness, for which different terms are used), but rather low-level persecution such as social rejection and economic boycotts. This was happening simply because they were Christians. Although the trials were painful, James calls the believers to rejoice, not because the pain is pleasant but because they should have a perspective which looks beyond the present life to eternal reward. The pure joy is not a present happiness, but joy in anticipation of God’s future.

“The reason they could rejoice is that this testing of their faith would produce perseverance or patience. Perseverance is an important Christian virtue, mentioned often by Jesus (Lk. 8:15; 21:19; cf. Mt. 10:22) and Paul (Rom. 5:3–4; 8:25; 2 Cor. 6:4; 12:12). For those readers who knew their Scripture, as James certainly did, the importance of this virtue is underlined by the fact that Abraham is the first person in Scripture to be tested (Gn. 22:1) and God rewarded his faithfulness. Furthermore, Job was also tested by Satan, and in the stories about Job circulating in first-century Judaism he was the supreme example of perseverance. Surely these Christians could expect a similar reward.

“Perseverance itself, however, has an effect. It is like holding a fine steel sword blade in the fire until it is thoroughly tempered. In this case the sword is the believer, the fire is testing and the ‘tempering’ is that the believer becomes mature and complete, not lacking anything (4). The Greek term for ‘mature’ is also often translated as ‘perfect’. This is the virtue that Noah exhibited in Gn. 6:9 (translated ‘blameless’ in the niv). This is what Jesus intends when he calls his followers to be ‘perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect’ (Mt. 5:48). It indicates a character like God’s. This type of maturity is produced by holding fast to the faith and Christian virtue while in the fire of persecution. The impurities in one’s character will be burned off. The end result will be not just maturity, but completeness, which means that not a single part of a God-like character will be lacking. If this is the end result of the readers’ trials, difficult as they may be, there is indeed something to rejoice about.”^[2]

vv.5-8: “But what is a person supposed to do if they are not ‘mature and complete’? What if one fears failing the test? Paul’s answer would have been that they should live, or be led, by the Spirit (e.g. Gal. 5:16–18, 25). James’s answer is for them to ask God for wisdom, because divine wisdom is the power which James believes counteracts evil in human life. Such a prayer would not be useless, for God is a generous giver. Nor is his generosity hemmed in by a critical spirit: ‘What? You again! What did you do with what I gave you last time?’ Far from having that attitude, God simply gives to all who ask, time after time.

“Yet there is one requirement if we are to receive wisdom: the asking must flow out of faith in, or rather commitment to, God. The ‘doubting’ James warns about is not that of a person who wonders whether or not God will answer this particular request, or that of an introspective doubter who struggles with faith. Instead it is that of a person who is double-minded, a phrase with a close equivalent in the Psalms (Ps. 12:1–2), and which is the opposite of trusting God from one’s whole heart (Dt. 6:5; 8:3). In other words, this kind of a doubter is the person who is not wholly committed to God, but ‘plays safe’ by praying. Their real interest is in advancement in this world, but they also want to enjoy some of God’s blessings now and go to heaven when they die. Such a person will not get wisdom, James says. In fact, such a person will not receive anything at all from God.”^[3]

vv.9-11: “Christianity brings to the rich man a new sense of self-abasement. The great peril of riches is that they tend to give a man a false sense of security. He feels that he is safe; he feels that he has the resources to cope with anything and to buy himself out of any situation he may wish to avoid.

“James draws a vivid picture, very familiar to the people of Palestine. In the desert places, if there is a shower of rain, the thin green shoots of grass will sprout; but one day’s burning sunshine will make them vanish as if they had never been. The scorching heat is the kaus?n. The kaus?n was the south-east wind, the Simoon. It came straight from the deserts and burst on Palestine like a blast of hot air when an oven door is opened. In an hour it could wipe out all vegetation.

“This is a picture of what a life dependent on riches can be like. A man who puts his trust in riches is trusting in things which the chances and changes of life can take from him at any moment. Life itself is uncertain. At the back of James’s mind there is Isaiah’s picture: ‘All flesh is grass, and all its beauty is like the flower of the field. The grass withers, the flower fades, when the breath of the Lord blows upon it; surely the people is grass’ (Isaiah 40:6, 7; cp. Psalm 103:15).

“James’s point is this. If life is so uncertain and man so vulnerable, calamity and disaster may come at any moment. Since that is so, a man is a fool to put all his trust in things—like wealth—which he may lose at any moment. He is only wise if he puts his trust in things which he cannot lose.

