^{page 401 note 1} The commonly held view that Apocalyptic represents a continuation or development of Prophecy (for which see Rowley, H. H., The Relevance of Apocalyptic, London, ² 1955,Google Scholar and Russell, D. S., The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic, London, 1964, pp. 92 ff.)Google Scholar is contested by Vielhauer, Ph. in ‘Apocalyptic’, New Testament Apocrypha, II (E.T. ed. Wilson, R. McL., London, 1965, pp. 595–7)Google Scholar: he argues that, while it was the intention of Apocalyptic writers to continue Prophecy, this did not in fact take place, and the dualism, determinism and pessimism of Apocalyptic form the gulf which separates it from Prophecy. G. von Rad declares that the view that Apocalyptic literature is the child of prophecy is ‘out of the question’, and claims that the decisive factor is ‘the incompatibility between the apocalyptic literature's view of history and that of the prophets’ (Theology of the Old Testament, II, E.T., London, 1965, p. 303).Google Scholar For a fresh presentation of the case for Apocalyptic being a continuation of Prophecy see Hanson, P. D., ‘Jewish Apocalyptic against its Near Eastern Background,’ R.B. LXVIII (1971), 31–58.Google Scholar

^{page 401 note 2} Cf. Betz, H. D., ‘On the problem of the religio-historical understanding of Apocalypticism’, in Apocalypticism, ed. Funk, R. W. (Journal of Theology and Church, VI; New York, 1969), pp. 134–56Google Scholar, esp. pp. 135 f.

^{page 402 note 1} It should be noticed, however, that in spite of the system of sevens, precise calculations of the End are absent from the Revelation: the 3½ years, 42 months or 1,260 days (xi. 2 f.; xii. 6, 14; xiii. 5) is a stereotyped apocalyptic number and does not here serve a strictly chronological interest.

^{page 402 note 2} Though interest in the general events of the End seems to be stressed rather less than the interest in the events which concern the Church in particular.

^{page 402 note 3} In the phrase Ίησοũ Χριστοũ (i. 1) the term does not bear the technical sense of a literary genre.

^{page 402 note 4} Cf. Ladd, G. E., ‘The Revelation and Jewish Apocalyptic,’ Evan. Quart. XXIX (1957), 94–100.Google Scholar

^{page 402 note 5} Kallas, J., ‘The Apocalypse –an Apocalyptic Book?,’ J.B.L. LXXXVI (1967), 69–81.Google Scholar

^{page 402 note 6} Cf. Jones, B. W., ‘More About the Apocalypse as Apocalyptic,’ J.B.L. LXXXVII (1968), 325–7.Google Scholar

^{page 403 note 1} The argument of Bacon, B. W., The Gospel of the Hellenists (New York, 1933), pp. 21 ff.Google Scholar, that Revelation is the pseudepigraphical work of a woman, the daughter of Philip the evangelist, has few, if any, supporters.

^{page 403 note 2} Only occasionally is the mediator of the revelation an angelus interpres, xvii. 1 ff.; xxi. 9; cf. i. 1 and xxii. 6 ff. Cf. the role of such angels in Dan. vii and Ethiopic Enoch.

^{page 403 note 3} It is sometimes suggested that the committing of the revelation to ‘a book which is written and read’ is an apocalyptic feature, in contrast to the direct address which is characteristic of the prophet. But the ‘book’ theme in the Revelation is related to the writer's desire to have the message read and heard in various congregations of the church: he therefore couches his revelation in the form of a written letter.

^{page 403 note 4} ‘The book written within and without and sealed with seven seals’ (v. 1) does not imply an appeal to antiquity for the writing. On the interpretation of these words and the significance of this ‘book’ for understanding the parallelism of the threefold predictions or descriptions of the eschatological period in chapters vi-xxii see Bornkamm, G., ‘Die Komposition der apokalyptischen Visionen in der Offenbarung Johannis’, Studien zu Antike und Urchristentum (München, 1959), pp. 204–22.Google Scholar

^{page 403 note 5} The sealing up of the revelation for disclosure in a distant future – a feature common in apocalyptic literature (cf. Dan. viii. 26; x. 4; xii. 4; I En. i. 2) –is strictly opposed (xxii. 10): the author insists that his writing should be understood as an ‘ecumenical letter’, not as a secret document (i. 4, 11, 19; xxii. 16, 21).

