The Bowls of God’s Wrath, 1-21

First, a summary of four views on interpreting this chapter (based on Gregg):-

Historicists, such as Barnes, view this vision as pertaining to the French Revolution, and to its part in weakening (but not totally eliminating) the power of the Papacy.

Preterists are divided as to whether this scene deals with Jerusalem or Rome, both seen as persecutors of the church.

Futurists understand these plagues to occur immediately prior to Christ’s return, at the close of the tribulation period (Walvoord, Ryrie).  Hal Lindsey links the plague of boils in v2 with the radioactive pollution caused by atomic bombs.

A spiritual interpretation regards these plagues as parallel to the trumpets, with both occuring simultaneously throughout the Christian dispensation.  The trumpets serve as warnings, while the bowls function as punishments (Hendriksen).

For Mounce, this chapter describes in detail the vivid scene of 2 Thess 1:6-10 –

1:6 For it is right for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 1:7 and to you who are being afflicted to give rest together with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels. 1:8 With flaming fire he will mete out punishment on those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 1:9 They will undergo the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his strength, 1:10 when he comes to be glorified among his saints and admired on that day among all who have believed

Duvall regards the seals, trumpets and bowls as all pointing to events occuring in the last days (the period between Christ’s first and second comings).  They grow more intense (from 1/4 to 1/3 to 1; the word ‘great’ occurs eleven times in this chapter), but each delivers us to the final judgment.

Goldsworthy explains:

‘As in the previous visions of the seals and the trumpets, the curse of God on creation is extended to these terrible acts of judgment that overtake the children of Adam who have chosen to become the children of the devil.’ (The Gospel in Revelation)

According to Boring, the present scene refers to the same period as the seals and the trumpets, but offering a different perspective and greater intensity:

‘Not merely a fourth or third, as in the first two septets, but all the world is struck by the blow against the sun and by the darkness, and everything in the sea dies. Not just the earth but the cosmos itself (heavens, sun, dry land, sea, rivers) is struck (16:1–8). Human rebellion against God has infected the creation itself (cf. Gen. 3:17; Isa. 24:5–6). As it is to be redeemed (21:1–22:6; cf. Rom. 8:18–23), so it passes through the judgment.’

Unlike the seals and trumpets, the bowls are total and final:

‘Total. The seals affect one in four (6:8), and the trumpets affect one in three (8:7). The seven thunders, had they not been rescinded, would presumably have affected one in two (10:3-4). The bowls affect one in one: everyone and everything (16:3). In the end the cosmos itself unravels (v 20).

Final. The seals and trumpets included a call to repentance (9:20-21), but the bowls are signs of final judgment “because with them God’s wrath is completed” (15:1). The seven bowls are no longer educative. They are retributive. They have a different function: to establish and complete the justice of God. With the seventh seal a voice from the throne cries: “It is done!” (16:17).’

(Chester)

How shall we account for this increasing intensity?  Schnabel (40 Questions About The End Times, ch. 5) thinks that it is unlikely that this indicates that life on earth will get progressively worse over time.  More likely, he writes, that John wishes to increase the drama of his portrayal in order to increase the intensity of the saints’ expectation of Christ’s return, or to urge them to faithfulness and to be ready for possible martyrdom.

As Boring insists, these plagues are a manifestation of God’s righteous judgment (see v5 and v7, especially):

‘No matter how severe the scenes may appear, John’s point is that they are just. The establishment of God’s reign as the goal of history is a matter of justice.’

As Ian Paul notes:

‘The theme of an invitation to repentance now fades from view, as God’s ultimate judgment looms on the horizon.’

The same writer adds that this chapter introduces us to:

‘ideas and images which will be expanded on in the following chapters: the final showdown between God and his opponents, the destruction of the powers of evil and the renewal of the created order. This sequence therefore makes a theological connection between the events we see in the world around us as manifestations of God’s judgment and justice, his power over specific forms of human rebellion as shown in particular empires in history, and the final revelation of his sovereignty at the End.’

The plagues of Rev 16

1. the plague of sores, v2; cf. the sixth plague in Ex 9:9);
2. the sea turns to blood, killing all sea animals, v3; recalling the first plague in Ex 7:20f
3. the rivers and wells become blood, v4, also recalling the first plague
4. the sun scorches people, v8f; reminiscent of the heavenly fire of the seventh plague, Ex 9:22–24);

(The first four plagues affect nature, in its traditional divisions: earth, sea, rivers, sky.)

5. the throne and kingdom of the beast blanketed with darkness, v10; cf. the ninth plague of Ex 10:21);
6. the Euphrates dries up, v12; not paralleled in Exodus;
7. earthquakes, collapse of great cities, disappearance of islands and mountains, huge hailstones, vv. 18–21; similar to the hail of the seventh plague, Ex 9:22.  Includes judgment on Babylon, which was situated on the Euphrates.

(The final three plagues affect humanity: they are political and social.)

Thus the first four plagues, like the first four seals and the first four trumpets, form a group.

Morris quotes Swete on the characteristics of this series of plagues:

‘While no personal suffering is inflicted on Man by the first five of the Egyptian plagues or by the first four of the Trumpet-visitations, he is attacked at the very outset of the present cycle. Again, while the first four Trumpet-plagues affect only a third of the earth, the sea, the fresh water supply, and the lights of heaven, no such limitation appears in the account of the Seven Plagues now about to be described. They are not tentative chastisements, but punitive and final.’

Osborne note a progression in this series of plagues:

‘from natural disasters (the first four, replicating the first four seals and trumpets),

to direct judgment against the throne of the beast (the fifth),

to preparation for the final battle (the sixth),

to the beginning of the destruction of Babylon the Great (the seventh), which prepares for the more detailed fall of Babylon in chapters 17–18.’

(Reformatted)

For conservative Bible teachers, the interpretation of this chapter is affected by views on the tribulation and so on.  Barton summarises:

‘Those who subscribe to the pre-Tribulation theory assert that because the believers have already been raptured, those who become believers after the Rapture will still be on the earth but will be protected from these plagues.

Those who subscribe to the mid-Tribulation theory say that just before these universal plagues hit, the believers are raptured so that the only people left on the earth at this point will be unbelievers.

Those who subscribe to the post-Tribulation theory say that the believers are still on the earth going through this difficulty. But even as these plagues hit, the believers will be protected by the seal of Christ they have received (7:3) and the promise of protection (Rev 3:10).’

