Revelation 11:7

The influence of Hebraic idiom helps to explain (cf. Revelation 20:7-9) the translator's “transition from futures through presents to preterites” here (Simcox). τελέσωσι (Burton, 203) indicates no uncertainty. When their work is done, they are massacred not till then; like their Lord (Luke 13:31 f.), they are insured by loyalty to their task. The best comment upon this and the following verses, a description coloured by the famous passage in Sap. 2:12 3, 9, is Bunyan's description of the jury in Vanity Fair and their verdict. This beast “from the abyss” is introduced as a familiar figure an editorial and proleptic reference to the beast “from the abyss” in Revelation 17:8 or from “the sea” (Revelation 13:1; the abyss and the sea in Romans 10:7 = Deuteronomy 30:13) which was (cf. Encycl. Rel. and Ethics, i. 53 f.) the haunt and home of daemons (Luke 8:31, etc.), unless he is identified with the supernatural fiend and foe of Revelation 9:2; Revelation 9:11. (Bruston heroically gets over the difficulty of the beast's sudden introduction by transferring Revelation 11:1-13 to a place after Revelation 19:1-3). The beast wars with the witnesses (here, as in Revelation 9:9 and Revelation 12:17, Field, on Luke 14:31, prefers to take πόλεμον = μάχην, a single combat or battle, as occasionally in LXX [e.g., 1 Kings 22:34] and Lucian), and vanquishes them, yet it is the city (Revelation 11:13) and not he who is punished. The fragmentary character of the source is evident from the fact that we are not told why or how this conflict took place. John presupposed in his readers an acquaintance with the cycle of antichrist traditions according to which the witnesses of God were murdered by the false messiah who, as the abomination of desolation or man of sin, was at feud with all who opposed his worship or disputed his authority.