Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary Revelation 11

John is given a “reed” (GK 2812), long and straight like a “rod” and thus suitable for measuring a large building or area (cf. Ezekiel 40:5). Its purpose is to “measure the temple of God and the altar.” Most agree that the principal OT passage in John’s mind was Ezekiel’s lengthy description of the measuring of the future kingdom temple (Ezekiel 40:3–48:35). Since interpreters are confused about what Ezekiel’s vision means, the ambiguity extends also to John’s description. Measuring with a reed or line may have various metaphorical meanings. It may refer to the promise of restoration and rebuilding, with emphasis on extension or enlargement (Jeremiah 31:39; Zechariah 1:16). It may also be done to mark out something for destruction (2 Samuel 8:2; 2 Kings 21:13; Isaiah 28:17; Lamentations 2:8; Amos 7:7–9). In Eze 40:2ff., this latter sense would be inappropriate. But what does John’s measuring mean?

Since John is told in v.2 not to measure the outer court but to leave it for the nations to overrun, it seems that here in ch. 11 the measuring means that the temple of God, the altar, and the worshipers are to be secured for blessing and preserved from spiritual harm or defilement. In 21:15–17, John similarly depicts the angel’s measuring of the heavenly city (with a golden rod), apparently to mark off the city and its inhabitants from harm and defilement (21:24, 27). As a parallel to the sealing of 7:1–8, the measuring does not symbolize preservation from physical harm but the prophetic guarantee that none of the faithful worshipers of Jesus as the Messiah will perish, even though they suffer physical destruction at the hand of the beast (13:7).

In Eze 43:10, the prophet is told to “describe the temple to the people of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their sins.” The purpose of the elaborate description and temple measurement there is to indicate the glory and holiness of God in Israel’s midst and convict them of their defilement of his sanctuary (43:12). Likewise, John’s prophetic ministry calls for a clear separation between those who are holy and those who have defiled themselves with the idolatry of the beast.

John is to measure “the temple of God.” There are two Greek words used in the NT for temple. Hieron (GK 2639) is a broad term that refers to the whole structure of Herod’s temple, including courts, colonnades, etc. (e.g., Matthew 4:5). Naos (GK 3724) is narrower and refers to the sanctuary or inner house where only the priests were allowed (Matthew 23:35; Matthew 27:51; always in Revelation). While the distinction between the two words is not always maintained, in this context (11:1) it may be appropriate since the next verse mentions the outer precinct as a separate entity.

Does John mean here the heavenly temple often mentioned in Revelation (cf. 11:19; 15:5, 8; 16:17), or does he refer to the Christian community, as in 3:12: “Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God”? Naos always refers to the Jerusalem temple in the Gospels with the single exception of John’s Gospel, where it refers to Jesus’ own body (cf. Revelation 21:22). Outside the Gospels it refers either to pagan shrines (Acts 17:24; Acts 19:24) or, in Paul’s letters, metaphorically to the physical bodies of Christians or to the church of God (1 Corinthians 3:16; 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:21; most likely also 2 Thessalonians 2:4). Since John refers to the “outer court” in v.2, it is likely that he has in mind not the heavenly temple of God but an earthly one, and likely also, symbolically, the covenant people. To take the temple in this verse as representing the church in the Great Tribulation is not without problems, but this seems the best view.

The “altar” (GK 2603) would then refer to the huge stone altar of sacrifice in the court of the priests, and the expression “the worshipers” would most naturally indicate the priests and others in the three inner courts (the court of the priests, the court of Israel, the court of the women). These represent symbolically the true servants of God and the measuring symbolizes their recognition and acceptance by God in the same manner as the numbering in ch. 7. The writer of Hebrews likewise speaks of an “altar” that Christians eat from, but that Jewish priests who serve in the temple are not qualified to eat from (Hebrews 13:10). By this language he speaks of the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ on the cross utilizing the background of the temple images, as does John.

