article16

§10 Interlude: Two Reminders of God’s Faithfulness (Rev. 10:1–11:14)

The role played by the interlude in each of the three visions of divine wrath is the same: to cause the readers to assess their present crisis in terms of the future realization of God’s past triumph in Christ. In this sense, the crisis confronting unbelieving humanity is a theological one. Their vision is blinded by the “official” propaganda of the surrounding world order; thus, their life is anchored not by faith in a sovereign God but rather by a false confidence in the idols of the anti-Christian world.

The crisis that confronts the believing community is similar in kind. Whenever the church’s witness to the gospel of God is challenged or even compromised, the fundamental issue at stake for John is theological: temptations are tests of faith in God, since every problem of faith stems from a diminishing confidence in God. The tendency is often to place confidence in the definitions of security and happiness promoted within the surrounding social order.

Thus, the interlude between the sounding of the sixth and seventh trumpets marks the return of John’s attention to the believing community. Like the interlude between the breaking of the sixth and seventh seals, this vision is formed by two integrated parts, which together posit that the church’s hope in the certain end of its tribulation and experience of salvation is in accord with the plan of God. Again, we are inclined to think of this interlude in terms of repeated and central themes found in the little scroll given to John in chapter 10 and written down in chapter 11.

Many have pursued the precise meaning of the little scroll without success. Most associate it with God’s scroll of seven seals (5:1), containing the heavenly edict of God’s triumph over earthly evil. This seems to us a reasonable conjecture for two reasons. First, the vision of the little scroll is an essential part of the vision that describes the writing on the scroll with seven seals. Second, the little scroll is given by another mighty angel, an obvious allusion to the first “mighty angel” who had earlier searched the universe for someone worthy enough to open the seals of God’s scroll and inaugurate the new age of God’s salvation.

If we are to understand the little scroll by the larger one that had “writing on both sides” (cf. 5:1), the adjective little might describe the brevity of its contents—its shorter length due perhaps to its more restricted focus on a single aspect of the larger scroll’s edict. Thus, Caird says, “The great scroll contained the purposes of God in so far as they were to be achieved by the Lamb. The little scroll contains a new version of those same purposes in so far as they are to be achieved through the agency of the church” (Caird, Revelation, p. 126).

Schüssler Fiorenza agrees, suggesting that the scroll’s more narrow focus concerns “the prophetic interpretation of the situation of the Christian community” (Revelation, p. 54). Given John’s pastoral concern about the fragile status of the believing community within a secular society, he may well wish to clarify its destiny according to the redemptive plan of a faithful God, and does so by making the scroll’s contents known to his readers. In this sense, “little” may also qualify the scroll’s overall importance in the cosmic plan of God’s salvation. Whereas God’s scroll could be opened only by the worthy Lamb and contains God’s “macroscopic” design for salvation’s history, the shorter scroll lies open in the hand of the angel (10:8) and contains a more “microscopic” vision that intends in part to encourage his beleaguered audience.

The interpreter should also be sensitive to John’s clear allusions to Ezekiel’s situation, especially when analyzing this interlude. Both are prophets in exile, commissioned to eat scrolls consisting of divine revelation (cf. Rev. 10:9; Ezek. 3:1–3a); and both of their scrolls tasted as sweet as honey in their mouths (cf. Rev. 10:10; Ezek. 3:3b). These linguistic links suggest to us that John understands his own commission and current situation in the context of biblical Ezekiel’s commission and situation: sharply put, John views himself a latter-day Ezekiel.

Recall that the exiled Ezekiel was told to go to an obstinate Israel with a twofold message: first a warning that death results when a righteous person turns to evil (Ezek. 3:20); but second a promise that life results when a righteous person heeds the prophet’s warning and does not sin (Ezek. 3:21). Interpreted by Ezekiel’s story, the message contained in John’s little scroll carries a comparable warning and promise to a similar people. Thus, the vision of woes contained in the scroll serves not only to condemn the world order, but also to encourage a church, struggling to remain faithful in its suffering, not to sin in order to enter eternal life. We will develop this central point in the following commentary.

