Expositor's Bible Commentary Commentary Revelation 5:6

"And I saw in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders, a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain, having seven horns, and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God, sent forth into all the earth." — Revelation 5:6 (ASV)

The third horseman is poverty and famine. He rides on a “black horse” and symbolizes the effects of war and bloodshed: sorrow, mourning, and desolation (Isaiah 50:3; Jeremiah 4:28; Lamentations 5:10). In the rider’s hand there is a “pair of scales.” A voice is heard interpreting its significance in economic terms: “a quart of wheat... and three quarts of barley for a day’s wage.” This amount suggests food prices much higher than normal and implies inflation and famine (Matthew 24:7). A quart of wheat would supply an average person one day’s sustenance. Barley was used by the poor to mix with the wheat. The expression “Do not damage the oil and wine” is less clear. Some view oil and wine as luxuries not necessary for survival, and the rich would have them while the poor were starving (cf. Proverbs 21:17). Others take them as showing the extent of the famine, since a drought affecting the grain may not be severe enough to hurt the vines and olive trees. Oil and wine are staple foods in the East, both in dearth and in prosperity (e.g., Dt 7:13; Hosea 2:8, 22). So in this view the third seal brings poverty and partial, though not severe, famine. There is an increasing intensity in the three cycles of judgment.

John goes even further. He enumerates each of the twelve tribes and their number: “From the tribe of Judah 12,000 were sealed,” etc. Why was it necessary to provide this detailed enumeration? And why the particular tribal selection? In answering these difficult questions, some facts about the list should be noted. John places Judah first, evidently to emphasize the priority of the messianic King who came from the tribe of Judah (5:5; cf. Hebrews 7:13–14). Nowhere in the tribal listings of the OT except in the space arrangement of the wilderness camp (Numbers 2:3ff.) does Judah come first. This exception may itself be linked with the messianic expectation through Judah (Genesis 49:10; 1 Chronicles 5:2). John’s priority of Judah is comparable to the emphasis placed in Judaism on the tribe of Levi (the priestly tribe). It is significant that John includes Levi among the other tribes, and thus gives no special place to the Levitical order; he places Levi in the comparatively unimportant eighth place. The particular order and names of the tribes as given here by John are unique. The OT has no fewer than twenty variant lists of the tribes, and these lists include anywhere from ten to thirteen tribes, though the number twelve is predominant (cf. Genesis 49; Dt 33; Ezekiel 48). The grouping of twelve may be a way of expressing the corporate identity of the elect people of God as a whole and may be maintained—even artificially at times—to preserve this identity (cf. the “twelfth” apostle chosen when Judas fell [Acts 1:25–26]). John omits Dan (which elsewhere is always included) and Ephraim. In order to maintain the ideal number twelve with these omissions, he must list both Joseph and Manasseh as tribes. This is peculiar because the tribe of Joseph is always mentioned in the other lists by either including Joseph and excluding his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh (Genesis 49), or vice versa (Ezekiel 48). Moreoever, only when the Levitical priesthood gained more prominence was the tribe of Levi omitted from the lists and replaced by the two sons of Joseph. Various efforts have been made to solve the enigma of John’s list and especially to explain the absence of the tribe of Dan. While no solution is completely satisfactory, the early church held that the Antichrist would arise from the tribe of Dan (this belief may in fact be a pre-Christian Jewish tradition). Furthermore, Dan was associated in the OT with idolatry (1 Kings 12:29–30). This may be the clue. If John sought to expose Christian idolatry and beast worship in his day by excluding Dan from the list of those sealed, it may also be possible to explain, on the same basis, why Manasseh and Joseph were chosen to fill up the sacred number rather than Manasseh and Ephraim, for in the OT Ephraim was also explicitly identified with idolatry (Hosea 4:17). If idolatry is the reason for omitting Dan and Ephraim, the readjustment of the list to include Joseph and Manasseh to complete the twelve can be understood. Since Dan will be reckoned first in the tribal listing of the restored eschatological Jewish community (Ezekiel 48) and John’s list puts Judah first, it may be that John’s listing describes the church, not ethnic Israel. It is important to note that John does not equate the 144,000 with everyone in the tribes. Rather, his repeated use of the preposition “from” (lit., “out of”; GK 1666) in vv.4–8 implies that the sealed were an elect group chosen out of the tribes. If John had the actual Jewish Israel in view, this use of “from” would indicate an election from the whole nation. On the other hand, if he intended to imply something about the church, his language might indicate God’s selecting the true church out “from” the professing church. This thought has already been mentioned (cf. 2:14ff., 20ff.; 3:16ff.) and is supported by Eze 9:4–7, where the seal distinguished the true servants of God from the false ones among the professing people of God. Paul states the same thought: “Nevertheless, God’s solid foundation stands firm, sealed with this inscription: ‘The Lord knows those who are his,’ and ‘Everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness’ ” (2 Timothy 2:19). The description of the judgments under the sixth seal (6:12ff.) ends with the question, “The great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?” (6:17). John answers this question by implying that only the true servants of God, who are divinely sealed, can be protected from the wrath of God and the Lamb.

As John looked to see the mighty Lion (the conquering warrior-Messiah from the Root of David), he saw instead the striking figure of a “Lamb” as if it had been slaughtered, standing in the center of the throne court. This new figure portrays sacrificial death and links the Messiah to the OT passover lamb (Exodus 12:5–6; Isaiah 53:7; Jn 1:29, 36; Acts 8:32; 1 Corinthians 5:7; 1 Peter 1:19). Here John joins the OT royal Davidic Messiah with the Suffering Servant of Isaiah (Isaiah 42–53). Both prophetic themes come together in Jesus of Nazareth, the true Messiah. “As if it had been slain” (lit., “with its throat cut”; GK 5377) could refer to the “marks of death” that the living Lamb still bore or to his appearance “as if being led to the slaughter,” i.e., “marked out for death.” The “lamb” metaphor dominates John’s thought in the rest of the book (e.g., 6:1ff.; 7:9ff.; 12:11; 13:8; 21:9).

John notices that the Lamb is also the ruler who bears the signs of the fullness of divine omnipotence, dominion, and omniscience (“seven horns and seven eyes”). The “eyes” are more explicitly identified as the “seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth,” probably a symbolic reference to the divine Holy Spirit who is sent forth by Christ into the world (1:4; 4:5; cf. a similar view of the Spirit in Jn 14:26; 15:26; 16:7–15).