As the “outer court” in the Jerusalem temple was frequented by a mixed group including Gentiles and unbelievers, so in John’s mind the earthly temple or community of God may involve a part where those who are impure or unfaithful will be (21:8; 22:15). The effect of not measuring this part of the temple is to exclude those in it from spiritual security and God’s blessing. So in measuring the temple, Ezekiel is instructed to exclude from the sanctuary “the foreigners uncircumcised in heart and flesh” (Ezekiel 44:5–9)—i.e., pagans who do not worship the true God and whose presence would desecrate the sanctuary. Previously, John has shown concern over those who were associated with the local churches but were not true worshipers of Christ (cf. 2:14–16, 20–25; 3:1–5, 16). When the great test comes, they will join the ranks of the beast and reveal their true colors.

On the other hand, it may be better to understand the desecration of the outer court as a symbolic reference to the victory of the beast over the saints (described in v.7). Thus by using two slightly different images, the “templealtar-worshipers” and the “outer court-holy city,” John is viewing the church under different aspects. Though the Gentiles (pagans) are permitted to touch the “outer court” and to trample on the “holy city” for a limited time (“42 months”), they are not able to destroy the church because the “inner sanctuary” is measured or protected in keeping with Christ’s earlier word in Mt 16:18.

Since John says the outer court will be “given to the Gentiles,” it is important to establish the best translation of “Gentiles” (ethnos; GK 1620). (1) In some NT contexts, this word may have the more general sense of “nations,” describing the various ethnic or national groups among humankind (e.g., Matthew 24:9, 14; Romans 1:5; Romans 15:11). (2) In other contexts, it denotes “Gentiles” in contrast to the Jewish people (e.g., Matthew 4:15; 10:5; Acts 10:45; Romans 11:11). In many cases the broader sense may shade off into the narrower, producing ambiguity. (3) But there is a third use of ethnos. Just as the Jews referred to all other peoples outside the covenant as “Gentiles,” so there gradually developed a similar Christian usage of the term that saw all peoples who were outside of Christ as ethnos, including unbelieving Jews (1 Corinthians 5:1; 1 Corinthians 12:2; 1 Thessalonians 4:5; 1 Peter 2:12; 3Jn 7; cf. our word” “pagan” or “heathen”). When the sixteen cases of ethnos in Revelation are examined, not once is “Gentiles” appropriate. Everywhere they are the peoples of the earth, either in rebellion against God (11:18; 14:8; 19:15; 20:3) or redeemed and under the rule of Christ (2:26; 21:24, 26; 22:2). There is no good reason why John does not intend the same sense in 11:2.

To sum up, “given to the Gentiles” refers to the defiling agencies that will trample down the outer court of the church, leading to defection from Christ or physical destruction, though all the while the inner sanctuary of the true believers will not be defiled by idolatry. This spiritual preservation of true believers will be accomplished by John’s prophetic ministry, which distinguishes loyalty to Christ from the deception of the beast.