10:1 / Some commentators have mistaken the mighty angel for the Risen Christ. To be sure, the phrases describing the angel’s descent from heaven are elsewhere used of Christ. Luke, for example, describes Jesus as robed in a cloud at his ascension (cf. Acts 1:9–11); and in Revelation, John likens Christ’s face to a sun (cf. 1:16) and his feet to fiery pillars (cf. 1:15). Yet, nowhere in the NT is Jesus referred to as an angelic being; and given his exalted status in Revelation, the oath made by this angel in verse 6 seems an inappropriate speech for Jesus to make.

In our view, these phrases of splendor identify this messenger as another mighty angel, sent from the throne of God with a message of great significance for John and his readers. His identifying characteristics also suggest that its role is continuous with that of the first “mighty angel” (5:2), who called our attention to God’s scroll (5:1) and to the worthy Lamb in inaugurating the new age of God’s salvation (see above). These phrases also echo Ezekiel’s theophany of God’s throne (cf. Ezek. 1:27–28); John already realizes that the angelic message contains yet another claim for the reign of God.

10:2–4 / The first part of the angel’s message is not recorded by the seer. After John hears the voices of the seven thunders, a voice from heaven tells him, “Seal up what the seven thunders have said and do not write it down.” Many have futilely speculated exactly what this sevenfold message contained. We gather from the number seven that its significance to John is eschatological. We might even suggest that John hears the seven thunders as the effects of God’s ruling glory, as stipulated in Psalm 29:3–9, thereby invoking his submission before God’s eternal rule (cf. Ps. 29:10–11). From this, we are left with the impression that this interlude has something to do with the triumph of God, which is the essential theme of John’s Revelation. Nothing beyond this very basic speculation should be advanced with confidence.

In our view, however, the prohibition not to write down what John hears has the rhetorical effect of directing the reader to the importance of John’s commission to take up the little scroll to eat it. Apparently, the seer is privy to “insider’s information” that his audience lacks, and this establishes his authority to write down divine revelation that is normative for their faith.

10:5–7 / The mighty angel is now prepared to take an oath and so raises his right hand to heaven, swearing by God’s name that “There will be no more delay!” Many have noted that behind this oath lies the OT text, Daniel 12:5–7, according to which John interprets this particular vision. In that Danielic text, written to address a similar situation (so Caird, Revelation, p. 127), two men first exchange a question, “How long will it be before these astonishing things are fulfilled?” (Dan. 12:6), and then its oath-like answer, “It will be for a time, times and half a time. When the power of the holy people has been finally broken, all these things will be completed” (Dan. 12:7). Recall that earlier in Revelation the Christian martyrs, who are parallel to Daniel’s “holy people … finally broken,” asked a question similar to the one asked by Daniel’s two men and equally provocative question: “How long … until you judge … earth and avenge our blood?” (Rev. 6:10). Now John has been given additional revelation which at last provides the definitive response: there will be no more delay. In God’s exaltation of the slain Lamb, the ultimate vindication of God’s people is asserted, especially against those who are opposed to the witness and worship of God’s people on earth.

The actual moment of victory will come when the seventh angel … sounds his trumpet (cf. Rev. 11:15–19). We would contend the moment of God’s victory has already taken place in heaven through the triumph of Jesus’ messianic mission on earth (see below). For this reason John draws on the language of the gospel in expanding on this climactic act: the mystery of God will be accomplished in fulfillment of the prophetic promise of God’s salvation. While the phrase mystery of God means different things to different NT writers, it usually refers to the content of the gospel message, the core of which is the atoning death and exaltation of Christ. This would seem to be John’s perspective since he uses the verb euēngelisen, which means “to preach the gospel.” The prophets of old promised a time when a faithful God would redeem humanity from sin and restore all things to their proper, created order. In the Christ event, that promised time has now come (cf. Rev. 5:9–10)!

John, however, does suggest a delay in completing this new age of fulfillment. According to the preaching of the earliest church, the full measure of God’s kingdom has “not yet” been realized on earth, even though it has “already” begun with the Messiah’s mission on earth. Verse 7 begins, then, with a strong adversative, But (alla), which usually prefaces a contrary statement or sentiment. While Christ’s coronation testifies to the fulfillment of God’s promise of salvation, there is a delay in its earthly effects. The full (i.e., historical) experience of God’s salvation awaits Christ’s parousia.

