Rev 9:13-19 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 13. And the sixth angel sounded . , seq. And I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God . In the language here used there is an allusion to the temple, but the scene is evidently laid in heaven. The temple in its arrangements was designed, undoubtedly, to be in important respects a symbol of heaven, and this idea constantly occurs in the Scriptures. Compare the Epistle to the Hebrews passim . The golden altar stood in the holy place, between the table of shew-bread and the golden candlestick. . This altar, made of shittim or acacia wood, was ornamented at the four corners, and overlaid throughout with laminee of gold. Hence it was called "the golden altar," in contradistinction from the altar for sacrifice, which was made of stone. Compare , seq. On its four corners it had projections which are called horns , ( ,) which seem to have been intended mainly for ornaments. See Jahn, Arch. % 332; Josephus Ant. iii. 6, 8. When it is said that this was "before God," the meaning is, that it was directly before or in front of the symbol of the Divine presence in the most holy place. This image, in the vision of John, is transformed to heaven. The voice seemed to come from the very presence of the Deity; from the place where offerings are made to God.

Revelation of John 9:13-19

Verse 13. And the sixth angel sounded. Rev 8:2-7, seq.

And I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God. In the language here used there is an allusion to the temple, but the scene is evidently laid in heaven. The temple in its arrangements was designed, undoubtedly, to be in important respects a symbol of heaven, and this idea constantly occurs in the Scriptures. Compare the Epistle to the Hebrews passim. The golden altar stood in the holy place, between the table of shew-bread and the golden candlestick. Heb 9:1-2. This altar, made of shittim or acacia wood, was ornamented at the four corners, and overlaid throughout with laminee of gold. Hence it was called "the golden altar," in contradistinction from the altar for sacrifice, which was made of stone. Compare Mt 21:12, seq. On its four corners it had projections which are called horns, (Ex 30:2-3,) which seem to have been intended mainly for ornaments. See Jahn, Arch. % 332; Josephus Ant. iii. 6, 8. When it is said that this was "before God," the meaning is, that it was directly before or in front of the symbol of the Divine presence in the most holy place. This image, in the vision of John, is transformed to heaven. The voice seemed to come from the very presence of the Deity; from the place where offerings are made to God. Verse 14. Saying to the sixth angel, which had the trumpet. Rev 8:2.

Loose, etc. This power, it would seem, was given to the sixth angel in addition to his office of blowing the trumpet. All this, of course, was in vision, and cannot be literally interpreted. The meaning is, that the effect of his blowing the trumpet would be the same as if angels that had been bound should be suddenly loosed and suffered to go forth over the earth: that is, some event would occur which would be properly symbolized by such an act.

The four angels. Compare Rev 8:2. It was customary to represent important events as occurring under the ministry of angels. The general meaning here is, that, in the vicinity of the river Euphrates, there were mighty powers which had been bound or held in check, which were now to be let loose upon the world. What we are to look for in the fulfilment is evidently this--some power that seemed to be kept back by an invisible influence as if by angels, now suddenly let loose and suffered to accomplish the purpose of desolation mentioned in the subsequent verses. It is not necessary to suppose that angels were actually employed in these restraints, though no one can demonstrate that their agency was not concerned in the transactions here referred to. Compare Dan 10:12-13. It has been made a question why the number four is specified, and whether the forces were in any sense made up of four divisions, nations, or people. While nothing certain can be determined in regard to that, and while the number four may be used merely to denote a great and strong force, yet it must be admitted that the most obvious interpretation would be to refer it to some combination of forces, or to some union of powers, that was to accomplish what is here said. If it had been a single nation, it would have been more in accordance with the usual method in prophecy to have represented them as restrained by an angel, or by angels in general, without specifying any number.

Which are bound. That is, they seemed to be bound. There was something which held them, and the forces under them, in check, until they were thus commanded to go forth. In the fulfilment of this, it will be necessary to look for something of the nature of a check or restraint on these forces, until they were commissioned to go forth to accomplish the work of destruction.

In the great river Euphrates. The well-known river of that name, commonly called, in the Scriptures, "the great river," and, by way of eminence, "the river," Ex 23:31, Isa 8:7. This river was on the east of Palestine; and the language here used naturally denotes that the power referred to under the sixth trumpet would spring up in the East, and that it would have its origin in the vicinity of that river. Those interpreters, therefore, who apply this to the invasion of Judaea by the Romans have great difficulty in explaining this--as the forces employed in the destruction of Jerusalem came from the West, and not from the East. The fair interpretation is, that there were forces in the vicinity of the Euphrates which were, up to this period, bound or restrained, but which were now suffered to spread woe and sorrow over a considerable portion of the world. Verse 15. And the four angels were loosed. Who had this mighty host under restraint. The loosening of the angels was, in fact, also a letting loose of all these hosts, that they might accomplish the work which they were commissioned to do.

