Revelation 9:20

And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues ... - One third part is represented as swept off, and it might have been expected that a salutary effect would have been produced on the remainder, in reforming them, and restraining them from error and sin. The writer proceeds to state, however, that these judgments did not have the effect which might reasonably have been anticipated. No reformation followed; there was no abandonment of the prevailing forms of iniquity; there was no change in their idolatry and superstition. In regard to the exact meaning of what is here stated Rev 9:20-21, it will be a more convenient arrangement to consider it after we have ascertained the proper application of the passage relating to the sixth trumpet. What is here stated Rev 9:20-21 pertains to the state of the world after the desolations which would occur under this woe-trumpet; and the explanation of the words may be reserved, therefore, with propriety, until the inquiry shall have been instituted as to the general design of the whole.

With respect to the fulfillment of this symbol - the sixth trumpet - it will be necessary to inquire whether there has been any event, or class of events occurring at such a time, and in such a manner, as would be properly denoted by such a symbol. The examination of this question will make it necessary to go over the leading points in the symbol, and to endeavor to apply them. In doing this I shall simply state, with such illustrations as may occur, what seems to me to have been the design of the symbol. It would be an endless task to examine all the explanations which have been proposed, and it would be useless to do so.

The reference, then, seems to me to be to the Turkish power, extending from the time of the first appearance of the Turks in the neighborhood of the Euphrates, to the final conquest of Constantinople in 1453. The general reasons for this opinion are such as the following:

If the previous trumpet referred to the Saracens, or to the rise of the Muhammedan power among the Arabs, then the Turkish dominion, being the next in succession, would be what would most naturally be symbolized. The Turkish power rose on the decline of the Arabic, and was the next important power in affecting the destinies of the world. This power, like the former, had its seat in the East, and would be properly classified under the events occurring there as affecting the destiny of the world. The introduction of this power was necessary, in order to complete the survey of the downfall of the Roman empire - the great object kept in view all along in these symbols.

In the first four of these trumpets, under the seventh seal, we found the decline and fall of the Western empire; in the first of the remaining three - the fifth in order - we found the rise of the Saracens, materially affecting the condition of the Eastern portion of the Roman world; and the notice of the Turks, under whom the empire at last fell to rise no more, seemed to be demanded in order to the completion of the picture. As a leading design of the whole vision was to describe the ultimate destiny of that formidable power - the Roman - which, in the time when the Revelation was given to John ruled over the whole world; under which the church was then oppressed; and which, either as a civil or ecclesiastical power, was to exert so important an influence on the destiny of the church, it was proper that its history should be sketched until it ceased - that is, until the conquest of the capital of the Eastern empire by the Turks. Here the termination of the empire, as traced by Mr. Gibbon, closes; and these events it was important to incorporate in this series of visions.

The rise and character of the Turkish people may be seen stated in full in Gibbon, Decline and Fall, iii. 101-103, 105, 486; iv. 41, 42, 87, 90, 91, 93, 100, 127, 143, 151, 258, 260, 289, 350. The leading facts in regard to the history of the Turks, so far as they are necessary to be known before we proceed to apply the symbols, are the following:

(1) The Turks, or Turkmans, had their origin in the vicinity of the Caspian Sea, and were divided into two branches, one on the east, and the other on the west. The latter colony, in the 10th century, could muster 40,000 soldiers; the other numbered 100,000 families (Gibbon, iv. 90). By the latter of these, Persia was invaded and subdued, and soon Bagdad also came into their possession, and the seat of the caliph was occupied by a Turkish prince. The various details respecting this, and respecting their conversion to the faith of the Koran, may be seen in Gibbon, iv. 90-93. A mighty Turkish and Moslem power was thus concentrated under Togrul, who had subdued the caliph, in the vicinity of the Tigris and the Euphrates, extending east over Persia and the countries adjacent to the Caspian Sea, but it had not yet crossed the Euphrates to carry its conquests to the west. The conquest of Bagdad by Togrul, the first prince of the Seljuk race, was an important event, not only in itself, but as it was by this event that the Turk was constituted temporal lieutenant of the prophet’s vicar, and so the head of the temporal power of the religion of Islam. “The conqueror of the East kissed the ground, stood some time in a modest posture, and was led toward the throne by the vizier and an interpreter. After Togrul had seated himself on another throne his commission was publicly read, which declared him the temporal lieutenant of the prophet. He was successively invested with seven robes of honor, and presented with seven slaves, the natives of the seven climates of the Arabian empire, etc. Their alliance (of the sultan and the caliph) was cemented by the marriage of Togrul’s sister with the successor of the prophet,” etc. (Gibbon, iv. 93).

The conquest of Persia, the subjugation of Bagdad, the union of the Turkish power with that of the caliph, the successor of Muhammed, and the foundation of this powerful kingdom in the neighborhood of the Euphrates, is all that is necessary to explain the sense of the phrase “which were prepared for an hour,” etc., Rev 9:15. The arrangements were then made for the important series of events which were to occur when that formidable power should be summoned from the East, to spread the predicted desolation over so large a part of the world. A mighty dominion had been forming in the East that had subdued Persia, and that, by union with the caliphs, by the subjugation of Bagdad, and by embracing the Muhammedan faith, had become “prepared” to play its subsequent important part in the affairs of the world.

(2) The next important event in their history was the crossing of the Euphrates, and the invasion of Asia Minor. The account of this invasion can be best given in the words of Mr. Gibbon: “Twenty-five years after the death of Basil (the Greek emperor), his successors were suddenly assaulted by an unknown race of barbarians, who united the Scythian valor with the fanaticism of new proselytes, and the art and riches of a powerful monarchy. The myriads of Turkish horse overspread a frontier of 600 miles from Taurus to Arzeroum, and the blood of one hundred and thirty thousand Christians was a grateful sacrifice to the Arabian prophet. Yet the arms of Togrul did not make any deep or lasting impression on the Greek empire. The torrent rolled away from the open country; the sultan retired without glory or success from the siege of an Armenian city; the obscure hostilities were continued or suspended with a vicissitude of events; and the bravery of the Macedonian legions renewed the fame of the conqueror of Asia. The name of Alp Arslan, the valiant lion, is expressive of the popular idea of the perfection of man; and the successor of Togrul displayed the fierceness and generosity of the royal animal. (‘The heads of the horses were as the heads of lions.’) He passed the Euphrates at the head of the Turkish cavalry, and entered Caesarea, the metropolis of Cappadocia, to which he had been attracted by the fame and the wealth of the temple of Basil” (vol. iv. 93, 94; compare also p. 95).

(3) The next important event was the establishing of the kingdom of Roum in Asia Minor. After a succession of victories and defeats; after being driven once and again from Asia Minor, and compelled to retire beyond its limits; and after subjecting the East to their arms (Gibbon, iv. 95-100) in the various contests for the crown of the Eastern empire, the aid of the Turks was invoked by one party or the other until they secured for themselves a firm foothold in Asia Minor, and established themselves there in a permanent kingdom - evidently with the purpose of seizing upon Constantinople itself when an opportunity should be presented (Gibbon, iv. 100, 101). Of this kingdom of Roum Mr. Gibbon (iv. 101) gives, the following description, and speaks thus of the effect of its establishment on the destiny of the Eastern empire: “Since the first conquests of the caliphs, the establishment of the Turks in Anatolia, or Asia Minor, was the most deplorable loss which the church and empire had sustained. By the propagation of the Moslem faith Soliman deserved the name of Gazi, a holy champion; and his new kingdom of the Romans, or of Roum, was added to the table of Oriental geography. It is described as extending from the Euphrates to Constantinople, from the Black Sea to the confines of Syria; pregnant with mines of silver and iron, of alum and copper, fruitful in grain and wine, and productive of cattle and excellent horses. The wealth of Lydia, the arts of the Greeks, the splendor of the Augustan age, existed only in books and ruins, which were equally obscure in the eyes of the Scythian conquerors. By the choice of the Sultan, Nice, the metropolis of Bithynia, was preferred for his palace and fortress - the seat of the Seljukian dynasty of Roum was planted one hundred miles from Constantinople; and the divinity of Christ was denied and derided in the same temple in which it had been pronounced by the first general synod of the Catholics. The unity of God and the mission of Muhammed were preached in the mosques; the Arabian learning was taught in the schools; the cadis judged according to the law of the Koran; the Turkish manners and language prevailed in the cities; and Turkman camps were scattered over the plains and mountains of Anatolia,” etc.

(4) The next material event in the history of the Turkish power was the conquest of Jerusalem. See this described in Gibbon, iv. 102-106. By this the attention of the Turks was turned for a time from the conquest of Constantinople - an event at which the Turkish power all along aimed, and in which they doubtless expected to be ultimately successful. Had they not been diverted from it by the wars connected with the Crusades, Constantinople would have fallen long before it did fall, for it was too feeble to defend itself if it had been attacked.

(5) The conquest of Jerusalem by the Turks, and the oppressions which Christians experienced there, gave rise to the Crusades, by which the destiny of Constantinople was still longer delayed. The war of the Crusades was made on the Turks, and as the crusaders mostly passed through Constantinople and Anatolia, all the power of the Turks in Asia Minor was requisite to defend themselves, and they were incapable of making an attack on Constantinople until after the final defeat of the crusaders and restoration of peace. See Gibbon, iv. 106-210.

(6) The next material event in the history of the Turks was the conquest of Constantinople in 1453 ad - an event which established the Turkish power in Europe and completed the downfall of the Roman empire (Gibbon, iv. 333-359).

After this brief reference to the general history of the Turkish power, we are prepared to inquire more particularly whether the symbol in the passage before us is applicable to this series of events. This may be considered in several particulars:

(1) “The time.” If the first woe-trumpet referred to the Saracens, then it would be natural that the rise and progress of the Turkish power should be symbolized as the next great fact in history, and as that under which the empire fell. As we have seen, the Turkish power rose immediately after the power of the Saracens had reached its height, and identified itself with the Muhammedan religion; and was, in fact, the next great power that affected the Roman empire, the welfare of the church, and the history of the world. There can be no doubt, therefore, that the time is such as is demanded in the proper interpretation of the symbol.

(2) “the place.” We have seen (in the remarks on Rev 9:14) that this was on or near the river Euphrates, and that this power was long forming and consolidating itself on the east of that river before it crossed it in the invasion of Asia Minor. It had spread over Persia, and had even invaded the region of the East as far as the Indies; it had secured, under Togrul, the conquest of Bagdad, and had united itself with the caliphate, and was, in fact, a mighty power “prepared” for conquest before it moved to the west. Thus, Mr. Gibbon (iv. 92) says, “The more rustic, perhaps the wisest, portion of the Turkmans continued to dwell in the tents of their ancestors; and from the Oxus to the Euphrates these military colonies were protected and propagated by their native princes.” So again, speaking of Alp Arslan, the son and successor of Togrul, he says (iv. 94), “He passed the Euphrates at the head of the Turkish cavalry, and entered Caesarea, the metropolis of Cappadocia, to which he was attracted by the fame and the wealth of the temple of Basil.” If it be admitted that it was intended by John to refer to the Turkish power, it could not have been better represented than as a power that had been forming in the vicinity of that great river, and that was prepared to precipitate itself on the Eastern empire. To one contemplating it in the time of Togrul or Alp Arslan, it would have appeared as a mighty power growing up in the neighborhood of the Euphrates.