(Numbering and emphasis added)

---

16:1 Then I heard a loud voice from the temple declaring to the seven angels: “Go and pour out on the earth the seven bowls containing God’s wrath.” 16:2 So the first angel went and poured out his bowl on the earth. Then ugly and painful sores appeared on the people who had the mark of the beast and who worshiped his image.

A loud voice from the temple – Since ch 15 concluded with the exclusion of all others from the inner sanctuary until the seven plagues were finished, this must be the voice of God.

‘Loud’ translates a form of the word ‘mega’ (‘great’).  As Walvoord notes:

‘This word occurs throughout the chapter, variously translated as “fierce” heat (v. 9), the “great” river Euphrates (v. 12), the “great” day of God Almighty (v. 14), a “loud” voice (v. 17), a “great” earthquake (v. 18), the “great” city and Babylon the “great” (v. 19), “great” hailstones (v. 21), and the plague that was “severe” (v. 21). As J. B. Smith expresses it, “This is the great chapter of the Bible.”’

This association with the temple defines God’s wrath as holy.  Phillips quotes Stephen Charnock:

‘A love of holiness cannot be without a hatred of everything that is contrary to it. As God necessarily loves himself, so he must necessarily hate everything that is against himself: and as he loves himself for his own excellency and holiness, he must necessarily detest whatsoever is repugnant to his holiness because of the evil of it.’

“Go and pour out on the earth the seven bowls containing God’s wrath” – The ‘wrath’ of God has been first mentioned in Rev 14:10, 19, and then in the present chapter (Rev 16:1,19).  See also Rev 19:15.

Mulholland comments on contemporary ideas about God’s wrath:

‘People nowadays seem to have one of two basic perspectives about the “wrath” of God. They either think of it as a punitive, vindictive, retribution on the part of God, or they dismiss it as a vestige of the cruel and darker perspectives of a less enlightened age.

The first results in a God who is mean, authoritarian, even cruel; a God who is all too often incarnate in believers who are judgmental, critical, vindictive, punitive, retributive.

The second results in a God who overlooks sin, who is not really concerned with the brokenness of people but who “blesses” human bondages as “normal” though “variant” lifestyles. Such a God is also incarnate in believers for whom the primary virtue is “tolerance” and whose values are but one set of relativities in a pluralistic world.’

(Paragraphing added)

A number of commentators quote the striking words of H. Richard Niebuhr about theological liberalism:

‘A God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross.’

Warfield:

‘Every moral being must burn with hot indignation against all wrong perceived as such. That is precisely what we mean by a moral being: a being which knows right and wrong, and which approves the right and reprobates the wrong. If we do not react against the wrong when we see it, in indignation and avenging wrath, we are either unmoral or immoral.’

Tozer:

‘The holiness of God, the wrath of God and the health of the creation are inseparably united…God’s wrath is His utter intolerance of whatever degrades and destroys. He hates iniquity as a mother hates the diphtheria or polio that would destroy the life of her child.’

In Grimsrud’s pacifist reading, the text here:

‘allows some distance between God’s actual direct involvement on earth and the outworking of God’s “wrath.” We see God’s direct involvement in the witness of Jesus and his followers. God’s “wrath” is best seen as more impersonal, an indirect unfolding of cause and effect in a moral universe.’ (To Follow the Lamb)

Again:

‘God’s wrath is not the direct finger of God. In fact, the powers of evil (the dragon, beast, and false prophet) are the ones directly responsible for the plagues.’

But this attempt to distance God from his own wrath amounts to an evasion of the meaning of text.

On the effects of the plagues on creation, Koester comments:

‘The Apocalypse has identified God the Creator as the world’s rightful Lord, and his angels now show his power over each sector of creation by pouring their offering bowls on earth and sea, as well as on rivers, springs, and the sun. Their actions encircle the beast’s kingdom with a ring of threats, exposing the weakness of its power and the fallacy of taking part in the ruler cult.’

Note that this plague affects the people who had the mark of the beast and who worshiped his image – This, according to Osborne, builds on:

‘the exodus motif that the people of God were spared from his outpouring of wrath (Exod. 8:22–23; 9:4, 6; 10:23; 11:7; 12:13; 19:5).’

16:3 Next, the second angel poured out his bowl on the sea and it turned into blood, like that of a corpse, and every living creature that was in the sea died.

Every living creature…died – This time, the judgments are total in their effects (whereas in the trumpets one-thrid of living creatures died (Rev 8:9).

This would have had profound economic implications for the Roman empire, dependent as it was upon the sea and sea travel.  This may be linked with the deprivation of buying and selling in Rev 13:16f and with the economic collapse of Babylon in Rev 18:15–17, 19 (Beale).

16:4 Then the third angel poured out his bowl on the rivers and the springs of water, and they turned into blood. 16:5 Now I heard the angel of the waters saying:

“You are just—the one who is and who was,
the Holy One—because you have passed these judgments,
16:6 because they poured out the blood of your saints and prophets,
so you have given them blood to drink. They got what they deserved!”

The angel of the waters – Presumably, the second angel (v3).  It was a common Jewish belief that angels had authority over different domains and regions of the world.

“You are just…because you have passed these judgments” – ‘God’s justice has seemed slow in coming, because no action has been taken against those responsible for the martyrs’ deaths (Rev 6:9–11). Therefore, the bowl visions emphasize the fact that God will deal justly against the wicked in the end.’ (Koester)

The one who is and who was, the Holy One – The AV has ‘and shalt be’ instead of ‘the Holy One’.  The NET reading reflects the best manuscripts.  Rev 4:8 has ‘…who was, and is, and is to come’, and this (correct) interpretation may have been read into the present text.  But, as Morris says, to refer to the future in the present verse would not be appropriate, since the consummation has already arrived.  ‘There is no point in speaking of a future coming.’  Osborne likewise.

Because God is the Holy One, he must always respond to sin with burning wrath:

‘He can no more cease to hate impurity than he can cease to love holiness: if he should in the least instant approve of anything that is filthy, in that moment he would disapprove of his own nature and being; there would be an interruption in his love of himself, which is as eternal as it is infinite. How can he love any sin which is contrary to his nature, but for one moment, without hating his own nature, which is essentially contrary to sin?…God indeed may be reconciled to the sinner, but never to the sin; for then he should renounce himself, deny his own essence and his own divinity, if his inclinations to the love of goodness, and his aversion from evil, could be changed, if he suffered the contempt of the one, and encouraged the practice of the other.’ (Charnock)

Saints and prophets – The first is a general word for the whole peole of God (there being no separate class of especially holy people), whereas the second is a particular group among them (who were especially vulnerable to persecution because of their calling to proclaim God’s word in a forthright way.