The nations will “trample on the holy city for 42 months.” What is “the holy city”? The more literal viewpoint sees it as the earthly city of Jerusalem. Support for this is found in (1) the OT’s use (Nehemiah 11:1; Isaiah 48:2; Isaiah 52:1; Daniel 9:24) and Matthew’s use of “holy city” for Jerusalem (Matthew 4:5; Matthew 27:53), (2) the proximity of the term “the holy city” to the temple reference (v.1), and (3) the mention in v.8 of the “great city... where also their Lord was crucified.” Since Jerusalem was destroyed in A. D. 70, and since Revelation was presumably written about 95, these interpreters hold two views about the meaning of this reference to the city. Some believe it to refer to a rebuilt Jerusalem and temple during the future Tribulation period. Others see it as merely a symbolic reference to the Jewish people without any special implication of a literal city or temple. But if John does in fact differentiate here between believing Jews (inner court) and the nation as a whole (outer court), this would be the only place in the book where he does so. Furthermore, such a reference at this point in the context of chs. 10–11 would be abrupt and unconnected with the main themes in these chapters—the nature of the prophetic ministry and the great trial awaiting Christians. Far more in keeping with the emphasis of the whole book, and of these chapters in particular, is the view that “the holy city,” like the temple, refers to the church. The consistent usage of the expression “holy city” means the community of those faithful to Jesus Christ, composed of believing Jews and Gentiles (21:2, 10; 22:19; cf. 3:12; 20:9). It should also be noted that the name Jerusalem nowhere appears in ch. 1, though a circumlocution for it in v.8 (“where also their Lord was crucified”) is prefaced with the word “figuratively” (see comment on v.8). While the vision of the future Holy City (chs. 21–22) describes the condition of the city when she has completed her great ordeal and is finally delivered from the great deceiver, the present reference is to God’s people as they must first endure the trampling of the pagan nations for “42 months.” Does the trampling (GK 4251) indicate defilement and apostasy, or does it instead mean persecution? This word can metaphorically mean either of these. Two factors favor the latter sense. The time of the trampling is “42 months,” which is the exact time John attributes to the reign of the beast (13:5–7). Furthermore, in Daniel’s prophecy the trampling of the sanctuary and host of God’s people by Antiochus Epiphanes (Daniel 8:10, 13) is clearly a persecution of the people of God. But what of the term “42 months”? This exact expression occurs in the Bible only here and in 13:5, where it refers to the time of the authority of the beast. Mention is also made of a period of 1,260 days (i.e., 42 months of 30 days each) in 11:3 and 12:6. In 12:14 a similar length of time is referred to as “a time, times [i.e., two times] and half a time.” All these expressions equal a three-and-onehalf-year period. In Revelation, “42 months” refers to the period of oppression of the Holy City and the time of the authority of the beast (11:2; 13:5). The “1,260 days” is the period the two witnesses prophesy and the time the woman is protected from the dragon’s reach (11:3; 12:6). “Time, times and half a time” seems to be used synonymously for the 1,260 days during which the woman will be protected in the desert (12:14). We cannot assume that because these periods are equal, they are identical. On the other hand, the three different expressions may well be literary variations for the same period. Daniel is generally taken to be the origin of the terms. In Da 9:27 a week is spoken of (“seven,” NIV), and the context makes it clear that this is a week of years, i.e., seven years. Further, the week is divided in half—i.e., three and a half years for each division. These half weeks of years are spoken of in Da 7:25 as “a time, times and half a time.” Both early Jewish and Christian interpreters referred this to the period of the reign of the Antichrist. In Da 12:7 the identical expression refers to the period “when the power of the holy people has been finally broken”; in 12:11 the equivalent period expressed in days (1,290) refers to the time of the “abomination” and defilement of the temple. Whether or not these references refer to the second-century B. C. activities of Antiochus Epiphanes must be left to the exegetes of Daniel; but it is known that the Jews and later the Christians believed that these events at least foreshadow, if not predict, the last years of world history under the Antichrist. Thus John would have a ready tool to use in this imagery for setting forth his revelation of the last days. Some commentators suggest that the first three and a half years is the period of the preaching of the two witnesses, while the second half of the week is the time of bitter trial when Antichrist reigns supreme. Others believe the expressions are synchronous and thus refer to the identical period. With some reservations, the former view is preferable. The 1,260-day period of protected prophesying by the two witnesses (11:3–6) synchronizes with the period of the woman in the desert (12:6, 14). When the death of the witnesses occurs (11:7), there follows the forty-two-month murderous reign of the beast (13:5, 7, 15), which synchronizes with the trampling down of the Holy City (11:2). This twofold division seems to be also supported by Jesus’ Olivet Discourse, where he speaks of the “beginning of birth pains” (Matthew 24:8) and then of the period of “great distress” shortly before his second coming (Matthew 24:21). Finally, are the two periods of three and a half years symbolic or do they indicate calendar years? Not all will agree, but a symbolic sense that involves a real period but understands the numbers to describe the kind of period rather than its length is in keeping with John’s use of numbers elsewhere (cf. 2:10; 4:4; 7:4). Hence, if we follow the twofold division of Daniel’s seventieth week of seven years, the preaching of the two witnesses occupies the first half, while the second half is the time of trial when the beast reigns supreme, and during which time the fearful events of chs. 13–19 take place. This explanation must, however, remain tentative.