The sort of ambiguity that results from living betwixt and between these “last days,” when sin and death are defeated but still experienced and when life and holiness are real but hard possibilities, is characteristic of the church’s current situation. This visionary interlude interprets the crisis that stems from the sometimes frustrating attempts to be faithful to God when the gospel’s promise has “not yet” been fulfilled in human experience.

10:8–10 / John is finally instructed to take the scroll that lies open in the hand of the angel who is standing on the sea and on the land. The scroll contains not only divine revelation, but, having already been opened, also revelation about current events. The very structure of John’s composition presumes that the scroll contains some account of the fulfillment of the prophecy mentioned in the preceding text and that it relates the gospel to John’s audience (see above).

The more precise nature of the scroll’s message is indicated by the next part of John’s commission: Take it and eat it. It will turn your stomach sour, but in your mouth it will be as sweet as honey. The commission is accepted by John, and the angel’s words are then fulfilled. While most commentators have understood this passage as symbolizing the ecstatic appropriation and assimilation of prophetic utterances, and virtually all have associated John’s experience in this regard with Ezekiel’s (cf. Ezek. 2:8–3:3), they have all noted this distinction: the scroll of divine revelation given to John turns his stomach sour. While both John and Ezekiel found divine revelation as sweet as honey (cf. Ps. 119:103), only John found it bitter (pikrainō). Why?

The question is more difficult if the interpreter limits the content of the little scroll to chapter 11. If its message extends through chapter 16, as some insist, then the souring of John’s stomach could be understood as a reaction to the total destruction of the world system. This option, however, does not seem possible since John’s scroll is contained within an interlude, ending with 11:14. Further, within the framework of this interlude, the scroll’s message is for the church and about its salvation, and not for the anti-Christian kingdom and about its destruction.

Perhaps a solution can be found in the larger context of the parallel passage in Ezekiel. The prophet’s response in receiving the hard message for an obdurate people was that he “went in bitterness and in the anger of my spirit” (Ezek. 3:14). Although the word for Ezekiel’s “bitterness” does not appear in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible (LXX, which John’s audience used), it is found in John’s Hebrew Bible. John would have presumed that Ezekiel’s bitterness was a visceral response to the hard prospect of convincing obstinate Israel that God’s warning of death was real and severe. By assuming the role of a “new Ezekiel,” John may use “sour stomach” to denote his bitter response to those congregations which have fallen from their earlier spiritual vitality. John recognizes that their situation is similar to Ezekiel’s exilic community; and his existential response to his difficult commission takes its cue from the prophet of old.

More importantly, however, John’s interpretation of Ezekiel’s commission suggests that he understood the purpose of the little scroll’s message as a warning to the believing but obstinate congregations. Failure to repent jeopardizes their participation in the eschatological salvation.

10:11 / John’s commission is to prophesy. In all probability, John’s audience would have understood John’s task as predicting future events, or outcomes of biblical promises about many peoples, nations, languages and kings. While the essential content of the little scroll concerns the church’s situation, John always locates the church’s salvation within a cosmic context, where the heavenly reality predicts the earthly outcome. Thus, the salvation of God’s people, in accord with the promise of a faithful God, is never removed from history. Moreover, while the outworking of God’s salvation is concentrated within the history of a particular people—God’s people—it involves a series of concrete interactions with the entire world order. This more global venue of God’s salvation makes for a messy and uneven history: the interaction between God’s people and many peoples, nations, languages and kings always threatens to undermine the church’s devotion to God. Yet, this is precisely the place where the church comes to know and experience God’s grace and peace.

11:1–2 / Many stylistic and thematic elements of this second part of the interlude differ from its first part. For this reason, most commentators think this difficult passage, which centers on the ministry and fate of the “two witnesses,” is derived from some discredited Jewish apocalyptic midrash on Daniel and adapted here by John for his Christian audience (Beasley-Murray, Revelation, pp. 176–81). However, unless John thought it contained an authentic prediction of a temple siege and the ultimate vindication of two witnesses, and unless he thought it of value for Christian proclamation, it is difficult for us to explain why he would pick up and use a prophecy regarded as false by the Jewish community. In any case, we do not think questions of sources need to be settled before coherent meanings of this passage can be advanced.

