The Meaning and Uses of Oxymora in the Book of Revelation

1 Introduction

The book of Revelation contains various figures of speech and literary devices used by John to address the Christians of Asia Minor in order to influence their value system and behavior. Such forms of speech as hyperbole, antomasia, metonymy, polysyndeton, simile and others reveal or enhance various facets of the meaning of the text.^[1] Although some of these techniques have already been the subject of study in New Testament scholarship, the oxymoron remains largely unexamined in the context of the book of Revelation. The only brief discussion of oxymora in the book of Revelation can be found in the article Rhetorische Auslegungsaspekte der Theologie in der Johannesoffenbarung by Konstantin Nikolakopoulos, in which the author devotes only one page to them and offers four oxymora.^[2] The following table shows that scholars who have addressed oxymora in the book of Revelation identify thirteen examples:

Although this table might indicate that oxymora are an area of interest among scholars, this is not the case. In the works listed above, commentators simply call a particular phrase an oxymoron without any further explanation. Furthermore, of the 38 commentaries I analyzed, only seven contain very brief references to oxymora. This lack of attention to the oxymoron demonstrates the relevance and necessity of this study.

This list also shows another issue – the lack of unity in the definition and understanding of what exactly an oxymoron is. Some scholars understand the oxymoron in a narrow sense as a union of two contradictory words, but others view it in a broader sense as a certain contrast or paradox. This raises a number of open questions: What literary device can be considered an oxymoron? What is the difference between an oxymoron, a contrast, and a paradox? Which phrases in the book of Revelation should be considered genuine oxymora? This article therefore aims to determine the meaning and uses of oxymora in the book of Revelation. To achieve this aim, the following tasks are set: 1) to provide a precise definition of oxymoron and to indicate its differences from other literary devices; 2) to analyze the text of the book of Revelation to determine phrases that can be considered genuine oxymora.

2 Definition of Oxymoron

As the above commentaries show, scholars give different meanings to the term “oxymoron.” In order to avoid confusion in the use of this term, it is necessary to clarify the definition of this literary device, to clearly outline its features and to show the differences from other figures of speech.

The meaning of oxymoron stems from the term itself. The term “oxymoron” comes from the Greek word ὀξύμωρος, which consists of two words, ὀξύς sharp, keen, pointed, and μωρός dull, stupid, foolish, that is sharply foolish, pointedly foolish, and acutely silly. Thus, “oxymoron” is a combination of two contradictory words, forming a paradoxical contrast. In fact, the term ὀξύμωρος is autological, that is, it is an oxymoron itself.

The Oxford English Dictionary gives the following definition of oxymoron: “A figure of speech in which a pair of opposed or markedly contradictory terms are placed in conjunction for emphasis.”^[17] Heinrich Lausberg defines the meaning as follows: “Oxymoron is the closely tightened syntactic linking of contradictory terms into a unity which, as a result, acquires a strong contradictive tension.”^[18] Roderich Kirchner gives the following definition: “Oxymoron (ὀξύμωρον) is the paradoxical juxtaposition of two contrary terms.”^[19] Finally, Franco Montanari defines an oxymoron as the “paradoxical union of discordant or contradictory concepts.”^[20] Thus, the oxymoron seeks to surprise the reader, create a dramatic pause, and make him think about the deeper meaning of the content.^[21] So, I propose the following definition of oxymoron:

An oxymoron is a literary device and a rhetorical figure in which, using several words (usually two) with contradictory literal meanings, the author forms a paradoxical conjunction to create emphasis, amplification, accent, or the creation of a new meaning.

Two contradictory or opposing words typically come from different grammatical parts of speech. The most common combinations in oxymora involve: 1) participle + noun: deafening silence; 2) adverb + adjective: awfully good; and 3) adverb + participle: coldly burning. While these are common combinations, oxymora can be formed using any part of speech. The key is that the words must contradict in a surprising or thought-provoking way, often emphasizing a point, creating humor, or blending seemingly incompatible ideas to provoke thought.

It is important to distinguish oxymora from other literary devices, such as contrast and paradox, which are easily confused with them. A contrast refers to the act of showing differences between two or more entities, characters, ideas, settings, or situations within a text. It is more general and does not necessarily involve contradiction but emphasizes how two elements are distinct: “He is rich, but she is poor.”^[22] A paradox is a statement or concept that appears self-contradictory or absurd but may reveal an underlying truth upon closer inspection. It is a broader, more conceptual contradiction: “I know that I know nothing.”^[23] Thus, despite certain similarities, an oxymoron remains a unique literary device and is typically a two-word phrase combining opposites.