Perhaps a greater diversity of interpretation surrounds these two personages than even the temple in the previous verses. They are called “two witnesses” (v.3), “two prophets” (v.10), and, more figuratively, “two olive trees and the two lampstands who stand before the Lord of the earth” (v.4). Interpretative suggestions are: two historic figures such as Moses and Elijah (already taught in Jewish tradition) or the apostles Peter and Paul, the church in its witness, Christian martyrs, all the prophets, and the two groups of the Jewish believers and Gentile believers in the church. Since opinion varies so greatly at this point, it may be wise not to be dogmatic about any one view.

Perhaps the best view is the one which sees the two witnesses as representing those in the church who are specially called, like John, to bear a prophetic witness to Christ during the whole age of the church. They also represent those prophets who will be martyred by the beast. Indications that they represent many individuals and not just two are: (1) they are never seen as individuals but do everything together—they prophesy together, suffer together, are killed together, are raised together, and ascend together—and all this is hardly possible for two individuals; (2) the beast makes war on them (v.7), which is strange if they are merely two individuals; (3) people throughout the whole world view their ignominious deaths (v.9)— something unlikely if only two individuals are involved; (4) their description as two “lamps” is applied in chs. 1–2 to local churches comprised of many individuals. They are “clothed in sackcloth” because they are prophets (cf. Isaiah 20:2; Zechariah 13:4) who call for repentance and humility (Jeremiah 6:26; Jeremiah 49:3; Matthew 11:21); this was the most suitable garb for times of distress, grief, danger, crisis, and self-humbling.

The reference to the “two olive trees and the two lampstands” is an allusion to Joshua and Zerubbabel in Zechariah’s vision, who were also said “to serve the Lord of all the earth” (Zec 4:l–6a, 10b–14). The import of Zechariah’s vision was to strengthen these two leaders by reminding them of God’s resources and to vindicate them in the eyes of the community as they pursued their God-given tasks. Thus John’s message is that the witnesses to Christ who cause the church to fulfill her mission to burn as bright lights to the world will not be quenched (cf. Revelation 1:20; 2:5). Why there should be two olive trees and two lampstands has been variously answered. Some suggest that “two” is the number of required legal witnesses (Numbers 35:30; cf. Matthew 18:16); others, that two represents the priestly and kingly aspects of the church or the Jewish and Gentile components.

Perhaps the dualism was suggested to John by the two olive trees from Zechariah and the two great prophets of the OT who were connected with the coming of the Messiah in Jewish thought, i.e., Moses and Elijah (v.6; cf. Matthew 17:3–4). What Joshua (the high priest) and Zerubbabel (the prince) were to the older community and temple, Jesus Christ is to the new community. He is both anointed Priest and King, and his church reflects this character especially in its Christian prophets (1:6; 5:10; 20:6).

Here the prophets’ divine protection from their enemies is described in terms reminiscent of the former prophets’ protection by God (2 Kings 1:10; Jeremiah 5:14). Fire is understood symbolically as judgment from God; and since it proceeds from the witnesses’ mouths, we understand that their message of judgment will eventually be fulfilled by God’s power (Genesis 19:23–24; 2 Samuel 22:9; Psalms 97:3). Their Lord gives them immunity from destruction until they complete their confirmation of God’s saving deed in Christ. This assures the people of God that no matter how many chosen saints are oppressed and killed, God’s witness to Christ will continue until his purposes are fulfilled.