+
the final conflict of the gods is to be fought out (so fallen angels in En. vi. 5, © at mount Hermon)— in which case the phrase is a survival of some apoca- lyptic myth no longer intelligible to John (Gunkel, Bousset)—or (6) to be taken as an allusion to the hills near the plain (in the light of Judges v. 18, το, iv. 6, 12, 14; Ezek, xxxvili.) 8, 2, σωας. ο τη. by. gematria the name is equivalent to
ΠΠ cay (Ewald, Hausrath),
but neither this nor the proposal to take
γρ] as a corruption of ην (city, so Hitzig, Hilgenfeld, Forbes), much less of
NOY (Aram. = yu: Volter), is natural.
Cf. for further etymological and mytho- logical suggestions, Nestle (Hastings, D. B. ii. 304, 305), Cheyne (Ε. Bi. i. 310, 311), and Legge and Cheyne in Proc. Society of Bibl. Arch. 1900, ii. 2. Bruston’s interpretation (ΕρμαΞ- ἀνάθεμα, Γεδᾶν, cf. Num. xiv. 45, xxi. 3; Judges xx. 45) is far-fetched, but there may be some link between this obscure fragment of tradition and the cycle of Gog and Magog (cf. Cheyne in E. Bi. ii. 1747, 1748).
17-21: the seventh bowl and plague as the climax of all.
Ver. 17. The temple (xi. 19) and the throne (viii. 3) are again blended in one scene. In Isa, Ixvi. 6 the divine ven-
15---21. 449 ’ A . . λέγουσα, “'' Γέγονε”. 18. καὶ | ἐγένοντο ἀστραπαί καὶ φωναὶ kath xxl. 6, ¢f ζεκ. * ο βρονταὶ καὶ "σεισμὸς ἐγένετο μέγας, ‘olos οὐκ ἐγένετο ἀφ οὗ xxxix. 8, i iv. 5.
ἄνθρωπος ἐγένετο ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, τηλικοῦτος σεισμὸς οὕτω μέγας. k viii. 5, xi. νι ρε ρα. ς , ς , m > , / ‘ ς όλ 13, 19, Jer. IQ. kal ἐγένετο ἡ πόλις ἡ µεγάλη “eis τρία µέρη, καὶ at πόλεις αν 19, A an ~ rom τῶν ἐθνῶν ἔπεσαν' καὶ " Βαβυλὼν ἡ " µεγάλη "ἐμνήσθη ἐνώπιον TOO Ass. Mos. A a le ῃ , A a ae - - Vili. I, θεοῦ, δοῦναι αὐτῇ 1d? ποτήριον τοῦ οἴνου τοῦ “Oupod τῆς ὀργῆς Dan. xii SES arn r \ a a ” νο» > ee I, Cf. αὐτοῦ. 20. "kal πᾶσα νῆσος ἔφυγε, καὶ "ὄρη οὐχ εὑρέθησαν. 21. Μαι, t m a XXiv. 21 καὶ “xddala µεγάλη ὡς "ταλαντιαία καταβαίνει ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἐπὶ ἅρα . ~ Shak τοὺς dvOpdirous* καὶ " ἐβλασφήμησαν οἱ ἄνθρωποι τὸν θεὸν ἐκ τῆς Ful.c
n Jer. li. 58, Dan. iv. 30. loose use of infin., cf. ver. 9. 8 Judith, xvi. 15, Sir. xvi. 19, etc. -T.; figur. = “colossal”,
p Isa. li. 17,
v verr. 0-11.
geance is heralded by φωνὴ ἐκ ναοῦ, φωνή Κυρίου ἀνταποδιδόντος ἀνταπόδοσιν τοῖς ἀντικειμένοις.
Ver. 18. The conventional storm- theophany brings on απ exceptionally severe earthquake, which (ver. 19) shatters Jerusalem into three parts and entirely overthrows the pagan cities. Rome’s more awful ruin is attributed in xvii. 16 to the invasion of Oriental hordes (cf. xvi. 12); here the allusion to her down- fall is proleptic (=xvii. 2, xviii. 6 f.), as a climax to the foregoing catastrophe. Probably the great city is Jerusalem (so ¢.g., Andr., Bengel, Simcox, B. Weiss, J. Weiss), as in xi. 8. She is distinguished from the Gentile cities as Rome also is singled out from her allies and adherents. Being primarily guilty, Rome-Babylon is reserved for a special fate. The whole passage is enigmatic and obscure. Did the earthquake destroy the inhabitants of Jerusalem? and why? The allusion must be to some form of the tradition underlying xi. 1-13 and xiv. 18-20, or to that of Zech. xiv. 4, 5. Both earth- quakes and invasions had been combined already in the Ο.Τ. eschatology (cf. Isa. xili. 13 f.; Hag. ii. 21 f.) ; both perils were real, at this period; and, in delineating both dangers with a free, poetic imagina- tion, the prophet aims as usual at im- pressiveness rather than at any systematic regularity. For earthquakes in Jerusalem, cf. G. A. Smith’s ¥eru- salem, i. pp. 61 [.--ἐμνήσθη: neither magnificence nor age wins oblivion for an empire’s crimes against the moral order.