and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John, ²who testified to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, everything that he saw. (New American Standard Bible – NASB)

We’re still in the 21st century:

“…Christ reveals these things to John by the medium of an angel and the use of signs and symbols (signified).”

“1:2 Who bore witness to the word of God, and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, to all things that he saw. John became a messenger to the Church by recording all that he saw and heard so that we might have an accurate record of all that God said and of the confirmation given to it by Jesus Christ.”     [from THE REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST, by Derek Williams, 2006]

This quote looks pretty straightforward, yet with rereading a slippery element arises. First, Williams is stating that it all came through “an angel.” We’ve discussed this earlier: there was not “an” angel delivering the message. There was Christ Himself, as well as a number of angels involved. Secondly, Williams glosses over “signs and symbols,” as if we can all agree that “signs and symbols” are the sum total of Revelation.

After the strong implication that “an angel” delivered this message that “Christ revealed,” Williams goes on to talk about “all that God said and the confirmation given to it by Jesus Christ.” So, who said it, who revealed it? Most of the commentators try to very clearly lay out who initiated the message, who brought the message forward, and who delivered it to who. I don’t always agree with what they come up with, but at least they try. Williams doesn’t seem to even notice that he’s left us more in the dark than when we read the text itself. We’re left with that slippery feeling of: did he intend to leave us in the dark, or did he really not notice?

“There is, then, a clear sequence of mediation through which John and his audience received the revelation: God, Jesus Christ, his angel, John, and the seven churches. The source of the revelation is God. The mediator of the revelation is Jesus Christ, who uses an angel to give it to John and the churches. Angels play an important role throughout the book of Revelation. They help in the mediation by leading or attending John through the visions, with the interpretation of the visions, in aiding John to focus on what is important in a particular vision, and by answering John’s questions concerning something within a vision (5:2).”

And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, “Who is worthy to open the scroll and to break its seals?”     (Revelation 5:2; NASB)

This next quote is a perfect example of how most commentators have handled this passage. This author, again, talks about “an angel,” but he redeems himself when he discusses “angels” and the roles they play.

“While the mediating agents of the revelation are Jesus Christ and his angel(s), the perceptible means by which John receives it are visions and/or visionary experiences. This is indicated by two verbs in 1:1, both done by Christ: ‘to show’ and ‘communicated in visible signs.’ John also describes his reception in 1:2 with the verb ‘saw.’ At the very beginning John is alerted to the fact that the primary means of his perception of the revelation will be visions (1:1), and he tells the reader(s) and hearer(s) that he will describe for them what ‘he saw’ (1:2). However, audible word will also be used, as indicated by ‘word,’ ‘who hear,’ and ‘words’ (1:2-3). Though visions will be used to convey the revelation to John, they only serve as visual aids in the revelation. The communication from John to the reader(s) and hearer(s) takes place through words. Of primary importance in the revelation is the word, the meaning and witness of the prophetic message which is portrayed by the visions…Thus the prophetic message of Revelation is the Word of God given in and with visual form.”        [from CONCORDIA COMMENTARY ON REVELATION, by Louis Brighton, 2009]

I like this explanation. Brighton doesn’t lean on “signs” and “signified.” According to him there were “signs,” “visions,” and “words,” which is absolutely true. His conclusion that “…the prophetic message of Revelation is the Word of God given in and with visual form” is also very true and important to remember.

“A verbal thread, ‘testify’ and ‘testimony’ (martyreo), which occurs three times in the opening, captures a prominent theme of the book. It is found twice in 1:2: the revelation from Jesus Christ was given to John who ‘testified’ to the word of God and to the ‘testimony’ of Jesus Christ. The third occurrence is in 1:5, where Jesus is called ‘the faithful witness.’ The word ‘testimony’ or ‘witness’ comes from the language of the law court: witnesses are called to testify to the truth, sometimes with their lives. Jesus is the first in the book to give testimony and John follows, bearing testimony to the word of God. Others will be called to give testimony, such as Antipas of 2:13 who, like Christ, lost his life for this ‘faithful’ testimony (cf. also 6:9; 12:11; 17:6; 19:10). 

