The Lion Who Is A Lamb: An Exposition Of Revelation 5:1–7

By David J. MacLeod

[David J. MacLeod is Dean for Biblical Studies, Emmaus Bible College, Dubuque, Iowa, and Associate Editor of The Emmaus Journal.

This is article two in a three-part series “Worship in Heaven.”]

The present age seems to be spinning a web of evil and misery from which one cannot break free. People feel caught up in a time of warfare, economic insecurity, rampant crime, and perverse moral values.[1] Many feel a sense of hopelessness and helplessness, concluding that life is meaningless and history is aimless. Others flee to Eastern religions, which teach that life is illusion and history is circular. So modern men and women have the uncomfortable choice between no meaning and wrong meaning.

But there is another option: the biblical meaning of history.[2] And according to Revelation 5:1–7 Christ is the meaning of history.[3] “We do not need Christ to tell us that the world is full of troubles. But we do need His explanation of history if its troubles are not to be meaningless.”[4] “Only in Christ crucified is to be found the answer to the riddle of life;. .. only in Judah’s Lion, David’s Root. .. who is also the Lamb of God.”[5] Life is not aimless, and history is not without purpose. The Bible teaches that history had a beginning and will have an end. People have spun the great web of evil in life, and they cannot escape the consequences of their guilt. History is a struggle between good and evil, and this struggle will lead to the ultimate triumph of God and good.[6]

Beginning in Revelation 6 John prophesied the judgments that God will bring on the earth, the return of Christ, and the establishment of His one-thousand-year reign on the earth. But before recording those judgments John related to his readers his wonderful vision of heaven in chapters 4 and 5. The implication is that only from the perspective of heaven can anyone understand what will take place on the earth.

As Calvin wrote, divine revelation is like a pair of eyeglasses. Without the Word of God people have defective vision. But with God’s revelation in Scripture they can begin to read distinctly.[7] Revelation 4–5 gives the reader spiritual eyeglasses, a new understanding of God’s program for the earth. In chapter 4 John affirmed that God is worthy to judge and rule because He is the Creator;[8] in chapter 5 he stated that God is worthy because He is the Redeemer. In chapter 4 John saw God in heaven on His throne. Now he noticed a book in His hand.

The Unopened Scroll In The Hand Of God (v. 1)

The Form Of The Scroll

Although a few have argued that John saw a book, most commentators agree that John saw a scroll in the hand of Him who sat on the throne.[9] Actually the Greek text suggests that the scroll lay on God’s palm (ἐπὶ τὴν δεξιὰν).[10] Scrolls were made from the pith of the papyrus plant, which grew in the Nile. The pith was extracted from the bulrush and cut into thin strips with a sharp knife. A row of strips was laid vertically, and on top of them another row of strips was laid horizontally. This was then moistened with water and glue and pressed together. The resulting substance was beaten with a mallet and then smoothed with a pumice stone. The final product was similar to brown paper.

The sheets were about eight inches by ten inches. They were fastened together with glue on the sides to form a continuous sheet. At each end was a wooden roller. To give an idea of the size of a scroll, the Book of Revelation would be about 15 feet long and 10 inches high. However, the text does not state the length of the scroll in God’s hand.

The side with the horizontal strips provided a better writing surface. That was the recto or right (i.e., suitable) side, and the reverse side was the verso. Papyrus was expensive, so someone with a lot to write but not much money might also use the verso side. Such a scroll is called an opisthograph, that is, a scroll with writing on both sides. The scroll in 5:1 was an opisthograph.[11]

The Contents Of The Scroll

Writers have proposed at least eight interpretations of the contents of the scroll.[12] First, the scroll is the book of the New Covenant, which is yet to be instituted with Israel in the millennial kingdom (Jer. 31:31–34; Rev. 20:4–6).[13] Second, the scroll is a book of redemption, that is, “the lamb’s book of life,” which lists the names of all believers (Rev. 3:5; 13:8; 20:12, 15; 21:27). So numerous are the names that they covered both sides of the scroll.[14] Third, the scroll is the Jewish Torah[15] or the entire Old Testament as it is fulfilled in Christ.[16] Fourth, the scroll contains the events of the yet future Tribulation.[17] It is a “doomsday book.”[18] As each seal is broken a part of the scroll opens, revealing an additional cosmic plague.[19]

Fifth, the scroll is “a bill of divorce; the Lamb divorces the unfaithful Jerusalem and marries the new Jerusalem.”[20] Sixth, the scroll is a record of the sins of mankind.[21] Seventh, the scroll is a “book of destiny,”[22] that is, the scroll contains “the unfolding of the consummation of the mystery of all things, the goal or end of all history, for both the conquerors and the worshipers of the beast.”[23] Eighth, the scroll is a testament or will.

The eighth view is most likely correct. The word “scroll” or “book” (βιβλίον) could mean a variety of things, but since John wrote that this scroll was “sealed up with seven seals,” this narrows it to one possibility.[24] In the first century a scroll sealed with seven seals was a testamentary disposition, that is, a testament or will “that names an inheritance to be received.”[25] Zahn pointed out that in Germany before the introduction of money orders, everyone knew that a letter sealed with five seals contained money. “So the most simple member of the Asiatic Churches knew that a βιβλίον made fast with seven seals was a testament [i.e., a will].”[26] For example emperors Augustus (63 B.C.–A.D. 14) and Vespasian (A.D. 9–79) left such wills for their successors.[27]

It is a mistake to think that the scroll contains the events of chapters 6–19 because this is a scroll sealed along the outside edge with seven wax seals. Only when they are all broken, that is, only after all the judgments have taken place, is the scroll opened and the will read.[28] The will contains the inheritance of God’s people. That it is sealed with seven seals does not speak so much of secrecy, as it does the fact that the contents await realization.[29] The breaking of the seals is preparatory to God’s people entering the promised inheritance, namely, the future one-thousand-year rule of Christ on earth.[30]

