Revelation 2:5

μνημόνευε οὖν. Prim. omits οὖν; 38 reads μνημόνευσον; see notes on 16, Revelation 3:3; Revelation 3:19. It is easier to imagine reasons why some verbs should be in the present, others in the aorist, than why some should be followed by οὖν and not others. Accidents of transcription would account for both.

πέπτωκας. With א (πεπτωκες) AB2C; P 1 and Text. Rec[81] read ἐκπἐπτωκας.

[81] Rec. Textus Receptus as printed by Scrivener.

5. μνημόνευε οὖν … καὶ μετανόησον. Here again it is possible to suppose that the contrast of tenses has the force it would bear in ordinary Greek, that the remembrance of the fall is to continue after the instantaneous change of purpose and conduct. Neither μετανοεῖν nor μετάνοια is used in St John’s Gospel or Epistles.

τὰ πρῶτα ἔργα ποίησον. Here too we may find a reason for the aorist; the Church is not merely to set about the first works, but to “perform the doing of them.” He does not say, “Love with the first love,” though the works were only valuable as proceeding from love: for to love, though depending on the state of the will, is not a directly voluntary act. But He says, “Do the first works,” for that is in thy power. Do again what love made thee do, that thou mayest learn to love again. The paradox is as true of spiritual graces as of natural virtues (Arist. Eth. Nic. II. iv. 1, 2) that the good habitual character is only gained by good acts, while really good acts are only possible as the product of the good character.

ἔρχομαι. Lit. “I am coming” the verb having of its own nature the sense of future time; cf. Revelation 1:4 and note. Possibly the distinction of tenses is intentional, the present here and Revelation 2:16; Revelation 2:22-23; Revelation 3:11-12 marking the immediate, and the future the subsequent action of the Speaker.

κινήσω τὴν λυχνίαν σου. i. e. make thee cease to be a Church. It seems scarcely relevant to point to the destruction of the city by the Turks, and its present desolation, as a fulfilment of this threat. We may presume that the Church of Ephesus did repent, as it was famous and prosperous, and fertile in saints, for centuries. It is likely enough that the Turkish conquest was God’s judgement on the sins of the Eastern Empire and its Churches: but we cannot conclude that the Church of Ephesus was in the 14th century more corrupt than e.g. that of Smyrna, because it was more entirely exterminated.