2Ys Jesus Christ had promised to come again, the Jewish expectations of a Messiah who should be revealed continued unabated among many of His disciples; that which as Jews they had hoped from the first and only advent they now deferred till the second. True, the kingdom of God which He had promised did not tally with the materialistic hopes of the people, but on the other hand He had not infrequently Himself employed the figurative language of the prophets and apocalyptic writers; and, after He had left the earth, many sayings borrowed from the Jewish apocalypses were put in His mouth by a vitiated tradition. In the expectations of Christians of the 1st century spiritual and material elements were strangely blent. Hence not only were the Jewish apocalypses, the genuineness of which no one doubted, read in the Christian communities and transmitted to the Gentile converts, but soon there appeared new apocalypses written by Christians. We cannot wonder at this, for all conditions favourable to the production of such writings were to be found in the churches also; above all, men were conscious of possessing the spirit of prophecy in a far fuller measure than ever before, and this spirit necessarily manifested itself not only in signs and wonders but also in revelations and predictions. Of the Christian apocalypses written between 70 and 170 a.d. only a very small portion is known to us; for the later church viewed them as dangerous and got rid of them. Even of the apocalypse of Peter, written in the 1st century and regarded as canonical in some provinces as late as the 3d, only a very few fragments have come down to us. But the great Apocalypse which bears the name of John has been preserved. It is to its reception into the canon that we owe the preservation of this precious, indeed unique, monument of the earliest Christian times.

Form, Contents, and Purpose.— If we leave out of view chapters i. to iii. the Apocalypse of John does not differ very materially in form from the Jewish apocalypses; but undoubtedly its arrangement is better, and its execution simpler and grander, and therefore more tasteful. In its contents, however, the distinction between this Christian apocalypse and its Jewish fellows is marked; for, while the latter have not and could not have any actual knowledge of the Messiah whom they promise, the Apocalypse of John centres round the crucified and risen Jesus, the Lamb that was slain. The author knows whom he and the Christian community have to expect; to him Jesus Christ is the alpha and the omega, the first and the last; he is the Lord of the world and of history. And this faith gives to the Apocalypse of John a tone of assured confidence and hope such as is not to be found in the Jewish apocalypses. On the other hand, however firm and sure the Christian faith of the author appears, he was still completely hide-bound in the old forms; it is really a case of new wine in old bottles. But this very circumstance gives to the book its peculiar charm, for in no other early Christian writing are new and old to be found so completely mingled as in this. The author’s attitude towards the world and the state is still entirely the Jewish attitude of surly hate—this disciple of the gospel has not yet learned that we are bound to love our enemies; but his attitude towards God and his view of the value of a man’s own works show no longer the Jewish but the new Christian belief, for he sees God in Christ, he has accepted the doctrine of the forgiveness of sins through the blood of the Lamb, and regards himself as a priest and king before God. Hence too he lives and moves no longer in the law but in the prophets and the psalms. From them, especially from the prophets Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Daniel, he borrowed most of his imagery and symbols. What he has done in his book is to create a great apocalyptic painting or rather a drama worked out in different acts. Impatient longing for the end, a deep abhorrence of the heathen state, a firm faith in Christ and His second coming, a minute and painstaking study of the old prophecies—these are the sources from which the description of the future are drawn. The purpose is the same as that of all apocalypses—to confirm and strengthen the little family of believers in their patience, their courage, and their confidence, by pointing out that the sufferings of the time will last but a brief span and that the present troubles are already the beginning of that end when sorrow and suffering will in a moment be transformed into glory unspeakable.