Behind the imagery of a scroll with seven seals is a legal practice of the Romans for plebians, who could not have formal legal wills. The testamentary disposition or will for plebians was called a mancipatio, from manum capere, meaning “to take ownership.” When a man made such a document, he assembled seven people: five witnesses, an official called a libripens whose professional instrument was a pair of copper scales, and a family friend called a familiae emptor (“buyer for the family”). He would put a price on the scales and the inheritance was transferred to him. The sole guarantee that the heirs would get their inheritance was the integrity of this family friend, the familiae emptor. He was the executor of the estate, but he actually owned it (as interim heir) until he gave it to the heirs. All seven would seal the scroll. When the testator died, the familiae emptor would pay the debts of the estate and then give the heirs their promised inheritance.[31]

In Revelation 5 all these actions are fulfilled by Christ. He is the Testator who died for the world and bequeathed to believers their inheritance. He is Himself the Heir of the kingdom of God. In a sense He was like a familiae emptor who drew down the scales of divine justice with the weight of the purchase price, His own precious blood. He took the place of sinners and has preserved for believers their future estate in the Father’s house (Gal. 4:1–7). He appeared in open court and rendered account, paying all the debts against the estate (Rom. 3:24–25).

Behind the imagery of the scroll with seven seals, therefore, is the idea of the believers’ inheritance, and that inheritance is ruling with Christ over the world to come, that is, the one-thousand-year kingdom on earth to follow the second advent of Christ (Rev. 20:4–6; cf. Heb. 2:5).

This inheritance of dominion is one of the great themes of the Bible, a theme that helps answer questions people have about the meaning of life and history. Genesis 1:27–30 records the fact that dominion or an inheritance was given to the human race.[32] “Fill the earth,” the Lord said, “and subdue it” (Gen. 1:28). In Psalm 8, “a lyric echo of the Mosaic account of the creation,”[33] dominion is celebrated. “What is man,” the psalmist asked, whom You crowned “with glory and majesty?” (v. 5). Genesis 3 gives the tragic record of dominion lost or the inheritance forfeited. Adam and Eve sinned and lost their royal status. In Jesus’ temptation by Satan dominion was usurped (Luke 4:6) in that the devil offered to give Jesus worldwide dominion if He would fall down at his feet (“for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish”).[34] In Jesus’ preaching dominion was announced or the inheritance reoffered (Matt. 4:17). Christ said, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Following the death, resurrection, and exaltation of Jesus, dominion is decreed or the inheritance insured. God the Father said to His victorious Son, “Ask of Me, and I will surely give the nations as Your inheritance” (Ps. 2:8). And here in Revelation 5 (looking on toward the Second Coming), dominion is taken or the inheritance conferred. The Son of Man will be presented before the Ancient of Days, and to Him will be “given dominion, glory and a kingdom” (Dan. 7:14).[35]

The Unsuccessful Search For One Worthy

To Open The Scroll (vv. 2–4)

As the apostle John watched, he saw “a strong angel” who issued a proclamation that went to the far reaches of creation. When the angel asked if anyone was “worthy” to break the seals, he did not use the word ἱκανός, which means “able.”[36] He used ἄξιος, meaning “worthy or deserving.” The angel’s concern was with moral fitness.[37] The vision assumed that “He who opens the scroll has the power to execute what is written therein.”[38]

No one took up the angelic challenge. “And no one. .. was found worthy to open the book or to look into it” (v. 3). No one “in heaven” (i.e., no angel), no one “on the earth” (i.e., no human being), nor anyone “under the earth” in the world of departed spirits (i.e., no prophet or great saint from Old Testament times) was able. No one is qualified to open the book and restore the lost inheritance. As Seiss observed, no political system, no scientific achievement, no artistic accomplishment, no educational breakthrough or reform, and no philosophical insight can open the book and restore what Adam has forfeited.[39]

There “is a simple but profound biblical truth here which cannot be overemphasized: apart from the person and redeeming work of Jesus Christ, history is an enigma.”[40] For many centuries Western thought has been influenced by the biblical view that history has a divinely ordained goal, which is inseparable from the redemptive work of Christ. Much of the modern world, however, has abandoned this Christian view. As a result many great thinkers have become prophets of doom. The lesson of these verses is that “Christ alone has the key to the meaning of human history.”[41]

John began to weep bitterly (v. 4). These were not the tears of sentimental, disappointed curiosity. John had been with Jesus. He knew the hope of the Old Testment and the promise of the Messiah, who one day will punish the wicked, redress the wrongs of the oppressed, assume His kingly power, and reign on the earth. The apostle wept because the hope of God’s action seemed to be postponed indefinitely.42 “If the scroll is not opened, then [there is] no protection for God’s children in the hours of bitter trial; no judgments upon a persecuting world; no ultimate triumph for believers; [and one could add, no millennial kingdom]; no new heaven and earth; no future inheritance!”[43]

Seiss said, “Such anxious and tearful longing for the ‘better country’ and the ransomed inheritance is noticed in heaven.”[44]

The Unchallenged Sovereign Who Is Worthy To Open The Scroll (vv. 5–7)

Christ As Conquering Messiah: The Lion (v. 5)

Some interpreters have said that 5:5–6 are some of the most profound verses in the Book of Revelation.[45] “They relate Jewish Messianic hopes to the distinctively Christian good news of the advent of the Messiah in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, but a Messiah of a character so wholly unexpected by the Jews that they rejected him.”[46] John was told by one of the twenty-four elders to stop weeping because “the Lion that is from the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has overcome,” that is, He is the Victor over Satan, sin, and death. And this entitles Him to break the seals and open the scroll.