Osborne comments:

‘The particular mention of “the saints and prophets” parallels 18:24 (cf. 17:6), where the destruction of Babylon the Great is linked to her shedding “the blood of the prophets and saints.” Jesus used the murder of the prophets as a reason for divine judgment in Matt. 23:31, 37 (cf. Matt. 5:11–12) and implied it in the parable of the wicked tenants in Mark 12:3–5 par. The theme is also found in Acts 7:52; Rom. 11:3; 1 Thess. 2:15; and Heb. 11:35–37. The early church believed their suffering was a sharing not only of the suffering of Jesus but also of that of the prophets.’

Carson (For the Love of God, Vol 1):

‘If God ignores the persistent attacks on his covenant people, if he pretends that the massive evils that have been perpetrated in the world never happened, he himself is diminished: he is at best amoral, perhaps immoral.’

You have given them blood to drink – They will be repaid in kind for the blood they have shed:

‘Ironically, those who had shed believers’ blood were left with blood to drink. They are punished with the methods of their own crimes.’ (Barton)

“They got what they deserved” – lit. ‘They are worthy’.  Cf. Gal 6:7 – people ‘reap what they sow’ and Lk 6:28 – you are measured with the same measure you use for others.

Koester comments:

‘Previously, the godly were worthy of blessing (Rev 3:4), and God and the Lamb were worthy of praise for their acts of creation and redemption (4:11; 5:9). Here, the opposite is the case: The violent are worthy of divine judgment.’

According to the IVPBBC:

‘In the Old Testament God often let people destroy themselves (the wicked fell into their own trap), and sometimes punished them in ways obviously related to their crime. Judaism developed this theme, emphasizing the appropriateness of particular punishments against the wicked.’

But their punishment was not with human hands, but by God’s command.  It is he who has said: ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay.’

As Duvall remarks, the theme of lex talionis is prominent throughout Scripture:

‘This theme runs through the Old Testament (e.g., Pss. 28:4; 62:12; Jer. 17:10) and the New Testament (Matt. 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 14:12; 2 Cor. 5:10; 11:15; 1 Pet. 1:17), and it surfaces repeatedly in Revelation, with reference to both believers and unbelievers (e.g., Rev 2:23; 11:18; 14:8–10, 13; 16:6; 18:4–8; 20:12–13; 22:12). Throughout the Scriptures, God “remembers” and repays accordingly (Rev 16:19; 18:5–6).’

Phillips agrees:

‘Scholars may assert, as Stephen Travis has done, that “the judgment of God is to be seen not primarily in terms of retribution, whereby people are ‘paid back’ according to their deeds,” yet this is precisely what the Bible shows over and over again. When Achan stole gold, silver, and precious cloths from fallen Jericho, God had him punished in retribution for his sins. Others who received plain retribution from God include Jeroboam, Ahab and Jezebel, Nebuchadnezzar, and Ananias and Sapphira. Israel herself received retributive justice from God when her idolatry was punished by exile into an idol-worshiping land.’

Phillips deals with a couple of objections to divine retribution:

1. Some complain that, under this theory, God is the one from whom we must be saved.  Answer: we must reverently reply in the affirmative.  The writer to the Hebrews urges us to embrance the salvation that is offered in Christ, because ‘it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God’ (Heb 10:31).

2. The doctrine of retribution appears to conflict with Christ’s command to love our enemies (Mt 5:39).  Would God tell us to do one thing, and then himself do the opposite?  Again, the answer is ‘Yes’,

‘for the very reason that God is different from us and so able to dispense justice perfectly. In Paul’s teaching, we are not to exact revenge precisely because we know that God will: “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord” (Rom. 12:19).’

Koester (Revelation and the End of All Things, 2nd ed.) thinks that this punishment falls short of the ‘like for like’ of the lex talionis (Gen 9:6; Ex 21:23):

‘Since Revelation agrees that “if you kill with the sword, with the sword you must be killed” (Rev. 13:10), we should expect the wicked to be slain in as pitiless a fashion as they slew the saints. Yet here they are not killed but given blood to drink. There is a strange restraint in the justice of God. Earlier, the saints under the altar asked how long God would delay in avenging their blood upon the inhabitants of the earth (6:9–11). Here a voice from the altar suggests that the prayers of the saints have received an answer that does not entail a full retribution on the wicked but a mitigated judgment that is declared to be “true and just” (16:7). The purpose of the plagues is not simple punishment. Rather, like the plague that turned the Nile River into blood before the exodus (Exod. 7:17–21), the plagues in Revelation are designed to bring repentance.’

Similarly, in his AB commentary:

‘Initially, this seems to follow the principle of retribution. There is poetic justice in people who have shed streams of blood being made to drink from blood-filled streams. Yet this is not punishment commensurate with the crime. The principle was that people were to be punished “life for life” (Exod 21:23; cf. Gen 9:6; Isa 49:26). Therefore, one might expect the wicked to be slain as they slew the saints, yet the perpetrators of injustice are not killed but are given blood to drink. There is restraint in the justice of God. The plague allows them to live, so that even here repentance remains a possibility.’

This is curious, because this section emphasises both the severity of the punishments and the lack of further opportunity for repentance.

Grimsrud (To Follow The Lamb) goes further, by suggesting that the shedding of blood in Revelation is only ever redemptive.  Therefore, to be ‘given blood to drink’ is to share in the redemptive benefits of the shedding of the blood of the martyrs.  This strikes me as implausible exegesis.

Chester quotes Miroslav Volf:

‘In a world of violence it would not be worthy of God not to wield the sword; if God were not angry at injustice and deception and did not make the final end of violence, God would not be worthy of our worship.’

‘My thesis, that the practice of nonviolence requires a belief in divine vengeance, will be unpopular with many Christians, especially theologians in the West. To the person who is inclined to dismiss it, I suggest imagining that you are delivering a lecture in a war zone (which is where a paper that underlines this chapter was originally delivered). Among your listeners are people whose cities and villages have been first plundered, then burned and levelled to the ground, whose daughters and sisters have been raped, whose fathers and brothers have had their throats slit. The topic of the lecture: a Christian attitude toward violence. The thesis: we should not retaliate since God is perfect non-coercive love. Soon you would discover that it takes the quiet of a suburban home for the birth of the thesis that human nonviolence corresponds to God’s refusal to judge. In a scorched land, soaked in the blood of the innocent, it will invariably die.’

16:7 Then I heard the altar reply, “Yes, Lord God, the All-Powerful, your judgments are true and just!”