“So, then, James urges the rich to cease to put their trust in that which their own power can amass. He urges them to admit their essential human helplessness and humbly to put their trust in God, who alone can give the things which abide for ever.”^[4]

vv.12-15: “James returns to the theme of testing by giving a promise. Blessed or happy is the person who perseveres under trial. How can that person be counted happy? They cannot be from the world’s perspective, but they can from God’s. God has promised a crown of life, that is life itself (as in Rev. 2:10), for such a person has shown that they do indeed love God by standing the test. This is like Abraham, who persevered in the test and then received God’s promise (Gn. 22:15–18), for God can say, ‘Now I know that you fear God’ (Gn. 22:12).

“Not everyone will prove genuine when tested. Those who fail or who want to give in when tested may do so by blaming God: ‘God is tempting me’. (The terms ‘test’, ‘trial’, and ‘tempt’ are all the same word in Greek.) This is precisely what Israel did in the wilderness; they complained that it was God’s fault and blamed him (Ex. 17:2, 7). In fact, they did this ten times (Nu. 14:22). The believers James was writing to are not to do this, he says, because first, ‘God ought not to be put to the test by sinful people!’ (This is a better translation than God cannot be tempted by evil.) This is precisely what was taught to Israel in Dt. 6:16.

“The second reason why the believers are not to blame God is because he does not tempt anyone. How could James have written that when Gn. 22:1 says ‘God tested [or tempted, again the same word] Abraham’? The answer is that beginning in the OT and continuing in Judaism between the testaments such stories as those of Abraham were interpreted as having left out the real cause of the test, the devil. (E.g. 2 Sa. 24:1 says, ‘[God] incited David’, while 1 Ch. 21:1 says, ‘Satan … incited David’.) Therefore in the inter-testamental book Jubilees the Gn. 22 account about Abraham is recast in a form similar to Job. Because of this interpretive tradition in his world, James, who in 2:21 cites Gn. 22 explicitly, could say that the real cause of testing is not God. The OT story is true, but it is a simplified form of reality.

“Yet James does not want people to blame the devil either (although he mentions him in 4:7), but to take the responsibility squarely on their own shoulders. It is desire within one which mades the test a test. This desire is what the Jews called the ‘evil impulse’ in people, or what psychologists call ‘drives’ or what Paul in Rom. 7 calls ‘sin’; it is quite simply the undifferentiated ‘I want’. Like a prostitute it entices, and gives birth to sin, and sin ends the process with death.”^[5]

vv.16-18: “In contrast to the evil things brought about by desire, God will only give a good and perfect gift. One example of such a good gift is the wisdom mentioned in v 5, the parallel section. In v 17 God is pictured as the Father of the heavenly lights or the Creator of the universe. But unlike the moon and other heavenly lights which he created, God himself does not change. He is always the same. So if he gives good today, he will not give evil tomorrow. His goodness is seen in that he chose (it was not an accident) to give us birth, meaning new birth, by means of the gospel (the word of truth). His goal was to make us firstfruits of all he created. The firstfruits were viewed as the best of the harvest, so God is making redeemed human beings the apex of all creation. Here we see another chain: God—word of truth—birth. Desire and the devil lead to death. God, by way of contrast, produces life.”^[6]

vv.19-27: “What will be the result of this life or wisdom from God? It will be a controlled tongue. Human anger, whether called ‘righteous anger’ or not, does not produce God’s type of righteousness. Therefore, the wise person will be slow to open his or her mouth and even slower to express anger. Indeed, James argues, a humble acceptance of the gospel (the word planted in you) will mean that one will get rid of all angry expression (as 3:9 and 4:1–2 show, it is the angry outburst, not the inward feeling, which is the issue) and all other types of evil, even if they are fully accepted by the world.

“James, moving to his third topic, points out that it is not enough simply to know Scripture or godly teaching. Knowledge alone is useless. It is even worse than useless, for the person who thinks that knowing the Bible makes one godly is self-deceived. Instead, it is obeying the teaching that makes one godly. What is the source of teaching for James? The perfect law that gives freedom is what one should obey, and that is the OT as interpreted by Jesus along with Jesus’ other teachings. As Jesus also said, it is not the hearing of his words but the obeying of them that brings a blessing (Mt. 7:24–27).

“This means that one can tell truly godly people by their lifestyle. If people have uncontrolled tongues (and so are often exploding in anger or quarrelling), all of their religious practices are worthless. They really do not love God in their hearts. The type of piety which God looks for has two characteristics, which are the two sides of the same coin. First, it cares for the poor (the orphans and widows are two of the four major categories of the poor in the OT). Secondly, it is not polluted by the world, which means that it is not seeking security or advancement in terms of what is valued by people in the world. Because it does not love the world, there is no need to hold on to money. Therefore such people can be generous and give freely.”^[7]

niv niv New International Version

^[2] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 1:2–4). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

^[3] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 1:5–8). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

^[4] The letters of James and Peter. 2000 (W. Barclay, lecturer in the University of Glasgow, Ed.). The Daily study Bible series, Rev. ed. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

^[5] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 1:12–15). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

^[6] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 1:16–18). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

^[7] Carson, D. A. (1994). New Bible commentary : 21st century edition (4th ed.) (Jas 1:19–27). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press.