Jesus’ title of “Lion” goes back centuries to the days of the patriarch Jacob. As Jacob lay on his deathbed, he blessed his sons and prophesied over them. He called his son Judah “a lion’s whelp” (Gen. 49:9). Judah’s greatest descendant, Jesus Christ, is now called “the Lion that is from the tribe of Judah.” Using the figure of the lion, 2 Esdras 12:31 says, “This is the Messiah.”

The magnificent title “Lion” points to Christ as the one who shall reign as King during the millennial age. In C. S. Lewis’s Chronicles of Narnia the great hero is Aslan, the lion, a picture of Jesus Christ. The nature of Aslan is the subject of a portion of dialog in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

“But shall we see him?” asked Susan. 

“Why, Daughter of Eve, that’s what I brought you here for. I’m to lead you where you shall meet him,” said Mr. Beaver. 

“Is—is he a man?” asked Lucy. 

“Aslan a man!” said Mr. Beaver sternly. “Certainly not. I tell you he is the King of the wood and the son of the great Emperor-Beyond-the-Sea. Don’t you know who is the King of Beasts? Aslan is a lion—the Lion, the great Lion.” 

“Ooh!” said Susan, “I thought he was a man. Is he—quite safe? I shall feel rather nervous about meeting a lion.” 

“That you will, dearie, and no mistake,” said Mrs. Beaver, “if there’s anyone who can appear before Aslan without their knees knocking, they’re either braver than most or else just silly.” 

“Then he isn’t safe?” said Lucy. 

“Safe?” said Mr. Beaver. “Don’t you hear what Mrs. Beaver tells you? Who said anything about safe? ‘Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King, I tell you.”[47] 

Later, Mr. Beaver says, “He’s wild, you know. Not like a tame lion.”[48]

No, He is not a tame lion! He will defeat His enemies. Yet He is good, and He will care for His people.

Revelation 5:5 also refers to Christ as “the root of David.” This title goes back to Isaiah 11:10 and is generally taken in the sense of a shoot from a root; that is, Christ is a descendant of David, and He will restore the Davidic kingdom.[49] Some commentators, however, say the title “root of David” refers not to Jesus’ human descendancy from David, but more likely to Christ as “the Divine root, which brought forth David.”[50] In favor of this view is the wording in 22:16, where Jesus said, “I am the root and the descendant of David” (ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ῥίζα καὶ τὸ γένος Δαυίδ). It is highly unlikely that “root” (ῥίζα) and “descendant” (γένος) are merely synonymous. It is true that in Isaiah the Messiah is viewed as growing from the stump or root of Jesse. But in Revelation 22:16, “the risen Lord. .. reverses the concept of Isaiah 11:1. He is the root from which David grew, and so [He is] the source of David’s line.”[51] The word “root” in this context, therefore, does not mean that Jesus is David’s son (though that is true as other verses make clear); rather it suggests that He is David’s God and Creator (cf. Matt. 22:41–46). As “root” He is David’s ancestor; as “descendant” He is David’s son.[52] Thus He is the God-Man.[53] “He is at once the. .. Beginning and the End of the whole economy associated with the Davidic family.”[54]

John was assured that the Lion “has overcome,” which, as noted earlier, refers to His defeat of Satan, sin, and death at the cross.[55] Osborne calls this “a great Christian paradox—Jesus has ‘conquered’ primarily not through military might, though that is to come, but through his sacrificial death (5:6, 9, 12).. .. As the royal Messiah, Jesus wages a messianic war against evil, and the major weapon that defeats the enemies of God is the cross. This cosmic victory enables him ‘to open’ the scroll.”[56]

Christ As Suffering Savior: The Lamb (vv. 6–7)

When John turned to see the lion, he saw instead a lamb. This is a central New Testament truth: Christ’s worthiness to break the seals of the testamentary disposition, that is, His worthiness to open the scroll and inherit the kingdom is based on the victory He won as the Lamb on the cross.

John saw the lamb “standing, as if slain.” He was “slain” (ἐσφαγμένον, lit., “slaughtered”), that is, He was a sacrificial lamb. What John saw was a Passover lamb that bore the marks of slaughter on its neck.[57] Ordinarily lambs are raised for their wool or are slaughtered for their meat.[58] But this lamb was “standing.” He has risen from the dead. He is the living Redeemer, and with the marks of slaughter He stood before the throne, prepared to inherit dominion over the earth.

John wrote that he saw the Lamb “in the middle of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the middle of the elders” (NASB margin).[59] This has been interpreted in two ways. First, while a number of commentators concede that the language indicates that the Lamb is in the middle of the throne and the center of the action, they conclude that verse 7 does not allow this interpretation. They argue that when John said, “And He came and took the book,” he was indicating that he watched the Lamb walk into the circle of the twenty-four elders and toward the throne. They prefer a translation like that of the NASB, “And I saw between the throne (with the four living creatures) and the elders a Lamb standing.”[60]

Second, other commentators follow a more literal translation, “And I saw the lamb who is on the center of the throne and among the four living creatures.”[61] This translation is preferred for several reasons. First, it agrees with the uniform testimony of the New Testament that when Christ ascended into heaven He sat down at the right hand of God (Acts 2:33; Heb. 1:3). Second, it harmonizes with Revelation 3:21, where the ascended Christ said, “as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.” Third, it also concurs with 7:17, which says that the Lamb is “in the center of the throne.” Fourth, it rejects the idea that the clause “And He came and took the book” in verse 7 poses a problem. The “coming” in verse 7 “must depict merely His movement from beside the Father to a position where He could receive the scroll.”[62]

In Revelation John used the word “Lamb” (ἀρνίον, diminutive of ἀρήν) twenty-eight times of Christ.[63] This word, used of Christ only in the Book of Revelation, originally meant “little lamb,” but that diminutive sense had disappeared by New Testament times.[64] (The other word for “lamb,” ἀμνός, is used of Christ in John 1:29, 36; Acts 8:32; and 1 Peter 1:19).

