Various interpretations on Revelation 6:6
Once a month during our ongoing sermon series in the book of Revelation we host Q & A sessions. Sunday night we gathered together for a wonderful evening of fellowship, food, and discussion about the book of Revelation.
One of the questions that was asked Sunday night was about a rather strange verse with multiple options for interpretation.
What I'm going to do here today is two things. First, I'm going to show you the Greek text alongside three English translations of a passage and their distinguishing features rendered in English. Second, I'm going to quote several different perspectives on this passage to give you a sense for both the general consensus believed among Christians regarding this passage, and the general points of distinction between interpretations.
Revelation 6:6 is the passage in question. (Click here to watch yesterday's sermon on Revelation 6) The question was something along the lines of "What are some of the different possible interpretations of Revelation 6:6?" Here is how the Greek NIV, KJV, and ESV render Revelation 6:6:
καὶ ἤκουσα ⸀ὡς φωνὴν ἐν μέσῳ τῶν τεσσάρων ζῴων λέγουσαν· Χοῖνιξ σίτου δηναρίου, καὶ τρεῖς χοίνικες ⸀κριθῶν δηναρίου· καὶ τὸ ἔλαιον καὶ τὸν οἶνον μὴ ἀδικήσῃς. (Greek Interlinear)
Then I heard what sounded like a voice among the four living creatures, saying, “Two pounds of wheat for a day’s wages, and six pounds of barley for a day’s wages, and do not damage the oil and the wine!” (NIV)
And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine. (KJV)
And I heard what seemed to be a voice in the midst of the four living creatures, saying, “A quart of wheat for a denarius, and three quarts of barley for a denarius, and do not harm the oil and wine!” (ESV)
As you can see there are some distinctions in the way how the translators have approached this passage in the NIV, KJV, and ESV English editions.
- The NIV takes the Greek conjunction "καὶ" and renders it "then" while the KJV and ESV prefer "and".
- The NIV and ESV both seem to allow for a bit of wiggle room for the sound which John heard while the KJV simply straightforward says "a voice". The Greek word "φωνὴν" can mean a voice or sound.
- The sound originates from the direction or area of the four living creatures which is agreed upon by all three translations although the KJV prefers the word "beast" to "creature".
- Each of the three translations differ on how they represent the amount of wheat and barley. The NIV typically tries to communicate a meaning which is up to date with its reader's common vernacular. Rather than being specific in using certain words, phrases, or concepts which are present in the original text, the NIV generally tries to convey a meaning that the reader can come away with understanding. This is one reason why the NIV chooses to phrase the cost of wheat and barley in the language of "day's wages" and why the NIV uses "pounds" as the unit of measurement for the wheat and barley. The KJV renders the phrase about cost as "a penny" and the unit of measurement as simply "measures". The KJV to some extent did what the NIV was seeking to do, just from the mindset of 1600s English and grammar. The ESV generally tries to keep word meaning tied to the original use of a word. Thus, the ESV uses the specific term for a monetary value of a specific amount of coinage from the first century "denarius".
- We see that the NIV conveys the meaning for the last clause "do not damage", while the KJV says "see thou hurt not" and the ESV says "do not harm". All three of these convey a similar meaning while also keeping the basic structure of the original Greek phrase intact.
The scales that the rider carries are the usual balance scales, suspended from a rod held in the hand, that were used widely in the ancient world. Though updated to measures of weight in many English translations, the quantities of wheat and barley are given in Greek as measures of volume (choinix, approximately equivalent to one quart or one litre), which would have been unusual, especially in a time of shortage—a reminder that John’s language here is general rather than precise, and evokes the idea of famine rather than referring to a particular incident.The announcement of the shortage comes from a voice in the midst of the … living creatures (AT), that is, from the throne, but John is doubly oblique about highlighting this, as a way of holding together the tension between the absolute authority of God and his permissive will in allowing these things to happen. A denarius (AT) was the typical wages for a manual worker for one day, and would normally buy about sixteen quarts of wheat, rather than the one quart here. This would be enough for only one individual, leaving no provision for his family. Barley was usually about half the price of wheat, and, being less nutritious, was the choice of the poor (see John 6:9).The command not to harm the oil and the wine (AT) has been understood in a variety of ways. If oil and wine were luxury items, this might suggest a famine which harmed the poor and not the wealthy—but in fact both items were consumed by all sectors in society. It was an accepted practice for invading armies, even if they devastated annual crops such as wheat and barley, to leave vines and olive trees unharmed, since they take much longer to regrow and their destruction would devalue the land that had been captured. But the protection of vines and olive trees allowed those who owned them to continue to make a profit, and the reduced capacity then to grow wheat led to frequent shortages of bread in cities, and was the main reason behind Domitian’s edict in ad 92 to destroy half the vines across the empire (see the introductory comment on the message to Philadelphia). So the command ‘not to harm’ allows the economic imbalance that exists to have its full effect in creating uncertainty about food supply and a greater vulnerability to the effects of war and conflict.Ian Paul, Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary, ed. Eckhard J. Schnabel, vol. 20, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (London: Inter-Varsity Press, 2018), 145–146.