(3) “the four angels:” “Loose the four angels which are bound.” That is, loose the powers which are in the vicinity of the Euphrates, as if they were under the control of four angels. The most natural construction of this would be, that under the mighty power that was to sweep over the world, there were four subordinate powers, or that there were such subdivisions that it might be supposed they were ranged under four angelic powers or leaders. The question is, whether there was any such division or arrangement of the Turkish power, that, to one looking on it at a distance, there would seem to be such a division. In the “History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” (iv. 100) we find the following statement: “The greatness and unity of the Turkish empire expired in the person of Malek Shah. The vacant throne was disputed by his brother and his four sons; and, after a series of civil wars, the treaty which reconciled the surviving candidates confirmed a lasting separation in the Persian dynasty, the oldest and principal branch of the house of Seljuk. The three younger dynasties were those of Kerman, of Syria, and of Roum; the first of these commanded an extensive, though obscure dominion, on the shores of the Indian Ocean; the second expelled the Arabian princes of Aleppo and Damascus: and the third (our special care) invaded the Roman provinces of Asia Minor. The generous policy of Malek contributed to their elevation; he allowed the princes of his blood, even those whom he had vanquished in the field, to seek new kingdoms worthy of their ambition; nor was he displeased that they should draw away the more ardent spirits who might have disturbed the tranquility of his reign.

As the supreme head of his family and nation, the great Sultan of Persia commanded the obedience and tribute of his royal brethren: the thrones of Kerman and Nice, of Aleppo and Damascus; the atabeks and emirs of Syria and Mesopotamia erected their standards under the shadow of his scepter, and the hordes of Turkmans overspread the plains of Western Asia. After the death of Malek the bands of union and subordination were gradually relaxed and dissolved; the indulgence of the house of Seljuk invested their slaves with the inheritance of kingdoms; and, in the Oriental style, a crowd of princes arose from the dust of their feet.” Here it is observable, that, at the period when the Turkman hordes were about to precipitate themselves on Europe, and to advance to the destruction of the Eastern empire, we have distinct mention of four great departments of the Turkish power: the original power that had established itself in Persia, under Malek Shah, and the three subordinate powers that sprung out of that of Kerman, Syria, and Roum. It is observable:

(a)That this occurs at the period when that power would appear in the East as advancing in its conquests to the West;

(b)That it was in the vicinity of the great river Euphrates;

(c)That it had never before occurred - the Turkish power having been before united as one; and,

(d)That it never afterward occurred - for, in the words of Mr. Gibbon, “after the death of Malek the bands of union and subordination were relaxed and finally dissolved.”

It would not be improper, then, to look upon this one mighty power as under the control of four spirits that were held in cheek in the East, and that were “prepared” to pour their energies on the Roman empire.

(4) “the preparation:” “Prepared for an hour,” etc. That is, arranged; made ready - as if by previous discipline - for some mighty enterprise. Applied to the Turkmans, this would mean that the preparation for the ultimate work which they executed had been making as that power increased and became consolidated under Togrul, Alp Arslan, and Malek Shah. In its successful strides Persia and the East had been subdued; the caliph at Bagdad had been brought under the control of the sultan; a union had been formed between the Turks and the Saracens; and the sultanies of Kerman, Syria, and Roum had been established embracing together all the countries of the East, and constituting this by far the most mighty nation on the globe. All this would seem to be a work of preparation to do what was afterward done as seen in the visions of John.

(5) “the fact that they were bound:” “Which are bound in the great river Euphrates.” That is, they were, as it were, restrained and kept back for a long time in that vicinity. It would have been natural to suppose that that vast power would at once move on toward the West to the conquest of the capital of the Eastern empire. Such had been the case with the Huns, the Goths, and the Vandals. But these Turkish hordes had been long restrained in the East. They had subdued Persia. They had then achieved the conquest of India. They had conquered Bagdad, and the entire East was under their control. Yet for a long time they had now been inactive, and it would seem as if they had been bound or restrained by some mighty power from moving in their conquests to the West.

(6) “the material that composed the army:” “And the number of the army of the horsemen.” “And thus I saw the horses in the vision. And the heads of the horses were as the heads of lions.” From this it appears that this vast host was composed mainly of cavalry; and it is hardly necessary to say that this description would apply better to the Turkish hordes than to any other body of invaders known in history. Thus, Mr. Gibbon (vol. iv. p. 94) says, “The myriads of the Turkish horse overspread a frontier of six hundred miles, from Taurus to Arzeroum,” 1050 ad. So again, speaking of Togrul (vol. iv. p. 94), “He passed the Euphrates at the head of the Turkish cavalry” (ibid.). So again (vol. iii. p. 95), “Alp Arslan flew to the scene of action at the head of forty thousand horse.” 1071 a.d. So in the attack of the crusaders on Nice, the capital of the Turkish kingdom of Roum, Mr. Gibbon (vol. iv. p. 127) says of the sultan Soliman: “Yielding to the first impulse of the torrent, he deposited his treasure and family in Nice; retired to the mountains with fifty thousand horse,” etc. And so again (ibid.), speaking of the Turks who rallied to oppose the “strange” invasion of “the Western barbarians,” he says, “The Turkish emirs obeyed the call of loyalty or religion; the Turkman hordes encamped round his standard; and his whole force is loosely stated by the Christians at two hundred, or even three hundred and sixty thousand horse,” 1097 a.d. Every student of history knows that the Turks, or Turkmans, in the early periods of their history, were remarkable for their cavalry.

(7) “their numbers:” “And the number of the army of the horsemen were two hundred thousand thousand.” That is, it was vast, or it was such as to be reckoned by myriads, or by tens of thousands - δύο μυριάδες μυριάδων duo muriades muriadōn - “two myriads of myriads.” Thus, Mr. Gibbon (vol. iv. p. 94) says, “The myriads of Turkish horse overspread,” etc. It has been suggested by Daubuz that in this there may be probably an allusion to the Turkman custom of numbering by tomans, or myriads. This custom, it is true, has existed elsewhere, but there is probably none with whom it has been so familiar as with the Tartars and Turks. In the Seljukian age the population of Samarcand was rated at seven tomans (myriads), because it could send out 70,000 warriors. The dignity and rank of Tamerlane’s father and grandfather was thus described, that “they were the hereditary chiefs of a toman, or 10,000 horse” - a myriad (Gibbon, vol. iv. p. 270); so that it is not without his usual propriety of language that Mr. Gibbon speaks of the myriads of the Turkish horse, or of the cavalry of the earlier Turks of Mount Altai, “being, both men and horses, proudly computed by myriads.” One thing is clear, that to no other invading hosts could the language used here be so well applied, and if it were supposed that John was writing after the event, this would be the language which he would be likely to employ - for this is nearly the identical language employed by the historian Gibbon.

(8) “their personal appearance:” “Them that sat on them having breastplates of fire, and of jacinth, and brimstone” - as explained above, in a “uniform” of red, and blue, and yellow. This might, undoubtedly, be applicable to other armies besides the Turkish hordes; but the proper question here is, whether it would be applicable to them. The fact of the application of the symbol to the Turks in general must be determined from other points in the symbol which designate them clearly; the only natural inquiry here is, whether this description would apply to the Turkish hosts; for if it would not, that would be fatal to the whole interpretation. On the application of this passage to the Turks Mr. Daubuz justly remarks, that “from their first appearance the Ottomans have affected to wear warlike apparel of scarlet, blue, and yellow - a descriptive trait the more marked from its contrast to the military appearance of the Greeks, Franks, or Saracens contemporarily.” Mr. Elliott adds: “It only needs to have seen the Turkish cavalry (as they were before the late innovations), whether in war itself, or in the djerrid war’s mimicry, to leave an impression of the absolute necessity of some such notice of their rich and varied colorings, in order to give in description at all a just impression of their appearance,” vol. i. p. 481.

(9) “The remarkable appearance of the cavalry:” “Having breastplates of fire, and of jacinth, and brimstone; and the heads of the horses were as the heads of lions; and out of their mouths issued fire, and smoke, and brimstone.” It was remarked in the exposition of this passage that this is just such a description as would be given of an army to which the use of gunpowder was known, and which made use of it in these wars. Looking now upon a body of cavalry in the heat of an engagement, it would seem, if the cause were not known, that the horses belched forth smoke and sulphurous flame. The only question now is, whether in the warfare of the Turks there was anything which would especially or remarkably justify this description. And here it is impossible not to advert to the historical fact that they were among the first to make use of gunpowder in their wars, and that to the use of this destructive element they owed much of their success and their ultimate triumphs.

The historical truth of this it is necessary now to advert to, and this will be done by a reference to Mr. Gibbon, and to the account which he has given of the final conquest of Constantinople by the Turks. It will be seen how he puts this new instrumentality of war into the foreground in his account; how prominent this seemed to him to be in describing the victories of the Turks; and how probable, therefore, it is that John, in describing an invasion by them, would refer to the “fire and smoke and brimstone,” that seemed to be emitted from the mouths of their horses. As preparatory to the account of the siege and conquest of Constantinople by the Turks, Mr. Gibbon gives a description of the invention and use of gunpowder. “The chemists of China or Europe had found, by casual or elaborate experiments, that a mixture of saltpetre, sulpher, and charcoal produces, with a spark of fire, a tremendous explosion. It was soon observed that if the expansive force were compressed in a strong tube, a ball of stone or iron might be expelled with irresistible add destructive velocity. The precise era of the invention and application of gunpowder is involved in doubtful traditions and equivocal language; yet we may clearly discern that it was known before the middle of the fourteenth century; and that before the end of the same the use of artillery in battles and sieges, by sea and land, was familiar to the states of Germany, Italy, Spain, France, and England. The priority of nations is of small account; none could derive any exclusive benefit from their previous or superior knowledge; and in the common improvement they stood on the same level of relative power and military science.

Nor was it possible to circumscribe the secret within the pale of the church; it was disclosed to the Turks by the treachery of apostates and the selfish policy of rivals; and the sultans had sense to adopt, and wealth to reward, the talents of a Christian engineer. By the Venetians the use of gunpowder was communicated without reproach to the sultans of Egypt and Persia, their allies against the Ottoman power; the secret was soon propagated to the extremities of Asia; and the advantage of the European was confined to his easy victories over the savages of the New World,” vol. iv. p. 291. In the description of the conquest of Constantinople Mr. Gibbon makes frequent mention of their artillery, and of the use of gunpowder, and of its important agency in securing their final conquests, and in the overthrow of the Eastern empire. “Among the implements of destruction he (the Turkish sultan) studied with special care the recent and tremendous discovery of the Latins; and his artillery surpassed whatever had yet appeared in the world. A founder of cannon, a Dane or Hungarian, who had almost starved in the Greek service, deserted to the Moslems, and was liberally entertained by the Turkish sultan. Muhammed was satisfied with the answer to his first question, which he eagerly pressed on the artist: ‘Am I able to cast a cannon capable of throwing a ball or stone of sufficient size to batter the walls of Constantinople? I am not ignorant of their strength, but, were they more solid than those of Babylon, I could oppose an engine of superior power; the position and management of that engine must be left to your engineers.’ On this assurance a foundry was established at Adrianople; the metal was prepared; and at the end of three months Urban produced a piece of brass ordnance of stupendous and almost incredible magnitude: a measure of twelve palms is assigned to the bore; and the stone bullet weighed above six hundred pounds.

A vacant place before the new palace was chosen for the first experiment; but to prevent the sudden and mischievous effects of astonishment and fear, a proclamation was issued that the cannon would be discharged the ensuing day. The explosion was felt or heard in a circuit of 100 furlongs; the ball, by force of gunpowder, was driven above a mile; and on the spot where it fell it buried itself a fathom deep in the ground,” vol. iv. p. 339. So, in speaking of the siege of Constantinople by the Turks, Mr. Gibbon says of the defense by the Christians (vol. iv. p. 343): “The incessant volleys of lances and arrows were accompanied with the smoke, the sound, and the fire of their musketry and cannon.” “The same destructive secret,” he adds, “had been revealed to the Moslems, by whom it was employed with the superior energy of zeal, riches, and despotism. The great cannon of Muhammed has been separately noticed - an important and visible object in the history of the times; but that enormous engine was flanked by two follows almost of equal magnitude; the long order of the Turkish artillery was pointed against the walls; fourteen battories thundered at once on the most accessible places; and of one of these it is ambiguously expressed that it was mounted with one hundred and thirty guns, or that it discharged one hundred and thirty bullets,” vol. iv. pp. 343, 344.

