Revelation 1:4

1:4 From John, ¹  to the seven churches that are in the province of Asia: ²  Grace and peace to you ³  from “he who is,” ⁴  and who was, and who is still to come, ⁵  and from the seven spirits who are before his throne,

Revelation 1:12-13

1:12 I ⁶  turned to see whose voice was speaking to me, ⁷  and when I did so, ⁸  I saw seven golden lampstands, 1:13 and in the midst of the lampstands was one like a son of man. ⁹  He was dressed in a robe extending down to his feet and he wore a wide golden belt ¹⁰  around his chest.

Revelation 1:20

1:20 The mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand and the seven golden lampstands is this: ¹¹  The seven stars are the angels ¹²  of the seven churches and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.

[1:4]  ¹ tn Grk “John.” The word “From” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:4]  ² tn Grk “Asia”; in the NT this always refers to the Roman province of Asia, made up of about one-third of the west and southwest end of modern Asia Minor. Asia lay to the west of the region of Phrygia and Galatia. The words “the province of” are supplied to indicate to the modern reader that this does not refer to the continent of Asia.

[1:4]  ³ tn It is probable that the ὑμῖν (Jumin) applies to both elements of the greeting, i.e., to both grace and peace.

[1:4]  ⁴ tc The earliest and best mss (Ì^18vid א A C P 2050 al lat sy co) lack the term “God” (θεοῦ, qeou) between “from” (ἀπό, apo) and “he who is” (ὁ ὤν, Jo wn). Its inclusion, as supported by the bulk of the Byzantine witnesses, is clearly secondary and a scribal attempt to achieve two things: (1) to make explicit the referent in the passage, namely, God, and (2) to smooth out the grammar. The preposition “from” in Greek required a noun in the genitive case. But here in Rev 1:4 the words following the preposition “from” (ἀπό) are in another case, i.e., the nominative. There are two principal ways in which to deal with this grammatical anomaly. First, it could be a mistake arising from someone who just did not know Greek very well, or as a Jew, was heavily influenced by a Semitic form of Greek. Both of these unintentional errors are unlikely here. Commenting on this ExSyn 63 argues: “Either of these is doubtful here because (1) such a flagrant misunderstanding of the rudiments of Greek would almost surely mean that the author could not compose in Greek, yet the Apocalypse itself argues against this; (2) nowhere else does the Seer [i.e., John] use a nom. immediately after a preposition (in fact, he uses ἀπό 32 times with the gen. immediately following).” The passage appears to be an allusion to Exod 3:14 (in the LXX) where God refers to himself as “he who is” (ὁ ὤν), the same wording in Greek as here in Rev 1:4. Thus, it appears that John is wanting to leave the divine name untouched (perhaps to allude to God’s immutability, or as a pointer to the Old Testament as the key to unlocking the meaning of this book), irrespective of what it “looks” like grammatically. The translation has placed the “he who is” in quotation marks to indicate to the reader that the syntactical awkwardness is intentional. (For further comments, see ExSyn 63).

[1:4]  ⁵ tn BDAG 106 s.v. ἀπό 5.d states: “The expr. εἰρήνη ἀπὸ ‘ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος’ Rv 1:4 is quite extraordinary. It may be an interpretation of the name Yahweh already current, or an attempt to show reverence for the divine name by preserving it unchanged, or simply one more of the grammatical peculiarities so frequent in Rv.”

[1:12]  ⁶ tn Throughout the translation John’s use of καί (kai) often reflects the varied usage of the Hebrew conjunction ו (vav). A clause which καί introduces has been translated in terms of its semantic relationship to the clause that preceded it. If the καί seemed redundant, however, it was left untranslated; that is the case in this verse.

[1:12]  ⁷ tn Grk “with me.” The translation “with me” implies that John was engaged in a dialogue with the one speaking to him (e.g., Jesus or an angel) when in reality it was a one-sided conversation, with John doing all the listening. For this reason, μετ᾿ ἐμοῦ (met’ emou, “with me”) was translated as “to me.”

[1:12]  ⁸ tn Grk “and turning I saw.” The repetition of ἐπιστρέφω (epistrefw) is somewhat redundant in contemporary English and has been translated generally.

[1:13]  ¹¹ tn This phrase constitutes an allusion to Dan 7:13. Concerning υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου (Juio" tou anqrwpou), BDAG 1026 s.v. υἱός 2.d.γ says: “ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου lit. ‘the son of the man’…‘the human being, the human one, the man’…On Israelite thought contemporary w. Jesus and alleged knowledge of a heavenly being looked upon as a ‘Son of Man’ or ‘Man’, who exercises Messianic functions such as judging the world (metaph., pictorial passages in En 46-48; 4 Esdr 13:3, 51f)…Outside the gospels: Ac 7:56…Rv 1:13; 14:14 (both after Da 7:13…).” The term “son” here in this expression is anarthrous and as such lacks specificity. Some commentators and translations take the expression as an allusion to Daniel 7:13 and not to “the son of man” found in gospel traditions (e.g., Mark 8:31; 9:12; cf. D. E. Aune, Revelation [WBC], 2:800-801; cf. also NIV). Other commentators and versions, however, take the phrase “son of man” as definite, involving allusions to Dan 7:13 and “the son of man” gospel traditions (see G. K. Beale, Revelation [NIGTC], 771-72; NRSV).

[1:13]  ¹² tn Or “a wide golden sash,” but this would not be diagonal, as some modern sashes are, but horizontal. The Greek term can refer to a wide band of cloth or leather worn on the outside of one’s clothing (L&N 6.178).

[1:20]  ¹⁶ tn The words “is this” are supplied to make a complete sentence in English.

[1:20]  ¹⁷ tn Or perhaps “the messengers.”