^{page 403 note 6} Cf. Isa. i. 1 (LXX)όρασις ⋯ν είδεν l' Hgr;σαιας and Amos i. 1 (LXX) λόγοι Αμως…ούς είδεν. The words ‘the revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to him to show to his servants’ recall Amos iii. 7: ‘Surely the Lord God does nothing without revealing his secret purpose (LXX έαν μή άποκλύψη παιδείαν, Heb. sōd) to his servants the prophets’.

^{page 403 note 7} Comblin, J., Le Christ dans ' Apocalypse (Paris, 1965), pp. 5 f.Google Scholar, 85.

^{page 404 note 1} Cf. Lohmeyer, E., Die Offenbarung des Johannes (Tübingen, ² 1953), p. 87,Google Scholar ‘πάλιν heißt, entsprechend seinem semitischen Aequivalent, sowohl “wieder” als auch “noch einmal”’.

^{page 404 note 2} Revelation through audition, which is typical of the prophets, is not unimportant in the book: e.g. in i. 10 we have ‘hear’ before ‘see’. On a rough check άκούω appears about forty times and είδον about fifty times in the book.

^{page 404 note 3} Cf. Schweizer, E., T.D.N.T. VI, 449.Google Scholar

^{page 404 note 4} ‘Now I am come to reveal to thee what is, what was and what shall be, that thou mayest know the invisible things like the visible, and to instruct thee concerning the perfect Man’ (ed. Till, p. 85): see also the description of the Naassenes by Hippolytus, Ref. v. 7. 20.

^{page 404 note 5} van Unnik, W. C., ‘A Formula describing Prophecy,’ N.T.S. IX (1962–1963), 86–94.Google Scholar

^{page 404 note 6} G. von Rad, op. cit. pp. 303 ff. Rössler, D. (Gesetz und Geschichte, Neukirchen, 1960)Google Scholar puts forward the unusual thesis that the essential interest of Apocalyptic lies in history and in the history of Israel in particular; but his interpretation largely ignores the dualism and eschatology in Apocalypticism. Rössler's work forms the exegetical basis for the understanding of the apocalyptic concept of history associated with the Pannenberg school (cf. Offenbarung als Geschichte, Beiheft I, Kerygma und Dogma, ed. W. Pannenberg (Göttingen, ³ 1965)).Google Scholar This general position is criticized by Murdock, W. R., ‘History and Revelation in Jewish Apocalypticism,’ Interpretation XXI (1967), 167–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 405 note 1} Cf. the recent study by Rollins, W. G., ‘The New Testament and Apocalyptic,’ N.T.S. XVII (1970–1971), 454–76Google Scholar (esp. p. 473) which examines critically E. Käsemann's thesis that ‘apocalyptic is the mother of Christian theology’.

^{page 405 note 2} Cf. Kümmel, W. G., Introduction to the New Testament (E.T., London, 1966), p. 323;Google Scholar also Rissi, M., ‘The Kerygma of the Revelation to John,’ Interpretation XXII (1968), 3–17,CrossRefGoogle Scholar esp. p. 5.

^{page 405 note 3} Oepke, A., T.D.N.T. III, 588Google Scholar (sub άποκάλυψις). Cf. also Goppelt, L., Apostolic and Post-Apostolic Times (E. T., London, 1969), p. 111:Google Scholar ‘The Book of Revelation did not, like the Jewish apocalypses, describe the course of world history with particular reference to contemporary events in order to be able to describe the Emperor and his officials as merely ephemeral phenomena. Instead, like early Christian prophecy, it traced the essential character of the final events, in particular the picture of the world-ruler of the end times, in order that the Church, in spite of all the deceiving appearances and threats to its comfort, might not worship the Emperor rather than God, asking him for both daily bread and salvation.’