Again: “The first random shots were productive of more sound than effect; and it was by the advice of a Christian that the engineers were taught to level their aim against the two opposite sides of the salient angles of a bastion. However imperfect, the weight and repetition of the fire made some impression on the walls,” vol. iv. p. 344. And again: “A circumstance that distinguishes the siege of Constantinople is the reunion of the ancient and modern artillery. The cannon were intermingled with the mechanical engines for casting stones and darts, the bullet and the battering-ram were directed against the same walls; nor had the discovery of gunpowder superseded the use of the liquid and inextinguishable fire,” vol. iv. p. 344. So again, in the description of the final conflict when Constantinople was taken, Mr. Gibbon says, “From the lines, the galleys, and the bridge, the Ottoman artillery thundered on all sides; and the camp and city, the Greeks and the Turks, were involved in a cloud of smoke which could only be dispelled by the final deliverance or destruction of the Roman empire,” vol. iv. p. 350. Assuredly, if such was the fact in the conquests of the Turks, it was not unnatural in one who was looking on these warriors in vision to describe them as if they seemed to belch out “fire and smoke and brimstone.” If Mr. Gibbon had designed to describe the conquest of the Turks as a fulfillment of the prediction, could he have done it in a style more clear and graphic than what he has employed? If this had occurred in a Christian writer, would it not have been charged on him that he had shaped his facts to meet his notions of the meaning of the prophecy?

(10) the statement that “their power was in their mouth, and in their tails,” Rev 9:19. The former part of this has been illustrated. The inquiry now is, what is the meaning of the declaration that “their power was in their tails?” In Rev 9:19 their tails are described as resembling “serpents, having heads,” and it is said that “with them they do hurt.” See the notes on that verse. The allusion to the “serpents” would seem to imply that there was something in the horses’ tails, as compared with them, or in some use that was made of them, which would make this language proper; that is, that their appearance would so suggest the idea of death and destruction, that the mind would easily imagine they were a bundle of serpents. The following remarks may show how applicable this was to the Turks:

(a) In the Turkish hordes there was something, whatever it was, that naturally suggested some resemblance to serpents. Of the Turkmans when they began to spread their conquests over Asia, in the eleventh century, and an effort was made to rouse the people against them, Mr. Gibbon makes the following remark: “Massoud, the son and successor of Mahmoud, had too long neglected the advice of his wisest Omrahs. ‘Your enemies’ (the Turkmans), they repeatedly urged, ‘were in their origin a swarm of ants; they are now little snakes; and unless they be instantly crushed, they will acquire the venom and magnitude. of serpents,” vol. iv. p. 91.

(b) It is a remarkable fact that the horse’s tail is a well-known Turkish standard - a symbol of office and authority. “The pashas are distinguished, after a Tartar custom, by three horsetails on the side of their tents, and receive by courtesy the title of beyler beg, or prince of princes. The next in rank are the pashas of two tails, the beys who are honored with one tail” - Edin. Ency. (art. “Turkey”). In the times of their early warlike career the principal standard was once lost in battle, and the Turkman commander, in default, cut off his horse’s tail, lifted it on a pole, made it the rallying ensign, and so gained the victory. So Tournefort in his Travels states. The following is Ferrario’s account of the origin of this ensign: “An author acquainted with their customs says, that a general of theirs, not knowing how to rally his troops that had lost their standards, cut off a horse’s tail, and fixed it to the end of a spear; and the soldiers rallying at that signal, gained the victory.”

He adds further, that whereas “on his appointment a pasha of the three tails used to receive a drum and a standard, now for the drum there have been substituted three horses’ tails, tied at the end of a spear, round a gilded haft. One of the first officers of the palace presents him these three tails as a standard” (Elliott, vol. i. pp. 485, 486). This remarkable standard or ensign is found only among the Turks, and, if there was an intended reference to them, the symbol here would be the proper one to be adopted. The meaning of the passage where it is said that “their power is in their tails” would seem to be, that their tails were the symbol or emblem of their authority - as in fact the horse’s tail is in the appointment of a pasha. The image before the mind of John would seem to have been, that he saw the horses belching out fire and smoke, and, what was equally strange, he saw that their power of spreading desolation was connected with the tails of horses. Anyone looking on a body of cavalry with such banners or ensigns would be struck with this unusual and remarkable appearance, and would speak of their banners as concentrating and directing their power. The above engraving, representing the standard of a Turkish pasha, will illustrate the passage before us.

(11) the number slain, Rev 9:18. That is said to have been “the third part of men.” No one in reading the accounts of the wars of the Turks, and of the ravages which they have committed, would be likely to feel that this is an exaggeration. It is not necessary to suppose that it is literally accurate, but it is such a representation as would strike one in looking over the world, and contemplating the effect of their invasions. If the other specifications in the symbol are correct, there would be no hesitation in admitting the propriety of this.

(12) the time of the continuance of this power. This is a material, and a more difficult point. It is said Rev 9:15 to be “an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year”; that is, as explained, three hundred and ninety-one years, and the portion of a year indicated by the expression “an hour”; to wit, an additional twelfth or twenty-fourth part of a year. The question now is, whether, supposing the time to which this reaches to be the capture of Constantinople, and the consequent downfall of the Roman empire - the object, in view in this series of visions - in reckoning back from that period for 391 years, we should reach an epoch that would properly denote the moving forward of this power toward its final conquest; that is, whether there was any such marked epoch that, if the 391 years were added to it, it would reach the year of the conquest of Constantinople, 1453 a.d. The period that would be indicated by taking the number 391 from 1453 would be 1062 - and that is the time in which we are to look for the event referred to. This is on the supposition that the year consisted of 360 days, or twelve months of thirty days each. If, however, instead of this, we reckon 365 days and six hours, then the length of time would be found to amount to 396 years and 106 days.

This would make the time of the “loosening of the angels,” or the moving forward of this power, to be 1057 a.d. In the uncertainty on this point, and in the unsettled state of ancient chronology, it would, perhaps, be vain to hope for minute accuracy, and it is not reasonable to demand it of an interpreter. On any fair principle of interpretation it would be sufficient if at about one of these periods - 1062 a.d. or 1057 ad - there was found such a definite or strongly marked event as would indicate a movement of the hitherto restrained power toward the West. This is the real point, then, to be determined. Now, in a common work on chronology I find this record: “1055 a.d., Turks reduce Bagdad, and overturn the empire of the caliphs.” In a work still more important to our purpose (Gibbon, iv. 92, 93), under the date of 1055 a.d., I find a series of statements which will show the propriety of referring to that event as the one by which this power, so long restrained, was “let loose”; that is, was placed in such a state that its final conquest of the Eastern empire certainly followed.

The event was the union of the Turkish power with the caliphate in such a way that the sultan was regarded as “the temporal lieutenant of the vicar of the prophet.” Of this event Mr. Gibbon gives the following account. After mentioning the conversion of the Turks to the Moslem faith, and especially the zeal with which the son of Seljuk had embraced that faith, he proceeds to state the manner in which the Turkish sultan Togrul came in possession of Bagdad, and was invested With the high office of the “temporal lieutenant of the vicar of the prophet.” There were two caliphs, those of Bagdad and Egypt, and “the sublime character of the successor of the prophet” was “disputed” by them, iv. 93. Each of them became “solicitous to prove his title in the judgment of the strong though illiterate barbarians.” Mr. Gibbon then says, “Mahmoud the Gaznevide had declared himself in favor of the line of Abbas; and had treated with indignity the robe of honor which was presented by the Fatimite ambassador. Yet the ungrateful Hashemite had changed with the change of fortune; he applauded the victory of Zendecan, and named the Seljukian sultan his temporal vicegerent over the Moslem world. As Togrul executed and enlarged this important trust, he was called to the deliverance of the caliph Cayem, and obeyed the holy summons, which gave a new kingdom to his arms. In the palace of Bagdad the commander of the faithful still slumbered, a venerable phantom. His servant or master, the prince of the Bowides, could no longer protect him from the insolence of meaner tyrants; and the Euphrates and the Tigris were oppressed by the revolt of the Turkish and Arabian emirs.

The presence of a conqueror was implored as a blessing; and the transient mischiefs of fire and sword were excused as the sharp but salutary remedies which alone could restore the health of the republic. At the head of an irresistible force the sultan of Persia marched from Hamadan; the proud were crushed, the prostrate were spared; the prince of the Bowides disappeared; the heads of the most obstinate rebels were laid at the feet of Togrul; and he inflicted a lesson of obedience on the people of Mosul and Bagdad. After the chastisement of the guilty, and the restoration of peace, the royal shepherd accepted the reward of his labors; and a solemn comedy represented the triumph of religious prejudice over barbarian power. The Turkish sultan embarked on the Tigris, landed at the gate of Racca, and made his public entry on horseback. At the palace gate he respectfully dismounted, and walked on foot preceded by his emirs without arms.

The caliph was seated behind his black veil; the black garment of the Abbassides was cast over his shoulders, and he held in his hand the staff of the Apostle of God. The conqueror of the East kissed the ground, stood some time in a modest posture, and was led toward the throne by the vizier and an interpreter. After Togrul had seated himself on another throne, his commission was publicly read, which declared him the temporal lieutenant of the vicar of the prophet. He was successively invested with seven robes of honor, and presented with seven slaves, the natives of the seven climates of the Arabian empire. His mystic veil was perfumed with musk; two crowns were placed on his head; two scimetars were girded to his side, as the symbols of a double reign over the East and West. Their alliance was cemented by the marriage of Togrul’s sister with the successor of the prophet,” iv. 93, 94. This event, so described, was of sufficient importance, as constituting a union of the Turkish power with the Moslem faith, as making it practicable to move in their conquests toward the West, and as connected in its ultimate results with the downfall of the Eastern empire, to make it an epoch in the history of nations. In fact, it was the point which one would have particularly looked at, after describing the movements of the Saracens (Rev 9:1-11), as the next event that was to change the condition of the world.

Happily we have also the means of fixing the exact date of this event, so as to make it accord with singular accuracy with the period supposed to be referred to. The general time specified by Mr. Gibbon is 1055 a.d. This, according to the two methods referred to of determining the period embraced in the “hour, and day, and month, and year,” would reach, if the period were 391 years, to 1446 a.d.; if the other method were referred to, making it 396 years and 106 days to 1451 a.d., with 106 days added, within less than two years of the actual taking of Constantinople. But there is a more accurate calculation as to the time than the general one thus made. In vol. iv. 93 Mr. Gibbon makes this remark: “Twenty-five years after the death of Basil his successors were suddenly assaulted by an unknown race of barbarians, who united the Scythian valor with the fanaticism of new proselytes, and the art and riches of a powerful monarchy.”

He then proceeds (pp. 94ff) with an account of the invasions of the Turks. In vol. iii. 307 we have an account of the death of Basil. “In the sixty-eighth year of his age his martial spirit urged him to embark in person for a holy war against the Saracens of Sicily; he was prevented by death, and Basil, surnamed the slayer of the Bulgarians, was dismissed from the world, with the blessings of the clergy and the curses of the people.” This occurred 1025 a.d. “Twenty-five years” after this would make 1050 a.d. To this add the period here referred to, and we have respectively, as above, the years 1446 a.d., or 1451 a.d., and 106 days. Both periods are near the time of the taking of Constantinople and the downfall of the Eastern empire (1453 a.d.), and the latter strikingly so; and, considering the general nature of the statement of Mr. Gibbon, and the great indefiniteness of the dates in chronology, may be considered as remarkable. - But we have the means of a still more accurate calculation.

It is by determining the exact period of the investiture of Togrul with the authority of caliph, or as the “temporal lieutenant of the vicar of the prophet.” The time of this investiture, or coronation, is mentioned by Abulfeda as occurring on the 25th of Dzoulcad, in the year of the Hegira 449; and the date of Elmakin’s narrative, who has given an account of this, perfectly agrees with this. Of this transaction Elmakin makes the following remark: “There was now none left in Irak or Chorasmia who could stand before him.” The importance of this investiture will be seen from the charge which the caliph is reported by Abulfeda to have given to Togrul on this occasion: “The caliph commits to your care all that part of the world which God has committed to his care and dominion; and entrusts to thee, under the name of vicegerent, the guardianship of the pious, faithful, and God-serving citizens.” The exact time of this investiture is stated by Abulfeda, as above, to be the 25th of Dzoulcad, A.H. 449.