In John’s vision he saw that the lamb had “seven horns.” In the Old Testament horns symbolized two things.[65] First, they symbolized power. In blessing the descendants of Joseph Moses said the horns of Joseph were like the horns of a wild ox and with them Joseph would push the people “to the ends of the earth” (Deut. 33:17). Second, they symbolized honor. The psalmist Ethan wrote that by God’s favor His people’s horn “is exalted” (Ps. 89:17; cf. 112:9; 148:14).

In the intertestamental period the Maccabees, the great liberators of Israel, were represented as horned lambs (1 Enoch 90:9).66 John used this portrait of Christ as a lamb to present two ideas. First, it is a reminder that Jesus was sacrificed for His people; He is the Passover Lamb. Second, He is an unusual Lamb in that He is a leader; He is a warrior-lamb.[67]

As symbols of their power, nations portray themselves as mighty beasts and birds. Russia elevates the bear, Britain the lion, France the tiger, and the United States the eagle. All of these are ravenous carnivores. It is true that Jesus Christ is a lion. Yet He is also a lamb, who leads—and a slain lamb at that.[68]

Also John wrote that the Lamb has “seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God, sent out into all the earth.” The energies and wisdom of the Spirit of God will be at His disposal during His reign. He will not rule over His kingdom by blind force.[69] The seven horns speak of the fullness of power, that is, omnipotence; the seven eyes speak of the fullness of knowledge, that is, omniscience.[70] The Spirit is to be sent out on a worldwide mission, namely, the evangelization of the nations.[71]

The Lion who is the Lamb “came, and took the book out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne” (5:7). This gesture implies that Christ is worthy and able to inherit dominion over the earth. Later John informed his readers that Christ will share that inheritance with His people (20:4, 6).

During the Gulf War of 1991, Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense under presidents Kennedy and Johnson, and architect of the Vietnam War, was interviewed by Time magazine.[72] Mr. McNamara was asked if the U.S. leadership was in control of the war. He said, “Yes, but [President] Bush, [General] Powell, and [Secretary of Defense] Cheney are doing a superb job, but I tell you Jesus Christ himself can’t keep one of these things under control.” Evidently Mr. McNamara had a very defective view of Jesus Christ. His comment does not reflect the Christology of heaven. In heaven Jesus Christ is known as the “Lion of the tribe of Judah,” who will be the perfect Sovereign of this world in the kingdom to come. In fact one of the lessons of this chapter is that only Jesus Christ can rule this world well.

Conclusion

Theologically Revelation 5:1–7 is an important stage in the process that will eventually lead to the Lamb’s enthronement.[73] In the New Testament there are at least five stages in this process, which roughly parallel the Israelite enthronement recorded in 1 Kings 1:32–48 and 2 Kings 11:12–20:[74] (a) the unction or anointing of the Messiah, which took place at Jesus’ baptism (Matt. 3:16–17; Acts 10:38); (b) the acclamation of the anointed One as messianic Son, which took place at His ascension (Ps. 2:7; Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:13; 5:5); (c) the “investiture” of the Lamb, that is “the act of establishing someone in office or the ratification of the office that someone already holds informally,” described in Revelation 5:6–7 (cf. Dan. 7:9–14);[75] (d) the enthronement of Christ, which will take place at the beginning of the millennial age (Rev. 20:4–6; cf. 11:15; Ps. 2:6, 8; Matt. 19:28; Heb. 1:6–8);[76] and (e) the homage to the Messiah (Phil. 2:10–11; cf. Ps. 2:12). Revelation 5:6–7, therefore, depicts not the enthronement of the Lamb, but the investiture of the Lamb.[77]

At least four applications stem from a study of Revelation 5:1–7. First, the passage is a rebuke to believers who seem content with the world. Can twenty-first-century Christians understand the passionate longing that caused John to weep for the kingdom to come? The insincerity with which they sing songs about heaven shows the coldness of their hearts. Spurgeon once said that it is “by weeping eyes the Lamb of God is best seen.. .. [Such eyes] are best able to see” the truths presented here in this text.[78]

Second, this passage points to the centrality of Jesus Christ. The Lion who is the Lamb is “the centerpiece of the whole tableau”[79] of John’s description of heaven. Should He not then be central in believers’ lives today and in their ministries, families, and other relationships?[80]

He should also be at the center of prophetic interpretation. Biblical prophecy cannot be properly understood unless Jesus Christ is seen at the center.[81]

Third, the worthiness of the Lamb to break the seals demonstrates that He is the key to history. Does life have meaning? Does history have a goal? The Scriptures say yes, and this will be seen by everyone when Jesus enters into His inheritance, His dominion over His one-thousand-year kingdom on this earth. He has the right to break the seals of the testamentary disposition, that is, to take control of (or dispose of) the affairs of this world, which is His inheritance.

