1

3.a. Variants: (1) (3rd pl. pf. from )] A C Andr f2031 WHort. (2)
() (3rd pl. pf. from )] 046 fam 10061006 1841 fam 16111611 2030 Andr d f2056
g l-1678 Byzantine; Hippolytus (de Ant. 40); cop. (3) ()] fam 16111854 Oecumenius2053
2062
Andr h-2302 n-2429. (4) ()] 051 Andreas. (5) ] Bousset (1906) 419. (6)
(3rd pl. pf. from )] fam 16112329 Andr/Byz 2b1828 syrh; Tischendorf, NT Graece;
B. Weiss, Johannes-Apokalypse, 137; von Soden, Text; Nestle-Aland27; UBSGNT4; TCGNT 1,
75758; TCGNT 2, 683. (7) ()] 025 Andr a f2023 598. (8) ] 94 2042 2065
2432 syrph; Charles, 1:96, 344; UBSGNT1; UBSGNT2. The variants divide among those
derived from , variants (1) through (3), those derived from , variants (4) through
(7), and those derived from , variant (8). Variant (1), the unusual pf. form ,
has been corrected in readings (2) and (3) (Schmid, Studien 2:141). Variant (7), , is an
orthographical variant of , variant (4). Reading (1), , the reading with the
strongest external attestation, is also the lectio difficilior.
In spite of the strong MS attestation of or (both 3rd pl. pfs that differ
morphologically [see below] but are semantically identical), they are rejected as semantically
impossible or inappropriate by most modern critical texts and commentators, with the
exception of WHort. Several versions support either reading with the translation have fallen
(syrph copsa bo arm eth). Of the two morphological variants, is probably the more
original, since by the first century A.D. the 3rd pl. aor ind ending - increasingly replaced the
3rd pl. pf. ind ending - (i.e., the pf. was in process of assimilation to the aor; Gignac,
Grammar 2:35455), e.g., in Rev 19:3 and in 21:6. Since the older ending
- is found in Revelation only in 8:2 (), is probably the original
reading. The reading , drank, a 3rd pl. pf. ind from , to drink, is preferred
by most modern critical texts and most commentators who comment on the text (e.g., Charles,
vol. 2). See the brief discussion in TCGNT 1, 75758 (nb. that MS 2321, containing only the
Gospels, is erroneously cited for 2329; the error was noticed by J. K. Elliott, NovT 25 [1983]
128, and corrected by Borger, TRu 52 [1987] 5051, but nonetheless carried over into TCGNT
2
, 683); more extensive discussions are found in Schmid, Studien 2:14143, and Borger, TRu
52 (1987) 5051. Yet the MS attestation for this reading is extremely weak (versions that read
have drunk include itgig vg Tyconius Beatus syrph). Nevertheless, it has been preferred since a
verb meaning to drink makes much more sense than one meaning to fall.
cop

Coptic versions
The reading of the majority of Byzantine MSS
NT Graece;
estamentum or New Testament
UBSGNT
United Bible Societies Greek New Testament
TCGNT
B.M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament
MS attesta
ph Series or Manuscript
pfs that d
ts
arm eth).
ian version
aor
aorist
ind ending
tive
NovT
Novum Testamentum
TRu
Theologische Rundschau
it
Itala or Old Latin
vg Tyconiu
ulgate (as published in Webers edition)
Byz