“I know where you dwell, where Satan’s throne is; and you hold firmly to My name, and did not deny My faith even in the days of Antipas, My witness, My faithful one, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells.    
(Revelation 2:13; NASB)

When the Lamb broke the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of those who had been killed because of the word of God, and because of the testimony which they had maintained;    
(Revelation 6:9; NASB)

And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of their testimony, and they did not love their life even when faced with death.    
(Revelation 12:11; NASB)

And I saw the woman drunk with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the witnesses of Jesus. When I saw her, I wondered greatly.     (Revelation 17:6; NASB)

Then I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, “Do not do that; I am a fellow servant of  yours and your brothers and sister who hold the testimony of Jesus; worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”    
(Revelation 19:10; NASB)

My first argument with this quote is the idea that people can testify “with their lives” in a court of law. The only time, that I’m aware of, that this was literally true, was during part of the Middle Ages and through into the 16th and 17th centuries: during the time when they would use the “dunking stool,” or would just throw a person into the water. If they drown they were judged to be innocent, but if they didn’t, they were guilty (this was frequently about discerning witches, so more women probably suffered this form of “judgment” than men). This was not done under Jewish law at all; it was only misinformed Christians who came up with this idea, which is why I find it disturbing that this author should allude to it. 

As a Christian, I am ashamed of those in the past who saw this type of “trial” as being Biblical somehow. Their only excuse was that they didn’t have access to Bibles in any language (only certain clergy had access), and most of them couldn’t have read it even if they did. 

In the Bible, martyrs are spoken of as “witnessing,” which may be what led to the confusion. Indeed, our word “martyr” comes from the Greek word for “witness” or “testify.” But, we came to call them “martyrs” because they often died for the witnessing for Christ; but they did not always have to die to be a witness for Christ, just as Paul did a lot of witnessing before his life was required of him. 

Next, let’s look at the following: “Jesus is the first in the book to give testimony and John follows, bearing testimony to the word of God. Others will be called to give testimony, such as Antipas of 2:13 who, like Christ, lost his life for this ‘faithful’ testimony.” It starts with Jesus and John giving “testimony” to the “word of God,” totally scuttling the second meaning for “word of God,” i.e., Jesus Himself. But worst of all, the author goes on to negate the whole reason that Jesus died on the cross. He is saying here that, like Antipas, Christ died for His “testimony.” It is a fundamental truth of Christianity that Christ died for our sins, not for His testimony.

“The ‘two witnesses’ of Rev. 11, whose testimony results in fierce opposition from the beast and the inhabitants of the earth, represent the faithful witness of the church.”

We will talk more about the two witnesses when we get there, but I’m pretty sure that I can’t agree with the witnesses being “the faithful witness of the church.” Commentators usually state that the witnesses are two of the Old Testament saints; a few think that one of them is John the Baptist. These are not churchmen. God is not trying to win the Jews to “the church” at that point, because the church has left the planet. He is trying to turn the Jews to Christ.

“A two-step progression develops the content of John’s testimony. He testified (1) to ‘the word of God,’ and (2) ‘to the testimony of Jesus Christ.’ The second part of the progression clarifies the first part. The ‘word of God’ is the ‘testimony of Jesus Christ.’ Jesus’ testimony includes both his words and deeds, especially his faithful witness of death and resurrection. As a faithful witness Jesus is the prototype for Christians. The distortion of the truth is a primary trait of the beast (cf. 13:14), and Christians are called to bear witness to God’s truth, ‘which means that (they) must be prepared to suffer for the sake of obedience in relation to the testimony of Jesus, even to the point of death (cf. 13:9-10; 14:4-5).’”           [from THE REVELATION OF JOHN: A NARRATIVE COMMENTARY, by James L. Ressinguie, 2009]

⁹If anyone has an ear, let him hear. ¹⁰If anyone is destined for captivity, to captivity he goes; if anyone kills with the sword, with the sword he must be killed. Here is the perseverance and the faith of the saints…¹⁴And he deceives those who live on the earth because of the signs which it was given him to perform in the presence of the beast, telling those who live on the earth to make an image to the beast who had the wound of the sword and has come to life.    
(Revelation 13:9,10,14; NASB)

⁴These are the ones who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are celibate. These are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever He goes. These have been purchased from mankind as first fruits to God and to the Lamb. ⁵And no lie was found in their mouths; they are blameless.    
(Revelation 14:4,5; NASB)

Ressinguie takes the idea of Jesus dying for His testimony even further here. He tries to make it right by saying His “death and resurrection” is “his faithful witness.” Was the death of Jesus and His resurrection a witness, or testimony, of Christ? Yes, but of what was He testifying? He died for our sins in a public way; His death testified to His love for us, and to our salvation, by dying for our sins on the cross. This is the main belief of Christianity; you cannot call yourself a Christian without this belief.