Now, reckoning this as the time, and we have the following result: The 25th of Dzoulcad, A.H. 449, would answer to February 2, 1058 a.d. From this to May 29, 1453, the time when Constantinople was taken, would be 395 years and 116 days. The prophetic period, as above, is 396 years and 106 days - making a difference only of 1 year and 10 days - a result that cannot but be considered as remarkable, considering the difficulty of fixing ancient dates. Or if, with Mr. Elliott (i. 495-499), we suppose that the time is to be reckoned from the period when the Turkman power went forth from Bagdad on a career of conquest, the reckoning should be from the year of the Hegira 448, the year before the formal investiture, then this would make a difference of only 24 days. The date of that event was the 10th of Dzoulcad, A.H. 448. That was the day in which Togrul with his Turkmans, now the representative and head of the power of Islamism, quitted Bagdad to enter on a long career of war and conquest. “The part allotted to Togrul himself in the fearful drama soon to open against the Greeks was to extend and establish the Turkman dominion over the frontier countries of Irak and Mesopotamia, that so the requisite strength might be attained for the attack ordained of God’s counsels against the Greek empire. The first step to this was the siege and capture of Moussul; his next of Singara. Nisibis, too, was visited by him; that frontier fortress that had in other days been so long a bulwark to the Greeks. Everywhere victory attended his banner - a presage of what was to follow.”

Reckoning from that time, the coincidence between the period that elapsed from that, and the conquest of Constantinople, would be 396 years and 130 days - a period that corresponds, with only a difference of 24 days, with that specified in the prophecy according to the explanation already given. It could not be expected that a coincidence more accurate than this could be made out on the supposition that the prophecy was designed to refer to these events; and if it did refer to them, the coincidence could have occurred only as a prediction by Him who sees with perfect accuracy all the future.

(13) The effect. This is stated, in Rev 9:20-21, to be that those who survived these plagues did not repent of their wickedness, but that the abominations which existed before still remained. In endeavoring to determine the meaning of this, it will be proper, first, to ascertain the exact sense of the words used, and then to inquire whether a state of things existed subsequent to the invasions of the Turks which corresponded with the description here:

(a) The explanation of the language used in Rev 9:20-21.

The rest of the men - That portion of the world on which these plagues did not come. One third of the race, it is said, would fall under these calamities, and the writer now proceeds to state what would be the effect on the remainder. The language used - “the rest of the people” - is not such as to designate with certainty any particular portion of the world, but it is implied that the things mentioned were of very general prevalence.

Which were not killed by these plagues - The two-thirds of the race which were spared. The language here is such as would be used on the supposition that the crimes here referred to abounded in all those regions which came within the range of the vision of the apostle.

Yet repented not of the works of their hands - To wit, of those things which are immediately specified.

That they should not worship devils - Implying that they practiced this before. The word used here - δαιμόνιον daimonion - means properly “a god, deity”; spoken of the pagan gods, Act 17:18; then a genius, or tutelary demon, e. g., that of Socrates; and, in the New Testament, a demon in the sense of an evil spirit. See the word fully explained in the notes on 1Co 10:20. The meaning of the passage here, as in 1Co 10:20, “they sacrifice to devils,” is not that they literally worshipped devils in the usual sense of that term, though it is true that such worship does exist in the world, as among the Yezidis (see Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, vol. i. pp. 225-254, and Rosenmuller, Morgenland, iii. 212-216); but that they worshipped beings which were inferior to the Supreme God; created spirits of a rank superior to human beings, or the spirits of people that had been enrolled among the gods. This last was a common form of worship among the pagan, for a large portion of the gods whom they adored were heroes and benefactors who had been enrolled among the gods - as Hercules, Bacchus, etc. All that is necessarily implied in this word is, that there prevailed in the time referred to the worship of spirits inferior to God, or the worship of the spirits of departed people. This idea would be more naturally suggested to the mind of a Greek by the use of the word than the worship of evil spirits as such - if indeed it would have conveyed that idea at all; and this word would be properly employed in the representation if there was any homage rendered to departed human spirits which came in the place of the worship of the true God. Compare a dissertation on the meaning of the word used here, in Elliott on the Apocalypse, Appendix I. vol. ii.

And idols of gold, and silver, ... - Idols were formerly, as they are now in pagan lands, made of all these materials. The most costly would, of course, denote a higher degree of veneration for the god, or greater wealth in the worshipper, and all would be employed as symbols or representatives of the gods whom they adored. The meaning of this passage is, that there would prevail, at that time, what would be properly called idolatry, and that this would be represented by the worship paid to these images or idols. It is not necessary to the proper understanding of this, to suppose that the images or idols worshipped were acknowledged pagan idols, or were erected in honor of pagan gods, as such. All that is implied is, that there would be such images - εἴδωλα eidōla - and that a degree of homage would be paid to them which would be in fact idolatry. The word used here - εἴδωλον eidōlon, εἴδωλα eidōla - properly means an image, spectre, shade; then an idol-image, or what was a representative of a pagan god; and then the idol-god itself - a pagan deity. So far as the word is concerned, it may be applied to any kind of image-worship.

Which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk - The common representation of idol-worship in the Scriptures, to denote its folly and stupidity. See Ps. 115; compare Isa 44:9-19.

Neither repented they of their murders - This implies that, at the time referred to, murders would abound; or that the times would be characterized by what deserved to be called murder.

Nor of their sorceries - The word rendered “sorceries” - φαρμακεία pharmakeia - whence our word “pharmacy,” means properly “the preparing and giving of medicine,” Eng. “pharmacy” (Robinson’s Lexicon). Then, as the art of medicine was supposed to have magical power, or as the persons who practiced medicine, in order to give themselves and their art greater importance, practiced various arts of incantation, the word came to be connected with the idea of magic sorcery, or enchantment. See Schleusner, Lexicon. In the New Testament the word is never used in a good sense, as denoting the preparation of medicine, but always in this secondary sense, as denoting sorcery, magic, etc. Thus, in Gal 5:20, “the works of the flesh - idolatry, witchcraft,” etc. Rev 9:21, “of their sorceries.” Rev 18:23, “for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.” Rev 21:8, “Whoremongers, and sorcerers.” The word does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament; and the meaning of the word would be fulfilled in anything that purposed to accomplish an object by sorcery, by magical arts, by trick, by cunning, by sleight of hand, or “by deceiving the senses in any way.” Thus, it would be applicable to all jugglery and to all pretended miracles.

Nor of their fornication - Implying that this would be a prevalent sin in the times referred to, and that the dreadful plagues which are here predicted would make no essential change in reference to its prevalence.

Nor of their thefts - Implying that this, too, would be a common form of iniquity. The word used here - κλέμμα klemma - is the common word to denote theft. The true idea in the word is that of privately, unlawfully, and feloniously taking the goods or movables of another person. In a larger and in the popular sense, however, this word might embrace all acts of taking the property of another by dishonest arts, or on false pretence, or without an equivalent.

(b) The next point then is, the inquiry whether there was any such state of things as is specified here existing in the time of the rise of the Turkish power, and in the time of the calamities which that formidable power brought upon the world. There are two things implied in the statement here:

(1)That these things had an existence before the invasion and destruction of the Eastern empire by the Turkish power; and,

(2)That they continued to exist after that, or were not removed by these fearful calamities.

The supposition all along in this interpretation is, that the eye of the prophet was on the Roman world, and that the design was to mark the various events which would characterize its future history. We look, then, in the application of this, to the state of things existing in connection with the Roman power, or that portion of the world which was then pervaded by the Roman religion. This will make it necessary to institute an inquiry whether the things here specified prevailed in that part of the world before the invasions of the Turks, and the conquest of Constantinople, and whether the judgments inflicted by that formidable Turkish invasion made any essential change in this respect:

(1) The statement that they worshipped devils; that is, as explained, demons, or the deified souls of people. Homage rendered to the spirits of departed people, and substituted in the place of the worship of the true God, would meet all that is properly implied here. We may refer, then, to the worship of saints in the Roman Catholic communion as a complete fulfillment of what is here implied in the language used by John. The fact cannot be disputed that the invocation of saints took the place, in the Roman Catholic communion, of the worship of sages and heroes in pagan Rome, and that the canonization of saints took the place of the ancient deification of heroes and public benefactors. The same kind of homage was rendered to them; their aid was invoked in a similar manner, and on similar occasions; the effect on the popular mind was substantially the same; and the one interfered as really as the other with the worship of the true God. The decrees of the seventh general council, known as the second council of Nice, 787 a.d., authorized and established the worshipping (προσκυνέω proskuneō - the same word used here - προσκυνήσωσι τὰ δαιμόνια proskunēsōsi ta daimonia) of the saints and their images.

This occurred after the exciting scenes, the debates, and the disorders produced by the Iconoclasts, or image-breakers, and after the most careful deliberation on the subject. In that celebrated council it was decreed, according to Mr. Gibbon (iii. 341), “unanimously,” “that the worship of images is agreeable to Scripture and reason, to the fathers and councils of the church; but they hesitate whether that worship be relative or direct; whether the Godhead and the figure of Christ be entitled to the same mode of adoration.” This worship of the “saints,” or prayer to the saints, asking for their intercession, it is well known, has from that time everywhere prevailed in the papal communion. Indeed, a large part of the actual prayers offered in their services is addressed to the Virgin Mary. Mr. Maitland, “the able and learned advocate of the Dark Ages,” says, “The superstition of the age supposed the glorified saint to know what was going on in the world; and to feel a deep interest, and to possess a considerable power, in the church militant on earth. I believe that they who thought so are altogether mistaken; and I lament, abhor, and am amazed at the superstition, blasphemies, and idolatries, which have grown out of that opinion” (Elliott, ii. p. 10).

As to the question whether this continued after the judgments brought upon the world by the hordes “loosed on the Euphrates,” or whether they repented and reformed on account of the judgments, we have only to look into the Roman Catholic religion everywhere. Not only did the old practice of “daemonolatry,” or the worship of departed saints, continue, but new “saints” have been added to the number, and the list of those who are to receive this homage has been continually increasing. Thus, in the year 1460, Catharine of Sienna was canonized by Pope Pius II; in 1482, Bonaventura; the blasphemer, by Sixtus IV; in 1494, Anselm by Alexander VI. Alexander’s bull, in language more pagan than Christian, avows it to be the pope’s duty thus to choose out, and to hold up the illustrious dead, as their merits claim, for adoration and worship.

(2) The statement that idolatry was practiced, and continued to be practiced, after this invasion: “Repented not that they should not worship idols of gold, silver, and brass.” On this point, perhaps it would be sufficient to refer to what has been already noticed in regard to the homage paid to the souls of the departed; but it may be further and more clearly illustrated by a reference to the worship of images in the Roman Catholic communion. Anyone familiar with church history will recollect the long conflicts which prevailed respecting the worship of images; the establishment of images in the churches; the destruction of images by the “Iconoclasts”; and the debars on the subject by the council at Hiera; and the final decision in the second council of Nice, in which the propriety of image-worship was affirmed and established. See, on this subject, Bowers’ History of the Popes, ii. 98ff, 144ff; Gibbon, vol. iii. pp. 322-341.