^{page 406 note 1} Goppelt, L., ‘Heilsoffenbarung und Geschichte nach der Offenbarung des Johannes,’ T.L.Z. LXXVII (1952), 513–22.Google Scholar

^{page 406 note 2} Feuillet, A., L'Apocalypse: État de la question (Paris, 1963), p. 8.Google Scholar As ‘prophetic’ traits Feuillet instances the author's giving of his name, his concern for the salvation of men and his desire to respond to the burning issues of his own time.

^{page 406 note 3} T.D.N.T. VI, p. 669.Google Scholar

^{page 406 note 4} The ‘angels’ of the churches do not represent bishops or special leaders, but probably are the heavenly counterparts of the various churches. Bornkamm's estimate of ‘apostles’ and ‘prophets’ recalls the letter to the Ephesians which bestows on these two groups (and most commentators take ‘prophets’ to be Christian prophets) the significance of being the ‘foundation’ of the church (ii. 20), and calls them (iii. 5), in contrast to all the usual language, the ‘holy’ apostles and prophets to whom the mystery of God's reception of the Gentiles was revealed. Since Paul, in his acknowledged letters, places the apostles (for all his own special position) on the same footing as all believers and considers prophecy as a gift to be aspired to by all members of the church (cf. I Cor. xiv), one is left with the impression that the importance accorded to ‘apostles and prophets’ in Eph. ii. 20 and iii. 5 (if it is not a later gloss) goes beyond what Paul himself would have said.

^{page 406 note 5} Satake, A., Die Gemeindeordnung in der Johannes-apokalypse (Neukirchen, 1966)Google Scholar: his thesis is criticized on exegetical and historical grounds by Holtz, T., T.L.Z. XCIII (1968), 262–4.Google Scholar

^{page 407 note 1} Cf. Caird, G. B., The Revelation of St John the Divine (London, 1966), p. 129.Google Scholar

^{page 407 note 2} Lohmeyer, op. cit. p. 86 suggests that we are not compelled to think only of Christian prophets. Cf. Swete, H. B., The Apocalypse of John (London, 1906)Google Scholar, ad loc.: ‘that a final and joyous clearing up of the problems of life should find a place in the last days was the gospel of the prophets, both Jewish and Christian’.

^{page 407 note 3} Caird, op. cit. p. 229 thinks that the context requires the allusion to be to Old Testament prophets.

^{page 407 note 4} Caird, op. cit. p. 134.

^{page 407 note 5} Charles, R. H., The Revelation of St John (I.C.C. London, 1920), I, 283:Google Scholar he draws attention to Prov. vi. 23, Wisd. xviii. 4 and Test. Levi. xiv. 4 for the idea of the Law as ‘the light of men’. Cf. also Lohmeyer, op. cit. p. 92.

^{page 408 note 1} Munck, J., Petrus und Paulus in der Offenbarung Johannis: Ein Beitrag zur Auslegung der Apokalypse (Copenhagen, 1950):Google Scholar he regards the entire scene as played out at Rome.

^{page 408 note 2} Nikolainen, A. T., ‘Über die theologische Eigenart der Offenbarung des Johannes,’ T.L.Z. XCIII (1968), 161–70Google Scholar (esp. p. 163).

^{page 408 note 3} See the perceptive study by Feuillet, A., ‘Essai d'interprétation du chapitre xi de l' Apocalypse,’ N.T.S. IV (1957–1958), 183–200Google Scholar which claims that this and the preceding chapters are concerned with the relations between the Church and the chosen people, while chapters xii ff. deal with the relations between the Church and pagan Rome: thus he finds in the book a structure corresponding to that of the prophetic books of the Old Testament, i.e. oracles against Israel (Jews) first, and then oracles against the nations. Feuillet's suggestion that the ‘two witnesses’ are allegorical personages who incarnate the testimony of the Law and the Prophets in the Church makes them representative of the Jewish-Christian wing only, not of the whole Church.