Jesus was the first fruit of the dead, but He was not a “prototype.” We are not made in the image of Christ, but of God. Is God a prototype? Of course not. If either Christ or God were “prototypes,” then we would be creating things out of nothing and living perfect, eternal lives right here on earth. Jesus showed us what a perfect human life looks like. Being born again does not remake us as Christ, living perfect human lives. Being born again gives us a new heart, and our lives are changed enough that the Spirit can dwell within us, and assist us in being more Christ-like…when we listen to Him.  Most of the time we are still sinful, fallen creatures; though we are saved sinful, fallen creatures: because Jesus died for our sins.

I need to point out a few more smaller points. First, Ressinguie does not capitalize the pronouns of Christ, which annoys me. Second, his arguments in this last paragraph take him even further away from the idea of Jesus as the Word of God. And third, the Bible passage he uses to illustrate the beast’s distortion of truth is actually about the False Prophet rather than the beast.

“Unique among the Bible’s books, Revelation claims to be a collaborative effort. Its prestigious lineage starts with God the Father, who conceived it, gave it to Jesus Christ. This presents the first of many of Revelation’s difficult mysteries. If Jesus is God, why does God the Father need to give it to him? Based on Matthew 24:36, some suggest Jesus did not have the details of this Revelation while he was on earth. 

But about that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.    
(Matthew 24:36; NASB)

“This view suggests Jesus only received the complete Revelation when he went to heaven. This interpretation is difficult because Jesus’ end-time teachings (e.g., Matthew 24) demonstrate his mastery of eschatology in general and last days events specifically. More likely, God the Father shared the vision’s content with Jesus sometime prior to his birth in Bethlehem.”

Hmmm. The author, I think rightly, questions the idea that if Jesus is God, why does the Father have to give the revelation to Him? And then the author turns around and states that God probably gave it to Jesus “prior to his birth.” (Another author with no capitalization of the pronouns…) The author is trying to explain how Jesus would know about the end times, but not know when they will happen. But that was not the original question, which was: why does God need to tell Himself about the end times? We’ve talked about this before, but I think the Christ held back certain information from Himself during His human life; He knew those things before birth, and when He died, He knew them again.

If it helps people to think of God as “passing on” the information to Jesus, who then gave it to John via “an” angel, then I won’t argue the point any further. I don’t have any big, special knowledge about this; just some thoughts that I’ve shared.

“After receiving this vision, Jesus gives it to its human transcriber through an emissary: God’s angel. While not directly identified, the angel’s role of revealing the vision to John is suggestive of the role of the Holy Spirit, who teaches and reveals all truths to people (John 14:26).”      [from UNVEILING THE MYSTERIES OF THE LAST DAYS: SYSTEMATIC PROPHECY FROM GENESIS TO REVELATION,  by David A. Hamblin, 2010]

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and remind you of all that I said to you.     (John 14:26; NASB)

I agree that how Hamblin describes it, it sounds like the role of the Holy Spirit.

“Revelation 1:1 also says this revelation came from Christ ‘by sending his angel to his servant John.’ The progression of the revelation was from God the Father to Christ the Son to the angel, who communicated the message to John as a ‘servant’ (v.1) rather than as an apostle is not unusual considering the way other New Testament apostles referred to themselves (cf. Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1; James 1:1; 2 Pet. 1:1; Jude 1).

Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God    
(Romans 1:1; NASB)

Paul and Timothy, bond-servants of Christ, Jesus, to all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, including the overseers and deacons     (Philippians 1:1; NASB)

Paul, a bond-servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the faith of those chosen of God and knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness    
(Titus 1:1; NASB)

James, a bond-servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes who are dispersed abroad: Greetings.    
(James 1:1; NASB)

Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ    
(2 Peter 1:1; NASB)

Jude, a bond-servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James, To those who are the called, beloved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ    
(Jude 1:1; NASB)

“1:2 who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw.

“The expression ‘bore witness’ in verse 2 means ‘to testify.’ The book of Revelation is not only the Word of God in that it originates in God, but John testifies to his reception of it. It has the added weight of being ‘the testimony of Jesus Christ,’ and John was faithful to record everything he saw. He was an eye witness.”          [from REVELATION (revised & edited by Philip E. Rawley & Mark Hitchcock), by John F. Walvoord, 2011]

Rawley and Hitchcock are revising a 1966 book by Walvoord here; we looked at the original about 5 posts ago. Mostly they’ve simplified Walvoord’s more complete text, however, the first paragraph is quite different from the original: “The channel through which the revelation comes from Christ is ‘by his angel unto his servant John.’ The communication spoken of as ‘signified,’ while often meaning revelation through symbols, as in this book, includes also revelation through words which communicate the meaning. The name of the angel is not given, though Gabriel has been suggested (cf. Dan. 8:16; 9:2, 21-22; Luke 1:26-31).”  Rawley and Hitchcock wisely avoided the “signified” debate, but  managed to go headlong into the unnecessary “progression of revelation.” Mark Hitchcock is a well-known commentator on prophecy, and I usually agree with him. I don’t know much about Philip Rawley, except that he revises books by Walvoord, and the Dallas Theological Seminary reviewed them favorably. I find it disturbing, however, that Rawley and Hitchcock removed several references to word meaning and usages from the original Walvoord book.