The importance of the question respecting image-worship may be seen from the remarks of Mr. Gibbon, iii. 322. He speaks of it as “a question of popular superstition which produced the revolt of Italy, the temporal power of the popes, and the restoration of the Roman empire in the West.” A few extracts from Mr. Gibbon - who may be regarded as an impartial witness on this subject - will show what was the popular belief, and will confirm what is said in the passage before us in reference to the prevalence of idolatry. “The first introduction of a symbolic worship was in the veneration of the cross, and of relics. The saints and martyrs, when intercession was implored, were seated on the right hand of God; but the gracious, and often supernatural favors, which, in the popular belief, were showered round their tombs, conveyed an unquestionable sanction of the devout pilgrims who visited, and touched, and kissed these lifeless remains, the memorials of their merits and sufferings. But a memorial, more interesting than the skull or the sandals of a departed worthy, is a faithful copy of his person and features delineated by the arts of painting or sculpture. In every age such copies, so congenial to human feelings, have been cherished by the zeal of private friendship or public esteem; the images of the Roman emperors were adored with civil and almost religious honors; a reverence, less ostentatious, but more sincere, was applied to the statues of sages and patriots; and these profane virtues, these splendid sins, disappeared in the presence of the holy people who had died for their celestial and everlasting country.

At first the experiment was made with caution and scruple, and the venerable pictures were discreetly allowed to instruct the ignorant, to awaken the cold, and to gratify the prejudices of the pagan proselytes. By a slow, though inevitable progression, the honors of the original were transferred to the copy; the devout Christian prayed before the image of a saint, and the pagan rites of genuflexion, luminaries, and incense again stole into the Catholic Church. The scruples of reason or piety were silenced by the strong evidence of visions and miracles; and the pictures which speak, and move, and bleed, must be endowed with a divine energy, and may be considered as the proper objects of religious adoration. The most audacious pencil might tremble in the rash attempt of defining, by forms and colors, the infinite Spirit, the eternal Father, who pervades and sustains the universe. But the superstitious mind was more easily reconciled to paint and worship the angels, and above all, the Son of God, under the human shape, which on earth they have condescended to assume.

The Second Person of the Trinity had been clothed with a real and mortal body, but that body had ascended into heaven; and had not some similitude been presented to the eyes of his disciples, the spiritual worship of Christ might have been obliterated by the visible relies and representations of the saints. A similar indulgence was requisite, and propitious, for the Virgin Mary; the place of her burial was unknown; and the assumption of her soul and body into heaven was adopted by the credulity of the Greeks and Latins. The use, and even the worship of images, was firmly established before the end of the sixth century; they were fondly cherished by the warm imagination of the Greeks and Asiatics; the Pantheon and the Vatican were adorned with the emblems of a new superstition; but this semblance of idolatry was more coldly entertained by the rude barbarians and the Arian clergy of the West,” vol. iii. p. 323.

Again: “Before the end of the sixth century these images, made without hands (in Greek it is a single word - ἀχειροποίητος acheiropoiētos), were propagated in the camps and cities of the Eastern empire; they were the objects of worship, and the instruments of miracles; and in the hour of dangler or tumult their venerable presence could revive the hope, rekindle the courage, or repress the fury of the Roman legions,” vol. iii. pp. 324, 325. So again (vol. iii. pp. 340ff): - “While the popes established in Italy their freedom and dominion, the images, the first cause of their revolt, were restored in the Eastern empire. Under the reign of Constantine the Fifth, the union of civil and ecclesiastical power had overthrown the tree, without extirpating the root, of superstition. The idols, for such they were now held, were secretly cherished by the order and the sex most prone to devotion; and the fond alliance of the monks and females obtained a final victory over the reason and the authority of man.”

Under Irene a council was convened - the second council of Nice, or the seventh general council - in which, according to Mr. Gibbon (iii. 341), it was “unanimously pronounced that the worship of images is agreeable to Scripture and reason, to the fathers and councils of the church.” The arguments which were urged in favor of the worship of images, in the council above referred to, may be seen in Bowers’ Lives of the Popes, vol. ii. pp. 152-158, Dr. Cox’s edition. The answer of the bishops in the council to the question of the empress Irene, whether they agreed to the decision which had been adopted in the council, was in these words: “We all agree to it; we have all freely signed it; this is the faith of the apostles, of the fathers, and of the Catholic church; we all salute, honor, worship, and adore the holy and venerable images; be they accursed who do not honor, worship, and adore the adorable images” (Bowers’ Lives of the Popes, ii. 159). As a matter of fact, therefore, no one can doubt that these images were worshipped with the honor that was due to God alone - or that the sin of idolatry prevailed; and no one can doubt that that has been continued, and is still, in the papal communion.

(3) The next point specified is murders Rev 9:21; “Neither repented they of their murders.” It can hardly be necessary to dwell on this to show that this was strictly applicable to the Roman power, and extensively prevailed, both before and after the Turkish invasion, and that that invasion had no tendency to produce repentance. Indeed, in nothing has the papacy been more remarkably characterized than in the number of murders perpetrated on the innocent in persecution. In reference to the fulfillment of this we may refer to the following things:

(a) Persecution. This has been particularly the characteristic of the Roman communion, it need not be said, in all ages. The persecutions of the Waldenses, if there were nothing else, show that the spirit here referred to prevailed in the Roman communion, or that the times preceding the Turkish conquest were characterized by what is here specified. In the third Lateran council, 1179 a.d., an anathema was declared against certain dissentients and heretics, and then against the Waldenses themselves in papal bulls of the years 1183, 1207, 1208. Again, in a decree of the fourth Lateran council, 1215 a.d., a crusade, as it was called, was proclaimed against them, and “plenary absolution promised to such as should perish in the holy war, from the day of their birth to the day of their death.” “And never,” says Sismondi, “had the cross been taken up with more unanimous consent.” It is supposed that in this crusade against the Waldenses a million people perished.

(b) That this continued to be the characteristic of the papacy after the judgments brought upon the Roman world by the Turkish invasion, or that those judgments had no tendency to produce repentance and reformation, is well known, and is manifest from the following things:

(1) The continuance of the spirit of persecution.

(2) The establishment of the Inquisition. 150,000 persons perished by the Inquisition in thirty years; and from the beginning of the order of the Jesuits in 1540 to 1580, it is supposed that nine hundred thousand persons were destroyed by persecution.

(3) The same spirit was manifested in the attempts to suppress the true religion in England, in Bohemia, and in the Low Countries. Fifty thousand persons were hanged, burned, beheaded, or buried alive, for the crime of heresy, in the Low Countries, chiefly under the Duke of Alva, from the edict of Charles V against the Protestants to the peace of Chateau Cambresis in 1559. Compare the notes on Dan 7:24-28. To these are to be added all that fell in France on the revocation of the edict of Nantz; all that perished by persecution in England in the days of Mary; and all that have fallen in the bloody wars that have been waged in the propagation of the papal religion. The number is, of course, unknown to mortals, though efforts have been made by historians to form some estimate of the amount. It is supposed that fifty million of persons have perished in these persecutions of the Waldenses, Albigenses, Bohemian Brethren, Wycliffites, and Protestants; that some fifteen million of Indians perished in Cuba, Mexico, and South America, in the wars of the Spaniards, professedly to propagate the Catholic faith; that three million and a half of Moors and Jews perished, by Catholic persecution and arms, in Spain; and that thus, probably no less than sixty-eight million and five hundred thousand human beings have been put to death by this one persecuting power. See Dr. Berg’s Lectures on Romanism, pp. 6, 7. Assuredly, if this be true, it would be proper to characterize the times here referred to, both before and after the Turkish invasion, as a time when murders would prevail.

(4) The fourth point specified is sorceries. It can hardly be necessary to go into detail to prove that this also abounded; and that delusive appeals to the senses; false and pretended miracles; arts adapted to deceive through the imagination; the supposed virtue and efficacy of relics; and frauds calculated to impose on mankind, have characterized those portions of the world where the Roman religion has prevailed, and been one of the principal means of its advancement. No Protestant surely would deny this, no intelligent Catholic can doubt it himself. All that is necessary to be said in regard to this is, that in this, as in other respects, the Turkish invasion, and the judgments that came upon the world, made no change. The very recent imposture of the “holy coat of Treves” is a full proof that the disposition to practice such arts still exists, and that the power to impose on a large portion of the world in that denomination has not died away.

(5) The fifth thing specified is fornication. This has abounded everywhere in the world; but the use of the term in this connection implies that there would be something special here, and perhaps that it would be associated with the other things referred to. It is as unnecessary as it would be improper to go into any detail on this point. Anyone who is acquainted with the history of the Middle Ages - the period here supposed to be referred to - must be aware of the widespread licentiousness which then prevailed, especially among the clergy. Historians and poets, ballads, and acts of councils, alike testify to this fact. It is to be remarked also, as illustrating the subject, that the dissoluteness of the Middle Ages was closely, and almost necessarily, connected with the worship of the images and the saints above referred to.

The character of many of those who were Worshipped as saints, like the character of many of the gods of the pagan Romans, was just such as to be an incentive to every species of licentiousness and impurity. On this point Mr. Hallam makes the following remarks: “That the exclusive worship of saints, under the guidance of an artful though illiterate priesthood, degraded the understanding, and begat a stupid credulity and fanaticism, is sufficiently evident. But it was also so managed as to loosen the bonds of religion, and pervert the standard of morality” (Middle Ages, vol. ii. pp. 249, 250; edit. Phil. 1824). He then, in a note, refers to the legends of the saints as abundantly confirming his statements. See particularly the stories in the Golden Legend. So, in speaking of the monastic orders, Mr. Hallam (Middle Ages, vol. ii. 253) says: “In vain new rules of discipline were devised, or the old corrected by reforms. Many of their worst vices grew so naturally out of their mode of life that a stricter discipline would have no tendency to extirpate them. Their extreme licentiousness was sometimes hardly concealed by the cowl of sanctity.”

In illustration of this we may introduce here a remark of Mr. Gibbon, made in immediate connection with his statement about the decrees respecting the worship of images. “I shall only notice,” says he, “the judgment of the bishops on the comparative merit of image-worship and morality. A monk had concluded a truce with the demon of fornication, on condition of interrupting his daily prayers to a picture that hung in his cell. His scruples prompted him to consult the abbot. ‘Rather than abstain from adoring Christ and his mother in their holy images, it would be better for you,’ replied the casuist, ‘to enter every brothel, and visit every prostitute in the city,’” iii. 341. So again, Mr. Gibbon, speaking of the pope, John XII., says: “His open simony might be the consequence of distress; and his blasphemous invocation of Jupiter and Venus, if it be true, could not possibly be serious. But we read with some surprise that the worthy grandson of Marozia lived in public adultery with the matrons of Rome; that the Lateran palace was turned into a place for prostitution, and that his rapes (if virgins and of widows had deterred the female pilgrims from visiting the tomb of Peter, lest, in the devout act, they should be violated by his successor,” iii. 353. Again, the system of indulgences led directly to licentiousness. In the pontificate of John XXII, about 1320 a.d., there was invented the celebrated Tax of Indulgences, of which more than forty editions are extant. According to this, incest was to cost, if not detected, five groschen; if known and flagrant, six. A certain price was affixed in a similar way to adultery, infanticide, etc. See Merle D’Aubigne’s Reformation, vol. i. p. 41. And further, the very pilgrimages to the shrines of the saints, which were enjoined as a penance for sin, and which were regarded as a ground of merit, were occasions of the grossest licentiousness.

So Hallam, Middle Ages, says: “This licensed vagrancy was naturally productive of dissoluteness, especially among the women. Our English ladies, in their zeal to obtain the spiritual treasuries of Rome, are said to have relaxed the necessary caution about one that was in their own custody,” vol. ii. 255. The celibacy of the clergy also tended to licentiousness, and is known to have been everywhere productive of the very sin which is mentioned here. The state of the nunneries in the middle ages is well known. In the fifteenth century Gerson, the French orator so celebrated at the council of Constance, called them Prostibula meretricum. Clemangis, a French theologian, also contemporary, and a man of great eminence, thus speaks of them: Quid aliud sunt hoc tempore puellarum monasteria, nisi quaedam non dico Dei sanctuaria, sed veneris execranda prostibula; ut idem sit hodie puellam velare, quod et publice a.d. scortandum exponere (Hallam, Middle Ages, ii. 253). To this we may add the fact that it was a habit, not infrequent, to license the clergy to live in concubinage (see the proof in Elliott, i. 447, note), and that the practice of auricular confession necessarily made “the tainting of the female mind an integral part of Roman priest-craft, and gave consecration to the communings of impurity.” It hardly needs any proof that these practices continued after the invasions of the Turkish hordes, or that those invasions made no changes in the condition of the world in this respect. In proof of this we need refer only to Pope Innocent VIII, elected in 1484 to the papacy.