This reply may come from:

(a) the personified altar (Mounce and others);

(b) the martyr’s souls beneath the altar, who had cried out in prayer for God to avenge their blood (Rev 8:3).  So Aune, Beale.  That prayer is just a more graphic version of the petition, ‘Deliver us from evil’ (Mt 6:13).  Now they praise God for his ‘true and just’ judgments.

(c) an angel presenting the martyr’s prayers before God, as in Rev 8:3-5 (Osborne).

As Kistemaker comments:

‘No one can accuse God of being hasty in his judgment, for the Almighty has demonstrated extraordinary patience, warning the people repeatedly while they scornfully refused to repent. No one can charge him with injustice, for he passes judgment that accords with truth and justice (Deut. 32:4; Ps. 19:9; 119:137; Dan. 3:27–28 Old (Greek and Theod.).’

16:8 Then the fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and it was permitted to scorch people with fire.

6:9 Thus people were scorched by the terrible heat, yet they blasphemed the name of God, who has ruling authority over these plagues, and they would not repent and give him glory.

The sun…was permitted to scorch people with fire – That same heavenly body which nurtures life itself, becomes the source of pain and misery.

Wright suggests that in the first four plagues we see the natural consequences of human sin working out:

‘God will allow natural elements themselves (earth, sea, rivers and sun) to pass judgment on the human beings who have so grievously abused their position as God’s image-bearers within creation. They are supposed to be looking after God’s world, and caring for one another as fellow humans. But God will call the natural elements themselves to turn on them and judge them for their wickedness.’

Stott (The Incomparable Christ) notes that the first four plagues have to do with the natural world.  He writes:

‘Talk about earth, sea, water and sun has a modern sound in our era of environmental sensitivity. We are concerned about the earth’s bio-diversity, the plankton of the oceans, the availability of clean water and the preservation of the ozone layer to protect us from radiation and its harmful effects. This priority given to life on planet Earth is also a necessary preparation for the coming renewal of all things. As Bishop Paul Barnett has written, “the destruction of the “old heavens and earth” is now completed, clearing the way for the new creation of God”.’

James Hamilton (Preach The Word) notes that in Greek and Rom an mythology there were gods of healing, of the sun, of the sea, of the rivers, and so on.  We are here being shown the utter superiority of Yahweh over these so-called gods.

Hamilton then attempts to apply this to our own contemporary world:

‘We have our own version of the Greco-Roman pantheon and cult today. In place of those who worshiped Poseidon and Neptune we have the environmentalists who worship the earth and its plants and animals. In place of those who worshiped Apollo the god of healing we have the worshipers of modern medicine who believe that health care is what they need and are panicked at the thought of losing access to it or at the thought of someone not having access to it, as though that were the worst thing that could possibly happen. The devotees of these modern cults need to know the one true and living God, Yahweh. Yahweh will crush the things they worship. They will either see Yahweh’s justice and worship him for it, as we just saw in 16:5–7, or they will respond the way the idolaters do in 16:8–21.’

I find it extraordinary that a Christian writer, while rightly emphasising the sovereignty of the God of the Bible over all idolatrous substitutes, should speak to disparagingly of efforts to protect the environment or to heal the body.

They blasphemed the name of God – Osborne writes that

‘Blasphemy in the Apocalypse is to slander God’s holy name through idolatry (especially in worshiping the beast) and to mock his name through rejection.’

They were not atheists!  They hate the God they say they don’t believe in!

They would not repent and give him glory –

‘Three times we are told that the ungodly respond to these divine judgments by refusing to repent of their evil deeds, including their demon worship, idolatry, murder, magic arts, sexual immorality, deception, and theft (Rev 16:9, 11, 21; cf. 2:20–22; 9:20–21; 21:8; 22:15). In spite of the judgments, they refuse to change their thinking or alter their lifestyles. They never accept responsibility for their own sinfulness but curse or blaspheme (blasphēmeō) God instead. In spite of the severe suffering, symbolized by the gnawing of their tongues (v. 10), there is no hint of humility, much less repentance or submission in worship.’ (Duvall)

Is it the case that they will not, or that they cannot, repent?  Is their refusal voluntary, or divinely pre-determined?  I don’t think the interpretative options are so simple as a binary choice implies.

We see God’s creation turning against those who had been appointed as its stewards:

‘God made humanity stewards of his creation. But, instead of husbanding the earth, humans have exploited it. One day humanity will reap the bitter harvest they have sown. The earth will turn on them as God’s judgment comes to its climax. People have been given every chance to repent, both through the disasters of history and the faithful witness of God’s people, but they consistently refuse (16:9, 11).’ (Chester)

We see here a terrible illustration of the ‘unpardonable sin’:

‘They had totally and irrevocably rejected God. They cursed (literally, blasphemed) his name. They had taken on the character of the Beast (Rev 13:6) and had committed the unforgivable sin by rejecting God with absolute finality.’ (Barton)

This process of hardening leads, ultimately to God’s judicial abandonment:

‘This chapter’s recurring theme is the refusal to repent demonstrated by sinners whose hearts are hardened by the punishments God has sent (vv. 9, 11, 21). Furthermore, failing to glorify God results in God abandoning them. Hence, Paul in Romans 1:24–28 notes three times in succession that God gives hardened sinners over to their own sins in an act of divine judgment. In summary, these people are lost forever.’ (Kistemaker)

Bauckham (Climax) remarks that God’s judgments will prompt either faith and obedience, or stubborn resistance to God.

McKnight agrees:

‘Myriads will enter the new Jerusalem—but not all humans will repent. In his vision of the new Jerusalem John says that some people—those who maintain their allegiance to the dragon—will be excluded.’ (Revelation for the rest of us)

See Rev 21:8,27; 22:15.

God’s judgments are his megaphone to a deaf world:

‘God sends judgments not only to vindicate his oppressed people (Rev 6:9–11; 8:3–6), but also to get the world’s attention and offer them the opportunity for repentance (Rev 16:9, 11, 21). That many people do not repent when they face judgment is not too surprising (Rev 16:9). One survivor of a plane crash recounts that he always expected people who were dying to cry out to God for mercy in their final moments, but noted that he heard many respond with cursing, following the habits they had spent their lives developing. Whether God acts with justice or mercy, some refuse to believe (Rev 16:9)’ (Keener)

Mulholland:

‘When citizens of fallen Babylon begin to experience the destructive and debilitating consequences of their life without God, they rarely see this as a touch of God seeking to awaken them to their condition and call them out of their brokenness into God’s wholeness. Instead, they blame others or society or government or big business or technology or leading nations for either causing their plight or failing to resolve their problems. Citizens of fallen Babylon rarely ever realize that the root of their condition lies deep within their own life and not in the circumstances and conditions of the world around them. They believe it is the surrounding world that needs to change to make things better, not they.’

