It flowed down the centre of the main street. On each side of the river grew a tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, with a fresh crop each month. The leaves were used for medicine to heal the nations.
Revelation 22:2
What a curious comment: “The leaves were used for medicine to heal the nations.” Allow me to remind you again of the questions Gem readers have asked related to this statement:
How can the nations still exist when they have been destroyed?
What does ‘the leaves were used for medicine to heal the nations’ even mean?
And why is there any need for healing if there is no sickness, pain or death in the New Jerusalem? Is this an example of a contradiction in the Bible?
Why does John close Rev 22:2 and add a hint in 22:15 with reference to “nations”, when he has had a major theme of Tribe, Language, People, Nation?
Why don’t we have another example of Tribe, Language, People and Nation in Revelation 22 to bring it all to a climax? (Using the four key terms he has been using throughout).
Why not include kingdoms as well in order to contrast the kingdoms of this world with the Kingdom of God? (That would make for a nice contrastive conclusion. I think that is what I would have done. ) I hope you have reread the Gem Series mentioned and highlighted above for you to ponder.
The Bible doesn’t have to be re-translated but it does have to be re-read.
Dr Eli Lizorkin-Girzhel (Eyzenberg)
The Bible, the Word of God, is full of amazing nuances, little touches and figures of speech which add deeper meaning. Most readers have no clue that something significant is being said by the words of the text at a deeper level than they could imagine. Furthermore, I am of the opinion that most commentators miss the point on many of the deeper figures of speech of the Bible, especially in Revelation. I have pointed out a few of them over the series of Gems I have written on Revelation. One of the most impactful to me is found in Ha Makom, another hidden treasure of God in an overlooked name for God Himself. Our God is the Hiding Place as Corrie Ten Boom and Immaculeé Iligabiza found and which you can find too in your most desperate time of need.
I have been shocked to realise that there are two camps among the commentators on the matter of the meaning of “The leaves were used for medicine to heal the nations”. The majority of commentators avoid making comment about this final portion of Revelation 22:2 altogether. A classic case of if-in-doubt; don’t open your mouth. I was surprised to find there were no commentators comments listed in Ronald Trail’s second volume of his Exegetical Summaries on Revelation on this verse. Normally he is very thorough, but it seems none of the commentators at his disposal ventured to make a comment on the purpose of John’s statement related to the healing of the nations. Not one! So I turned to the SIL/Wycliffe Exegetical Helps Series on Revelation which covers 41 different commentaries in addition to the 80+ commentaries I have access to. Only four commentators dared to refer to “the healing of the nations” found in this verse. Their comments I have quoted below:-
This healing stands for the healing of the sickness from which the heathen suffered in their earthly life.
Friedrich Dusterdieck
This should be understood as health-giving to promote the enjoyment of life in the New Jerusalem and not for correcting ills which do not exist [there].
John Walvoord
We are not to think of nations living on the new earth in the age to come who will need healing. The contrast is between this age and the age to come.
George Eldon Ladd
The healing leaves indicate the complete absence of physical and spiritual want. We are not to infer that nations will continue to exist outside the New Jersusalem.
Robert H.Mounce
At least two of them [Ladd and Mounce] do acknowledge that we ought not interpret this statement of John’s to mean there will be other nations left after the Coming of the LORD, who are still in need of healing. The inference being, they will be allowed into the New Jerusalem once they are healed. That alternative interpretation is due to the influence of Henry Barclay Swete. Here is the comment from Swete which has led others down the same path related to this closing reference to “nations” in Revelation 22:15.
The seer [John] seems to forecast the presence of ἔθνη, nations not yet included among the citizens of the New Jerusalem, even after the Parousia.
Henry Barclay Swete p 300
Swete’s comment suggests after the Parousia (the Coming of the LORD as Judge) there will be nations who are not yet included in the New Jerusalem
I will deal more thoroughly with Swete’s comment in Gem 2397 when I close the current topic and address Revelation 22:15 and The Dogs Outside The City. At this point I personally feel the four men I have quoted above have made their comments because they felt they had to say something. I don’t feel their input adds anything to our understanding and in fact leaves us still looking for a good explanation.
Finally, I came across two quotes that I felt were worthwhile and were in accord with what I had thought was the most valid, likely explanation, giving us a more useful perspective of what John intended:
What is sorely needed after human empires ravaged the nations is the promotion of communal harmony between the tribes and nations.
Bruce M Metzger
The leaves will continue to bring healing not to individuals but to the nations, those entities which have historically been at odds and at war with one another.
Gordon D. Fee
At last some experts I can agree with. When I first thought about this verse I thought the obvious connection is to John’s Tribe, Language, People, Nation motif. But why does John only mention Nation and not the four terms in the motif? I think what he is doing is using the figure of speech called synechdoche*. I think John was likely using the term “nations” to represent all terms he has used in Revelation by taking the larger scale term to stand for all of the terms he used. One day I will have the chance to ask him what he intended behind the scene. You can join me if you are not willing to take my word for it. However, the other three terms: Tribe, Language and People (Groups) are all subsumed in Nations.
But now we must ask the question: If the nations were all wiped out in the final battle, do any of them make it through to the New Jerusalem?
- Another matter to address is what leaves have to do with all this?
- What is your answer to these questions?
I guess I could ask you again the question I repeated in the Gem Series on this motif:-
- Do the tribes matter? Will there be representatives of every tribe in the New Jerusalem? Or are they left outside?
- Do the languages matter? Will there be representatives of every language in the New Jerusalem? Or are they left outside?
- Do the people groups matter? Will there be representatives of every people group in the New Jerusalem? Or are they left outside?
- Do the nations matter? Will there be representatives of every nation in the New Jerusalem? Or are they left outside?
- What is your answer to these questions?
- Can you see why John would use ‘nation’ in his summary for all of the other terms he has used?
I will bring this topic to a conclusion in Gem 2396. That will give you a chance to decide what you think about those outside the New Jerusalem. Is it as Swete suggests that ‘the dogs’ have a chance to be healed and allowed to enter the open gates of the New Jerusalem or are they excluded as Ladd and Mounce suggest? There is time for you to make up your mind before I get to Gem 2397. Choose your position carefully, it may determine your future.
*Synecdoche (pronounced sin-EK-duh-kee) is a figure of speech in which a specific part of something is used to represent the whole, or less commonly the whole is used to represent a part.
Choose your rut well, you will likely be in it for the next 20 kilometres.” Sign on a gravel road – equally valid as an adage for life.
Ian
How you respond to crisis in your life, is the greatest message you’ll ever preach.
AR Bernard
The closer you live to God, the smaller everything else appears!
Rick Warren
The less we know, the longer the explanation.
Ian