Ancient literature contains various examples of the use of oxymora in both Latin and Greek. In particular, two oxymora are found in the work of Cicero. He said to Catiline: quodam modo tacita loquitur (“Somehow, she speaks to you silently,” Cat. 1.18).^[24] Cicero also wrote: cum tacent, clamant (“by being silent, they shout,” Cat. 1.21).^[25] Horace used oxymora like rerum concordia discors (“the discordant harmony of things,” Ep. 1.12.19) and symphonia discors (“discordant harmony,” Ars 374). In Greek literature, Aeschylus used the oxymoron νόμον ἄνομον (“a song that is no song,” Ag. 1142) in order to signify a museless music.^[26] Sophocles used the oxymoron ὅσια πανουργήσασα (“having committed a holy crime,” Ant. 74).^[27] And Aristophanes used the oxymoron ψυχὰν ἄψυχον (“soulless soul” or “lifeless life,” Ran. 1334).^[28] Examples of the use of this literary device in ancient literature indicate that there is a possibility that it was used in the book of Revelation as well.

3 Oxymora in the Book of Revelation

Having defined the term, it is now possible to analyze the oxymora proposed by scholars to determine whether they correspond to it. This will help to separate genuine oxymora from other literary devices.

The first verse where scholars see an oxymoron is Rev 1,5, which contains the phrase “the firstborn of the dead” (ὁ πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν, Rev 1,5). Buist M. Fanning characterises this expression as “a classic oxymoron referring to Jesus’s resurrection and what it means for Christians.”^[29] However, in reality this phrase cannot be called an oxymoron, since it does not contain contradictory terms. The title “the firstborn of the dead” is rich in various theological meanings, the main ones being priority and sovereignty.^[30] The expression reveals the meaning of the resurrection of Jesus Christ and his victory over death.^[31] Although the phrase creates a kind of tension between two ideas – life and death – nevertheless, too general a meaning excludes it from the list of oxymora.

The second verse is also found in the first chapter of the book of Revelation. John quotes Jesus Christ’s words to him: “the living one. I was dead” (ὁ ζῶν, καὶ ἐγενόμην νεκρός, Rev 1,18). Nikolakopoulos writes: “Bereits vom ersten Kapitel an wird die gottmenschliche Person des Herrn Jesus mit einer Oxymoron-Wendung, die zutiefst christologisch und auch soteriologisch ist, verknüpft.”^[32] However, it should be noted that the two words “the living one” and “I was dead” do not describe Jesus as alive and dead at the same moment, but rather describe different events separated by time. John writes that Jesus was dead, but then came to life, that is, resurrected.^[33] Therefore, these two words “the living one” and “I was dead” are not an oxymoron.

The third verse in the second chapter of the book of Revelation contains the following address: “I know your tribulation and your poverty, but you are rich” (οἶδά σου τὴν θλῖψιν καὶ τὴν πτωχείαν, ἀλλὰ πλούσιος εἶ, Rev 2,9). Nikolakopoulos also considers this expression an oxymoron: “Derartige scheinbare Gegensätzlichkeit kann durch das Oxymoron auf beste Weise zum Ausdruck gebracht werden.”^[34] However, this phrase is not an oxymoron, since here the contradiction is expressed not through a combination of contradictory terms within a single phrase, but through contradictory ideas, which suggests a paradox. In addition, the words “poverty” and “rich” have different levels of meaning: poverty has a literal meaning (the material dimension), and wealth has a metaphorical meaning (the spiritual dimension).^[35]

The fourth oxymoron proposed is also found in the second chapter of Revelation. David E. Aune, in commenting on “with an iron rod” (ἐν ῥάβδῳ σιδηρᾷ, Rev 2,27), mentions Gerhard Wilhelmi’s suggestion that this expression is an oxymoron.^[36] He understands the term oxymoron as “linking of opposite notions in one expression” and gives an argument why the expression “an iron rod” can be one: “a shepherd’s crook is used for the benefit and guidance of the flock, whereas an iron crook emphasizes its use as a weapon.”^[37]

Although at first glance it seems that an iron rod may be an oxymoron, the following points indicate otherwise. First, the literal meanings of the two words are not opposites of each other. A rod can be made of wood, reeds, bones, metal, or any other material, including a combination of these. The fact that a rod was most often made of wood and less often of iron does not at all indicate a contradiction or opposite. Likewise, in an area where a stone knife is most often used, an iron knife would not be an oxymoron. The use of metal for a rod is simply a rarer occurrence. Therefore, the material from which a particular thing, including a rod, is made, is not the opposite of the tool itself.