In this regard, the more pressing need is to determine how to approach this text, whether literally or symbolically (cf. Morris, Revelation, p. 140), or perhaps as a “parable” of God’s faithfulness to the believing community during the difficult course of its “last days.” A brief survey of the text’s four constitutive elements, when taken symbolically and collectively, suggests a coherence that some commentators find lacking. (1) For instance, the entire section is bracketed by two references to a people who worship God. The worshiping community, found in the heavenly temple’s sanctuary (11:1), refers to the eschatological Israel, removed to a heavenly haven and protected from its earthly enemies (11:2). The concluding doxology (11:13), when a portion of those previous opponents joins the believing community in praise of God, indicates the final vindication not only of God but also of the church. (2) Sandwiched between this celebration and worship of a faithful God is a story of conflict and dark distress. Actually, the three “moments” of the story depict the action of the period of salvation’s history between Christ’s exaltation and parousia, and thus prepare the reader for chapters 12–22. The plot begins in a triumphant testimony of Christ’s two witnesses (11:3–6) and ends in martyrdom and mockery at the hands of the Abyss’ beast and his people (11:7–10). But this conflict only presents a situation ultimately reversed for the good by the God-given “Breath of life” (11:11–12; cf. Gen. 2:7; Ezek. 37:6). (3) Yet, the setting for this drama of conflict and final resolution is no particular place and every place. From the sanctuary of heavenly worship (11:1; cf. Heb. 8:2), to the “Sodom” of earthly paganism and persecution (11:8), and finally to the apocalyptic, global “city” of fulfilled promises (11:13), John moves the reader along a mythical path that finds its reality in every age. Such conflict characterizes the church’s ongoing pilgrimage to the promised land. (4) Finally, the very movement of this second part of the interlude is controlled by a profound sense of time. It is something like an inverted hour-glass, so that the first act is played out over a period of seven years (11:2–3), followed by a much shorter second act of three and a half days (11:9, 11), and climaxed by an “hour of power” (11:13). Of course, these time values hold theological rather than chronological significance for John. They together characterize the course of these “last days,” and signify that all is in accord with the divine program of salvation. Further, the ever-shortening periods of time—from seven years (11:2–3) to a single hour (11:13)—create the impression of a quickening pace toward the consummation of history.

The preface to the vision of the two witnesses has the image of Ezekiel’s eschatological temple as its background (Ezek. 40–48). In the biblical vision, an angel commissions Ezekiel to “pay attention” as a man used a measuring rod (Ezek. 40:3) in order to measure the temple of God and the altar for a restored Israel (cf. Ezek. 40:48–43:27). In addition to the instructions given Ezekiel, John is told to count the worshipers there, as though the sanctuary is already in place and eschatological Israel already dwells within it. In this way, then, John is able to convey that Ezekiel’s prophecy of an eschatological temple for a restored Israel has already been fulfilled, and its fulfillment is the church. This is a theological conviction found at the core of early Christian proclamation (see Rev. 3:12; 1 Pet. 2:1–10; Eph. 2:11–22; 1 Cor. 3:16–17; Acts. 6:13–14; 7:44–50; but Rev. 21:22).

Because a faithful God has already fulfilled the biblical promise of an eschatological temple, John’s task is somewhat different than Ezekiel’s. John is called to measure critical sections of an extant temple in order to protect the inner sanctuary (and the believers found worshiping there) from defilement or destruction. The believers are gathered around the altar, where the prayers of the saints are heard by God (cf. Rev. 8:2) and where they are purified to serve God’s interests (cf. Ezek. 43:13–27).

Since the outer court … has been given to the Gentiles (or non-believers; cf. Eph. 4:17), it is excluded from John’s measurement and the non-believers from the purifying glory of God. According to the customs of the Second Temple in Jerusalem, only the outer court could be used by non-Jews or “unofficial” (i.e., ethnic but non-religious or outcast) Jews. They were excluded from the inner courts where the more important and solemn ceremonies of Jewish worship were conducted; only religious Jews could enter and celebrate God there.