Conclusion:

‘Such a perspective makes it extremely difficult to repent.’

Morris quotes Colclasure:

‘The only way to flee from God is to flee to Him’

Carson (For the Love of God, Vol 2) remarks that:

‘In some ways, the terrible words of 16:9, 11 explain something of hell itself. Hell is not filled with people who have learned their lesson. It is filled with people who still refuse to repent. Like those who suffer from these plagues, they suffer and curse God because of their suffering, but they refuse to repent of what they have done. That is what hell is like: an ongoing cycle of sin, rebellion, judgment, sin, rebellion, judgment, world without end.’

16:10 Then the fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast so that darkness covered his kingdom, and people began to bite their tongues because of their pain. 16:11 They blasphemed the God of heaven because of their sufferings and because of their sores, but nevertheless they still refused to repent of their deeds.

The throne of the beast – Attention begins to turn from the physicial creation to ‘the representative of the world’s rebellion against the creation, Rome’ (Boring).  This paves the way for chapters 17 and 18, and their account of the fall of Babylon.

Darkness covered his kingdom – As with so much of the imagery in this book, we should avoid literalising this, seeking an fantastical explanation in terms of, say, the death of the Sun following its supernova explosion (v8f).

People began to bite their tongues because of their pain – Suggestive of mental derangement, brought about by severe and prolonged suffering.

They blasphemed the God of heaven because of their suffering – Suffering will drive us either to repentance or rejection.  We will either be awakened, or calloused by it.

They still refused to repent of their deeds – These ‘deeds’, suggests Koester, would include:

‘idolatry, murder, sorcery, fornication, theft, faithlessness, and deception (Rev 9:20–21; 21:8; 22:15).’

On terminal impenitence:

‘In all the biblical descriptions of the lost, the absence of sorrow for sin as related to justice and the hatred of justice itself are invariable elements. Satan and his angels, together with condemned men, are utterly and malignantly impenitent.’ (W. G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, vol. 3)

16:12 Then the sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates and dried up its water to prepare the way for the kings from the east. 16:13 Then I saw three unclean spirits that looked like frogs coming out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 16:14 For they are the spirits of the demons performing signs who go out to the kings of the earth to bring them together for the battle that will take place on the great day of God, the All-Powerful.

The sixth angel poured out his bowl – The effect is not a result of direct divine intervention, but on the activity of evil powers, permitted by God and which serve his ultimate purpose (Williamson).

The great river Euphrates – This river marked the eastern border of the Roman Empire and offered protection from the Parthians and other nations to the east.

Dried up its water recalls the crossing of the Jordan (Josh 3:1-4:18).  This, writes Boring, presents:

‘another mind-wrenching rebirth of imagery, in which not only the “Parthians” but the demonic powers behind them—dragon, beast, and false prophet—are used by God in his eschatological judgment.’

To prepare the way for the kings from the east – Such an attack by the Parthians was greatly feared by the Romans.

Keener notes that in the 19th century many Protestants identified ‘the kings of the east’ with the Turks, or with the lost tribes of Israel.  After that, the prophecy movement focused on Japan and then Communist China.  But such interpretations are geographically, historically and theologicaly implausible.

Walvoord notes that up to 50 different interpretations have been offered of these ‘kings from the east’.  Their very number, he suggests, is their refutation.  But, presumably, that refutation does not apply to his interpretation:

‘The passage is best understood as referring to kings from, literally, the “sun rising,” referring to Oriental rulers who will descend upon the Middle East in connection with the final world conflict described a few verses later. The massive specter of communist China alone, with its population of more than 1.3 billion people, makes such an invasion a reasonable prediction.’

Three unclean spirits that looked like frogs – Frogs were regarded as ugly and unnatural (living much of their time in the water, but lacking fins and scales).  See Ex 8:2–6; Lev 11:10; Ps 78:45; 105:30).

This description:

‘communicates at a visceral level how evil these spirits (and the hosts who disgorged them) were.’ (Fanning)

Moreover, frogs make nonsensical croaking sounds, in stark contrast to the truth which comes from the mouth of God and from his prophets.

Koester elaborates:

‘The imagery suggests that what the evil alliance says is as meaningless as the croaking of frogs (Lucian, Merc. cond. 28.4). The conflict between God and evil is a struggle between truth and falsehood. The dragon threatened the woman who represented God’s people by pouring forth a destructive river from its mouth (Rev 12:15). The beast issued blasphemies from its mouth (Rev 13:5–6), and the words of the false prophet drew people into idolatry (Rev 13:11–18). Now the unclean spirits from the mouths of the dragon, beast, and false prophet lure kings into an alliance against God. By way of contrast, fire comes from the mouths of true prophets (11:5), and a sword comes from Christ’s mouth (Rev 1:16; 19:15, 21). These images point to the superior power of the truth they bring.’

These came out of the mouths of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet – Commentators often think of these as an ‘unholy trinity’.

Because these spirits come out of their mouths, we may assume that they are, in the first instances agents of slander and propaganda.  Developing this, Keener states this may include false accusations against the innocent, who are subject to ‘trial by media’, or ‘trial by neighbours’.

One of the hundred of sub-postmasters and sub-postmistresses falsely accused of stealing thousands was Nichola Arch, who:

‘was spat at in the street and stopped going outside after being falsely accused of stealing thousands of pounds while managing Chalford Hill Post Office.’ (Source)

Spirits of demons – Better: demonic spirits.

Barton summarises:

‘Demons comprise a powerful army whose goal has always been to keep people from Christ, to tempt believers into sin, and to destroy Christ’s church in any way possible.’

But in all their allure, they are intent only on destruction, gathering ‘the kings of the earth’ for battle.

These demons perform signs, reminding us that we need to distinguish between real and counterfeit miracles.  This will require the alertness of which v15 speaks.

Koester comments:

‘Signs are miraculous deeds that purport to demonstrate divine power. They may be performed by true (Deut 34:11) or false (13:1–5) prophets; therefore, the signs do not guarantee authenticity (Matt 24:24 par.; 2 Thess 2:10). One could ascribe miracles to Satan (Mark 3:22) as well as to the action of God. In Revelation the signs are ascribed to demonic spirits and are presumably carried out through human agents.’

Again:

‘People need discernment to tell which signs reveal the will of God. The traditional criterion is whether a sign draws people to God or sets them against God (Deut 13:1–3). When the demonic spirits use signs to lure the kings into battle, they promote rebellion against God and Christ, the true ruler of earth’s kings (Rev 1:5; 17:14; 19:16).’