Fourth, the description of Christ as a slaughtered Lamb reminds the reader of humanity’s real problem, namely, sins. On the cross, Christ, the sacrificial Lamb, bore the penalty of the curse of God. He died as humankind’s substitute, and God, satisfied with that work, demonstrated that satisfaction by raising Jesus from the dead (cf. Rom. 4:25). The Greek perfect tense of the participle “slain” in Revelation 5:6 (ἐσφαγμένον, from σφάζω) suggests that not only did Jesus die at a point in time, but that the efficacy of that death is still present in all its power.[82]

Notes

1. Leon Morris, The Revelation of St. John, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969), 93.
2. Stephen Travis, I Believe in the Second Coming of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 109–10.
3. Hendrikus Berkhof, Christ the Meaning of History, trans. Lambertus Buurman (Richmond, VA: John Knox, 1966), 28–36.
4. Michael Wilcock, I Saw Heaven Opened: The Message of Revelation, The Bible Speaks Today (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1975), 69.
5. Ibid.
6. Travis, I Believe in the Second Coming of Jesus, 110.
7. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960), 1:70.
8. David J. MacLeod, “The Adoration of God the Creator: An Exposition of Revelation 4, ” Bibliotheca Sacra 164 (April–June 2007): 198–218.
9. R. H. Charles, The Revelation of St. John, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: Clark, 1920), 1:136–37; G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 343; Gottlob Schrenk, “βιβλίος, βιβλίον,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, trans. and ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 618–19. For a full discussion of the scroll’s form see David Aune, Revelation 1–5, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, 1997), 341–43.
10. Isbon T. Beckwith argued that God holds the scroll in His hand and not on it because of the difficulty of picturing a large scroll balanced on an open hand (The Apocalypse of John [London: Macmillan, 1919; reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979], 504). However, elsewhere John used the words ἐν τῇ χειρί (“in the hand”) (1:16; 10:2, 8), and so in 5:1 he could have used that phrase if he had wanted to (Beale, The Book of Revelation, 337). As Robert L. Thomas notes, the hand could be cupped to hold the scroll and still be open (Revelation 1–7: An Exegetical Commentary [Chicago: Moody, 1992], 375).
11. The word “opisthograph” comes from two Greek words (ὄπισθεν, “on the other side,” and γεγραμμένον, “written”), both found in verse 1. See William Barclay, The Revelation of John, rev. ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976), 1:165–66; Morris, The Revelation of St. John, 94; Frederic G. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts (New York: Harper, 1958), 10–11; J. Harold Greenlee, Introduction to New Testment Textual Criticism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 18–24; and Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament (New York: Oxford, 1968), 3–8.
12. Cf. Henry Alford, The Greek Testament, rev. Everett F. Harrison (Chicago: Moody, 1958), 4:604–5; G. B. Caird, A Commentary on the Revelation of St. John the Divine, Harper’s New Testament Commentaries (New York: Harper & Row, 1966), 70–72; George Eldon Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972), 79–81; Aune, Revelation 1–5, 343–46; and Grant R. Osborne, Revelation, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 248–49.
13. Robert Govett, The Apocalypse Expounded by Scripture (London: Thynne, 1861; reprint, Miami Springs, FL: Conley and Schoettle, 1981), 2:91–97. Against this view is the presence of the seven seals. Seals were used to authenticate a document, to guarantee that its contents could not be changed or falsified, and to keep the contents secret until the time the scroll was opened. However, the details of the New Covenant would have been well known to John’s readers. Furthermore, while the New Covenant will be ratified with redeemed Israel in the land, it has already been inaugurated (“enacted,” Heb. 8:6) with God’s people in the present age, and they presently enjoy its salvific benefits—the blessings of which are obviously not a secret.
14. D. T. Niles, As Seeing the Invisible (New York: Harper, 1961), 55. This view is problematic in that once the seals are broken there is no indication that the names of the redeemed are divulged. The process of breaking the seals is meaningless unless it relates to the remainder of the Apocalypse (Caird, A Commentary on the Revelation of St. John the Divine, 71).
15. Lucetta Mowry, “Revelation 4–5 and Early Christian Liturgical Usage,” Journal of Biblical Literature 71 (1955): 75–84 (esp. 82–83).
16. John Sweet, Revelation, TPI New Testament Commentaries (Philadephia: Trinity Press, 1990), 123; Otto A. Piper, “The Apocalypse of John and the Liturgy of the Ancient Church,” Church History 20 (1951): 10–22 (esp. 13–15). Piper and Mowry base their view in part on the unfounded supposition that the liturgy of Revelation 4–5 is a heavenly counterpart to the worship services of early Christianity in which the Old Testament would be read. Sweet, on the other hand, argues that since Christ is the subject of the Old Testament, He alone is able to open it, that is, unlock its true meaning since its prophecies are fulfilled in Him. True, Revelation does show how Christ fulfills Old Testament prophecy. Against this view, however, is the fact that Daniel 7, 12, and Ezekiel 2–3, which likely form the backdrop to the scroll in Revelation 5, deal with future end-time events and not with the first-century fulfillment of parts of the Old Testament in Christ (Beale, The Book of Revelation, 314–16, 340).
17. Charles, The Revelation of St. John, 1:137–38; and Elisabeth Fiorenza, “The Eschatology and Composition of the Apocalypse,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 30 (1968): 537–69 (esp. 564).
18. James Moffatt, “The Revelation of St. John the Divine,” in The Expositor’s Greek Testament, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1910; reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), 5:382–83.