Which were prepared. See Rev 9:7. The word here used properly refers to that which is made ready, fitted up, arranged for anything: as persons prepared for a journey, horses for battle, a road for travellers, food for the hungry, a house to live in, etc. See Rob. Lex., s. voce ετοιμαζω. As used here, the word means that whatever was necessary to prepare these angels--the leaders of this host--for the work which they were commissioned to perform, was now done, and that they stood in a state of readiness to execute the design. In the fulfilment of this it will be necessary to look for some arrangements existing in the vicinity of the Euphrates, by which these restrained hosts were in a state of readiness to be summoned forth to the execution of this work, or in such a condition that they would go forth spontaneously if the restraints existing were removed.

For an hour, etc. Marg., at. The Greek--εις--means properly unto, with reference to; and the sense is, that, with reference to that hour, they had all the requisite preparation. Professor Stuart explains it as meaning that they were "prepared for the particular year, month, day, and hour, destined by God for the great catastrophe which is to follow." The meaning, however, rather seems to be that they were prepared, not for the commencement of such a period, but they were prepared for the whole period indicated by the hour, the day, the month, and the year; that is, that the continuance of this "woe" would extend along through the whole period. For

(a) this is the natural interpretation of the word "for"--εις;

(b) it makes the whole sentence intelligible for though it might be proper to say of anything that it was "prepared for an hour," indicating the commencement of what was to be done, it is not usual to say of anything that it is "prepared for an hour, a month, a day, a year," when the design is merely to indicate the beginning of it; and

(c) it is in accordance with the prediction respecting the first "woe," (Rev 9:5,) where the time is specified in language similar to this, to wit, "five months." It seems to me, therefore, that we are to regard the time here mentioned as a prophetic indication of the period during which this woe would continue.

An hour, and a day, and a month, and a year. If this were to be taken literally, it would, of course, be but little more than a year. If it be taken, however, in the common prophetic style, where a day is put for a year, (Barnes on "Da 9:24", seq.,) then the amount of time (360 + 30 + 1 + an hour) would be three hundred and ninety-one years, and the portion of the year indicated by an hour--a twelfth or twenty-fourth part, according as the day was supposed to be divided into twelve or twenty-four hours. That this is the true view seems to be clear, because this accords with the usual style in this book; because it can hardly be supposed that the "preparation" here referred to would have been for so brief a period as the time would be if literally interpreted; and because the mention of so small a portion of time as an "hour," if literally taken, would be improbable in so great transactions. The fair interpretation, therefore, will require us to find some events that will fill up the period of about three hundred and ninety-one years.

For to slay the third part of men. Compare Rev 8:7,9,12. The meaning here is, that the immense host which was restrained on the Euphrates would, when loosed, spread desolation over about a third part of the world. We are not to suppose that this is to be understood in exactly a literal sense; but the meaning is, that the desolation would be so widespread that it would seem to embrace a third of the world. No such event as the cutting off of a few thousands of Jews in the siege of Jerusalem would correspond with the language here employed, and we must look for events more general and more disastrous to mankind at large. Verse 16. And the number of the army of the horsemen. It is to be observed here that the strength of the army seemed to be cavalry. In the former plagues there is no distinct mention of horsemen; but here that which struck the beholder was the immense and unparalleled number of horsemen.

Were two hundred thousand thousand. A thousand thousand are a million, and consequently the number here referred to would be two hundred millions. This would be a larger army than was ever assembled, and it cannot be supposed that it is to be taken literally. That it would be a very large host--so large that it would not readily be numbered--is clear. The expression in the original, while it naturally conveys the idea of an immense number, would seem also to refer to some peculiarity in the manner of reckoning them. The language is, two myriads of myriads--δυομυριαδεςμυριαδων. The myriad was ten thousand. The idea would seem to be this. John saw an immense host of cavalry. They appeared to be divided into large bodies that were in some degree separate, and that might be reckoned by ten thousands. Of these different squadrons there were many, and to express their great and unusual number he said that there seemed to be myriads of them-- two myriads of myriads, or twice ten thousand myriads. The army thus would seem to be immense; an army, as we should say, to be reckoned by tens of thousands.

And I heard the number of them. They were so numerous that he did not pretend to be able to estimate the number himself, for it was beyond his power of computation; but he heard it stated in these round numbers, that there were "two myriads of myriads" of them. Verse 17. And thus I saw the horses in the vision. That is, he saw them as he proceeds to describe them, for the word thus--ουτως--refers to what follows. Compare Rob. Lex. on the word, (b,) and see Mt 1:18, 2:5, Jn 21:1, Heb 4:4. Professor Stuart, however, refers it to what precedes. The meaning, as it seems to me, is, that he fixed his attention on the appearance of the immense army--the horses and their riders, and proceeded to describe them as they struck him.

And them that sat on them. He fixed the attention on horse and rider. Their appearance was unusual, and deserved a particular description.