The battle that will take place on the great day of God, the All-Powerful – Recalling the prominent OT motif of ‘the day of the Lord’.

Barton notes:

‘In Scripture, the phrase is always used in connection with an extraordinary happening, whether a present event (such as a locust plague in Joel 1:15), a near future event, or the final period of history when God will defeat all the forces of evil. The final day of the Lord is pictured as a time when God will intervene directly and dramatically in world affairs. Predicted and discussed often in the Old Testament (Isaiah 13:6–12; Ezekiel 38–39; Joel 2:11, 28–32; 3:2; Zephaniah 1:14–18; 14:1–21), the day of the Lord will include both punishment and blessing. God will triumph completely. Christ will judge sin and set up his eternal kingdom.’

Osborne:

‘This end-of-the-world battle was predicted in the OT (Ezek. 38–39; Zech. 12–14; Joel 2:11; 3:2), early Jewish literature (1 Enoch 56.7–8; 90.15–19; 94.9–11; T. Dan 5.10–11; 2 Esdr. [4 Ezra] 13:33–39), and the NT (2 Thess. 2:8), so in a sense the use of the definite article points back to the final battle predicted by the prophets. The battle itself is described further as “the great day of God Almighty,” similar to Rev. 6:17, where it is depicted as “the great day of their [God’s and the Lamb’s] wrath.” It is a “great day” because it culminates the plan of God that existed “from before the creation of the world” (Matt. 25:34; Eph. 1:4; Heb. 4:3; Rev. 13:8; 17:8). It is then that “God Almighty” will show his sovereignty and bring this age to an end, when he “takes his great power and begins to reign” (11:17). The battle will be over in a millisecond when the sword comes out of the mouth of Christ (19:15a) and annihilates his enemies (14:20; 19:15b, 21).’

16:15 (Look! I will come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays alert and does not lose his clothes so that he will not have to walk around naked and his shameful condition be seen.)

This interjection presumably comes from the mouth of Jesus.  If so, then this is the first time he has spoken since chapters 2 and 3.  The wording recalls that used in several of the seven letters.  This reminds us that Revelation as a whole is addressed, in the first instance, to those seven churches.

Koester comments:

‘The point is that no one knows when Christ will come, but the negative image also presses readers to ask why Christ presents himself as a thief instead of as a guest politely knocking at the door as in Rev 3:20. Previously, Christ was compared to a thief in order to startle self-satisfied Christians at Sardis and rob them of their complacency (3:3). Extending the saying to all readers is designed to have a similar effect.’

Where are the saints?  Johnson observes that these final judgments only affect the unbelieving world.  But are the faithful still on earth?  Some, including Farrar, think that they are now gone (Rev 15:2 represents them as being before God’s throne).  But the present exhortation seems to make it clear that they are still present, even though the focus is, for the time being, on the fate of the impenitent.

When we resolve to leave all vengeance in God’s hands, we are freed to follow his command to love our enemies:

Rom 12:17 ‘Do not repay anyone evil for evil; consider what is good before all people….Do not avenge yourselves, dear friends, but give place to God’s wrath, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay,” says the Lord. 12:20 Rather, if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him a drink…12:21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.’

Phillips expresses it like this:

‘Christians know that God is going to judge all evil and save his people from the afflictions of the wicked. Knowing this frees believers to serve as agents of mercy and grace in the world for the sake of the gospel.’

As Mulholland comments, the issue is not prediction but preparedness:

‘Jesus made it unmistakably clear that the end will come suddenly and unexpectedly, even noting in a most puzzling statement that he himself does not know when it will occur. (On the sudden and unexpected nature of the final act of history, see Matt 24:37–44; 25:1–13; Mark 13:34–37. On Jesus’ own unawareness of the time, see Matt 24:36.) Paul and Peter reiterated the same perspective (see 1 Thess 5:1–3; 2 Pet 3:10). In the book of Revelation, Jesus twice repeats the indication of his return at a totally unexpected time, for he will come like a thief in the night (3:3; 16:15; cf. 1 Thess 5:2). In all these instances, the issue for Christians is not prediction but preparedness. Citizens of God’s New Jerusalem are called to live their lives in such true discipleship that whenever the end comes it does not find them unprepared but living fully in loving, responsive relationship with Christ in all the aspects of their lives.’

“I will come like a thief” reflects a prominent NT teaching, also expressed by Jesus (Mt 24:43), Paul (1 Thess 5:2), and Peter (2 Pet 3:10).

“Blessed is the one who stays alert” – This is the third of seven beatitudes in Revelation (Rev 1:3; 14:13; 16:15; 19:9; 20:6; 22:7, 14).

To walk around naked recalls:

‘the shameful stripping of captive Babylon (Is 47:3), one drunk (Hab 2:16), or God’s adulterous people (Hos 2:3; Ezek 16:37; cf. Rev 3:18).’ (IVPBBC)

Vigilance is urged.  Koester:

‘This verse defines vigilance as remaining clothed or, literally, keeping one’s garments (Rev 16:15). The point is like that of the parable about servants waiting for their master to return. They are to keep their garments wrapped around their waists so that they are ready for action (Luke 12:35–38), unlike those who become drowsy and undress for bed (Song 5:3; Neh 4:23.’

So also Osborne: the picture is of a person who ‘stays awake and fully clothed in readiness for Christ’s return.’

But the mention of ‘shame’ suggests a further meaning: to be without the garments of righteousness which are the apparel of the justified:

‘The imagery of clothing is used to refer to holiness given to us freely by the Lamb’s sacrifice for us, a holiness that we live out in consistent faith and obedience toward God.’ (Fanning)

Chester explains the symbolism of ‘clothing’ ourselves:

‘We make ourselves ready by clothing ourselves, which, in the Bible, means clothing ourselves with Christ (Revelation 3:15-19; Luke 12:35-47; Romans 13:11-14; 1 Thessalonians 5:1-11; 2 Peter 3:10-14). The martyrs who cry out for justice from the altar are given white robes to wear (Revelation 6:11). Before God’s justice we are all naked and exposed (Hebrews 4:12-13). But God himself clothes those who trust in Christ. The church in Laodicea is self-sufficient and self-righteous, but in reality they are wretched and pitiable before God’s judgment (Revelation 3:17). But the risen Christ says, “I counsel you to buy from me … white clothes to wear, so that you can cover your shameful nakedness” (Rev 3:18).’