His character is told in the well-known epigram:

Octo nocens pueros genuit, totidemque puellas;

Hunc merito potuit dicere Roma patrem.

It was to Alexander VI, his successor, who at the close of the fifteenth century stood before the world a monster, notorious to all, of impurity and vice; and to the general well-known character of the Roman Catholic clergy. “Most of the ecclesiastics,” says the historian Infessura, “had their mistresses; and all the convents of the capital were houses of ill fame.”

(6) The sixth thing specified Rev 9:21 is thefts; that is, as explained, the taking of the property of others by dishonest arts, on false pretences, or without any proper equivalent. In the inquiry as to the applicability of this to the times supposed to be here referred to, we may notice the following things, as instances in which money was extorted from the people:

(a) The value fraudulently assigned to relics. Mosheim, in his historical sketch of the twelfth century, observes: “The abbots and monks carried about the country the carcasses and relics of saints, in solemn procession, and permitted the multitude to behold, touch, and embrace the sacred remains, at fixed prices.”

(b) The exaltation of the miracle-working merit of particular saints, and the consecration of new saints, and dedication of new images, when the popularity of the former died away. Thus, Mr. Hallam says: “Every cathedral or monastery had its tutelar saint, and every saint his legend; fabricated in order to enrich the churches under his protection; by exaggerating his virtues and his miracles, and consequently his power of serving those who paid liberally for his patronage.”

(c) The invention and sale of indulgences - well known to have been a vast source of revenue to the church. Wycliffe declared that indulgences were mere forgeries whereby the priesthood “rob people of their money; a subtle merchandise of Antichrist’s clerks, whereby they magnify their own fictitious power, and instead of causing people to dread sin, encourage people to wallow therein as hogs.”

(d) The prescription of pilgrimages as penances was another prolific source of gain to the church that deserves to be classed under the name of thefts. Those who made such pilgrimage were expected and required to make an offering at the shrine of the saint; and as multitudes went on such pilgrimages, especially on the jubilee at Rome, the income from this source was enormous. An instance of what was offered at the shrine of Thomas Becket will illustrate this. Through his reputation Canterbury became the Rome of England. A jubilee was celebrated every fiftieth year to his honor, with plenary indulgence to all such as visited his tomb; of whom one hundred thousand were registered at one time. Two large volumes were filled with accounts of the miracles performed at his tomb. The following list of the value of offerings made in two successive years to his shrine, the Virgin Mary’s, and Christ’s, in the cathedral at Canterbury, will illustrate at the same time the gain from these sources, and the relative respect shown to Becket, Mary, and the Saviour

First Year

British shillings

d.

pounds

Christ’s Altar

3

2

6

Virgin Mary’s

63

5

6

Becket’s

832

12

9

Next Year

Christ’s Altar

0

0

0

Virgin Mary’s

4

1

8

Becket’s

954

6

3

Of the jubilee of 1300 a.d. Muratori relates the result as follows: “Papa innumerabilem pecuniam ab iisdem recepit; quia die et nocte duo elerici stabant a.d. altare Sancti Pauli, tenentes in eorum manibus rastellos, rastellantes pecuniam infinitam. ” “The pope received from them a countless amount of money; for two clerks stood at the altar of Paul night and day, holding in their hands little rakes, collecting an infinite amount of money” (Hallam).

(e) Another source of gain of this kind was the numerous testamentary bequests with which the church was enriched obtained by the arts and influence of the clergy. In Wycliffe’s time there were in England 53,215 faeda milltum, of which the religious had 28,000 - more than one-half. Blackstone says that, but for the intervention of the legislature, and the statute of mortmain, the church would have appropriated in this manner the whole of the land of England, vol. 4, p. 107.

(f) The money left by the dying to pay for masses, and that paid by survivors for masses to release the souls of their friends from purgatory all of which deserve to be classed under the word “thefts” as already explained - was another source of vast wealth to the church; and the practice was systematized on a large scale, and, with the other things mentioned, deserves to be noticed as a characteristic of the times. It is scarcely necessary to add, that the judgments which were brought upon the world by the Turkish invasions made no essential change, and worked no repentance or reformation, and hence that the language here is strictly applicable to these things: “Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.”

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Rev 9:20-21. And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues — That is, the Latin Church, which pretty well escaped these calamities; yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils — Daimonia, demons, or second mediatory gods, as it hath largely been shown before, saints and angels; and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and wood — From hence it is evident, that those calamities were inflicted upon the Christians for their idolatries. As the eastern churches were first in the crime, so they were first likewise in the punishment. At first they were visited by the plague of the Saracens, but this working no change or reformation, they were again chastised by the still greater plague of the Othmans; were partly overthrown by the former, and were entirely ruined by the latter. What churches were then remaining, which were guilty of the like idolatry, but the western, or those in communion with Rome? And the western were not at all reclaimed by the ruin of the eastern, but persisted still in the worship of saints and (what is worse) the worship of images, which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk — And the world is witness to the completion of this prophecy to this day. Neither repented they of their murders — Their persecutions and inquisitions; nor of their sorceries — Their pretended miracles and revelations; nor of their fornications — Their public stews and uncleanness; nor of their thefts — Their exactions and impositions on mankind: and they are as notorious for their licentiousness and wickedness, as for their superstition and idolatry. As they therefore refused to take warning by the two former woes, the third wo, as we shall see, will fall with vengeance upon them.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

9:20-21 Even when humans are faced with plagues and death, repentance is not automatic. People tend to continue in their evil deeds and to worship demons and idols—things that belong to the created order—rather than worshiping the Creator (see 13:4; 14:9-10; Rom 1:25; 1 Cor 8:4; 10:19-22). • murders . . . witchcraft . . . immorality . . . thefts: What people worship parallels the ways in which they live (see Rev 21:8; 22:15; Rom 1:23, 29-32). • Revelation portrays the extent to which depravity controls unbelievers. It is not logical for people to worship powers and beings that torture and kill them; the powers of sin and rebellion against God are deceptively captivating.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Rev 9:20-21. Οὔτε—καὶ οὐ) A Predicate of two members—in Latin, neque, neque (neither, nor). There are similar particles, Joh 4:11; 3 John Rev 9:10; Mar 5:3-4. [Their repentance had been the aim of the plagues.—V. g.]—τὰ εἴδωλα, idols) The worship of images was solemnly established in the East, A. 842.—τῆς πορνείας) The plural, πορνεῖαι, is used, 1Co 7:2; and yet in this place the singular number is placed between plurals. Other acts of wickedness are performed by men at intervals: there is one perpetual πορνεία in the case of those who are without purity of heart.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rev_9:20 sq. The plagues that have been introduced cause no repentance in the survivors.[2670]

οἱ λοιποὶ τ. ἀνθρ. The contextual reference to Rev_9:18 is yet expressly marked: οῖ οὐκ ἀπεκτ. ἐν τ. πληγ. ταύτ. As the ἐκ is meant to limit the οὐ μετενόησαν, the final clause, ἵνα μὴ, κ.τ.λ.,[2671] is explained: they repented not of the works of their hands, in order not (any more) to worship, etc. The μετανοεῖν ἐκ τ. ἔργ. τ. χειρ. αὐτ. would have as its intention the ceasing henceforth the προσκυνεῖν, κ.τ.λ. But by the words ἵνα μὴ προσκ., κ.τ.λ., not only is the pregnancy of the clause μεταν. ἐκ τ. ἔργων τ. χειρ. αὐτ., which in itself is readily intelligible, explained, but an authentic interpretation is also given to the expression τ. ἔργ. τ. χειρ. αὐτ., which it is here impossible to designate as the entire course of life,[2672]which by no means follows from Rev_2:22, Rev_16:11, since there the characteristic τῶν χειρῶν αὐτ. is lacking,but just as Act_7:41, in connection with O. T. passages like Deu_4:28, Psa_135:15 sqq., must designate idols made with their own hands.[2673] It is, indeed, to be observed, that not only the expression τ. ἔργ. τ. χειρ. αὐτ. in itself, but also the allusion to the material whence human hands have fashioned the idols, and to their blindness and dumbness, refer to O. T. descriptions. But that the discourse is first in general concerning the works of mens hands, and that then a more minute presentation follows (ἵνα μὴ προσκ., κ.τ.λ.), contains what is objectionable as little as the directly opposite order of Act_7:41.

τὰ δαιμόνια. Cf. 1Co_10:20. Bengel suffers here a peculiar embarrassment, because he regards the rest of men especially as so-called Christians, and then must give the explanation as to how far they worshipped devils. But he knows how to help himself. Notwithstanding the incursions of the Turks, he says that the Christians of that time retained the worship of images and of saints; and now there might be many among the worshipping saints who abode not in heaven, but in hell.

καὶ οὐ μετεν. The repetition is necessary, because the former οὐ μετεν., Rev_9:20, is already too remote to admit of a connection[2674] with what follows in Rev_9:21 (ἐκ τ. φόνων, κ.τ.λ.), but is entirely irrelevant for the more detailed explanation of the whole text.[2675] Concerning the sequence of the particles Οὐ, ΟὔΤΕ, ΟὔΤΕ, cf. Winer, p. 457.

ΦΑΡΜΑΚΕΙῶΝ. Sorceries, xviii. 23.[2676] Ebrard understands it symbolically of seductive enchantments. He reaches this conclusion, because in Rev_9:20 he finds sins against God; in Rev_9:21, sins against ones neighbor, while actual sorcery, as a sin against God, does not belong in Rev_9:21.[2677] But the established linguistic usage suits no arbitrary dispositions. It is also to be stated against those who have regarded the ΦΑΡΜΑΚ. in a certain combination with the preceding ΦΌΝΩΝ,[2678] or with the succeeding ΠΟΡΝΕΊΑς,[2679] that the very generally expressed idea of sorcery,the plural also should be observed,according to its nature, does not admit of a more specific determination, as the text itself does not give such.

Τῆς ΠΟΡΝΕΊΑς ΑὐΤ. The sing. designates all the particular forms of manifestation[2680] of the always same kind of sins. Beng. says appropriately: Other crimes are committed by men at intervals; ΠΟΡΝΕΊΑ alone is perpetual with those who are destitute of purity of heart.

The entire description of sins, Rev_9:20-21, which is to be comprehended in its unity, is manifestly directed to essentially heathenish godlessness, so that they of whom the third are killed, and two-thirds survive but are not converted, are to be regarded essentially as heathen.[2681] [See Note LXII., p. 294] It is the mass of the ΚΑΤΟΙΚΟῦΝΤΕς ἘΠῚ Τῆς Γῆς,[2682] in contrast with the sealed.[2683] From the fact that the latter are not affected by the plague of the sixth trumpet, it is to be inferred, according to the standard of Rev_9:4, that the armies in this vision, like the locusts of the fifth trumpet, are of a demoniacal kind.

[2670] Cf. Rev_16:11.

[2671] Cf. Winer, p. 428.

[2672] All the deeds of life (Ewald, De Wette, Ebrard).

[2673] Beng., Hengstenb.; also Ew. ii.

[2674] Ewald, etc.

[2675] Possibly as a designation of ἕργ. τ. χειρ αὐτ. (Rev_9:20), or a classification of sins.

[2676] Cf. Meyer on Gal_5:20.

[2677] Cf. also Hengstenb., who, besides, notes the ten sins against the first table (Rev_9:20)? and the four sins against the second table.

[2678] Hengstenb.

[2679] Ewald.

[2680] Cf. 1Co_7:2.

[2681] Cf. De Wette, etc.

[2682] Cf. Rev_6:10.

