Revelation 22:18-21
18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll. 19 And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll.
20 He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.
21 The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God’s people. Amen.
Revelation 22:18-21 indeed contains a stern warning.
It says that if anyone adds to or takes away from the words of the prophecy in that particular book, God will add to them the plagues described in Revelation or take away their share of the tree of life and the holy city.
This specific warning is directed at the Book of Revelation, emphasizing its completeness and the importance of preserving its message. I interpret this as applying specifically to the Revelation itself, I do not view it as a principle that could extend to the entirety of Scripture.
My view that it specifically applies to Revelation and not necessarily to other New Testament books is a valid interpretation, as the passage explicitly refers to "this scroll," which is understood to mean Revelation.
This warning is not explicitly repeated for other New Testament books. John felt any tampering with the specific details of Revelation's prophecies could lead to false interpretations and mislead people.
Why Not Repeated for Other Books:
Contextual Focus: The urgency and severity of the warning in Revelation are tied to the nature of the book itself, which deals with the ultimate fulfillment of God’s plan and the final judgment. While other parts of Scripture also caution against distorting God’s word, the book of Revelation focuses on the final revelation of God’s will for humanity. As such, the warning is more explicit because it deals with the conclusion of God’s plan of redemption.
Completion of the Canon: Revelation is the last book of the Bible, marking the conclusion of God’s written revelation. With its closure, no more prophetic books were to be added. The other books of the New Testament, while also inspired and authoritative, did not carry the same final, conclusive nature that Revelation does, which is why the same explicit warning is not given.
Theological Consideration: The warning in Revelation may also reflect the particular danger posed by the eschatological content of the book. Because Revelation deals with the last things, the consequences of misinterpreting or altering its message are seen as especially severe. Other books, while foundational to Christian doctrine, do not deal as directly with the final judgment and the consummation of all things as Revelation does.
Conclusion:
Revelation 22:18-21 emphasizes the solemn responsibility of correctly handling the prophetic message in Revelation, with severe consequences for adding to or taking away from the prophecy. The uniqueness of this warning comes from Revelation's role as the final book in the Bible, marking the conclusion of God’s written Word. While other Scriptures also caution against altering God’s Word, the eschatological nature of Revelation and its status as the final biblical revelation makes this warning especially strong and pointed. It underscores the seriousness with which the early church regarded the integrity of the canonical text, as well as the eternal implications of how Scripture is handled.
Why did only John warn his readers about the book Revelation? Other New Testament writers did not have a problem with "precise" words, perfect words, or adding and removing words?
Please read the Commentary from Patterson, Paige. 2012. Revelation. Edited by E. Ray Clendenen. Vol. 39. The New American Commentary. Nashville, TN: B&H.
22:18–21 A final warning comes from John in v. 18. The apostle warns that if anyone adds anything to the prophecy of the book, God will add to him the plagues described in the book. On the other hand, if anyone takes away from the words of the prophecy, his part in the tree of life and the Holy City, as described in this book, will be taken away from him.4 Though dendron is most often the word translated “tree,” here xulon is used (v. 14). The latter may mean “tree” but is more often rendered “wood” (e.g., Rev 18:12). This same word is employed in reference to the cross (Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; 1 Pet 2:24). In any event, the serious threat associated with the manipulation of the text is almost unexpected. The precise significance of this warning is not entirely agreed on by interpreters.
At the time of the writing of the Apocalypse, the only way for multiple copies of any written material to make their way from the location of writing to the various recipients anticipated was for multiple copies to be handwritten. Some have imagined that John is concerned with the copying of the book and wants to be sure copyists do not take matters into their own hands. Perhaps a copyist would feel that something included did not make sense to him and therefore should be omitted, or perhaps a copyist might think that some other explanation more than John had given was essential. John, according to those who hold this view, is concerned for the integrity of the text because he believes that it is not merely the imagination of his own mind but rather the Spirit of God who has inspired the text. Consequently, he wants it reproduced by copyists with maximum accuracy.
In the introduction there has been some discussion of the textual evidence for the book of Revelation, and this textual evidence is somewhat fragmented with many unresolved textual problems in the book just as would be found in other New Testament literature. This alone would provide reason for John to say this.5
However, the more likely cause for this expression can be seen in the beatitude when those are promised blessedness if they keep the words of the prophecy of this book (22:7). To attempt to do something other than abide by its message, either explaining it away or adding to its message, only results in a deception that makes one the recipient of the plagues who has lost any opportunity for access to the tree of life and the holy city. This seems to be the best understanding of this final warning.6
John provides one more testimony from the living Lord. “He who testifies to these things says, ‘Yes, I am coming soon.’ ” That promise rings from John two important responses. First, he says, “Amen.” As previously noted, the word “amen” arises from the Hebrew and references an affirmation. When Jesus once again concludes that he is coming soon, John’s response from his island observatory is immediately one of affirmation, “Amen. Let it be so.” There follows a prayer voiced heavenward, “Come, Lord Jesus.” John’s heart is ready, and he is eager for the return of Christ. In typical epistolary form not often found in apocalyptic literature, the final theme exhibited in v. 21 is the grace of God.
John prays for his readers now by saying, “The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God’s people.” The NIV has added the words “God’s people.” Pantōn, which means “all,” certainly supports this translation; but the text just uses the one word. The NIV includes the word “amen,” which is present in the textus receptus and in Codex Sinaiticus and a great variety of other texts on Revelation. Some, however, omit it, probably thinking that it would not occur in both vv. 20 and 21. The NIV translators have probably grasped it correctly in finding its presence in the original text. The Revelation is concluded with the affirmation, “Let it be so.”
4 The Authorized Version reading “book of life” may seem to make more sense, but in this case the textual evidence for “tree of life” is so overwhelming that the 3rd edition of the United Bible Society’s Greek New Testament does not even give the reading “book of life.” The slim evidence favoring “book” may be seen in H. C. Hoskier, Concerning the Text of the Apocalypse (London: Bernard Quaritch, 1929), 2:644.
5 A. Y. Collins notes, “Charles argued that these verses were added to Rev by a later editor (Commentary 2. 222–23). His strongest argument was that since John expected the end in a short time, he hardly would be concerned about the transmission of his book over a long period of time. But the remarks in vv 18–19 say nothing about a long period. If he considered that his work contained divine revelation necessary for the faithful to prepare properly for the end, he may well have been concerned that it be transmitted accurately in the short time remaining. Another function of these remarks is to reinforce the claim made elsewhere in the book that its contents originate with God (see 1:1)” (NJBC, 1016).
6 Using this verse to support a cessationist perspective regarding the gift of prophecy, R. L. Thomas says, “The conclusion of this investigation accepts the inevitability of connecting the decline and cessation of the spiritual gift of prophecy to Rev 22:18. Compliance with, indeed universal knowledge of, this warning was not immediate. Nevertheless the divine intention behind the warning necessitated that it eventually be recognized and that the body of Christ move into new phases of its growth without dependence on the foundational gift of prophecy” (“The Spiritual Gift of Prophecy in Rev 22:18,” JETS 32 [1989]: 216).
No comments:
Post a Comment