Left unprotected from the powers and principalities of evil, the unbelieving world is corrupted to become in turn corrupting agents who trample on (pateō) the holy city for 42 months. Although reminiscent of Jesus’ prediction that the city of Jerusalem would be “trampled on (pateō) by the Gentiles” (Luke 21:24), in this context both the holy city and the temple of God are symbols for God’s people (cf. Rev. 21:9–10) and not a geographical location. Likewise, the rounded sum of 42 months or 1,260 days represents an indefinite period of time during which the increased distress and harassment for God’s people underscores the imminence of Christ’s return and God’s coming triumph. The essential point, envisioned by John’s commission to measure only the inner sanctuary, frames the second half of this interlude: the church, the restored Israel of God, will be protected by God from the corrupting influences of evil and so will persevere through these ‘last days’ and into God’s promised shalom.

11:3–6 / The (actually, my) two witnesses make an abrupt appearance into the vision, and the reader is not forewarned about the apparent change in speaker from John to God. Since they are given only what God can dispense—the power to prophesy for 1,260 days—the oracles they proclaim must bear witness to God’s reign rather than to any part of John’s Revelation.

Their identity is more difficult to ascertain. While cases have been mounted for a variety of historical figures (e.g., Moses and Elijah) and theological categories (e.g., law and gospel), we are best advised to pursue symbolic meanings consistent with the conviction envisioned by John’s precedent commission. This course of action seems especially prudent since the two witnesses are called the two olive trees and the two lampstands—obvious symbols of their important roles in the life of God’s people. The background for the first symbol, the two olive trees … that stand before the Lord of the earth, is found in Zechariah’s vision of two olive trees that stand on either side of the gold lampstand (Zech. 4:3, 11). In his vision, the “two olive trees” symbolize the reign of King Zerubbabel and the priesthood of Joshua, the anointed mediators of God’s covenant with Israel, “who serve the Lord of all the earth” (Zech. 4:14). In the wider context of the prophet’s oracle, Zechariah commends Zerubbabel’s work in completing the temple (Zech. 4:9) and Joshua’s ministry in purifying God’s people (Zech. 3:9). They are both viewed as effective mediators of God’s covenant with Israel. John looks to this wider context of Zechariah’s prophecy to justify his conviction that in some sense the two witnesses represent the renewal and restoration of God’s relationship with God’s people. This spiritual reality is indicated earlier by John in the final stanza of the “new song”: the exalted Lamb has made the entire redeemed community into a kingdom, to reign like Zerubbabel, made up of priests, to serve God like Joshua (Rev. 5:10; cf. 1:6).

Further, the two lampstands, which symbolize the church elsewhere in Revelation (cf. 1:20), suggest that the two witnesses are a synecdoche for the community of faithful disciples. The number two has significance as well, referring to the number of witnesses required by Judaism to admit evidence into a court of law. The essential ministry of “two” witnesses (cf. Deut. 19:15), in continuity with the “testimony of Jesus Christ” (1:2), is to provide a valid “testimony” (11:7; cf. 1:2) to God through their death (11:7) and God’s resurrection of them (11:11).

Likewise, in the confidence of eternal life (cf. 11:11), the ministry of the faithful church is to give courageous and powerful testimony to God’s salvation, even though it will provoke increased tribulation and even martyrdom. Even more specifically, the ministry of the two witnesses agrees with the twofold character of the redeemed community. First, the witnesses serve God (cf. 5:10). They are clothed in sackcloth, not to mourn the circumstances of their own tribulation but rather to submit themselves in humble dedication to the redemptive interests of God (cf. Dan. 9:3–19). Second, they reign on the earth with extraordinary power. Like the church they have received divine power to prophesy about God’s certain triumph (cf. Eph. 3:10); and like Christ they hold the fiery power of the prophet Elijah (cf. 2 Kings 1:1–18) to devour their enemies who must die as “a compelling divine necessity” (Morris, Revelation, p. 144). Their powers extend to the natural order to shut up the sky so that it will not rain … to turn the waters into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague. In echoing the biblical traditions of Elijah (1 Kings 17:1; cf. James 5:17–18) and Moses (Exod. 7:20; 8:12; cf. Heb. 11:23–29), who demonstrated similar powers, John intends to interpret the church’s ongoing witness to God by the OT prophetic witness. In doing so, John underscores the prophet’s most important characteristic: a single-minded faithfulness to proclaim and embody the word of the Lord.