^{page 408 note 4} A. Satake, op. cit. pp. 119–33 also regards the two witnesses as a symbolic representation of the Church: also Brütsch, Ch., La Clarté de l' Apocalypse (Geneva, 1966)Google Scholar and M. Rissi, op. cit. p. 13.

^{page 408 note 5} Cf. R. H. Charles, op. cit. I, 269–73.

^{page 408 note 6} These are to be understood as heavenly beings, similar to the Old Testament ‘council of Yahweh’: they do not represent earthly office-bearers.

^{page 409 note 1} Lohmeyer, op. cit. p. 96: this leaves ‘those who fear thy name, the small and the great’ to form another triple grouping.

^{page 409 note 2} Proksch, O., T.D.N.T. I, 110.Google Scholar

^{page 409 note 3} Charles, op. cit. I, 296 who notes that the Greek Christians so designated themselves in I Clem. xxi. 7.

^{page 409 note 4} Cf. the meaning at x. 7 in which there is an anticipatory statement on the seventh trumpet sound here fulfilled. Since xi. 1–13 is probably a distinct and self-contained Section it is unlikely that there is any reference to the two prophets mentioned there.

^{page 409 note 5} Schweizer, E., Church Order in the New Testament (E.T., London, 1961), pp. 134 f.Google Scholar (13 e).

^{page 409 note 6} Lohmeyer, op. cit. p. 151.

^{page 409 note 7} H. B. Swete, op. cit. p. 234, thought that they connoted the two highest ministries of the Church (I Cor. xii. 28), while Lohmeyer, op. cit. p. 151, thinks they represent the pious of the New Testament and of the Old, respectively.

^{page 410 note 1} Lohmeyer, op. cit. p. 151. Some scholars (e.g. Turner, N., Revelation, ad loc., Peake's Commentary, 1962Google Scholar) have considered ‘apostles’ as an addition to the original (Hebrew) source: Bousset, cf. W., Die Offenbarung Johannis (Göttingen, 1906), p. 425CrossRefGoogle Scholar – ‘from a later hand’.

^{page 410 note 2} Cf. Lohmeyer, op. cit. p. 201 and A. T. Nikolainen, op. cit. p. 163.

^{page 410 note 3} Charles, op. cit. II, 128 ff., regards xix. 9b10 as an interpolation rewritten by an editor from xxii. 8–9 and given a less general meaning. If xix. 10 is original, he argues, then the action of the seer in again prostrating himself before the angel in xxii 8 f. would be incomprehensible: but see on this point Caird, op. cit. p. 283.

^{page 411 note 1} Charles, op. cit. II, 225: see also pp. 128, 130.

^{page 412 note 1} Noteworthy in this connection is xii. 11 ‘they conquered… διά τόν λόγον τ⋯ς μαρτυρíας αύτ⋯ν’, i.e. the word of their testimony: the testimony is expressed verbally, as is that referred to in xi. 7, where the completion of the witnesses' testimony is equivalent to the completion of their prophesying.

^{page 412 note 2} Although the Revelation often brings witnessing and death by violence into close association (e.g. ii. 13; xi. 3; xvii. 6), it never calls the death of persecuted Christians μαρτυρία, nor does it ever say that the faithful render their witness in or by their death: the fact that the witnesses are those who die violently does not justify the identification of ‘witness’ (μαρτυρία) with martyrdom: the witnesses of Christ are not so named because they die, but they die because they are witnesses. Brox, Cf. N., Zeuge und Märtyrer: Untersuchungen zur frühchristlichen Zeugnisterminologie (München, 1961), pp. 92–105:Google Scholar also J. Comblin, op. cit. pp. 134–9 and A. T. Nikolainen, op. cit. pp. 164–7.

^{page 412 note 3} The relationship between the content of the ‘witness’ in Revelation and in Deutero-Isaiah (especially Isa. xliii. 9–12 and xliv. 6–8) is fruitfully explored by J. Comblin, op. cit. pp. 146–55.