The supreme paradigm for hospitality in early Jewish literature was the hospitality of Abraham, shown to his heavenly visitors (Gen. 18:2 – 15), which is probably alluded to in Hebrews 13:2: “for by so doing some people have entertained angels without knowing it.”

[…]

Hold marriage as honorable and keep the sexual relationship pure (13:4). Another motif common in early Christian ethical teaching was the need to keep the marriage relationship in proper perspective. The institution of marriage was assaulted from two sides in the ancient world. Some felt chastity in marriage was unreasonable. For example, in some corners of Greco-Roman culture men were expected to take mistresses as their confidants and sexual partners.

Correspondingly, the marriage bed (koite), used here as an idiom for the sexual relationship, is to be guarded or “kept pure.” The defilement that the author has in mind is expressed in the explanatory “for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.” The former word, “adulterers” (moichoi), is more focused than the latter, referring specifically to those who betray their marriage vows. The latter, “the sexually immoral” (pornoi), refers to all those involved in sexual activity apart from the sanctity of the marriage relationship. Together the two words cover the gamut of illicit sexual behavior. For those so involved in dishonoring marriage and defiling the marriage bed, the judgment of God awaits.

Be content with your financial status (13:5). The sins of sexual impurity and covetousness are linked in several New Testament passages (e.g., 1 Cor. 5:10 – 11; Eph. 4:19; 1 Thess. 4:3 – 6), probably because their prohibitions are given side by side as the seventh and eighth of the Ten Commandments. Both the sexually immoral and those greedy for money pursue a myopic self-gratification that takes them outside the bounds of God’s provision. Such greed amounts to accusing God of incompetence as a provider of one’s most basic needs and, therefore, is incompatible with commitment to God himself (cf. Matt. 6:24). Consequently, Christians are exhorted to keep their lives “free from the love of money” and to “be content” with what they have.

[…]

The basis for such contentment is God’s promise of his ever-present help: “Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you.” No Old Testament quotation perfectly corresponds to this quote in Greek, although several approach correspondence (e.g., Gen. 28:15; Deut. 31:6 – 8; Josh. 1:5), and various theories have been offered as to how the author was using his source material. Perhaps he conflated two Old Testament passages or used a Greek translation no longer in existence. Nevertheless, the significance of the promise is clear: God keeps his covenant to provide for his people. Therefore, believers need not worry that their needs will go unmet.

[…]

Why do we believe that the prescriptions concerning hospitality, for instance, or sexual ethics, love of money, and church leaders should be followed today? Are these perhaps just throwbacks to a social structure that has long since passed from the scene, disintegrating in the light and heat of modern learning?

Perhaps the most graphic departure from these guidelines found in Hebrews 13 is in the area of sexuality. For many in modern culture the sanctity of the marriage bed is a nonissue. Adultery and sexual immorality are so widely accepted in the Western world as to barely raise a yawn, much less an outcry. In some circles the love of money is seen as a virtue rather than a vice, and in a democratic society, who wants to talk about submission to leaders or anyone else?

Early Christian teachers had a body of Scripture we call the Old Testament, parts of which were written more than a millennium prior to its use by the earliest Christ-followers. Certainly, many of the contemporaries of first-century believers would have considered the Ten Commandments outdated. The view that people of the first century generally were prudish is naïve from a historical perspective. Sexual immorality in a wide variety of forms was rampant. The prescriptions concerning the purity of the marriage bed in Hebrews 13:4, therefore, would have been considered absurd to many. Yet Jesus himself and the authors of the New Testament practiced interpretation and application of the “much-older” Testament, bridging the contexts between the messages found in their scrolls and their own world. Thus, we have a precedent for bridging the context between the world of an ancient body of literature and a later time period.

vv.7-19 Some of the recipients of Hebrews are perhaps being drawn away from Christian fellowship and doctrine to theological expressions heralded within a community practicing Judaism. They are embracing aspects of Jewish community life and thought that are at odds with the gospel of grace through Jesus Christ. The author asserts that such ceremonial foods have no “value to those who eat them.” They are not the true means of grace and spiritual strength. When he states, “We have an altar from which those who minister at the tabernacle have no right to eat” (v. 10), he reiterates the demarcation between those who participated in the old covenant religion and the members of the new covenant. Although it is not clear exactly what he has in mind regarding the Christian’s “altar,” this much is certain: The participants of the new covenant draw spiritual sustenance and life from a source unavailable to those of the tabernacle, and that source is the sacrifice of Christ.

