κρατήσατε, " ἄχρι οὗ ἂν ἥέω.
/ ” - A A τέλους τὰ ἔργα µου, δώσω "' αὐτῷ ἐξουσίαν ἐπὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν. 27. καὶ
ποιμανεῖ αὐτοὺς ἐν " ῥάβδῳ σιδηρᾶ,
, 3,’ lol ΄ "συντρίβεται, “as κἀγὼ εἴληφα παρὰ τοῦ πατρός µου: 28. καὶ
, - oe δώσω αὐτῷ τὸν ἀστέρα τὸν πρωϊνόν.
, - - , τί τὸ Πνεῦμα λέγει ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις.
Jo
26. Καὶ 6 νικῶν καὶ 6 "τηρῶν ἄχρις “ Till
such time as I come" (eschat., as iii. 11): néw aor. subj. from Héa.
ti. 3, sug- gested by
κρατ. 25.
ὡς τὰ σκεύη TO κεραμικὰ
29. Ὁ ἔχων ots ἀκουσάτω
“TIT. 1. Καὶ τῷ ἀγγέλῳ τῆς ἐν Σάρδεσιν ἐκκλησίας γράψον, u Resuming
v Cf. Mic. v. 5, Isa. x. 24-26. y Doubie promise here only (exe. iii. 12 ?).
Ver. 26. Triumph here consists in un- flagging attention to the duties of a Christian vocation, The ἔργα are (xiv. 12, xix. 8) the normal activities of this calling, viewed as the outcome of a per- sonal relation to Jesus; they are “ his,’ as commanded by him and executed in his strength. The general idea of ths and the following verse is that the only irresistible force is the force of a life which is able to resist seduction and compromise, because it holds to faith and purity. The promise of reward, preceding (as in iii. 5, 12, 21) the appeal for attention, is couched in terms of messianic conquest (from Ps, ii. 8, ο). In a more or less figurative form, the tule of the saints, a cherished hope of Jewish eschatology, had its own attrac- tion for some circles of early Christianity (see on v. 10 and 1 Cor. vi. 3; and for ῥάβδῳ, the well-known flail wielded by Horus, the Egyptian god of requital or warfare): evidently it appealed to their eagerness for a righting of present wrongs and a reversal of the immoral sway of captain ill over captive good. ‘The ἐξουσία ἐπὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν (by which they are not governed but shivered in irrepa- rable ruin; cf. Isa. xxx. 14, Jer. xix. 11) is defined with ferocious detail in 27; the whole description is modelled on a tradi- tionally messianic application of (LXX) Ps. 11. 8, 9. For the shepherd’s staff as a royal sceptre see E. Br. 4317. ὡς Kayo κ.τ.λ., God, Christ, and the individual Christian as in ill, 21 (John xvii. 16-22). ‘Tllud ὡς aliquam similitudinem, non paritatem = significat”’ (Rosenmiiller). John xxi. 15-17 is not ‘‘a deliberate cor- rection of this terrible sentence” (Sel- wyn, 105), but the mature expression of Christian solicitude in a different province, from which messianic incongruities have been wholly purged.
Ver. 28. To ‘grant the morning- star’”’ (a characteristically loose usage of δίδωµι) means, not to invest him with its
w xii. 5, xix. 15, cf. Bar. iv. 25.
nom. absol. x Cf. John xiv. 6f., etc.
glory, nor to give him possession of Christ himself, but (so Bleek, after Victor.) to make the dawn of salvation or of life eternal shine on him after his dark afflic- tions. The victor shares in the divine life (with its punitive government) and honour above, or rather in the new messianic era of Jesus himself (see note on xxii. 16, where by a further applica- tion the metaphor is directly connected with Jesus). Staunch adherence to the truth on the part of leaders and confes- sors is similarly rewarded in Dan. xii. 3, En. civ. ii. Semitic folklore found some mystic connexion between the countless brilliant stars in heaven and the departed faithful, who became immortal (4 Esd. vil. [97]), and the sense here might be that the loyal Christian was sure of shining like a star in immortality; cf. Ign. ad Rom. ii. 2, καλὸν τὸ δΌναι ἀπὸ κόσμου πρὸς Θεὸν, ἵνα εἰς αὐτὸν ἀνατείλω (and passage cited oni. 10), But xxii. 16 (cf. Job iii. g) tells against this, as does Ign. ibid. vi. 2 (speaking of his martyrdom) ἄφετέ pe καθαρὸν φῶς λαβεῖν: ἐκεῖ παραγενόµενος ἄνθρωπος ἔσομαι. The collocation of the morning star and the judicial authority over the nations may have been suggested to the prophet’s mind (cf. 14, 20) by the prophecy, read in a messianic sense, of Num. xxiv. 17. The sequence and the Christian spirit of the whole promise are certainly im- proved if we omit 27 a with Selwyn (194) and Jacoby (Neutest. Ethik, 1899, p- 446) and Wellhausen (with 23-28 a), since the doubled promise and the later use of the metaphor do not justify any suspi, cion of 28 as a gloss (so Κόππεσκε, Ῥ. 34). But it is as likely that the author himself (cf. xvii. 14) added this co-opera- tion with the vindictive messiah (cf. xii. 5, xix. 15), as that an early copyist was responsible for the insertion.