^{page 412 note 4} Cf. ix. 20 f., xvi. 9, 11 where the negative statement ‘they did not repent ’ is not intended to show the impossibility of repentance, but rather to point to the responsibility of the world for its non-acceptance of the offer.

^{page 412 note 5} For a clear statement of the core of the message of the book see Rissi's, M. article ‘The Kerygma of the Revelation to John,’ Interpretation XXII, 3–17.Google Scholar

^{page 412 note 6} Strathmann, H., T.D.N.T. IV, 501.Google Scholar

^{page 413 note 1} So Charles ad loc. and Caird ad loc.: cf. Lohmeyer, op. cit. p. 180.

^{page 413 note 2} Lohmeyer, op. cit. p. 7, but cf. p. 180.

^{page 413 note 3} So Lohmeyer, op. cit. p. 180: ‘die Propheten aller Gemeinden, denen der Inhalt der Offenbarung durch den Seher zukommen soll’.

^{page 413 note 4} Schweizer, E., T.D.N.T. VI, 449 n.816,Google Scholar and Church Order in the New Testament, pp. 134 f. (13 e).

^{page 413 note 5} As elsewhere in the Revelation the Spirit is regarded as operative in the Church as a kind of representative of the heavenly Christ, resembling in function the Paraclete of the fourth gospel whose activity there has to do, in part, with the proclamation and interpretation of the message of Jesus by all believers.

^{page 414 note 1} A similar view may be implied in I John iv. 1–6. The warning against false prophets suggests that the ‘spirits’ to be tested are prophetic utterances; but there is no indication that these are reserved for a special group inside the church: every member is in principle a prophet.

^{page 414 note 2} Cf. Ellis, E. E., Paul's Use of the Old Testament (Edinburgh, 1957), pp. 107–12.Google Scholar

^{page 414 note 3} See further Ellis, E. E., ‘The Role of the Christian Prophet in Acts’, in Apostolic History and the Gospel, ed. Gasque, W. W. and Martin, R. P. (Exeter, 1970), pp. 55–67.Google Scholar

^{page 415 note 1} Käsemann, E., ‘Sentences of Holy Law in the New Testament’, New Testament Questions of Today (London, 1969), pp. 66–81:Google Scholar originally ‘Sätze Heiligen Rechtes im NT’, N.T.S. I (1954–1955), 248–60.Google Scholar

^{page 415 note 2} Cf. Berger, K., ‘Zu den sogenannten Sätzen Heiligen Rechts,’ N.T.S. XVII (1970–1971), 10–40.Google Scholar

^{page 415 note 3} Greeven, H., ‘Propheten, Lehrer, Vorsteher bei Paulus,’ Z.N.W. XLIV (1952–1953), 1–43:Google Scholar quotation from p. 11.

^{page 415 note 4} Cf. Nikolainen, A. T., T.L.Z. XCIII (1968), 161–2.Google Scholar

^{page 416 note 1} See Bruce, F. F., Tradition Old and New (Exeter, 1970), pp. 64 f.Google Scholar

^{page 416 note 2} Pace Bultmann, R., The History of the Synoptic Tradition (E.T., London, ² 1968), pp. 127–8:Google Scholar for criticism of Bultmann's view see Neugebauer, F., ‘Geistsprüche und Jesuslogien,’ Z.N.W. LIII (1963), 218–28,Google Scholar who observes that if prophetic utterances gradually became regarded as sayings of Jesus, this very fact presupposes that the church was aware of the difference between them.

^{page 416 note 3} Attention has been focused on the textual form of allusions to the Old Testament, but there is a simple discussion of the author's adaptation of the Old Testament allusions in Preston, R. H. and Hanson, A. T., The Revelation of St John the Divine (London, 1949), pp. 36–43.Google Scholar

^{page 417 note 1} Feuillet, A., L' Apocalypse: État de la question, p. 65.Google Scholar

^{page 417 note 2} A. Satake, op. cit. pp. 196–219 draws attention to certain similarities between the ‘wise’ (i.e. the maskilim) in Dan. vii-xii and the prophets in the book of the Revelation.