The revelation proper begins with iv. 1,—the first three chapters forming an introduction (the seven letters to the seven churches of Asia Minor, which are prefixed, are marked by poetical beauty and power of language). The future is written in a book with seven seals, which the Lamb opens one after the other (iv., v.). The opening of each seal brings a plague upon the earth (vi. ). Before the seventh seal is opened, the church of the latter days is itself sealed that it may be preserved harmless from the assaults of the powers of hell (vii.). At the opening of the seventh seal seven angels with trumpets appear on the scene, each of whom blows a trumpet-blast as a prelude to new honors on the earth (viii., ix. ). With the sixth trumpet the preliminary judgments are at an end (hence the episode, ch. x. ). The judgment proper begins with the fall of Jerusalem (xi. ). Then the seventh trumpet sounds as the signal for the last dread horrors and for the final judgment of the world and of all wickedness. This is preceded, however, by a description of the preservation of the church of the latter days (xii.), forming one of those pauses in the narrative which give the reader breathing time and relieve the horror of the description by the introduction of scenes of peace and words of comfort. The power of the world that opposes Christ (the Roman empire) is described along with all its devilish accomplices (xiii.), and (xiv.) its destruction is by anticipation set forth in figures. The seven angels follow with the seven vials of wrath, which are poured forth and represent the beginning of the final catastrophe (xv., xyi. ). This final catastrophe, involving the imperial city, thθ antichristian emperor, his governors, and, last of all, the devil himself, is described in xvii.-xx. 3,—xix. 11 sq. forming the climax, when Christ himself appears on a white horse and vanquishes all his foes. The devil is chained in the bottomless pit for a thousand years; during this time the saints of the latter days—not all believers—reign with Christ. After the devil has been released once more and has made war on the holy city he is for ever overthrown and the last judgment follows (xx.). In xxi∙-xxii. 5 the glory of the heavenly and eternal Jerusalem is set forth. In xxii. 6-21 several epilogues may be detected.

Unity and Integrity.— The above analysis will have shown the essential unity of the book. The more attentively we scan the connexion of the descriptions with each other the more clearly do we perceive the unity, the artistic and systematic arrangement, of the book. This is completely overlooked by those who fancy that in the seven seals, the seven trumpets, the seven vials of wrath, the whole course of the judgment is simply repeated in ever new imagery. Leaving all other objections out of account, this supposition is refuted by the simple observation that the author has not merely placed the different scenes side by side but has linked them together in such a way that each scene follows as a consequence from the scene before. A correct perception of the plan of the book further negatives the opinion of older scholars and of Völter in modern times (Die Entstehung der Apokalypse, 1882) that the book consists of different parts by different authors. But it is probable enough that the work has been interpolated and touched up in various places (certainly in i. 1-3); and several verses of the epilogue (xxii. 6-21) are not by the author of the book, as indeed the language itself is sufficient to prove. Unless we are utterly deceived, the book underwent systematic if not very radical revisions even before the middle of the 2d century. To the additions then made belong, amongst others, the famous words (xix. 13) καί. κεκKgται to όνομα αυτόν ό λόγος τον 6εοv, which do not fit into the passage. An exact investigation of the extent of the alterations and additions would be a very useful work. Language.— The language is more Hebraic than that of any other New Testament book. The author thought in Hebrew and wrote in Greek. But the gross violations of Greek grammar are not to be explained from ignorance. “In the language of the Apocalypse there is nothing of the bungling and happy-go-lucky style of a beginner; indeed it bears the stamp of consistency and purpose.” The author writes, e.g, χάρις καi ειρήνη άπό ό ωv κα,ϊ ό ήν καί ό ερχόμενος καί από των επτά πνευμάτων . . . και άπό Ιησον Χρίστον, ό μάρτνς, ό πιστός (i. 4, 5), although he has shown in a hundred passages that he knew very well the rules which he has here broken. He must have deliberately intended to break them in order to give to the words of his greeting a certain elevation and solemnity. Of course only to a foreigner could it have occurred to employ those means for this end.