Surely the courage and power of the witnesses should characterize the church’s current reign on the earth. Yet, the character of their witness is rooted in their faithfulness; faithfulness is the condition for power over sin and for courageous witness in the present dispensation. In this light, then, the two witnesses may well refer only to the portion of the whole church, already represented by the two faithful congregations at Smyrna and Philadelphia, which exemplify single-minded devotion to God and power over sin under difficult circumstances.

11:7–10 / Only when they have finished their God-ordained and empowered testimony can the beast that comes up from the Abyss … kill them. Two elements of this event are critical for the interpreter to consider. First, this is the first appearance of the beast, who personifies evil power and who figures so prominently in the rest of John’s composition. His absence from Revelation until this point is consistent with the primary emphasis of the first section of John’s composition on God’s triumph over evil through the exalted Lamb. Second, his exit from the Abyss (cf. 9:1) and the onslaught of his evil work commence only after the testimony of the two witnesses is finished (teleō; cf. John 19:30). The limits of evil are established by God and ultimately serve God’s purposes. In this sense, John’s apocalypticism is not dualistic in either an ontological or a teleological sense. That is, God and the Evil One are not two eternal beings of equal power, directing two different histories in an independent fashion. God reigns alone and God alone will finally vanquish all pretenders to the heavenly throne through Christ.

Therefore, while the beast makes his destructive power felt, the parameters for the exercise and effect of his evil power are set by the sovereign God. In this light, we may recognize the irony John conveys by using the verb overpower (nikaō) to describe the beast’s “empty” defeat of the two prophets. This is the same catchword John uses in speaking of those faithful believers who form a community of “overcomers” who witness to God’s triumph in Christ by “overcoming” (nikaō) evil. They will receive the reward of eternal life at Christ’s return (2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21).

We are not to suppose for a moment that the “two witnesses,” who represent the community of overcomers, are actually overcome by the beast. Their death is only a temporary defeat. Their final victory, as the reader will soon discover, is forthcoming. By employing the Christ typology, John identifies the place of their execution as where also their Lord was crucified. He is not moving from symbolism to literalism to speak of the city of Jerusalem. He is rather saying something about the theological significance of the death of the “two witnesses” (and those they represent): like Jesus they suffered an apparent defeat at the hands of his enemies, and like Jesus their execution will lead to their eventual resurrection and vindication. John’s main point is therefore this: faithfulness unto death is always the ultimate measure of the disciple’s faithfulness to God.

What happens when there is no longer a faithful testimony to God’s gospel? What happens when social evil increases and intensifies, and the “trampling” of worshipers in the “holy city” turns ugly and ends in their martyrdom? Without the ongoing testimony of Jesus, provided by the community of faithful disciples, any great city can turn into a wicked Sodom (cf. Isa. 1:9–10; Ezek. 16:46–55) in a rather short period of time—in three and a half days. In this context, the great city does not refer to a specific city, but to any neighborhood in the “global village” where people live and work, and where pervasive evil has replaced or compromised the testimony of Jesus Christ. In such places, the force of the beast’s corrupting power is felt at many levels. The worldwide celebration, when the inhabitants of earth exchange gifts, suggests that special festival days have been instituted for this occasion. There is the complete breakdown of basic social conventions, so that men … gaze on their bodies and refuse them burial. In creating a public spectacle of their death and by not providing them a decent burial, the leaders of the anti-Christian kingdom have acted with unbridled disrespect. Without social manners there is left anarchy and chaos, which are the marks of the Evil One (cf. Rom. 1:29–31) and not of Christ.

11:11–13 / To this point of the interlude, John has defended the vital importance of the faithful congregation in any city: by such a testimony the congregation restrains evil and conveys the power of God’s reign to the surrounding society. Without such a testimony, the destructive powers of evil would rapidly increase to create disorder and death. By envisioning the extinction of the faithful congregation (i.e., the “two witnesses”), John wishes to encourage his audience to resist the temptation of spiritual laxity, no doubt prompted by the current “trampling of the Gentiles,” and to live faithfully for God.

