σφραγῖσιν ἑπτά.
αὐτό.
383
2. Καὶ εἶδον ἄγγελον "ἰσχυρὸν κηρύσσοντα ἐν ε Defined
~ by o. mu. , aA a ’ Φωνῇ µεγάλῃ, “Tis ἄξιος ἀνοῖξαι τὸ βιβλίον, καὶ doar τὰς c/. Ps. a mes ή νι _ 2 clii. 20. oppayidas adtod;’’ 3. καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐδύνατο ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ οὐδὲ ἐπὶ ~ ~ 4A ~ ~ Lad τῆς γῆς οὐδὲ ὑποκάτω τῆς γῆς ἀνοῖξαι τὸ βιβλίον οὔτε βλέπειν 4. Καὶ ἐγὼ ἔκλαιον πολὺ ὅτι οὐδεὶς ἄξιος εὑρέθη ἀνοῖξαι Ν ἆ ο ᾱ 5 a , d = Genit. 5. kat “ets "ἐκ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων © partit.
τὸ βιβλίον οὔτε βλέπειν αὐτό.
proves upon this theory by taking ὅπ. with κατεσφρ. and thus eliminating any idea of the βιβλίον being ὀπισθόγραφον: it simply rests on (ἐπὶ) the right hand, as a book does, instead of being held ἐν the right hand, as a roll would be. But
ἐπὶ τ. 8. is a characteristic irregularity οἱ
grammar ; to describe a sealed book as ‘‘ written within ” is tautological; ἀνοῖξαι could be used of a roll as well as of a codex ; and ἔσωθεν would probably have preceded yeyp. had it been intended by itself to qualify the participle. A Roman will, when written, had to be sealed seven times in order to anthenticate it, and some have argued (e.g. Hicks, Greek Philosophy and Roman Law in the Ν. Τ. 157, 158, Zahn, Selwyn, Kohler, J. Weiss) that this explains the symbolism here: the βιβλίον is the testament as- suring the inheritance reserved by God for the saints. The coincidence is in- teresting. But the sacred number in this connexion does not require any extra-Semitic explanation and the horrors of the seal-visions are more appropriate to a book of Doom. Besides, the Apoc. offers no support otherwise to this inter- pretation, for the sole allusion to κληρονομεῖν is quite incidental (cf. on xxi. 7). The sealing is really a Danielic touch, added to denote the mystery and obscurity of the future (not of the past, En. Ixxxix.-xc.). On the writer’s further use of the symbol of the book of Doom, cf. below on ch. x., xi. 16-19. The silence following the opening of the last seal certainly does not represent the contents of the book (= the promised Sabbath-rest, Zahn). This would be a jejune anti-climax. Possibly the cosmic tragedies that follow that seal ατε in- tended to be taken as the writing in question. The βιβλίον is therefore the divine course and counsel of providence in the latter days (ἡ πάνσοφος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἀνεπίληπτος µνήµη, Areth.). Only, while an angel read all the divine policy to Daniel (Dan. x. 21), the Christian prophet feels that Jesus alone is the true interpreter and authority, and that the divine purpose can only be revealed or
realised through his perfect spiritual equipment (iii. 1, v. 6, cf. 1. 5, ii. 27, iii. 21, Xvi; τή, οἳς:]
Ver. 2. The καὶ after ἀνοῖξαι is either epexegetic or the mark of a hysteron proteron (cf. the awkward οὔτε βλέπειν of 3-4, unless look here means to look into the contents). The cry is a chal- lenge rather than an appeal.
Ver. 3. ὑποκάτω, the under-world of departed spirits or of daemons. Not even angels ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ (cf. Mark xiii. 32) can discharge this function; their rdle in the Apocalypse is prominent but limited. Gunkel prefers to think of a magical background to the whole sym- bolism ; the book defies the necromancy of the universe, but yields to the superior power of ‘‘the new god, the lord of the book”. For the mythological basis of the idea of an opened heavenly book ¢f. Winckler (Alt-orient. Forsch. ii. 386) and Brandis (Hermes, 1867, 283). The triple division of the universe was originally Babylonian but it had long ago become a popular religious idea, (cf. Phil. ii. ro).
Ver. 4. A naive expression of disap- pointment, the expectation of iv. 1 being apparently thwarted. The sense of con- solation and triumph is so strong in this book that no tears are shed in self-pity. The prophet only weeps at the apparent check to revelation.