19. Hans-Peter Müller, “Die himmlische Ratsversammlung. Motivgeschichtliches zu Ap 5, 1–5, ” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 54 (1963): 254–67 (esp. 255). Some proponents of this view argue that the eschatological catastrophes will begin with the breaking of the first seal (Müller, 255; Charles, The Revelation of St. John, 1:137–38; and Schrenk, “βιβλίος, βιβλίον,” 619). Others argue that the contents of the scroll cannot be actualized until all seven seals have been broken, that is, in Revelation 8:1 (Beckwith, The Apocalypse of John, 263–64; Günther Bornkamm, “Die Komposition der apocalyptischen Visionen in der Offenbarung Johannis,” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 36 [1937]: 132–49). The debate is irrelevant for two reasons: (1) The seals are the judgments, and as each one is broken there is an eschatological catastrophe. But the seals are not the contents of the scroll. Only when all the seals have been broken will the contents of the scroll be revealed. (2) Furthermore, the process does not end with the breaking of the seventh seal in 8:1, that is, the scroll is not opened at that time. It is not opened, in fact, until all the judgments (seals, trumpets, and bowls) have been executed. The three sets of judgments are arranged in a kind of “telescopic structure,” a point that is ignored by many commentators (see Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 8–11: An Exegetical Commentary [Chicago: Moody, 1995], 5). No detail is given about the seventh seal in 8:1, and the most likely explanation is that the seventh seal includes the seven trumpets of judgment (8:2, 6–11:15). Similarly there is no detail given about the seventh trumpet in 11:15–19, and, again, the most likely explanation is that the seventh trumpet includes among its events the seven bowls of judgment (chaps. 16–19). In short, the scroll is not opened until all of the judgments of the Tribulation (chaps. 6–19) have been executed. See Alan F. Johnson, “Revelation,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, rev. ed., vol. 13 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), 646.
20. J. Massyngberde Ford, Revelation, Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 1975), 93–94. This idiosyncratic view has not found wide acceptance in that the notion of the Lamb divorcing Israel is not mentioned anywhere in Revelation. Furthermore this suggestion seems out of place in the immediate context (the investiture of the Lamb and the joy over the redemption of His people).
21. Otto Roller, “Das Buch mit den sieben Siegeln,” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 36 (1937): 98–113. According to Roller the scroll was a debenture, that is, a certificate of indebtedness. The Lamb has paid the debt for those who acknowledge their debt, but the judgment of unbelievers is confirmed. This view would be more applicable to a scene of judgment such as Revelation 20:11–15. It is out of place in chapter 5, which is a scene of “tumultuous joy,” not a judgment scene (Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 123; cf. Aune, Revelation 1–5, 345).
22. Henry Barclay Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John [London: Macmillan, 1906], 74.
23. Johnson, “Revelation,” 646. See also Martin Kiddle, The Revelation of St. John, Moffatt New Testament Commentary (New York: Harper, 1940), Caird, A Commentary on the Revelation of St. John the Divine, 72–73; Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, 81; Jürgen Roloff, The Revelation of John, Continental Commentary, trans. John E. Alsup (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 77; Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, New International Commentary on the New Testament, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 129–30; Thomas, Revelation 1–7, 378–79; and Ian Boxall, The Revelation of Saint John, Black’s New Testament Commentaries (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2006), 95. Boxall holds to this sixth interpretation, but he muddles his exposition by attempting to include the notion of a realized eschatology and inaugurated kingdom into the passage.
24. Theodor Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament, trans. Melancthon Williams Jacobus et al. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1909; reprint, Minneapolis: Klock & Klock, 1977), 3:393–96; cf. Karl Heinrich Rengstorf, “ἑπτά,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 2 (1964), 633; Gottfried Fitzer, “σφραγίς κτλ,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 7 (1971), 950; H. A. Ironside, Lectures on the Book of Revelation (1919; rev. ed., New York: Loizeaux, 1930), 91; G. R. Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, New Century Bible (London: Oliphants, 1974), 120–23; and Beale, The Book of Revelation, 339–46.
25. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 340.
26. Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament, 3:394. The Odes of Solomon (about A.D. 100) provide further confirmation that the scroll is a testament of inheritance (Beale, The Book of Revelation, 341). This early Christian or Jewish-Christian work was evidently dependent on Revelation. People wanted to take and read a sealed letter (The Odes of Solomon, 23:7–8). The “letter became a large volume, which was entirely written by the finger of God” (v. 21). “They were not allowed to loosen its seal; for the power which was over the seal was greater than they” (v. 9). When the contents were revealed, they concerned “the kingdom and. .. providence [and] the Son of Truth [who] inherited and possessed everything” and judged the ungodly (vv. 12, 18–20). In the end the Son, together with the Father and the Holy Spirit, “rule for ever and ever” (v. 22). See The Odes of Solomon: Syriac Texts, ed. and trans. James H. Charlesworth (Chico, CA: Scholars, 1977), 94–95.
27. Ethelbert Stauffer, Christ and the Caesars, trans. K. Gregor Smith and R. Gregor Smith (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1955), 182–83.
28. Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, 79; and Charles, The Revelation of St. John, 1:137.
29. Like the sealed book of Daniel 12:9 the seals in Revelation 5 “also serve to delay prophetic fulfillment until they are removed” (Beale, The Book of Revelation, 345).
30. “The seven seals of the book define it as a testamentary disposition [that is, a will]. It contains the history of the Messiah’s assumption of the kingdom for us written in advance” (S. Lewis Johnson Jr., “The Mediator’s Cross according to Heaven,” Reformation and Revival Journal 5 [winter 1996]: 18). As Zahn wrote, “The document fastened with seven seals is an easily understood symbol of the promise and assurance by God to His Church of the future βασιλεία.. . . The point of comparison, since the promise of future glory and royal dominion is likened to a sealed will, lies not so much in the fact that no one knows the contents, as that they still await realization. No one is authorized to open the testament and thereby to put into execution the will of God therein laid down, except the Lamb, who by dying gained the victory like a lion, and delivered the Church (5:5, 9–10). The returning Christ will open the testament of God and execute it. The fact that a will is opened by breaking all the seven seals at one time, but that in the vision the seals are broken one after the other by the Lamb, and that the opening of each seal is accompanied by a vision (6:1–17; 8:1), does not destroy the applicability of the symbolism. At the same time, the breaking of the seals of a testament is a complicated act, which may be divided into seven operations, and which primarily prepares the way for its opening and execution. For this reason it is well adapted to show what, through the returned Christ, preparatory to it must precede the final fulfillment of the promise” (Introduction to the New Testament, 3:394–95 [italics his]).