But what of those faithful witnesses in John’s churches who have already been martyred? What is their destiny? Since the two witnesses continue to bear witness to the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ right up to their execution, we would expect them to share in his resurrection from death to life as well. Perhaps because John wishes the reader to associate this scene with the resurrection of Jesus, he changes tense from present to aorist. Indeed, echoes of Jesus’ glorification abound, especially of his ascension: And they went up to heaven in a cloud, while their enemies looked on (cf. Acts 1:9–11). Ironically, according to the Lukan narrative of Jesus’ ascension, two witnesses act as interpreters for the disciples while they … looked on, telling them that his ascension makes certain his parousia! John may well intend the very same promise for his own audience. Actually, John’s substitution of enemies for disciples is apropos not only because the former enemies convert and become disciples, but because they respond to the resurrection of the two witnesses in the same way that the disciples first responded to Jesus’ resurrection: in holy terror (cf. Mark 16:8)!

The biblical idiom, breath of life from God, is employed by John for the resurrection. The phrase draws upon the OT images of God’s breath, which gave life to humanity (cf. Gen. 2:7) and promised new life to an exiled Israel (cf. Ezek. 37:9–10). John’s use of it here accords with his convictions about the lordship of God as creator (cf. Rev. 4:11) and the faithfulness of God in keeping the biblical promise of bringing a new Israel back to life. The reality of God’s rule over the beast and of God’s faithfulness to the two witnesses is finally recognized by the survivors of the severe earthquake, who gave glory to the God of heaven. The conversion of God’s enemies is a new motif for John, but entirely consistent with the overarching theme of this part of his composition: the vindication of the exalted witnesses, as with the exalted Lamb before, issues in a demand to repent and turn to God, who is “faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9).

11:14 / The completion of the intervening vision about the death and exaltation of the two witnesses signals the end of the second woe. Concerning the third woe, however, John is much more cryptic: he says only that it is coming soon. Does this mean that the “third woe begins with the seventh trumpet” soon to sound? This seems hardly possible, since the seventh trumpet is a fanfare not to woes and lamentations but to a heavenly chorus of praise and thanksgiving! Does John wish to create the impression that the third woe is delayed and will not be revealed until after the seventh trumpet has sounded its note of praise? As we stated earlier, this interpretation makes the most sense: the third woe looks ahead to the second part of Revelation’s main body, where the current crisis facing God’s people is envisioned. The two woes that have passed are linked with the death and exaltation of Christ; the one remaining woe interprets the period of salvation’s history in which the church now lives (and often suffers at the hands of evil powers), envisioned by John as three heavenly signs (12:1–19:10).

That two-thirds of the messianic woes have been completed indicates that God’s final judgment of the fallen world has not yet occurred. Of course, the incomplete nature of the devastation wreaked by God’s wrath has been an important element of both the seal and the trumpet visions. We have maintained that God’s partial judgment functions as a warning to a fallen world. John’s message, rooted in the Christ event, is that the world system is fallen and now lives under God’s indictment; unbelievers must recognize, with the survivors of the city’s earthquake (11:11–13), that they need God’s mercy to “survive” and they receive “survivable” mercy through the Lamb. The same image also warns the unfaithful church to repent of its spiritual laxity before its final justification is imperiled. Further, the phrase coming soon rehearses Christ’s promise of his imminent return, which is also found repeatedly in Revelation’s “bookends” (2:5, 16; 3:11; 22:7, 12, 20). The first effect of the phrase in concluding this interlude is to convince the unbelieving or unfaithful reader of Revelation that repentance is made all the more urgent by the imminence of the history’s end and evil’s destruction. Further, the second effect is to give hope to the faithful that the sufferings of the third woe, which envisions the present age, will conclude at any moment in the collapse of the world order and in the transformation of God’s people.

Finally, 11:14 marks a transition between the first and second sections of Revelation’s body rather than between the interlude and the seventh trumpet. The seventh trumpet itself concludes the first section in triumphant declaration of the cosmic significance of Jesus’ death and exaltation as God’s Lamb, and it prepares the reader of the next section of Revelation to consider the current crisis in hope and confidence.