“Is being a Christian martyr about how one dies? One of the books of the New Testament that is often associated with inspiring martyrdom in the early centuries of Christianity is the Book of Revelation. We think of promises like the one given by the risen Christ at the end of his letter to the church at Smyrna, ‘Be faithful unto death and I will give you the crown of life’ (Revelation 2:10). There is a clear connection between witness and death in Revelation. The Greek noun martus, usually translated witness, and its related forms occur several times. First and foremost, Jesus is set forth as the preeminent example of a witness; Jesus’ prophetic witness led, in part, to His death (1:5; 3:14).” 

and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. to Him who loves us and released us from our sings by His blood    
(Revelation 1:5; NASB)

“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Origin of the creation of God, says this     (Revelation 3:14; NASB)

This author is getting perilously close to what Ressinguie was saying earlier: that Christ dying on the cross was for something other than our sins. Also, when someone says that something “led to His death,” there is an implication that maybe Christ didn’t have to die, and maybe it would have been better if He hadn’t. I remember thinking that way before I turned my life over to Christ. But that thinking is all wrong. The plan was that Christ would die for our sins, right from the beginning. 

“Secondly, Revelation also tells of other witnesses who were put to death, such as Antipas from the church in Pergamum (2:13 [see above]) and ‘the ones killed on account of their witness’ whom John sees under the altar calling for judgment (6:9 [see above]). The two witnesses of Revelation 11, who symbolize the prophetic Office of the Holy Ministry in the church, are put to death but rise again to bear witness. The whore of Babylon is described as one who is “drunk with the blood . . . of those who bore witness to Jesus” (17:6 [see above]). Towards the end of this visionary experience, John sees ‘the souls of those beheaded on account of their witness for Jesus’ (20:4). Certainly, Revelation tells of a relationship between witness and being put to death. 

Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast of his image, and had not received the mark on their foreheads and on their hands; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.    
(Revelation 20:4; NASB)

“It is noteworthy, however, that the various occurrences of witness language in Revelation do not primarily describe the witness that Christians gave as they were put to death, but the witness given during their lives on earth. Faithful Christians who testified to Jesus with their lips and lives and then died of sickness or old age, rather than being killed on account of their confession, are also known as martyrs. Simply put, a martyr or witness in the Book of Revelation is one who gives testimony (the Greek noun marturia) or testifies (the Greek verb martureō). The testimony to which one testifies is all about Jesus (1:2; 12:17; 19:10 [see above]): who Jesus is as God incarnate and what He has done by ‘freeing us from our sins by His blood’ (1:5 [see above]). 

So the dragon was enraged with the woman, and went off to make war with the rest of her children, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus.    
(Revelation 12:17; NASB)

“The importance of this testimony in the life of Jesus and His followers can hardly be overstated. Jesus’ own testimony in Revelation is paired and on par with ‘the word of God’ (1:2, 9; 20:4 [see above]; cf. 12:11 [see above]). These texts are stark evidence, within a few decades of Jesus’ own ministry, of the weighty regard given by early Christians to the testimony concerning Jesus’ salvific life, death, resurrection and return.”       [from WITNESS IN THE BOOK OF REVELATION: LIVING AS FAITHFUL AND TRUE MARTYRS, by Charles Gieschen, in LIFE OF THE WORLD magazine, March 2011, Vol 15, Number 1]

I can’t disagree that testimony seems to be tied up with being put to death in Revelation. But I’m glad that Gieschen points out that the meaning of the Greek word martur (the last vowel is transliterated as “u” or “y,” and I’m not sure what the rules are) does not include being killed for your faith, because he’s right. In the Greek sense, all who testify to Christ are “martyrs.” It’s the first century Christians who connected the word with dying for the faith. So, while Revelation does speak about Christians losing their lives for the faith during the Tribulation, it is not touted as the only means of witness.

We’ve run over somewhat today, so we’ll stop here. We’re pushing to the end of the this phrase; I think it’s still 2 more posts to go.