2
Rev 14:8 (see 17:2) provides an extremely close parallel:
, all nations have drunk from the wine, namely the
wrath of her fornication. Here the pf. ind active (3rd sing. in agreement with the
neut. pl. subject; see BDR 133.1) from clearly indicates the propriety of reading
, (), or even in 18:3. Yet it can also be argued that an original
in 18:3 (clearly the lectio difficilior) could have been corrected from 14:8 (that this
in fact occurred is clear in my opinion from the weakly supported variant in 18:3,
supported only by 94 2042 2065 2432 and syrph, even though it appeared in the text of
UBSGNT1 and UBSGNT2 and was earlier supported by Charles, 1:96, 344).
How could the more difficult reading or have replaced an original
or ? Possibly through assimilation to the verbs , in 18:2; i.e.,
as Babylon fell, so did the nations (Charles, 1:96; TCGNT 1, 75758). Schmid rejects as not
fully convincing the possibility of an error of the eye or hand in copying instead of
the very similar but original ; he rather suggests that the original reading
completely disappeared through misreading, i.e., an error of the ear, and that it was corrected
probably through the influence of 14:8 (Studien 2:143). Yet since or is
the reading in so many MSS and versions, it is clearly not as impossible as many suppose
(Charles, 1:96). There is, in fact, a progression from , had drunk, of 14:8, to
, were intoxicated, of 17:2, to , had collapsed, of 18:3.
3.b-b. Variants: (1) ] 046 fam 10061006 Andreas 94
1773 Byzantine itdem copsa bomss. (2) ] 051 Andreas itgig copbopart
Hippolytus (de Ant. 40). (3) ] A fam 16111611 Oecumenius2053 2062 ita vgst
copbomss. (4) ] fam 16111854 syrph Primasius Beatus. (5)
] C. A, C, and Oecumenius reflect the omission of through scribal
carelessness (TCGNT 1, 757; TCGNT 2, 683), an omission presupposed in reading (2), where
it has been restored but at an incorrect location (Schmid, Studien 2:93).
3.c. is a gen. of apposition or an epexegetical gen. providing, in effect, an
allegorical interpretation of . In the noun clause , the
second articular noun is a gen. of quality functioning like an adj: her immoral passion
(Zerwick, Greek, 40; BDF 165). has two distinct meanings; here (and in 14:8, a close
parallel) it means intense desire (Louw-Nida, 25.19), while in 14:10 it means fury,
intense anger (Louw-Nida, 88.178).
3.d. Since here and in the following clause introduces a clause that provides the reason
for the action in the preceding clause, it functions syntactically as a causal particle and can
therefore be translated for, because. Charles (2:431 n. 1) considers this an example of a
Hebraic circumstantial clause (see GKC 156) literally reproduced in Gk.; for similar uses of
in Revelation, see 12:11 (with a detailed discussion in Note 12:11.c.*) and 19:3.
BDR 133.

ss, A. Debrunner, and F. Rehkopf, Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch

tive/adjectival
BDF 165).
ss, A. Debrunner, and R. W. Funk, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament (University
of Chicago/University of Cambridge, 1961)
GKC
Gesenius Hebrew Grammar ed. E. Kautsch, trans. A. E. Cowley (London/New York: OUP,
1910; repr. 1966)
*
11.c. introduces a clause that provides the reason for the statement in the preceding
clause and should therefore be translated in a causal sense, e.g., for, because. In the OT,
adj: her

3
3.e. is an aor with the value of a pf. (Mussies, Morphology, 338).
3.f. See Note 3.d.*
3.g. is an aor with the value of a pf. (Mussies, Morphology, 338).
3.h-h. In the phrase , means wealth, but
combined with , sensuality, luxury, it emphasizes degree, hence excessive luxury
(BAGD, 208). here means luxury rather than sensuality since it is connected with
the verb .1

causal clauses are occasionally introduced by waw (GKC 158), and is similarly used in
the LXX as a causal particle (Aejmelaeus, Parataxis, 2324). However, this use of cannot
be considered a strict Semitism since it is also found in pagan Gk. (Ljungvik, Syntax, 5759).
Charles (1:cxlviii) says that (= w) introduces a statement of the condition under which
the action denoted by took place. Two OT examples are Gen 8:18; 26:27. For the
same syntactical phenomenon, cf. Rev 18:3; 19:3.
*
3.d. Since here and in the following clause introduces a clause that provides the reason
for the action in the preceding clause, it functions syntactically as a causal particle and can
therefore be translated for, because. Charles (2:431 n. 1) considers this an example of a
Hebraic circumstantial clause (see GKC 156) literally reproduced in Gk.; for similar uses of
in Revelation, see 12:11 (with a detailed discussion in Note 12:11.c.*) and 19:3.
BAGD, 208)
uer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian
Literature, ET, ed. W. F. Arndt and F. W. Gingrich; 2d ed. rev. F. W. Gingrich and F. W. Danker
(University of Chicago, 1979)
1
David E. Aune, vol. 52C, Word Biblical Commentary : Revelation 17-22, Word Biblical
Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2002), 965.