31. Emmet Russell, “A Roman Law Parallel to Revelation Five,” Bibliotheca Sacra 115 (July–September 1958): 258–64.
32. This truth is suggested by Erich Sauer in the title of his book, The King of the Earth, trans. G. H. Lang, Michael Bolister, and H. L. Ellison (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962). “The ‘book’ in ch. 5 should be understood as a covenantal promise of an inheritance when seen in the light of. .. the broader theological context of the Apocalypse concerning paradise lost and paradise regained” (Beale, The Book of Revelation, 340–41).
33. Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Psalms, trans. Francis Bolton (Edinburgh: Clark, 1871; reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, n.d.), 1:148.
34. Satan’s comment in Luke 4:6 seems to suggest that he had such authority to offer. This right was apparently his by virtue of his victory over the first Adam, the rightful heir of creation. See David J. MacLeod, “The Temptation of Christ,” Emmaus Journal 10 (summer 2001): 25.
35. See Joseph A. Seiss, Lectures on the Apocalypse (New York: Charles C. Cook, 1906), 1:264–74. As will be argued later, however, the actual enthronement of Christ did not take place in Revelation 5. That awaits fulfillment in the millennium.
36. Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, 75.
37. Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, 75.
38. Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 123.
39. Seiss, Lectures on the Apocalypse, 1:275.
40. Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, 82.
41. Ibid.
42. Caird, A Commentary on the Revelation of St. John the Divine, 73.
43. William Hendriksen, More Than Conquerors (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1967), 109.
44. Seiss, Lectures on the Apocalypse, 1:278–79.
45. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 131 n. 13.
46. Ronald H. Preston and Anthony T. Hanson, The Revelation of Saint John the Divine, Torch Bible Commentaries (London: SCM, 1949), 75.
47. C. S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (New York: Macmillan, 1950), 64.
48. Ibid., 149. The assertion, “He’s not a tame lion,” is made a number of times in the Chronicles of Narnia. For example see C. S. Lewis, The Last Battle (New York: Macmillan, 1956), 15, 16, 25, 70.
49. Christian Maurer, “ῥίζα,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 6 (1968), 989; Caird, The Revelation of St. John the Divine, 74; Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 131 n. 15; Aune, Revelation 1–5, 350–51; Beale, The Book of Revelation, 349; Osborne, Revelation, 254; and Boxall, The Revelation of Saint John, 97. Swete wrote, “The stump of the old tree of the House of David had sent forth a new David to rule the nations” (The Apocalypse of St. John, 76).
50. Alford, The Greek Testament, 4:607. Alford, however, defended the traditional view.
51. Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 342. “In His own person Christ is at once the root, and the stem and branches that spring from the root, and thus combines all the Messianic claims of the Davidic family. Thus He forms the climax of Jewish expectation” (Charles, The Revelation of St. John, 2:219).
52. Thomas, Revelation 8–22, 510; and Wilcock, I Saw Heaven Opened, 217.
53. “There is also his designation as ‘the Root of David,’ which implies that he who came after David was also before him; and this is a pointer to his pre-existence as the eternal Son of God” (Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, The Book of the Revelation [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990], 79). See also William Kelly, Lectures on the Book of Revelation (London: Morrish, 1874), 112; Walter Scott, Exposition of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, 4th ed. (London: Pickering and Inglis, n.d.), 134; Johannes Cocceius, quoted in J. A. Alexander, Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah, rev. ed. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1875; reprint, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974), 1:256; and Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 342.
54. Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, 306. Beale rejects this interpretation of 22:16 and argues that ἡ ῥίζα καὶ τὸ γένος are synonyms (The Book of Revelation, 1146–47).
55. Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John, 84.
56. Osborne, Revelation, 254. “The infinitive ἀνοῖξαι (to open) carries its basic purposive force. The lion has conquered ‘so that’ he can ‘open the scroll and its seven seals’ ” (ibid., 254 n. 11). Cf. Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 590–91.
57. Otto Michel, “σφάζω,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 7 (1971), 934; and Aune, Revelation 1–5, 353.
58. Paul J. Achtemeier, “Revelation 5:1–14, ” Interpretation 40 (July 1986): 283–88.
59. The Greek reads ἐν μέσῳ τοῦ θρόνου καὶ τῶν τεσσάρων ζῴων καὶ ἐν μέσῳ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων ἀρνίον ἑστηκὸς.
60. Charles, The Revelation of St. John, 1:140; Aune, Revelation 1–5, 351–52; Beale, The Book of Revelation, 350; Osborne, Revelation, 255; and Boxall, The Revelation of Saint John, 98.
61. Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., rev. and ed. Frederick W. Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago, 2000), 635; Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, 77; Thomas, Revelation 1–7, 389–90; and Darrell D. Hannah, “Of Cherubim and the Divine Throne: Rev. 5:6 in Context,” New Testament Studies 49 (2003): 528–42.
62. Thomas, Revelation 1–7, 390. A modern-day parallel would be a banquet in which a soon-to-retire executive is to receive an award. He sits on the dais next to the company president, and after the appropriate introduction he stands, turns to his left, and receives the gift from the president.
63. On this point see Norman Hillyer, “The ‘Lamb’ in the Apocalypse,” Evangelical Quarterly 39 (October 1967): 228–36; and Robert H. Mounce, “The Christology of the Apocalypse,” Foundations 11 (1968): 42–51.
