Albert Barnes Commentary Revelation 5:7

"And he came, and he taketh [it] out of the right hand of him that sat on the throne." — Revelation 5:7 (ASV)

And he came and took the book out of the right hand (Revelation 5:7), and so on. It was as if it belonged to Him by virtue of rank or office. There is a difficulty here, arising from the incongruity of what is said about a lamb, which is not easy to solve. The difficulty is in imagining how a lamb could take the book from the hand of Him who held it. To address this, several solutions have been proposed.

1. Vitringa supposes that the Messiah appeared as a lamb only in a similar way that the four living beings (Revelation 4:7) resembled a lion, a calf, and an eagle; that is, that they had this resemblance only regarding the head, while the body was that of a man.

   He thus supposes that, though regarding the upper part the Savior resembled a lamb, yet hands were attached to the front part of the body by which He could take the book. But there are great difficulties in this supposition. Besides the fact that nothing of this kind is suggested by John, it is contrary to all probability that the Redeemer would be represented as a monster.

   In His being represented as a lamb, there is nothing that seems inappropriate or unpleasant, for He is often spoken of in this manner, and the image is one that is agreeable to the mind. But all this beauty and fitness of representation is destroyed if we think of Him as having human hands coming from His breast or sides, or as combining human and animal forms. The representation of having an unusual number of horns and eyes does not strike us as incongruous in the same sense; for though the number is increased, they are such as properly belong to the animal to which they are attached.

2. Another supposition is that suggested by Professor Stuart: that the form was changed, and a human form resumed when the Savior advanced to take the book and open it. This would resolve the entire difficulty. The only objection to it is that John has not given any explicit mention of such a change in the form; and the only question is whether it is right to suppose this to address the difficulty in the case.

   In support of this, it is said that all is symbol. The Savior is represented in the book in various forms. As His appearing as a lamb was designed to represent in a striking manner the fact that He was slain, and that all He did was based on the atonement, there would be no impropriety in supposing that when an action was attributed to Him, He assumed the form in which that act would be naturally or usually done.

   And as, in taking a book from the hand of another, it is wholly incongruous to think of its being done by a lamb, is it not most natural to suppose that the usual form in which the Savior is represented as appearing would be resumed, and that He would appear again as a man? But is it absolutely certain that He appeared in the form of a lamb at all?

   May not all that is meant be that John saw Him near the throne and among the elders, and was immediately struck by His appearance of meekness and innocence, and with the marks of His having been slain as a sacrifice, and spoke of Him in strong figurative language as a lamb?

   And where His "seven horns" and "seven eyes" are spoken of, is it necessary to suppose that there was any real assumption of such horns and eyes? May not all that is meant be that John was struck with that in the appearance of the Redeemer of which these would be the appropriate symbols, and described Him as if these had been visible?

   When John the Baptist saw the Lord Jesus on the banks of the Jordan and said, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world (John 1:29), is it necessary to suppose that He actually appeared in the form of a lamb? Do not all immediately understand him as referring to traits in His character, and to the work which He was to accomplish, which made it proper to speak of Him as a lamb?

   And why, therefore, may we not suppose that John in the Apocalypse designed to use language in the same way, and that he did not intend to present such an incongruous description as that of a lamb approaching a throne and taking a book from the hand of Him that sat on it, and a lamb, too, with many horns and eyes?

   If this supposition is correct, then all that is meant in this passage would be expressed in some such language as the following: "And I looked, and behold, there was one in the middle of the space occupied by the throne, by the living creatures, and by the elders, who, in appearance, and in the emblems that represented His work on the earth, was spotless, meek, and innocent as a lamb; one with marks on His person which brought to mind the fact that He had been slain for the sins of the world, and yet one who had most striking symbols of power and intelligence, and who was therefore worthy to approach and take the book from the hand of Him that sat on the throne."

   It may help confirm this view to recall that when we use the term "Lamb of God" now, as is often done in preaching and in prayer, it never suggests to the mind the idea of a lamb. We think of the Redeemer as resembling a lamb in His moral attributes and in His sacrifice, but never as to form. This supposition relieves the passage of all that is incongruous and unpleasant, and may be all that John meant.