Revelation 5:1

ἔσωθεν καὶ ὄπισθεν. With A; א reads ἔμπροσθεν καὶ ὄπισθεν: Orig. in different places is quoted for this reading, for ἔσωθεν καὶ ἔξωθεν the reading of B2P Hipp[183] And[184], and for the text.

[183] St Hippolytus. The readings not given by Tischendorf are from the newly published 4th book of his commentary on Daniel.
[184] Andreas Archbishop of Caesarea.

1. ἐπὶ τὴν δεξιάν. Perhaps the simplest explanation of the case is that in a decaying language an illiterate writer who knew that ἐπὶ was used with three cases took the accusative, where his phrase did not suggest the correct case as in ὁ καθήμενος ἐπὶ τῷ θρόνῳ: possibly we are to understand that, as the book had not been seen before, the construction marks a new feature in the Vision, as if the book were so to speak an addition to the Hand. It lies in any case upon the open palm.

βιβλίον, i.e. a roll; the ordinary meaning for the equivalent words in all ancient literature, though books arranged in leaves like ours were not unknown.

γεγραμμένον ἔσωθεν καὶ ὄπισθεν. So Ezekiel 2:10. It was a recognised but quite exceptional way of getting an unusual amount of matter into a single volume: such rolls were called opisthographi. See Juv. i. 6, where he complains of an interminable poem, “written till the margin at the top of the book is full, and on the back, and not finished yet.” Ancient commentators who knew this still found many mysteries in the distinction between what was written without and what was written within. If we are to ask, how St John saw that it was thus written, it may be said that he saw that there was writing on the part outside, between the seals, and took for granted that this implied that the side folded inwards was full of writing too. But perhaps this is too minute: St John saw the book now, and learnt (either now or afterwards) how it was written.

κατεσφραγισμένον. See Isaiah 29:11; Daniel 12:4. The seals are along the edge of one end of the roll.

The traditional view, so far as there is one, of this sealed book is, that it represents the Old Testament, or more generally the prophecies of Scripture, which are only made intelligible by their fulfilment in Christ. But Christ’s fulfilment of prophecy was, in St John’s time, to a great extent past: and he was told (Revelation 4:1) that what he was now to see was concerned with the future. Many post-Reformation commentators, both Romanist and Protestant, have supposed the book to be the Apocalypse itself: some supposing, by a further refinement, that the seven seals were so arranged that, when each was opened, a few lines of the book could be unrolled, viz. those describing what was seen after its opening: while the opening of the last would enable the whole roll to be spread out. But of this there is not the smallest evidence in the Apocalypse itself: nor do we ever find the Prophets of Scripture representing, as Mahomet did, that their writings are copies of an original archetype in Heaven; though apparently the angel, Daniel 10:21, has read in Heaven what he declares to the seer on earth. Most modern commentators therefore generalise, and suppose that it is the Book of God’s counsels. Some insist on the fact that, though the seals are all broken, “no portion of the roll is actually unfolded, nor is anything read out of the book”: they suppose it to stand for the complete counsel of God, which will not become intelligible till it has all been fulfilled, not therefore before the end of time. But this book tells us what is to happen until all has been fulfilled, until time has ended: and why then do we not hear of the opening of the book, even if it be not for us yet to know what is written therein? And to this we may answer, we are told, Revelation 20:12, of the opening of a very important Book, the Book of Life; and that Book belongs to the Lamb that was slain, Revelation 13:8; Revelation 21:27. Is not then this Book the same as that? so that the opening of it will be “the manifestation of the sons of God” (Romans 8:19).