[2683] Cf. Rev_7:1 sqq.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rev 9:20-21 . The impenitence of the surviving two-thirds of men, who persist in worshipping daemons and idols (Weinel, 3, 4). Hellenic superstition (Plut. de defectu orac. 14) attributed to malignant daemons these very plagues of pestilence, war, and famine. Plutarch is always protesting against the excessive deference paid to such powers, and on the other hand against the rationalists and Christians who abjured them entirely.

δαιμ ., either the gods of paganism (LXX) or the evil spirits of contemporary superstition. In Enoch 19:1, the spirits of the fallen angels “assuming many forms defile men and shall lead them astray to offer sacrifices to demons as to gods”; cf. Enoch 46:7 (of the kings and rulers) “their power rests on their riches, and their faith is in the gods which they have made with their hands”. (See Clem. Strom , vi. ver 39, 4) ἀργυρᾶ , contracted form, as in 2Ti 2:20 (Helbing, pp. 34 f.). φαρμ ., here in special sense of magic spells inciting to illicit lust (Artemid. ver 73), a prevalent Asiatic vice ( cf. Greg. Naz. Orat. iv. 31). But in the imprecatory (c. 100 B.C.) inscription of Rheneia (Dittenberger, Syll. Inscript. Graec . pp. 676 f.), punishment is invoked from tov τὸν κύριον τῶν πνευμάτων ( cf. Rev 22:6 ) upon τοὺς δόλωι φονεύσαντας ἢ φαρμακεύσαντας the hapless girl. The three vices of the decalogue occur here (as in Matt.) in the Hebrew order, not in that of the LXX (Rom 13:9 ; Mar 10:19 ; Luk 18:20 ). cf. on Rev 21:8 , and, for the connexion of polytheism and vice, Harnack’s Mission and Exp. of Christianity , i. (1908), pp. 290 f. Repentance here (as in Rev 16:9 ; Rev 16:11 ) is primarily a change of religion, but the prophet has evidently little hope of the pagan world. There is no polemic against the Egyptian worship of animals, and, in spite of the Jewish outlook upon the dolores Messiae , the Apocalypse ignores family disturbances and false messiahs as harbingers of the end. Once more ( cf. Rev 7:1 f.) between the sixth (Rev 9:13-21 ) and the seventh (Rev 11:15-19 ) members of the series, a passage (this time of some length) is intercalated (Rev 10:1 to Rev 11:13 ), in which the personality of the seer now re-emerges (on earth, instead of in heaven). The object of Rev 10:1-11 is to mark at once a change of literary method and a transition from one topic to another. The passage, which certainly comes from the prophet’s own pen (so Sabatier, Schon, and others), looks backward and forward. Now that the preliminaries are over, all is ready for the introduction of the two protagonists (Rev 9:11-13 .) whose conflict forms the closing act of the world’s history (Rev 15:1 to Rev 20:10 ). One of these is Jesus, the divine messiah, who has hitherto (Rev 9:5-9 .) been depicted as the medium of revelation. Since his rôle is now to be more active, the prophet expressly alters the literary setting of his visions. The subsequent oracles are not represented as the contents of the book of Doom (which is now open, with the breaking of its last seal). Dropping that figure (contrast Rev 5:2 and Rev 10:1 ) the writer describes himself absorbing another roll of prophecy received from an angel. Evidently he intends to mark a new departure, and to introduce what follows as a fresh start. This new procedure is accompanied by an explicit assurance intended to whet the reader’s interest that the Apocalypse has now reached the verge of the final catastrophe; the prophet apparently makes this eagerness to reach the goal the reason for omitting a seven-thunders vision (or source) which otherwise he might have been expected to include either at this point or subsequently. It is quite in keeping with the wider outlook and rather more historical atmosphere of 11 f., that a freer and less numerical method pervades these oracles. In short, Rev 10:1-11 is a digression only in form. It serves to introduce not simply the Jewish fragment (Rev 11:1-13 ) whose strange contents probably required some express ratification but the rest of the oracles (13 f.), which are thus awkwardly but definitely connected with the foregoing design (through the closing trumpet-vision: Rev 10:7 = Rev 11:15 f.).

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Now remaineth the event (as I said upon the first verse) which followed of so many and so grievous judgments in the most wicked world: namely an impenitent affirmation of the ungodly in their impiety and unrighteousness, though they feel themselves most vehemently pressed with the hand of God: for their obstinate ungodliness is showed in this verse: and their unrighteousness in the verse following. Hitherto hath been the general history of things to be done universal in the whole world: which because it doth not so much belong to the Church of Christ, is therefore not so expressly distinguished by certainty of time and other circumstances, but is woven, as they say with a slight hand. Also there is none other cause why the history of the seventh Angel is passed over in this place, than for that the same more properly appertaineth unto the history of the Church. But this is more diligently set out according to the time thereof, Rev. 11 and 16, as shall appear upon those places.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

the rest of the men--that is, the ungodly.

yet--So A, Vulgate, Syriac, and Coptic. B and Aleph read, "did not even repent of," namely, so as to give up "the works," &c. Like Pharaoh hardening his heart against repentance notwithstanding the plagues.

of their hands-- (Deu 31:29). Especially the idols made by their hands. Compare Rev 13:14-15, "the image of the beast" Rev 19:20.

that they should not--So B reads. But A, C, and Aleph read "that they shall not": implying a prophecy of certainty that it shall be so.

devils--Greek, "demons" which lurk beneath the idols which idolaters worship.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 20. Yet repented not] The commission which these horsemen had was against idolaters; and though multitudes of them were destroyed, yet the residue continued their senseless attachment to dumb idols, and therefore heavier judgments might be expected. These things are supposed to refer to the desolation brought upon the Greek Church by the Ottomans, who entirely ruined that Church and the Greek empire. The Church which was then remaining was the Latin or western Church, which was not at all corrected by the judgments which fell upon the eastern Church, but continued its senseless adoration of angels, saints, relics, &c., and does so to the present day. If, therefore, God's wrath be kindled against such, this Church has much to fear.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(20, 21) And the rest . . .—Translate, And the rest of mankind who were not slain in these plagues did not even repent of (or, out of—i.e., so as to forsake) the works of their hands, that they should not worship the demons (evil spirits), and the idols of gold, and of silver, and of brass, and of stone, and of wood; which can neither see, nor hear, nor walk: and they did not repent of (or, out of) their murders, nor of (or, out of) their sorceries, nor out of their fornication, nor out of their thefts. These verses make one or two points clear. First, they show us that, whatever the nature of the plagues might be, they were afflictions designed to bring about repentance, and to rouse men, whether nominally Christian or not, from the lethargy into which long indulged sin had plunged them. Those terrible revolutions which are the growth of years, and which startle men with their apparent suddenness and violence, are the great appeals of God, asking men to see the meaning of sin; they are the trumpet blasts calling to repentance. But we are told more; the remainder of the godless did not repent. We are not, indeed, told that they did not feel terror, or remorse, or momentary qualms and misgivings, but that they did not show that which alone is regarded as genuine repentance, the repentance out of sin, the repentance which turns away from sin. We need always that wholesome caution. We need it most in times when hysterical and emotional religionism is fashionable, and it is forgotten that true repentance is a repentance whereby we forsake sins. These men repented not out of their sin. And their sins are enumerated, and the enumeration again takes us back to the history of Israel as to the historical basis which the sacred seer enlarged and vivified; for the sins are just those against which Israel was warned and into which Israel fell (Deu_4:28; Psa_106:34-40; Act_7:41). The sins are demon-worship and idolatry: “They served idols; they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils.” (Comp. 1Co_10:20; 1Ti_4:1.) It is needful to trace these sins in the history of Israel, as it has been argued that these are heathen sins, and that therefore these plagues must be plagues which fall on those who are literally heathens. But if we bear in mind that the series of visions describe features which will accompany the advance of Christianity in the world, we shall remember that it is against worldliness, wherever found, idolatries, of whatever kind, murders and thefts, called by whatever name, that the true genius of Christianity makes war. Christ is king, and king of righteousness, and in righteousness does He make war, and the heathenisms which are called Christianity are as much the objects of His displeasure as the most obvious Paganism. It is needful to remember that Jews are addressed as if they were heathen, aye, very habitues of Sodom (Isa_1:10), and that the Christian Church is warned against sins which are little else than idolatries. Covetousness, the very essence of worldliness, is by St. Paul twice over called idolatry (Col_3:5, and Eph_5:5). It seems, therefore, to be foreign to the purpose to try and limit these plagues only to the non-Christian world. To do this is to get a narrow, improbable (may we not say an impossible?) interpretation; for the greatest strength of the world-power would be left untouched. It is true that the visions are not showing us the plagues which fall on apostasy and fornication within the Church; but it is true that we are beholding visions which show how terribly the world-spirit avenges itself on all who harbour it, whether called Christian or not. Gross sins, gigantic frauds, complacent familiarity with crime, followed by blunted moral sense, are heathenish, whether found in Pagan or Christian society. Heavy woes must inevitably await the society which tolerates such works; but the worst omen of the coming doom is seen when society has lost the power to repent because it has lost the power to hate evil. Such an incapacity is invariably significant of advanced moral decay. It is the climax in the growth of sin which the Psalmist noticed where men lose the sacred abhorrence of evil (Psa_36:4). To such repentance is becoming impossible.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20. that they should not worship … idols] This verse gives us the only clue we have to the interpretation. It is a plague on idolaters that is here described—neither on unfaithful Christians, nor on antichristian infidels of a more refined type—unless the latter shall in the last days, as in the age of the Roman persecutions, and one may almost say of the Renaissance and Reformation, ally itself against the Gospel with the vulgar or sensuous idolatry which it was its natural tendency to despise.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And the rest of men which were not killed by these plagues,.... By whom are meant the western antichristian party; and such of them as were not plagued, harassed, and destroyed by the Turks, as in Germany, at least some parts of it, France, Spain, Italy, &c.

yet repented not of the works of their hands: their idols, their images of saints departed, which their hands had made; the goodness of God in saving them from the depredations of the Turks, should have led them to repentance for their idolatrous worship of images, but it did not:

that they should not worship devils; or demons, a sort of deities with the Heathens, that mediated between the superior gods and men; and here design angels and saints departed, which the Papists worship, and use as mediators of intercession for them; and this is no other than worshipping of devils, in God's account, and is downright idolatry, and the doctrine of it is the doctrine of devils:

and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood; which are the several materials of which the Popish images are made: and what aggravates the stupidity of the worshippers of these images, and of the persons represented by them, is, that these are such

which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk; can neither see their persons, nor hear their prayers, nor stir one foot to their help and assistance; see Psa 115:4.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

20 And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk:

Ver. 20. That they should not worship devils] As all idolaters do, 1Co 10:20. The devil is ειδωλοχαρης, saith Synesius, glad to be worshipped in an idol, as he was by Israel in a calf. And as he is still by the Papists, in their mawmets (idols) and monuments of idolatry. And whereas they say they worship not the image (much less the devil) but God; they are like Clodia the strumpet, who, to excuse her incest, said she did company with Metellus as a husband, but with Clodius as with a brother.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The rest of men, who were not slain by these plagues, which before are metaphorically called fire, smoke, and brimstone, did not for all that do penance, nor repent of their idolatrous worship of devils, and of idols of gold, silver, &c. nor for their sorceries of magic, nor for their fornication, nor for their thefts. This again may be either understood of what shall happen hereafter, a little before the end of the world (see Cornelius a Lapide); or perhaps of the Roman heathen idolaters, who still persisted in their iniquitous practices. Dr. Hammond expounds it of the Gnostic heretics. But to apply it to popish Christians, is a groundless invention of the late pretended reformers, neither supported by any authority or reason; (though Dr. W. is pleased to join with them) whereas all Catholics (and as he calls them, papists) have constantly declared in their controversies, in all their catechisms, that they adore none but God alone. Of this more hereafter. (Witham)

====================

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues; the two-thirds of men that should be left, for we read of one-third part destroyed; and this also must be understood of men dwelling in countries subject formerly to the Roman empire on this side of the Euphrates.

Yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils: this leaves this applicable to none but papists; for there are none else but them who worship demons, Greek, δαιμονια, or idols of gold and silver. By

devils are meant demons, that is, persons that are dead, whom the heathens made their petty gods, and worshipped as middle beings between them and the supreme gods, according to their notion; which is the same thing the papists are guilty of, with this only difference, (as Mr. Mede excellently observeth), that the heathens made many supreme gods, and these modern idolaters own but one in that notion, but as many deastri or demons as they did, which are all those saints to whom they pay an adoration, as to those who should present their desires to God, which, as Mr. Mede sufficiently proves from writers, was the very work the pagans allotted for those whom they canonized after death. From whence came the names of Baal and Bel, &c., but from Belus, who is said to have been the first prince, whom, being dead, they made a god, and adored? Which demons God in Scripture calleth devils. Nor do any but they now worship images, the works of men’s hands, made of

gold, silver, brass, and wood, who are here described in the same words as by the psalmist, Psa 115:4; 135:15. Notwithstanding God’s great judgment executed upon the Grecian churches, yet they repented not of their idolatry and superstition; so as God hath brought them wholly under the power of those barbarous enemies; and though the Romish party seeth this, yet neither do they repent; which may give them cause to fear that God should make use of the same adversary to destroy them likewise; especially considering that neither to this day do they repent.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

20. The rest—The two thirds of the profane world, not the sealed of God, (note Rev_9:4,) remained obdurate. War punishes and reduces the number of the wicked and brings them to subjection; but it rather demoralizes than reforms the incorrigible.

Repented not—Of their false religions in this verse; of their wicked practices in the next verse. The pagan adhered to his idols, the criminal to his crimes. Two classes of pagan thinkers are distinguished; those who worshipped the mere image, and those who worshipped the supposed deity it represented.

Devils—Demons, which in the Greek includes both good and bad spirits.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues; the rest of mankind (Revised Version). That is, the two thirds (ver. 18). Some understand "these plagues" to refer to the first six trumpets. It may be so, but it seems more correct to limit it to the sixth, as the same phrase, which occurs in ver. 18, must be so limited. Mankind must be taken to mean the worldly only. Of the ungodly, some are killed (the third part), the rest yet do not repent. The vision is not concerned with the fate of the righteous. Yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk. "The works of their hands" refers to idolatry, as shown by the succeeding words. This verse begins to prepare us for the seventh judgment. Men will not repent; therefore the last final judgment becomes necessary. The absurdity of idolatrous worship is frequently thus set forth by Old Testament writers. (cf. Psa_115:4 Psa_135:15 Isa_2:8 Eze_22:1, 4 Hos_13:2) See also the description in Dan_5:23 which seems to have suggested the wording of this part of the vision. It has been well remarked that in this verse mention is made of sins against God; in the following verse man"s sins against his neighbours are detailed.

HOMILIES BY S. CONWAY. Ver. 20. Man"s stubborn will.

"And the rest... yet repented not." The fatal obstinacy of wicked men, the dreadful hardness of the human heart, sin"s searing of the susceptibilities of the soul, such is the mournful fact that the text, repeated again in the next verse, as if to summon our special attention, vividly reveals. Implied or stated in it are such truths as these

I ALL MEN NEED REPENTANCE. The judgment fell only on some, but all deserved it; all had sinned, and all should have repented. When we see God"s judgment falling on any one, our reflection should be not, "How evil he must have been!" but "How merciful of God to spare me!

II GOD PLEADS WITH MEN TO BRING THEM TO REPENTANCE. These judgments of which we read are not God"s primary dealings with men. He does not begin in this manner. There has been much that has preceded this. God has pleaded with men by his Spirit in their consciences. By his goodness, giving them all manner of providential mercies. Then, more especially by his Word, delivered by revelation, through his messengers, etc. And in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, in the message of the gospel. Men always knew that their deeds were evil; the sense of sin was everywhere; and they knew that God would have them repent. And there were some who did, and therefore held aloof from the abominations of the rest. And since Christ has come the Divine pleadings have been more than ever heard.

III BUT THESE MILDER METHODS OFTEN FAIL. All history shows this, as well as the Bible, and our own experience confirms it. See our Saviour weeping over Jerusalem. That sorrow had been known before, and has been since.

IV STERNER METHODS ARE THEN TRIED. In these Apocalyptic visions we have portrayed over and over again these more awful means which God employs to bring men to repentance. In Israel"s history how often they were tried! and they often succeeded, as, blessed be God, they often succeed now. This is their purpose.

V BUT EVEN THESE, AT TIMES, AND FOR LONG TIME, FAIL. This is the declaration of our text. (cf. also Jer_5:3 Jer_8:6 Rom_2:4, Rom_2:5) So was it with Pharaoh, when the plagues one after another, which in many respects resembled these trumpet plagues, came upon him. The invariable effects of the Divine law, which ordains that sin persisted in becomes fixed habit which cannot be shaken off, and of which, therefore, the writer of the Book of Exodus says, "The Lord hardened Pharaoh"s heart; "this Divine law was illustrated in him. So again and again in Israel"s history, "until the wrath of the Lord arose against them, and there was no remedy." In men, too, like that wicked King Amon, of whom it is said, "But Amon sinned more and more." True, the psalmist says, "Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now have I kept thy Word." But though it might have been true of him, it is as often as not, if not more often, true that men go astray after affliction just as they did before. "Though thou bray a fool in a mortar, yet will not his folly depart from him." So, with equal, if not greater truth, does the proverb assert that opposite and most melancholy fact of which the Bible, all life, and our text here say so much. "God"s visitations pass lightly over souls asleep in sin. Which of us has not lived through a thousand of them, and never seen, never noticed, never given heed to, one? Death, sudden death, coming into our street, or into our home, which of us has not hardened his heart again, after a very brief pause, against lessons which this ought to teach, and sinned on as before? Oh the desperate hardness of the human heart! What can melt it save omnipotent grace?

VI WHAT IS THE REASON OF THIS? The answer is manifold, as, for example:

1. Those that are spared argue from that fact that they need not repent. The Jews thought that those on whom the tower of Siloam fell must indeed have been sinners. Our Lord told them that was not the case, and, said he, "Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish." And no doubt "the rest of mankind" told of in our text congratulated themselves, not only that they were spared, but that they did not deserve what had befallen the others. There was, therefore, no need for them to repent so would they argue, as do and have done their successors ever since.

2. Sin deadens belief in God. It makes men practical atheists. God, therefore, is not recognized in aught that occurs.

3. God"s judgments are put down to secondary causes. Everything can be explained; they know how and why things fell out as they did. They look not beyond or above those causes which are close at hand and can be readily understood. Hence their own sin and God"s displeasure thereat, being far too abstract and remote factors, are not even considered.

4. Perfect love casteth out fear. This is true in a sense the apostle never meant. Let the heart love sin, as it is so prone to do, and that love will utterly cast out the fear of God. And some sins, especially, will do this; those that are named in these verses will. Idolatry, which lulls the conscience whilst it gives free licence to sin. Gain gotten in ungodly ways as they are here called. Who does not know how the petty pilferer develops into the practised thief, embezzler, robber, and forger, until he has graduated in all such villainy? Lust as it is here termed. Let those who have known its hell and have told its dark dread secrets be believed, when they affirm that, indulged, it becomes ungovernable. Against it the fear of God has no chance. Cruelty is the name given it here; that, too, grows with deadly speed and three. The Herods, Neros, and Henry the Eighths, Duke Alvas, and the entire spawn of the Inquisition, they were once tender, humane, gentle hearted. But, like the tiger that has tasted blood, it will have blood whenever it can. And:

5. The law of habit. We spoke of this just now. Character ever tends to become permanent. "He that is holy" to be "holy still blessed be God for this! but "he that is unrighteous,... he that is filthy," to be "unrighteous," to be "filthy still." You may bend the sapling, but not the tree.

VII HOW INTENSELY SERIOUS ARE THE TEACHINGS OF THIS FACT! Is it true that, though God sends judgment after judgment upon men, they will yet not repent? Then:

1. More judgments and worse will come. Assuredly it will be so. We cannot imagine God allowing himself to be for ever baffled by the unruly wills and affections of sinful men. "Our God is a consuming fire;" and until the dross be separated the fire will burn on. How awful, therefore, is the prospect for ungodly and impenitent men!

2. How we need to watch and pray lest we be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin! Ah, what fools they are, "who make a mock at sin;" who dally with it, count it a trifle! Better play with vipers and scorpions.

3. What imperative need there is of the power of the Holy Spirit! The disciples were in despair about their work. However should such as they persuade and convert men? The Lord promises to send the Holy Spirit, and "when he is come he shall convince the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment." The baptism of the Holy Ghost that is the need of the Church if she is ever to win the world for Christ.

4. Surrender to Christ, prompt, complete, abiding, that he, according to his Name, may save us from our sins, this assuredly is our bounden duty, our true wisdom, because our sure safeguard, and our only one. S.C.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And the rest of the men who were not killed - Whom the Saracens did not destroy. It is observable, the countries they over- ran were mostly those where the gospel had been planted. By these plagues - Here the description of the second woe ends. Yet repented not - Though they were called Christians. Of the works of their hands - Presently specified. That they should not worship devils - The invocation of departed saints, whether true, or false, or doubtful, or forged, crept early into the Christian church, and was carried farther and farther; and who knows how many who are invoked as saints are among evil, not good, angels; or how far devils have mingled with such blind worship, and with the wonders wrought on those occasions? And idols - About the year 590, men began to venerate images; and though upright men zealously opposed it, yet, by little and little, images grew into manifest idols. For after much contention, both in the east and west, in the year 787, the worship of images was established by the second Council of Nice. Yet was image worship sharply opposed some time after, by the emperor Theophilus. But when he died, in 842, his widow, Theodoura, established it again; as did the Council at Constantinople in the year 863, and again in 871.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

20, 21. The rest … repented not. It is implied that these woes were sent as judgments. The Christianity of the East overthrown by the Saracens and Turks had become utterly corrupt. The rest, that is, those in other countries not conquered by Turks, continued their sins. That they should not worship devils. The worship of dead saints is what is meant by demon worship in the Scriptures. And the idols. Images had now been introduced into the churches everywhere and were worshiped.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

those who were not killed by these plagues

This can be stated in active form. AT: "those whom the plagues had not killed" (See: Active or Passive)

things that cannot see, hear, or walk

This phrase reminds us that idols are not alive and do not deserve to be worshiped. But the people did not stop worshiping them. AT: "even though idols cannot see, hear, or walk" (See: Distinguishing versus Informing or Reminding)

translationWords

plague

repent

works

worship

demon

false god

gold

silver

bronze

sorcerer

sexual immorality

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

20. ἐκ τῶν ἔργων τῶν χειρῶν αὐτῶν. Primas[345] reads factorum suorum malorum = ἐκ τῶν ἔργων αὐτῶν τῶν πονηρῶν.

[345] Primasius, edited by Haussleiter.

20. ἐκ τῶν ἕργων τῶν χειρῶν αὐτῶν. A common Old Testament formula both for idolatry, Jer 1:16, and other sins, ib. Jer 25:14.

ἵνα μή προσκυνήσουσιν. This verse gives us the only clue we have to the interpretation. It is a plague on idolaters that is here described—neither on unfaithful Christians, nor on antichristian infidels of a more refined type—unless the latter shall in the last days, as in the age of the Roman persecutions, and one may almost say of the Renaissance and Reformation, ally itself against the Gospel with the vulgar or sensuous idolatry which it was its natural tendency to despise.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Repented not of the works [ουτε μετενοησαν εκ των εργων] . Lit., "Out of the works." The preposition ejk out of with repent, denotes a moral change involving an abandonment of evil works. See on Mt 3:2; Mt 21:29.

Works of their hands. Not their course of life, but the idols which their hands had made. Compare Deu 4:28; Psa 134:15; Act 7:4. Devils [δαιμονια] . More properly, demons. See on Mr 1:34. Compare 1Co 10:20; 1Ti 4:1.

See, hear, walk. Compare Dan 5:23.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.