ος καὶ προσκυνήσατε τῷ ὃ ποιήσαντι τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν καὶ ae τα, Σθάλασσαν καὶ " πηγὰς ὑδάτων. appre bn 8. καὶ ἄλλος ἄγγελος δεύτερος ] ἠκολούθησε λέγων, farther, “Ἔπεσεν ° ἔπεσε ° Βαβυλὼν ἡ ‘ µεγάλη: 6, Deut, | © ἐκ τοῦ οἴνου [τοῦ θυμοῦ] τῆς πορνείας αὐτῆς πεπότικε with Acts πάντα τὰ €Ovy.” κ η g. καὶ ἄλλος ἄγγελος τρίτος ἠκολούθησεν αὐτοῖς λέγων ἐν φωνῆ
Vill. το, aN oe ote) Yen 6 , Ν AY ae 2 > οἱ ‘ ΧΝΙ. 4. an Ρεγα η, Ει τις προσκυνει το ηριον και την εικονα αυτου και 2
[ο]
irreg. λ , , ο Να a , SEU mea vis! WA ae a Tile ses omission αμβάνει χάραγµα ἐπὶ Tod μετώπου αὐτοῦ ἢ ἐπὶ τὴν χεῖρα " αὐτοῦ, of article, , a A a a a a see Win, Το. “kat αὐτὸς ᾿πίεται ἐκ τοῦ οἴνου τοῦ θυμοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ, τοῦ § 18, 7d. / mn 3 , > n ’ A > an > A ‘
χο of ©6Kekepacpevou "' ἀκράτου ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ τῆς ὀργῆς αὐτοῦ, καὶ “what has f 2 ‘ A) ΄ πε, > / ο Sut. Bip. βασανισθήσεται ἐν πυρὶ καὶ "θείω ἐνώπιον ἀγγέλων ° ἁγίων pened”
(SO xviii. 2), Moult. i. 135; cf. Isa. xxi. ο. er Ρος ν. τα. f Dan. iv. 27 (30), Jer. li. 58. 6 Seductive influence of idolatry (as in xiii. 2, Jer. 1. 2). h xiii. 12-17. i gen. as Vii. 3, etc. 4 he, as well as Babylon; cf. on iii. 20. 1 Jer. xxv. 17-19, 27-29, xxxii. 1,also Ps. lxxv. 9, Ps. Sol. viii. 15. See below at xvi. 19, xix, 15. m cf. Jos. Ant. xvii. 6, 1, xviii. 9, 8, etc. n Cf. on Σχ. 19. ο As Mark viii. 38, Acts x. 22, etc.
1 The tautological δευτερος goes either before (AQ, 1, etc., Areth., Lach., Tr., Al., ‘WH, Sw., Bj.) or after (ΝΕΟ Ρ, min., Me., Pesh., Arm., etc., Ti., Ws.) αγγελος. του θυµον (om. fuld. 1, 96, Tic., Pr., Cassiod.) as at xviii. 3 (om. S., Pr.) a gloss [BL., ᾧ 35, 6]? ΟΡ. xvii. 2.
24... αντον (om. S.) a gloss?
grimly writes, drawing on α powerful O.T. figure; the passion of God’s hot in- dignation will be forced down their throats, like a bitter draught (ver. 10). θυμός, how- ever, besides translating a Hebrew equi- valent for “fury” (Isa. li. 17 f.), is oc- casionally a LXX rendering for the ana- logous idea of ‘‘ venom” or ‘‘ poison”’
(nan OF wings, cf. Job xx. 16), and
this would yield a good sense here.
Vv. 9-11. The third angel proclaims that the deliberate adherents of the Im- perial cultus are to be held responsible for their actions, and punished accord- ingly. The object is that these votaries may be “scared into faith by warning of sin’s pains”. The plea of force (xiii. 12) is no excuse (cf Matt. x. 28).
Ver.10. κεκερασµένου here as in xviii. 6 by oxymoron = ‘“‘poured out,” the original meaning of ‘‘mixed’’ (with water) being dropped. The torture (de- picted from Isa. xxxiv. 9, 10) is inflicted before the holy angels (who evidently sit as assessors at the judgment, En. xlviii. 9), ἁγίων being either an efitheton ornans or an allusion to xii. 8-9. Normally the prophet refrains from introducing such spectators of doom (xix. 20, xx. το-14). ‘‘Fire is the divine cruelty of the Semitic religions” (Doughty), but
(Bj., cf. xiii. 16).
the torment which Judaism designed for fallen angels and apostates is assigned here to the worshippers of the Czsars. The Apocalypse is silent upon agents of torture; they are not the angels, much less the devil (who is himself punished, xx. ΙΟ). But, like 4 Esd. vii. [ver. 36] (‘‘the furnace of Gehenna shall be dis- closed and over against it the paradise of delight”’), John locates the place of tor- ment over against the place of rest. For such grim popular fancies Enoch (xxvii. 2, 3, xiviii. 9, xc. 26, 27) is mainly respon- sible; there (as in Clem. Hom. xvii.) the tortures proceed under the eyes of the righteous, though (especially in the later fragments, as in John’s Apoc.) the moralisation of the idea has advanced, until Gehenna vanishes from the scene of bliss. ‘It is impossible for us to understand how such a sight could be compatible with heavenly happiness ” (Stanton, ¥ewish and Christian Messiah, p. 3443; cf. Lecky’s European Morals, ii. 225 f.), but the psychological basis of the ghastly expectation can be verified in the cruder types of primitive and modern re- ligion. Most critics delete καὶ ἐνώπιον τοῦ Gpviov as another gloss (cf. on ver. 4); the position of Jesus after the angels is not unexampled (cf. i. 4, 5), even if before the holy angels were not