Recollect that Paul can write of being ‘clothed with Christ’, Gal 3:27, and of being clothed with Christian virtues, Col 3:12 –

‘It is these qualities and actions, expressed as ‘deeds’, that the Christians in Sardis lack, since they are asleep, and Jesus will come as a thief to them (3:2–3). The failure to live a holy life in readiness to meet Jesus is likened to the cultural shame in first-century Judaism of being naked, the state you are naturally in when sleeping in a hot climate.’ (Ian Paul)

This imagery is associated with the Laodicean church in Rev 3:18.

Here, according to Duvall, is the central message for the readers:

‘In light of the coming battle, Christians should remain faithful and resist compromise. Jesus had repeatedly warned his followers to stay alert because his return would occur suddenly and (for some) unexpectedly, like a thief in the middle of the night (e.g., Matt. 24:43; Luke 12:39; Rev. 3:3; cf. 1 Thess. 5:2, 4; 2 Pet. 3:10).’

Duvall adds:

‘In Jesus’s eschatological discourse, he repeatedly warns his followers to stay alert and remain watchful (e.g., Matt. 24:4, 42, 44; 25:13). In the parables that conclude the discourse, he defines watchfulness as faithfulness (Matt. 24:43–25:30).’

16:16 Now the spirits gathered the kings and their armies to the place that is called Armageddon in Hebrew.

Armageddon – Geographically, this is the site of a traditional battlefield (the site of some 200 battles), situated about twenty miles south-west of Nazareth. Symbolically, it represents the God’s final conquest over evil.

Duvall notes that:

‘Since Megiddo was the location of important ancient battles (e.g., Judg. 5:19–21; 2 King 23:29; 2 Chron. 35:20–25), “Armageddon” came to represent not a specific geographical location but the epic battle between God and the forces of evil.’

‘Armageddon’ is mentioned only once in the entire Bible, yet it has generated a huge amount of eschatological speculation.

Tonstad and Sigve comment:

‘In January 2017 a Google search on the word yielded 24,900,000 entries, and a simple entry on Amazon.com returned 25,134 results. “Armageddon” might well be Revelation’s most successful contribution to popular perceptions of its message. But the word is not self-explanatory: it could be a prime example of a misperception, the one thing everyone knows that isn’t what it is thought to be.’

Aune writes that ‘Armageddon’:

‘represents the mythical apocalyptic-world mountain where the forces hostile to God, assembled by demonic spirits, will gather for final battle against God and his people.’

Some imagine that human armies with gather at this very site to wage war against God’s people (identified by some as Israel).

Lightner (The Last Days Handbook) offers a representative dispensational view:

‘This is the last world war. It will be the final conflict in a series of battles between world powers over the city of Jerusalem and the land of Palestine. It is therefore more of a campaign that rages through most of the last half of the Tribulation than one single battle.

‘Armageddon itself is a vast plain in the nation of Israel. It is there that the kings of North, South, and East will assemble to contend with the Antichrist and lay claim to Jerusalem and the land of Israel. This puts these vast alliances in conflict with one another.

‘Somehow, once they are gathered, they manage to put their differences aside and join forces to oppose God Himself. It is to the valley of Armageddon that the Lord Jesus descends along with “the armies which are in heaven” (Rev. 19:14) to defeat the armies of the earth along with Satan, the Antichrist, and the false prophet. Jesus will then reign over the earth as King of kings and Lord of lords.’

David Pawson:

‘There is to be a battle at the end of history, and it is to be in the Middle East. I have stood on this spot. Imagine a triangular plain about ten miles across each way, surrounded by hills, and at one key point there is a slight rise; it is a hill called the hill of Megiddo, and from it you can see the whole plain. At its foot is a crossroads, and it is the crossroads of the entire world. The road from Europe down to Arabia comes there; the road from Asia to Africa comes there, and the crossroads is a few hundred yards from the hill of Megiddo. It is the point at which continents meet and there in that plain is to be fought a battle which will signal the last war or battle of history.’

But this is to ignore the symbolic nature of the entire book.

Mounce emphasises the symbolism of this passage:

‘Geography is not the major concern. Wherever it takes place, Armageddon is symbolic of the final overthrow of all the forces of evil by the might and power of God. The great conflict between God and Satan, Christ and antichrist, good and evil, that lies behind the perplexing course of history will in the end issue in a final struggle in which God will emerge victorious and take with him all who have placed their faith in him. This is Har-Magedon.’

Barton summarises some of the different  views held by conservative Bible teachers:

1. ‘Dispensational premillennialists believe that the battle of Armageddon begins when the king of the north and the king of the south converge on Israel to attack the Antichrist and his troops. After these armies are defeated, the kings of the east invade Israel (16:16). Then Christ will intervene and demonstrate his power by destroying all remaining foes (19:19–21).

2. Amillennialists and historic premillennialists believe that evil and destruction will increase in the last days. Christians will be present on earth during this period of Tribulation. Both amillennialists and historic premillennialists believe that the vision of Armageddon in Revelation figuratively portrays the final rebellion against God. As a result, they pay more attention to Christ’s second coming than to the battle itself.

3. Postmillennialists believe that evangelists and Christians who try to spread God’s word will always face obstacles. Postmillennialists don’t believe that wickedness and persecution will significantly increase as the world draws to a close. Instead, because they think the church is gradually transforming society, they believe that Armageddon is a picture of Christ’s victory over evil forces throughout church history. God’s word will triumph over all opposition and establish the millennial kingdom.’

(Numbering added)

As the Fortress Commentary notes:

‘For today’s premillennialists, it will be a future World War III, centered on the plains of northern Israel, where Christ will defeat the Antichrist and establish a literal thousand-year kingdom in Jerusalem.’

Wiersbe summarises the significance, both in Scripture and elsewhere, of this area:

‘The name Armageddon comes from two Hebrew words, har Megiddo, the hill of Megiddo. The word Megiddo means “place of troops” or “place of slaughter.” It is also called the Plain of Esdraelon and the Valley of Jezreel. The area is about fourteen miles wide and twenty miles long, and forms what Napoleon called “the most natural battlefield of the whole earth.” Standing on Mount Carmel and overlooking that great plain, you can well understand why it would be used for gathering the armies of the nations.

It was on this plain that Barak defeated the armies of Canaan (Judg. 5:19). Gideon met the Midianites there (Judg. 7) and it was there that King Saul lost his life (1 Sam. 31). Titus and the Roman army used this natural corridor, as did the Crusaders in the Middle Ages. British General Allenby used it when he defeated the Turkish armies in 1917.’