[…]

Although Christians should not participate in the Jewish cultic meals, they have their own appropriate “sacrifices” to offer (13:15 – 16). These offerings are to be made “through Jesus,” since Christ, the mediator, has made it possible for believers to come before God in worship (9:9 – 14; 10:1 – 14). The writer details two spiritual sacrifices in 13:15 – 16. (1) He exhorts the readers to “continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise,” which he explains as “the fruit of lips that confess his name.” The words translating “sacrifice of praise” occur in the LXX of Leviticus 7:12 and speak of the highest form of peace offering under the old covenant. This thank offering was voluntary and could only be made after the expiatory offerings had been presented and the worshiper was ritually clean; its primary purpose was to express gratitude to God. However, the author’s explanatory comment concerning the “fruit of lips” shows that he has in mind a metaphorical application of this language found in the Psalms, where the “sacrifice” is the prayer of thanks (e.g., Ps. 50:14, 23; 107:22; also 2 Chron. 29:31).

[…]

The Christ-follower is also to offer a sacrifice of good deeds (13:16). Already having emphasized the necessity of good works in the form of ministry to others (e.g., 10:24; 13:1 – 3) — activities in which these believers had been engaged in the past (6:10; 10:34) — the author reminds them again to be faithful in this regard. The word translated “share with others” (koinonia) emphasizes a life in the covenant community, in which members meet the practical needs of one another. As the life of faith pleases God (11:6), so the sacrifices of praise and practical ministry give him pleasure.

[…]

Just as the first six verses address Christian living “out in the world,” the next thirteen address life “in the church.” At least three issues are paramount here with regard to a leader’s role. (1) Leaders are responsible for living in such a way that their lives are worthy of imitation. (2) They must lead the way in holding to right doctrine, which will lead to right identification with Christ and his church. (3) They are responsible for caring for those under their charge, and those under their charge are responsible for facilitating their leadership.

Notice the orientation of this passage, however. These remarks are addressed to the church members in response to their leaders!

[…]

Church leaders, especially those who serve as the “main minister” or “pastor,” have difficult jobs. In many contexts they are expected to wear the multiple hats of social coordinator, superb orator (several times a week), sensitive and insightful counselor, administrator, motivator, teacher, evangelist, mender of relationships, “marryer,” and “buryer” — all the while cultivating an exemplary personal, spiritual, and family life. The pressure to spend hours in study, hours in the community, hours in visiting prospects, hours in counseling, hours in training the staff, and hours in prayer all add up to unrealistic expectations on the part of the church. The effect can be overwhelming.

[…]

(1) Church members are to keep in mind the example of godly leaders, scrutinizing the outcome of their manner of life and imitating their faith. In our application, therefore, we must reflect on those in our church life whom we should be holding up as examples worthy of imitation.

(2) Church members are to respond to leadership by embracing right doctrine, valuing the Christian community and Christian thought more than the comfort and community offered by other groups that do not believe the gospel. Believers are to respect and yield to their leaders in this regard, being teachable when it comes to Christian instruction.

(3) Believers should offer to God “thank offerings” for the sacrifice of Christ and should perform practical ministry to one another in the community of faith. The impetus for such worship and work is the work of Christ, who has redeemed and leads the community.

(4) Finally, members of the church should reflect on the effects of their responses on the church’s leadership. Does a relationship with you or me facilitate their difficult work or hinder it? This does not mean that members of a church are to give their leaders a “blank check” or uncritical deference in all situations. The leaders need accountability and members of the church must exercise spiritual gifts. However, when leaders are living within biblical guidelines and teaching faithfully the central tenets of the Christian faith (the focus here is on the sacrifice of Christ as the communication of God’s grace), church members should seek to make the leaders’ ministry a joy. Application, therefore, involves reflection on how this can be accomplished. When leaders are ministering faithfully and members of the church are following with right attitudes, it is to everyone’s “advantage” (v. 17).

vv.20-25 The writer begins his closing in verse 22, urging the readers to bear with or “put up with” his “word of exhortation,” a rather diffident request that is rhetorical in nature. The expression “word of exhortation” is probably a technical phrase referring to a sermon (cf. Acts 13:15, where Paul and companions are invited to give a “message of encouragement” in a synagogue service; the same expression is used in both places: logos parakleseos). This understanding is not diminished by the next statement: “for I have written you only a short letter.” The Greek text does not contain the word “letter” and would be better translated, “I have written to you briefly.” The author is referring to the writing down of his sermon. That he has written “briefly” is a literary convention of the day, a polite statement included at the end of a correspondence.

All commentary drawn from: Guthrie, George H. “Hebrews 13:1 – 25” In The NIV Application Commentary: Hebrews. By George H. Guthrie, 433-11. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, © 1998.