4
Comentarios sobre Jess en Apocalipsis 18:1
David Aune, Revelation Word Biblical Commentary
, and the earth was illuminated by his splendor. This
phrase is a relatively close rendering of the Hebrew text of Ezek 43:2, the earth shone with
his glory (referring, however, to Yahweh), which exhibits several differences from the LXX
version (Vanhoye, Bib 43 [1962] 437). This is the only instance in Revelation in which an
angelic being is described as having , glory, splendor, a term usually reserved as a
designation for the presence of God (Rev 15:8; 21:11, 23; see Comment on 15:8).2
Gregory Beale, Revelation, New International Greek Testament Commentary
As throughout the book, (after these things) refers to the temporal order of the
visions from the seers viewpoint, not to a chronological order of events in history. The
descending angel may be but is not necessarily the same one that introduced the vision in 17:1.
His great authority confirms the validity of the following message of judgment. The
concluding reference to the aura of the angels glory emphasizes his attribute of authority
(Hebrew kbd is translated as in LXX, where it sometimes refers to a particular
attribute of God and sometimes alludes to the sum of Gods attributes).
The earth shone with a light from the glory around God when Ezekiel saw a vision of the
end-time restoration of Israel to its land and temple (Ezek. 43:2, also in conjunction with a
loud voice, as in Rev. 18:12). This OT text provides an appropriate allusion to introduce a
chapter in which a major theme will be exhortation to Gods true people to separate from the
world and be restored to the Lord (see on 18:4).
The appearance of the descending angel may be a christophany comparable to appearances of
the angel of the LORD in the OT (see on 10:1), since Ezekiel speaks of Gods glory. The
portrayal is similar to that of the luminous angelic appearance in 10:1, which is likely a
christophany. That the angel is Christ is confirmed by the fact that every ascription of glory
to a heavenly figure in the Apocalypse refers to either God or Christ (God in 4:9, 11; 5:13;
7:12; 11:13; 14:7; 15:8; 16:9; 19:1; 21:11, 23; Christ in 1:6; 5:1213) and by 21:23: the glory
of God illumined it [the new Jerusalem], and the lamp of it is the Lamb. But it is still possible
that the figure in 18:1 is a mere angel reflecting the divine glory.3

L
B
2

David E. Aune, vol. 52C, Word Biblical Commentary: Revelation 17-22, Word Biblical
Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2002), 985.
L
3

G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids,
Mich.; Carlisle, Cumbria: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1999), 892.

Grant Osborne, Revelation, Baker Exegetical Commentary

Also in contrast to the beast, this angel has two characteristics. First, he possesses
(exousian megaln, great authority), compared to the derived authority of the beast
(from the dragon, 13:2, and from God, 13:5). Second, (h
g ephtisth ek ts doxs autou, the earth was illumined with his glory), while the
members of the false trinity do not possess glory in the Apocalypse. In fact, no celestial
being, angelic or demonic, has glory in the book except here. Therefore, it is likely that the
angel reflects the glory of God, implying he has come directly from the divine presence.
In 10:1 the mighty angel who also ascended from heaven was clothed in a cloud, and a
rainbow was upon his head. His face was like the sun, and his legs were like fiery pillars.
Both there and here, the angels reflect the power and splendor of God, especially his authority
over earthly affairs (in 10:2 he placed his right foot on the sea and his left on the land,
indicating control over this world). Also, in both places some scholars believe we have Christ
rather than an angel. Gundry (1994: 670) calls 10:1 and 18:12 instances of angelomorphic
christology and notes the extent to which the description here repeats characteristics of Christ
elsewhere.
The descent from heaven looks back to 10:1, the great authority to 12:10, enlightening the
earth to the New Jerusalem of 21:14, and the strong voice to 10:3. Thus, he sees this as an
actual appearance of Jesus. But as stated at 10:1, there is too little evidence that language used
of angels in the Apocalypse ever refers to Christ; it is more likely that it always refers to
celestial beings.
Most agree that Ezek. 43:2 is echoed here, The land was radiant with his glory. In Ezek. 43
the measurements of the temple have been completed (42:1520), and now a solemn
procession occurs as Yahweh enters the restored temple through the east gate (43:1). Here the
glory of God once more returns to the temple (43:29) and illumines the whole earth (43:2). In
that narration, Israel is reminded of the past and warned of future judgments if she persists in
her sin (43:3, 79). The twin motifs of Yahwehs glorious presence and the warnings of
judgment are also present here, and it is likely that John intended these parallels to Ezek. 43.
Some (Beale 1999: 893, following Sweet 1979: 266) also believe that this anticipates Rev.
21:1011, the New Jerusalem that is also based in part on Ezek. 4048. The desolation of
Babylon thus prepares the way for God to dwell in the new creation (Beale 1999: 893).4

Grant R. Osborne, Revelation, Baker exegetical commentary on the New Testament (Grand
Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2002), 634.