Author’s Standpoint.— That the book is not written by a disciple of the apostle Paul, that its author is filled with Jewish hatred and abhorrence of the heathen state, that in other ways traces of the Jewish spirit crop up here and there in the Apocalypse, is beyond question. But many critics, especially the so-called Tübingen school, as well as Renan, Mommsen, and others, have gone still farther; the author of the Apocalypse, say they, was an Ebionite and a decided opponent of the apostle Paul. In support of this hypothesis, which they put forward as if it were an established truth, they appeal chiefly to the following observations :—(1) in ch. vii. only 144,000 Jews are sealed, therefore the author regarded only born Jews as full members of the Messiah’s kingdom; consequently (ver. 9 sq.) the multitude which is not numbered forms a wider circle, viz., the proselytes, λvho are not counted and also not sealed, and are therefore of lower rank; (2) in ii.-iii. the author displays the greatest abhorrence of those who eat meat which has been offered to idols and who practise “fornication”; by these none but disciples of Paul can be meant; (3) in xxi. 14 the author speaks only of twelve apostles, and thereby undoubtedly excludes Paul; (4) the author praises (ii. 2) the Ephesians because they have found the false apostles to be liars and have rejected them, but by these false apostles only Paul could be meant; (5) the author cannot conceive (xi. 1, 2) that the temple at Jerusalem should ever be destroyed, and proves by this how much he himself still clung to the temple worship.

The point in dispute is of the highest importance for the proper understanding of the history of primitive Christianity. If the Tübingen school is right, the Pauline epoch was followed in Asia Minor by an Ebionitic epoch, and in this case Catholicism may very well be the product of a compromise between Paulinism and Jewish Christianity. But on this very point it can be clearly shown that the Tübingen school is in the wrong; for the above arguments amount to nothing.

(1) The 12×12,000 (vii. 4 sq.) can only, like James i. 1, be interpreted allegorically and referred to Christians generally without respect of nationality; the twelve tribes are the Christians. This interpretation is the only possible one, because (a) in xiv. 3 it is said of the 144,000 that they are bought from the earth, and because (5) besides the 144,000 who are sealed no one survives the horrors of the last time. We must not overlook the fact that in ch. vii. two entirely different visions are presented, which are not to be fused into a single vision: the 144,000 are on earth, the unnumbered multitude (ver. 9 sq. ) are not a supplement of these 144,000, but are already in heaven and represent the sum of all the children of God from the beginning. Thus, if the 144,000 were exclusively Jews, in the last time there would be no Christian at all from among the heathen; that is, no heathen would be saved. But that this is the author’s meaning not even the Tübingen critics can maintain. Thus the “twelve tribes” are to be understood allegorically. Λs Abraham is the father of all believers, so all believers make up the nation of the twelve tribes. (2) The polemic against the eating of meat offered to idols and against “fornication” is not peculiar to the author, but is to be found in several early Christian writings. It is not a polemic against Paul; at most it is a polemic against lax disciples of Paul; further it is no sign of Ebionitism, for very many Gentile Christian writers of the 2d century {e.g., Justin) combated the eating of meat offered to idols. The rule mentioned in Acts xv. 29 may really have been made between 58 aud 70 a.d., and may have been a condition of intercourse between Jewish and Gentile Christians. After that time it gradually prevailed all over Christendom. (3) In the ideal description of the new Jerusalem it would have been impossible for the author to speak of thirteen apostles. (4) The plural απόστολοι (ii. 2) shows that Paul is not meant, and the comparison with ii. 9 and iii. 9 makes it probable that Jewish emissaries are intended. But, apart from this, we see better than heretofore by the newly discovered Teaching of the Apostles that the name “apostle” was not confined to the twelve apostles and Paul. If the author had wished to express abhorrence of Paul lie could not have done it more obscurely than he has done it in ii. 2. (5) The author says expressly (xxi. 22) that he saw no temple in the new Jerusalem, “for the Lord is her temple and the Lamb”; hence he felt that the temple worship was no longer needed to satisfy his religious wants; in excepting the temple buildings from the universal destruction (xi. 1) he follows a Jewish notion, to which in his heart he has already risen superior.

The arguments to prove the Ebionitism of the Apocalypse are therefore insufficient; rather, we should say, the Apocalypse shows us a Christianity free from the law, free from national prejudices, universal, and yet a Christianity which is quite independent of Paul. It is this that constitutes the high importance of the book. The author speaks not at all of the law—the word does not occur in his work; he looks for salvation from the power and grace of God and Christ alone, and knows that to be clean a man must wash his robes in the blood of the Lamb; nowhere has he made a distinction between Gentile and Jewish Christians; in this respect he is even more liberal than Paul, for Paul believes...