Second, the material of a rod is not tied to only one function (wood – the benefit and guidance, and iron – the weapon). A rod was an indispensable tool for shepherds, which they used in a variety of situations: 1) guidance: guiding their flocks to and from pastures and leading them through narrow valleys; helping their flocks gain access to water sources; and counting sheep (Lev 27,32, Ezek 20,37); 2) support: leaning on a rod when moving along steep terrain in mountainous regions; 3) protection: shepherds used a rod to fight off predators; and 4) defense: during a conflict, a shepherd could use a rod as a weapon to defend himself and his flocks. Accordingly, regardless of the material, a rod had different functions at the same time. Therefore, guidance is not a contradiction or opposite of protection or defense. Consequently, for these reasons, the expression “an iron rod” does not meet the definition of an oxymoron.

The fifth verse is in the third chapter: “you have a name of being alive, but you are dead” (ὄνομα ἔχεις ὅτι ζῇς, καὶ νεκρὸς εἶ, Rev 3,1). Nikolakopoulos considers this expression an oxymoron: “Das Motiv ‘Leben – Tod,’ das beim Verfasser der Offenbarung sehr beliebt zu sein scheint, erweist sich für die Schaffung dieses begrifflichen Oxymorons als vorzüglich geeignet.”^[38] However, this sentence cannot be an oxymoron, because it does not combine opposing words in a direct, side-by-side manner. Here “alive” and “dead” represent two separate ideas across a broader context, addressing outward reputation versus inner reality. Thus, it functions more as a rhetorical paradox, emphasizing a difference between appearance and essence. In addition, the two words have a metaphorical meaning: “Alive” might refer to outward religious observance, while “dead” points to a lack of genuine spiritual engagement.^[39] Also, these two words do not describe the Christians in Sardis as both alive and dead. John only writes that to some people these Christians look alive, but to Jesus they are actually dead. There are two views from the outside, but their real state is only one – dead.^[40] Therefore, the combination of these two words do not form an oxymoron.

The sixth expression, which has been called an oxymoron, is found in the fourth chapter of the Apocalypse, where four living creatures are “in the middle of the throne, and in a circle around the throne” (ἐν μέσῳ τοῦ θρόνου καὶ κύκλῳ τοῦ θρόνου, Rev 4,6). Martin Karrer admits: “Zugleich entsteht ein Oxymoron (scharfsinniger Widerspruch), weil sich die Wesen sowohl in der Mitte des Throns als auch um ihn herum befinden.”^[41] Although this phrase may seem like an oxymoron, it would be more accurate to describe it as a spatial paradox. The combination of “middle” (implying a central, singular position) and “circle around” (implying an external or surrounding arrangement) creates a seemingly contradictory spatial setup.^[42]

Scholars see the seventh oxymoron in the image of “a Lamb […] who has seven horns” (ἀρνίον […] ἔχων κέρατα ἑπτά, Rev 5,6). David L. Barr notes that horns are a symbol of strength, and therefore “In this sense, a lamb with horns is an oxymoron for lambs are not powerful animals.”^[43] At first glance, this image may seem like an oxymoron, since there is a combination of two contrasting images – meekness (a lamb) with strength (the seven horns). However, in fact, this image functions more as a paradox or symbolic juxtaposition.^[44] It is more accurate to say that it is a paradoxical image rather than a syntactically contradictory one.

The eighth verse is found in the sixth chapter of the book of Revelation: “the wrath of the Lamb” (τῆς ὀργῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου, Rev 6,16). Barr calls the phrase an oxymoron outright, “this oxymoron defines the basic moral issue of the Apocalypse,”^[45] while Edmondo Lupieri speaks more lightly of “the somewhat oxymoronic ‘rage of the Lamb’ in 6:16.”^[46] The phrase “the wrath of the Lamb” may seem like an oxymoron, since the term “lamb” is typically associated with gentleness, innocence, and sacrifice, while the term “wrath” connotes intense anger and judgment.^[47] But the contradiction exists only at the level of theological meaning/ideas, not at the level of the literal understanding of the terms. So in fact, the two words “wrath” and “lamb” do not contradict each other in the ordinary sense and therefore do not form an oxymoron. It is a theological paradox that highlights the complex nature of God, who is both merciful and just.^[48]

The ninth and tenth texts where scholars have noted oxymora concern “a great multitude” who survived in “the great tribulation” at the end of time and died a martyr’s death (Rev 7,9–14). They received salvation by washing their robes in the blood of the Lamb (Rev 7,14). Craig S. Keener states that “If triumph in martyrdom sounds like an oxymoron, so does washing one’s robes white in blood.”^[49] Regarding the latter, Barr also notes: “John seems fond of such oxymorons.”^[50] These words indicate that the authors understand the term “oxymoron” in a broad sense: Although Christians have suffered, they nevertheless triumph; likewise, washing one’s garments in the blood of a Lamb does not pollute them, but rather cleanses them. However, these verses do not actually contain oxymora but paradoxes, since the apparent contradictions are contained at the level of theological concepts, and not the literal meaning of the words.^[51]