Ian Paul is certainly not a partial preterist, nor is he a historicist. He at times displays a preference for futurist or spiritualist interpretations. Yet in this section he sees a possible historic referent to the time of Domitian (AD 92) while also contending that there is a general time of famine in mind.
C. Marvin Pate of Ouachita Baptist University, Arkadelphia, AR, in his paper titled "REVELATION 6: AN EARLY INTERPRETATION OF THE OLIVET DISCOURSE" (this paper was published on January 1, 2011 in the Criswell Theological Review) takes a "both and" approach. He sees Revelation 6:6 as both with Jerusalem and the siege of 70 A.D. in mind, along with a future fall of the Roman empire.
The Connection between Revelation 6:5-6 and the Olivet Discourse.
The inevitable consequence of war is famine, nowhere so starkly depicted as in Rev 6:5-6 (cf. w. 7-8), with its description of the third horseman. It would have been easy for the seer of the Apocalypse to envision war and famine. The Olivet Discourse does the same (Matt 24:7/Mark 13:8/Luke 21:11). During Claudius's reign, famine occurred in Rome in AD 42, and food shortage was reported in Judea in 45-46, in Greece in 49, and in Rome again in 51, and quite often in Asia Minor including the time of Domitian, 92. The reference to the pair of scales and the inflated prices for food in 6:5-6 cannot help but recall the severe famine that occurred in Jerusalem during its siege by the Roman army (Matt 24:7/Mark 13:8/Luke 21:11). During that time the inhabitants of Jerusalem had to weigh out their food and drink because of the scarcity of those necessities. The situation became so severe that a mother might eat her child (J.W. 6.3.4; see also J.W. 5.10.5; cf. 6.5.1; Luke 21:23).
The Already/Not Yet Fulfillments of the Black Horse Judgment.
The fell of Jerusalem and the resulting famine may also explain the ironic statement in Rev 6:6, "and do not damage the oil and the wine." The command to spare the oil and the wine is possibly an allusion to General Titus's order that even during the ransacking of Jerusalem, olive trees (for oil) and grapevines (for wine) were to be spared. If so, the fall of Jerusalem serves as the perfect backdrop for the third seal judgment (6:5-6), as it does for the Olivet Discourse prophecy about the eventuality of famines. Indeed, Jesus' statement that such horrors were but the beginning of the end (Mark 13:7), the initiation of the messianic woes (13:8), points in that direction. But not to be overlooked in this discussion is the similar edict of Domitian restricting the growing of vines in Asia in AD 92. For John, this well could have signaled to him that the Parousia of Christ was near and with it the fall of Rome. Thus we may say that the famine in Jerusalem occasioned by the siege of that city by Roman legions along with the other famines that plagued the Roman Empire constituted the already aspect of the judgment of the black horse, which served as a foreboding of the return of Christ and the ultimate famine to be inflicted upon Rome, the not yet aspect of that judgment. (See page 51 of the spring 2011 Criswell Theological Review or page 7 of the PDF of this paper)
Pate clearly a specific historic reference with the famine and war in the seals and four horsemen as they relate to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D under Roman general Titus (who would go on to become Emperor). Yet, Pate is not willing in this piece to hold to an exclusively preterist view of this text as he sees fulfillment in these historic events as only partial previews of a future judgment still yet to come.
Matthew Henry (coming from a historicist perspective) wrote in his commentary on Revelation 6 the following:
The next three seals give us a sad prospect of great and desolating judgments with which God punishes those who either refuse or abuse the everlasting gospel. Though some understand them of the persecutions that befel the church of Christ, and others of the destruction of the Jews, they rather seem more generally to represent God's terrible judgments, by which he avenges the quarrel of his covenant upon those who make light of it....