64. Joachim Jeremias, “ἀρνίον,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 1 (1964), 340.
65. Barclay, The Revelation of John, 1:171.
66. Because of the lamb’s seven horns some commentators have argued that the word ἀρνίον should here be translated “ram” (Ford, Revelation, 86; Osborne, Revelation, 256). But Jeremias says, “The philological justification of the translation ‘ram’ is highly doubtful” (“ἀρνίον,” 341). In ancient Greek the term ἀρνίον was never used to mean “ram” (κριός). Furthermore the fact that the lamb was slaughtered sacrificially links Him with the Old Testament Passover lamb, the lamb led to slaughter (Isa. 53:7), the lamb who takes away sin (John 1:29), and the unblemished lamb whose blood was shed (1 Pet. 1:19). These sacrificial associations would seem to require the sense of “lamb,” even when the seven horns suggest that he is a leader as well as a sacrifice. See the lengthy discussion in Aune, Revelation 1–5, 367–73.
67. Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 125; and Charles, The Revelation of St. John, 1:cxiii-cxiv. “This dual presentation of the salvific function of Jesus as the crucified Messiah, i.e., in terms of a theologia crucis, ‘theology of the cross,’ and a theologia gloriae, ‘theology of glory,’ pervades various phases of early Christianity” (Aune, Revelation 1–5, 352). “By placing the slain Lamb in the throne scenes in different ways, heavenly worship becomes a way of expressing the irony of kingship through crucifixion” (Leonard L. Thompson, The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire [New York: Oxford University Press, 1990], 65).
68. Morris, The Revelation of St. John, 96.
69. Seiss, Lectures on the Apocalypse, 1:284.
70. Jeremias, “ἀρνίον,” 1:341.
71. See Richard Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy: Studies on the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: Clark, 1993), 238–337. “It is to all the nations of the world that the seven Spirits are sent out, in order, through the prophetic witness of [God’s people], to win the nations to the worship of the true God” (ibid., 336).
72. Carl Bernstein, “On the Mistakes of War,” Time, February 11, 1991, 70–72 (esp. 70).
73. Several commentators have suggested that in Revelation 5:1–7 the apostle followed the three steps of ancient enthronement: exaltation, presentation, and enthronement (e.g., Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, 110; Sweet, Revelation, 120–27; and Roloff, Revelation, 75). Aune surveys and evaluates various scholars who have attempted to prove that Revelation 5 is an enthronement scene based on ancient Near Eastern myths or Egyptian enthronement rituals (Revelation 1–5, 332–35). However, Willem Cornelis Van Unnik has advanced the following arguments against the view that Revelation 5 depicts an enthronement ritual. (1) The scroll taken by the Lamb is not a royal insignia but simply a book (a will or testament) that can be unrolled and read. (2) Nothing is said in chapter 5 about the elevation of the Lamb. (3) Nothing is said about the accession of the Lamb to the throne, though such an accession is clearly indicated in 20:4–6. (4) The Lamb does not change status in chapter 5, but the sealed scroll does change status in that it can now be opened (“ ‘Worthy Is the Lamb’: The Background of Apoc. 5, ” in Mélanges bibliques en homage au R. P. Béda Rigaux, ed. Albert Louis Descamps et al. [Gembloux: Duculot, 1970], 445–61 [esp. 447–48]). Aune adds two other arguments. (5) There is no mention in the text of the reception of royal insignia by the Lamb. (6) The “presentation” of the Lamb is not a ritual introduction to the royal assembly, but simply the apostle’s statement that he saw the Lamb in the heavenly court for the first time (Revelation 1–5, 335).
74. Cf. Roland de Vaux, Social Institutions, vol. 1 of Ancient Israel (New York: McGraw-Hill), 102–7. Building on 1 Kings 1:32–48 and 2 Kings 11:12–20, the only coronation accounts in the Old Testament, de Vaux suggested a six-stage enthronement structure: (1) the setting in the sanctuary, (2) the investiture with royal insignia, (3) the anointing, (4) the acclamation, (5) the enthronement, and (6) the homage. Kraus, building on Psalm 110 and Psalm 2:7, suggested a three-stage structure: (1) a prophetic declaration that the king is the “son of God” (Pss. 2:7; 110:3), (2) instruction to the king to ascend the throne and sit at the right hand of God (110:1), and (3) a declaration that the king is the legitimate heir (v. 4). Kraus’s suggestion would have more merit had he recognized the messianic nature of Psalms 2 and 110 (Hans-Joachim Kraus, Theology of the Psalms, trans. Keith Crim [Minneapolis; Augsburg, 1986], 111–19).
75. Aune, Revelation 1–5, 336. “It is clear that the act of ‘taking’. .. the scroll from the right hand of God signifies the ‘reception’ of the honors mentioned in verse 12: power, wealth, wisdom, might, honor, glory, and praise” (ibid.). James A. Montgomery calls this a “viceregal investiture” (The Book of Daniel, International Critical Commentary [Edinburgh: Clark, 1927], 304).
76. It should be noted that the reign of the redeemed (Rev. 5:10) is viewed as yet future from the perspective of the events in chapter 5.
77. A number of commentators argue for a realized eschatology in Revelation 5. Beasley-Murray wrote, “Despite the declaration of 4:1, that John is now to view ‘what must take place after this,’ it is evident that the victory of Christ has already taken place in his cross and resurrection, that he has ascended the throne of God, and that his reign has begun” (The Book of Revelation, 110; cf. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 347; and Boxall, The Revelation of Saint John, 95). True, Christ has achieved a great victory over Satan, sin, and death at the cross, and has ascended into heaven to the throne of God. But it is not correct to say that His reign has already begun. Jesus told the Laodicean church that He has overcome and has sat down with His Father on His (Father’s) throne (Rev. 3:21). But in that same verse He distinguished His Father’s throne from His own Davidic throne. He will reign from His own throne in the millennium when the overcomers will share in His glory.
78. Charles Spurgeon, “The Lamb in Glory (Rev. 5:6–7),” in The Treasury of the Bible (reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981), 8:745.
79. Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, 77 (italics his).
80. Spurgeon, “The Lamb in Glory (Rev. 5:6–7),” 8:747.
81. Kelly, Lectures on the Book of Revelation, 108–9.
82. Morris, The Revelation of St. John, 97.