The eleventh verse with a possible oxymoron is found in the tenth chapter of the book of Revelation. John writes of the words addressed to him: “it will make your stomach bitter, but in your mouth it will be sweet as honey” (καὶ πικρανεῖ σου τὴν κοιλίαν, ἀλλ’ ἐν τῷ στόματί σου ἔσται γλυκὺ ὡς μέλι, Rev 10,9). Nikolakopoulos considers this phrase the fourth oxymoron.^[52] However, actually it is not exactly an oxymoron but rather a juxtaposition of two contrasting experiences – sweetness and bitterness. Rather than a direct contradiction of opposites within a single concept (as in a classic oxymoron), it reflects a progression from one experience to another, illuminating a complex reality about spiritual experiences. So, this phrase is better understood as a layered metaphor that captures the dual nature of prophetic truth, rather than a strict oxymoron.

The twelfth place where scholars have noticed an oxymoron is in the third angel’s warning. It contains the image “the wine of God’s wrath, mixed unmixed” (τοῦ οἴνου τοῦ θυμοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ κεκερασμένου ἀκράτου, Rev 14,10). Thomas Schreiner asserts that “the words κεκερασμένου ἀκράτου literally mean ‘mixed unmixed,’ an oxymoron, meaning that the mixture is at ‘full strength.’”^[53] This phrase is truly an oxymoron because the literal meanings of the two words contradict each other. The two words “mixed” and “unmixed” are antonyms because they have opposite meanings: “mixed” indicates something that is combined or diluted with something else, and “unmixed” means pure, undiluted, that is, something that is not mixed with other components. The participle κεκερασμένου “mixed” can mean “properly prepared” and “poured out,” but if considered as an antonym of the word “unmixed,” it can indicate the addition of certain ingredients to enhance the wine’s heady strength (Ps 75,8; 3Maсс 5,45).^[54] The adjective ἀκράτου “unmixed” indicates that the wine is not diluted with water, so as not to weaken its strength.^[55] Thus, John uses the literary device “oxymoron” to heighten the sense of the intensity of God’s judgment and to emphasize that the wrath will be complete and without any mitigation.

The thirteenth expression where scholars saw an oxymoron is “the lake of fire” (τὴν λίμνην τοῦ πυρός, Rev 19,20; 20,10.14–15; 21,8). Craig S. Keener comments that “Jewish tradition recognized that God will banish the fallen angels, Gentiles, and disobedient Israelites to the Abyss of fire (1Enoch 90,24–27), but Revelation prefers a more graphic, oxymoronic picture of a ‘lake of fire.’”^[56] Since Keener does not speak of the term oxymoron itself but rather of a “graphic, oxymoronic picture,” he seems to imply a paradox. The phrase “the lake of fire” may at first seem like an oxymoron. This is because a lake traditionally evokes the image of water, which is usually associated with extinguishing fire, while fire evokes images of destruction and intense heat. Combining these terms into one phrase creates a sense of tension, as they seem to contradict each other. However, the expression “the lake of fire” is intended to convey a symbolic image of final judgment, destruction, and purification, not a literal body of water combined with fire. The phrase does not contain a literal contradiction, so it cannot be considered an oxymoron.

4 Conclusions

The results of the analysis show that the oxymoron is a unique literary device that combines words that are literally opposite in content, creating a paradoxical tension and emphasizing certain ideas or emotions. It is not just a contrast or paradox, where the opposition is expressed rather at the level of ideas, but a specific means of using contradiction in a compact form that can surprise the reader and make him/her think. The oxymoron has been known since ancient times and was used in classical literature in both Latin and Greek, giving the texts a special flavor and depth. Thus, the article lays a theoretical foundation for an accurate understanding of the term oxymoron, which will allow scholars to use it more accurately in future studies on the book of Revelation.

The analysis conducted in this article shows that many phrases from the book of Revelation that scholars considered oxymora are in fact other literary devices, such as paradoxes or metaphorical contrasts. In most cases, the tension between words or ideas arises on a theological or symbolic level, rather than from the direct juxtaposition of opposing terms, as is typical of oxymora. Of the thirteen passages, only one phrase, the one that speaks of “mixed unmixed” wine in Rev 14,10, meets the classic definition of an oxymoron, where words have literal opposite meanings and form a striking contradiction. In this text, John uses an oxymoron to heighten the sense of the intensity of God’s judgment. Thus, a detailed examination of these texts allows us to better understand the stylistic features of the book of Revelation, where the author uses various devices to convey the profound ideas and emotional tension characteristic of the apocalyptic genre. Further research into the literary device “oxymoron,” not only in the book of Revelation but also in other apocalyptic literature, can deepen our understanding of the various meanings of the texts.