Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T13:46:15.731Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Origin of the Title ‘King of Kings and Lord of Lords’ in Revelation 17. 14

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

G. K. Beale
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The purpose of this note is to discuss the christological title ‘King of kings and Lord of lords’ in Rev 17. 14. Most commentators have generally understood the title to have its broad background in intertestamental Judaism and the Old Testament. The title is also attested in Babylonian and Egyptian tradition, but such an influence is unlikely here since John usually limits his sphere of reference to the Old Testament and its related literature and traditions. Among the possible above-mentioned references in Judaism and the Old Testament, 1 En 9. 4 bears closest resemblance to Rev 17. 14. The 1 En reference could be in mind, not only because of its similarity of wording, but also because its context concerns eschatological judgment (i.e. of the fallen Watchers), as does that of Rev 17.

Type
Short Studies
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 31 , Issue 4 , October 1985 , pp. 618 - 620
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

[1] Various parts of the title appear in Deut 9. 26; 10. 17; Esth 4. 17b; Ps 135. 2–3; Ezek 26. 7; Dan 2. 37, 47; 2 Esdr 7. 12; 2 Macc 13. 4; 3 Macc 2. 2; 5. 35; 1 En 63. 4; 84. 2; As Mos 7.1. Commentators generally consider Deut, Pss, Dan, 1 En, 2 Macc, and 3 Macc as most important among these references.

[2] Cf. Charles, R. H., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John 2 (1920) 75Google Scholar and Lohmeyer, E., Die Offenbarung des Johannes (1953) 144Google Scholar. See also the use of šar šarri (or šarrāni) for ‘king of kings’ (in Tallqvist, K. L.. Akkadische Götterepitheta [1974] 237Google Scholar) and the use of bēl bēlē for ‘lord of lords’ (in Tallqvist, , Götterepitheta, 42Google Scholar). Consult also Seux, M.-J., Épithetes Royales Akkadiennes et Sumériennes (1967)Google Scholar. I am indebted to my colleague, Jeffrey J. Niehaus, for these references.

[3] For support of this idea with respect to John, as well as Jewish apocalyptists, see my ‘The Use of Daniel in Jewish Apocalyptic Literature and In the Revelation of St. John’, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation at the University of Cambridge (1981)Google Scholar. See also the revised monograph form of the dissertation with the same title (published by University Press of America, 1984)Google Scholar. However, see infra for the suggestion that the Babylonian title may have an indirect association with the Revelation 17 title.

[4] Cf. 1 En 9. 4 (‘Lord of lords, God of gods, King of kings’).

[5] Cf. Dan 4. 37 (LXX, ὄτι αύτός έστι θεός τω¯ν θεω¯ν καί κύρως τω¯ν κυρίων καί βασιλεύς τω¯ν βασιλέων) with Rev 17.14b (ὅτι κύριος κνρίων έστίν καί βασιλεύς βασιλέων).

[6] Note that the kings in Dan 4 and Rev 17 are directly associated with ‘Babylon’, whereas this is not the case in 1 En. The Dan 4 theme of absolute divine sovereignty over earthly kings is possibly also expressed in Rev 17. 17, where the same type of wording is used (cf. Rev 17.17, θεόςἔδωκεν είς τάς καρδίας αύτν … δοῡναιτήνβασιλείαναύτντῷθηρίῳ with Dan 4. 16 [Theod], καρδία θηρίου δοθήσεται αύτψ¯ [cf. similarly Dan 7. 4]. See further the LXX of Dan 4. 17, 35–37c and Dan 4.31–34 [MT].

[7] These passages are closer in form to Dan 4. 37 (LXX) and Rev 17 than are any other comparable references in the LXX. Dan 2. 47 is especially relevant since it has the same eschatological reference as in Rev 17, i.e. a divine being who defeats the kings of the earth. The title in Dan 2. 37 and 3. 2 (cf. 4. 37b, LXX) refers to the king of Babylon, with whom there is also a more general association in Rev 17 (cf. v. 5). Perhaps the title in Daniel is used with polemical irony, i.e. the title is viewed as being wrongly assumed by the Babylonian king and truly predicable only of the ‘Most High’ God. Such polemical irony is seen most vividly in Nebuchadnezzar's praise of the ‘Most High’ God as ‘King of heaven’ and ‘earth’ in Dan 4. 35 ff. (LXX; cf. Dan 4. 31 ff. in MT).

[8] In Dan 4. 37b βασιλεύς βασιλέων is repeated after the expression of universality (cf. 37a).

[9] The same kind of connection occurs in Dan 3. 2 (LXX).

[10] The use of Dan 7 phraseology throughout Rev 17 is so pervasive that it is evident that the whole chapter has been modelled on that of Dan 7 (most commentators agree on the abundant use of Dan 7 in Rev 17).

[11] Although it is not an exact verbal reproduction, the phrase probably represents John's own coinage from the similar phrases repeated throughout Daniel (cf. varying threefold combinations of plural forms of λαός, Φυλή, γλσσα,$$$$$$$ ἓθνος and χώρα in Dan [Theod] 3. 4, 7, 96 [sg.]; 4. 1; 5. 19; 6. 26; 7. 14; Dan [LXX] 3. 2, 4, 7, 96; 4. 21, 37b; 6. 26. Cf. also the MT of Dan 3. 4, 7, 31; 5. 19; 6. 26; 7. 14. Ὅχλος appears to be an added element to the Danielic formula in Rev 17. The next closest parallels to Danieloccur in Gen 10. 5, 20, 31; Judith 3. 8. John repeats the Danielic formula of Rev 17. 15 elsewhere, usually in relation to other Danielic allusions [cf. Rev 5. 9; 7. 9; 10.11; 11.9; 13.7;14.6]).

[12] In the LXX and NT συντελέω, τελειόω or τελέω are not often used with λόγος to designate fulfilment of God's prophetic word (cf. 2 Esdr 1. 1; 7. 12; Isa 10. 23; Rom 9. 28). Cf. also the eschatological use of συντελέω in Dan 12. 7.

[13] The phrase βαβυλών ή μεγάλη in Rev 17. 5 is found nowhere else in the OT except Dan 4. 27 (30).

[14] The repeated use of μυστήριον in Dan 2 is probably also in mind since it refers to a dream vision of the king of Babylon, as it does in Dan 4. This is also evident since the eschatological nuance of μυστήριον is found in the OT only in Dan 2.

[15] Since ‘Babylon’ in John's thought is probably associated with Rome, it may also be concluded that Domitian's title of ‘Dominus et Deus noster’ was an element attracting John's attention to the divine title in Dan 4.