Having breastplates of fire. That is, those who sat on them had such breastplates. The word here rendered breastplate denoted properly a coat of mail that covered the body from the neck to the thighs. Eph 6:14. This would be a prominent object in looking at a horseman. This was said to be composed of "fire, and jacinth, and brimstone;" that is, the part of the body usually encased in the coat of mail had these three colours. The word "fire" here simply denotes red. It was burnished and bright, and seemed to be a blaze of fire. The word "jacinth"--υακινθινους-- means hyacinthine. The colour denoted is that of the hyacinth--a flower of a deep purple or reddish blue. Then it refers to a gem of the same colour, nearly related to the zircon of the mineralogists, and the colour here mentioned is deep purple or reddish blue. The word rendered "brimstone"--θειωδης--means properly sulphurous, that is, made of sulphur, and means here simply yellow. The meaning of the whole then is, that these horsemen appeared to be clad in a peculiar kind of armour--armour that shone like fire, mingled with blue and yellow. It will be necessary to look for the fulfilment of this in cavalry that was so caparisoned.

And the heads of the horses were as the heads of lions. Resembled, in some respects, the heads of lions. He does not say that they were the heads of lions, or that the riders were on monsters, but only that they, in some respects, resembled the heads of lions. It would be easy to give this general appearance by the way in which the head-dress of the horses was arrayed.

And out of their mouths issued. That is, appeared to issue. It is not necessary to understand this as affirming that it actually came from their mouths, but only that, to one looking on such an approaching army, it would have this appearance. The heathen poets often speak of horses breathing out fire and smoke, (Virg. Geor. ii. 140; iii. 85; Ovid, Met. vii. 104,) meaning that their breath seemed to be mingled smoke and fire. There is an image superadded here not found in any of the classic descriptions, that this was mingled with brimstone. All this seemed to issue from their mouths; that is, it was breathed forth in front of the host, as if the horses emitted it from their mouths.

Fire and smoke and brimstone. The exact idea, whether that was intended or not, would be conveyed by the discharge of musketry or artillery. The fire, the smoke, and the sulphurous smell of such a discharge, would correspond precisely with this language, and if it be supposed that the writer meant to describe such a discharge, this would be the very language that would be used. Moreover, in describing a battle, nothing would be more proper than to say that this appeared to issue from the horses' mouths. If, therefore, it should be found that there were any events where fire-arms were used, in contradistinction from the ancient mode of warfare, this language would be appropriate to describe that; and if it were ascertained that the writer meant to refer to some such fact, then the language here used would be that which he would adopt. One thing is certain, that this is not language which would be employed to describe the onset of ancient cavalry in the mode of warfare which prevailed then. No one describing a charge of cavalry among the Persians, the Greeks, or the Romans, when the only armour was the sword and the spear, would think of saying that there seemed to be emitted from the horses' mouths fire, and smoke, and brimstone. Verse 18. By these three. Three things--explained immediately as referring to the fire, the smoke, and the brimstone.

Was the third part of men killed. Rev 8:7-12, on each of which verses we have notices of calamities that came upon the third part of the race, of the sea, of rivers, etc. We are not to suppose that this is to be taken literally, but the description is given as it appeared to John. Those immense numbers of horsemen would sweep over the world, and a full third part of the race of men would seem to fall before them. Verse 19. For their power is in their mouth. That is, as described, in the fire, smoke, and brimstone that proceeded out of their mouths. What struck the seer as remarkable on looking on the symbol was, that this immense destruction seemed to proceed out of their mouths. It was not that they trampled down their enemies; nor that they destroyed them with the sword, the bow, or the spear: it was some new and remarkable power in warfare--in which the destruction seemed to proceed from fire and smoke and sulphur issuing from the mouths of the horses themselves.

And in their tails. The tails of the horses. This, of course, was something unusual and remarkable in horses, for naturally they have no power there. The power of a fish, or a scorpion, or a wasp, may be said to be in their tails, for their strength or their means of defence or of injury are there, but we never think of speaking in this way of horses: It is not necessary, in the interpretation of this, to suppose that the reference is literally to the tails of the horses, any more than it is to suppose that the smoke and fire and brimstone literally proceeded from their mouths. John describes things as they appeared to him in looking at them from a considerable distance. From their mouths the horses belched forth fire, and smoke, and sulphur, and even their tails seemed to be armed for the work of death.

For their tails were like unto serpents. Not like the tails of serpents, but like serpents themselves.

And had heads. That is, there was something remarkable in the position and appearance of their heads. All serpents, of course, have heads; but John saw something unusual in this--or something so peculiar in their heads as to attract special attention. It would seem most probable that the heads of these serpents appeared to extend in every direction --as if the hairs of the horses' tails had been converted into snakes, presenting a most fearful and destructive image. Perhaps it may illustrate this to suppose that there is reference to the Amphisbsena, or two-headed snake. It is said of this reptile that its tail resembles a head, and that with this it throws out its poison.--Lucan, ix. 179; Pliny's Hist. Nat. viii. 35. It really has but one head, but its tail has the appearance of a head, and it has the power of moving in either direction to a limited degree. If we suppose these snakes fastened to the tail of a horse, the appearance of heads would be very prominent and remarkable. The image is that of the power of destruction. They seemed like ugly and poisonous serpents instead of tails.

And with them they do hurt. Not the main injury, but they have the power of inflicting some injury by them.