Although ‘kings and their armies’ gather there, they are not mentioned again, and there is no description of a ‘Battle of Armageddon’ (but see Rev 19:11–21 which, if it describes such a battle, is entirely one-sided in God’s favour!).

Boring, therefore, can comment:

‘John uses the traditional military imagery, but in his own theology the decisive victory was already won at the cross and resurrection of Jesus (see above on 5:1–14; 12:7–12). Revelation thus contains no descriptions of eschatological battles (cf. 19:11–21; 20:7–10).’

‘Armageddon’ should be understood symbolically:

‘the fact that over two hundred battles have been fought in this vicinity makes this site an appropriate symbol for the final battle against evil.’ (EBC)

Mulholland:

‘For John’s vision, and for us, “Armageddon” provides an image of a final victory of God over the forces of the rebellious realm. It is an image of confidence and assurance in God’s final victory when everything else in present history suggests that fallen Babylon is on a path of unending conquest.’

Michaels remarks that the word ‘Armageddon’ would be evocative to the first readers, in a similar way that ‘Waterloo’ is to us.

For Wright, the point is that:

‘all the powers of evil must be brought to one place, so that they can be dealt with there.’

No army can hinder the purposes of God!

Wiersbe comments:

‘Movements of armies, confederations of nations, and worldwide opposition to God cannot hinder the Lord from fulfilling His Word and achieving His purposes. Men think they are free to do as they please, but in reality, they are accomplishing the plans and purposes of God!’

[/su_note]

16:17 Finally the seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air and a loud voice came out of the temple from the throne, saying: “It is done!” 16:18 Then there were flashes of lightning, roaring, and crashes of thunder, and there was a tremendous earthquake—an earthquake unequaled since humanity has been on the earth, so tremendous was that earthquake. 16:19 The great city was split into three parts and the cities of the nations collapsed. So Babylon the great was remembered before God, and was given the cup filled with the wine made of God’s furious wrath. 16:20 Every island fled away and no mountains could be found. 16:21 And gigantic hailstones, weighing about a hundred pounds each, fell from heaven on people, but they blasphemed God because of the plague of hail, since it was so horrendous.

Finally – Once again (as at the beginning of chapter 15) the conclusion of one vision also serves as the introduction to the next.  As Aune observes:

‘This unit of text serves as a conclusion to the section on the seven angels with the seven bowls of the wrath of God (Rev 15:1–16:21) and at the same time as an introduction to the extensive section on the fall of Babylon (Rev 17:1–19:10).’

The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air – The air was considered to be the domain of evil spirits.

“It is done!” – Answering the cry of the martyrs in Rev 6:9-11 – “How long?”.

This angelic declaration signals, perhaps, the end of history as we know it.  God’s purposes, both of redemption and judgment, have been accomplished (cf. Jn 19:30).

Koester:

‘Yet God’s wrath does not end here; it continues until evil has been completely overthrown (19:15). Only when the forces that threaten life are gone and all things are made new in the New Jerusalem will God say with absolute finality, “All is done!” (21:6). Creation rather than destruction is the goal.’

A tremendous earthquake – Sardis, Laodicea, Ephesus and Philadelphia had all been destroyed by earthquakes.  This earthquake is unprecedented in destructive power.

Wilcock links this with the great earthquake predicted in Hag 2:6, expounded in Heb 12:26f –

12:26 Then his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, “I will once more shake not only the earth but heaven too.” 12:27 Now this phrase “once more” indicates the removal of what is shaken, that is, of created things, so that what is unshaken may remain.

The great city was split into three parts – Utterly destroyed, probably by earthquake.  Most interpreters (incluidng Aune) identify this city with Babylon, although Patterson thinks that it is ‘almost certainly’ Jerusalem (so also Fanning).  Koester thinks that the expression refers both to Babylon and to the ungodly world as a whole.

Akin thinks that ‘Bablyon’ stands for any and every city, including Rome and Jerusalem,:

‘that stands in opposition to the city of God, the new Jerusalem (Rev 21–22). Babylon falls completely, and all the cities of her world fall with her.’

Babylon the great was remembered before God – in order to be called to account.

Pagan powers (including Rome in the 1st century) may imagine that they can persecute and slay with impunity.  But God will remember.

Preton Sprinkle comments on the identity of ‘Babylon’:

‘The book of Revelation…lifts the curtain and exposes “the spiritual environment within which the church perennially finds itself living and struggling.” The wild images in the book, therefore, shouldn’t be mapped onto first-century or twenty-first-century events in a direct, one-to-one correspondence—the beast is Iran, the locusts are Chinese tanks, the whore of Babylon is Lady Gaga, or whatever. Rather, the images and otherworldly scenes depict the struggle Christians face as they live within—and resist—the oppressive empires of every era. In this sense, “Babylon” is Rome of the first century, but it’s also the Umayyad Empire, the Vikings, crusaders, Ottomans, Nazis, and every other Babel-like state that seeks global domination. God rules the earth. And in every age, His followers—the kingdom of God—find themselves struggling to live out God’s rule in the midst of earthly empires. ‘ (Fight: A Christian Case For Non-Violence)

Rev 20:1-22:6 will record the details of God’s judgment of Babylon.

Koester:

‘The martyrs asked that God would see that justice prevailed, and God now remembers the injustice and their prayers and takes action against Babylon, the perpetrator (Rev 18:5; cf. Hos 7:2; 8:13; 9:9; Jer 14:10).’

The cup filled with the wine made of God’s furious wrath – According to Morris, there is no more emphatic statement than this in the entire book.

Every island fled away – ‘Islands’. in OT thinking, suggest the furthest parts of the world.  They will not escape God’s judgment.

No mountain could be found – ‘Mountains’ are suggestive of the ‘high places’ associated with idol worship.  Alternatively (suggests Ian Paul) there may be an allusion here to mountains being laid low to prepare for God’s coming (Isa 40:3–4; Mk 1:3).

Ian Paul comments on the eschatological charater of the patient endurance and faithful witness of the saints:

‘always has an eschatological character to it, as they wait for the true revelation of God and his justice at the end of time. Their suffering will be costly, but their prayers for justice, vindication and the coming of God’s kingdom will be heard and answered.’

Gigantic hailstones – adding to the destruction already caused by the great earthquake.  Perhaps an allusion to Isa 28:17.

They blasphemed God – Swete observes:

‘Even Pharaoh had shown signs of repentance under the hail (Exod. 9:27), though he relapsed into impenitence as soon as it had ceased; but the age of the last plague blasphemed while it suffered.’

The judgment upon Babylon will be the main theme of the next two chapters.