Upon opening the third seal, which John was directed to observe, another horse appears, different from the former, a black horse, signifying famine, that terrible judgment; and he that sat on the horse had a pair of balances in his hand (v. 5), signifying that men must now eat their bread by weight, as was threatened (Lev. xxvi. 26), They shall deliver your bread to you by weight. That which follows in v. 6, of the voice that cried, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny, and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine, has made some expositors think this was not a vision of famine, but of plenty; but if we consider the quantity of their measure, and the value of their penny, at the time of this prophecy, the objection will be removed; their measure was but a single quart, and their penny was our sevenpence-halfpenny, and that is a large sum to give for a quart of wheat. However, it seems this famine, as all others, fell most severely upon the poor; whereas the oil and the wine, which were dainties of the rich, were not hurt; but if bread, the staff of life, be broken, dainties will not supply the place of it. Here observe, 1. When a people loathe their spiritual food, God may justly deprive them of their daily bread. 2. One judgment seldom comes alone; the judgment of war naturally draws after it that of famine; and those who will not humble themselves under one judgment must expect another and yet greater, for when God contends he will prevail. The famine of bread is a terrible judgment; but the famine of the word is more so, though careless sinners are not sensible of it. (You can read more of Matthew Henry's complete Bible commentary by clicking here. It's page 2016-2017 of the PDF that the above quote comes from)
Robert Jamieson's commentary on Revelation takes a spiritual/idealists approach without attributing this passage to any particular time in particular:
6. a voice—Two oldest manuscripts, A, C, read, "as it were a voice." B reads as English Version. The voice is heard "in the midst of the four living creatures" (as Jehovah in the Shekinah-cloud manifested His presence between the cherubim); because it is only for the sake of, and in connection with, His redeemed, that God mitigates His judgments on the earth. A measure—"A chœnix." While making food scarce, do not make it so much so that a chœnix (about a day's provision of wheat, variously estimated at two or three pints) shall not be obtainable "for a penny" (denarius, eight and a half pence of our money, probably the day's wages of a laborer). Famine generally follows the sword. Ordinarily, from sixteen to twenty measures were given for a denarius. The sword, famine, noisome beasts, and the pestilence, are God's four judgments on the earth. A spiritual famine, too, may be included in the judgment. The "Come," in the case of this third seal, is said by the third of the four living creatures, whose likeness is a man indicative of sympathy and human compassion for the sufferers. God in it tempers judgment with mercy. Compare Mt 24:7, which indicates the very calamities foretold in these seals, nation rising against nation (the sword), famines, pestilences (Re 6:8), and earthquakes (Re 6:12). three measures of barley for a penny—the cheaper and less nutritious grain, bought by the laborer who could not buy enough wheat for his family with his day's wages, a denarius, and, therefore, buys barley. see thou hurt not the oil, and the wine—the luxuries of life, rather than necessaries; the oil and wine were to be spared for the refreshment of the sufferers. (You can read more of Robert Jamieson's commentary by clicking here. It's page 4430 and 4431 that the above quotes are taken from)
In Steve Gregg's book "Revelation, Four Views: A Parallel Commentary" rather than offering his own beliefs or interpretations, Steve puts forward summary interpretations from each of the four major Christian interpretive perspectives of Revelation. As Steve Gregg puts forward the preterist commentary for this passage he of course quotes Josephus (A former Jewish general and historian who fought in the wars that led up to the destruction of Jerusalem and was an eyewitness of those events in 70 A.D.). Nowadays whenever I'm reading a commentator I can quickly see how they approach Revelation with their own inclusion or exclusion of Josephus in their commentary. Below is a portion of the entry that sees Revelation 6:6 as being a prophetic account of the siege of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.:
The Jews in Jerusalem suffered terrible food shortages during the Roman siege. Though initially there was enough food stored up to last a long time, the warring factions in the city, out of sheer spite, regularly destroyed the grain stores of the opposing factions! Thus food became so scarce that Josephus records at least one case of a mother eating her infant (compare Deut. 28:53 and 2 Kings 6:28f). It was with reference to this time that Jesus had said, “But woe to those who are … nursing babies in those days!” (see Luke 21:20–23; 23:28–29). Consider the verbal parallels between this horseman’s decree and this description in Josephus:
Many there were indeed who sold what they had for one quart; it was of wheat, if they were of the richer sort, but of barley, if they were poorer. (Wars, 5:10:2)
The statement, do not harm the oil and the wine (v. 6) could allude to the fact that some sacrilegious Jews pillaged the oil and wine from the temple. Josephus writes that John Gischala, the leader of one of the factions, confiscated the sacred vessels of the temple:
Accordingly, drawing the sacred wine and oil, which the priests kept for pouring on the burnt offerings, and which was deposited in the inner temple, [John] distributed them among his adherents, who consumed without horror more than a hin in anointing themselves and drinking. (Wars, 5:13:6)
Steve Gregg, Revelation, Four Views: A Parallel Commentary (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson Publishers, 1997), 110–112.
It is my hope that this sort of making available resources is an encouragement to you in your faith, and educational for you in building you up to pursue God's intended meaning in Revelation. At the very least this gives you an insight into some of the discussions and various approaches to interpreting passages in a way which seeks to honor God as author and account for the possible meanings of the Biblical text.
Comments
Post a Comment