Some Less Relevant Commentary on Revelation 16:5

From my earlier survey (link thereto), here are a few commentaries that have at least a little bearing on the Revelation 16:5 debate.

• J. Hampton Keathley III (d. 2002), taught at Moody Bible Institute (link)
• The reference in Revelation 16:5; "who are and who were" refers to the eternal essence of God. As the Eternal One, one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. God is long-suffering but eventually God’s holiness must act and His judgment against sin will be delayed no longer.
• Dr. Manly Luscombe (b. 1950, Doctorate in Biblical Studies, Harvard) (link)
• 5 And I heard the angel of the waters saying: “You are righteous, O Lord, The One who is and who was and who is to be, Because You have judged these things.
• A. The angel declares that the judgment of God is righteous. God is Just. I made some extended comments on this matter in the notes in chapter 15.
• B. When God judges the wicked, all the saints will agree that the judgment was the only thing that a Righteous and Holy God could do. If God did not judge them in this way, He would not be a Holy and Just God.
• Schaff's Popular Commentary (Philip Schaff d. 1893, worked on the American Bible Revision Committee) (link)
• Revelation 16:5-6. And I heard the angel of the waters saying, Thou art righteous, which art, and which wast, the Holy One. No episode of this kind had intervened at the close of the third trumpet. But at the highest stage of judgment it is fitting that even those who suffer from it should answer that it is right. The answer is given by the ‘angel of the waters,’ not the angel ‘who was set over the waters,’ and surely not the angel who now poured out his bowl upon the waters, but the waters themselves speaking by their angel, and responding to the fact that the judgment which they have incurred is just. The ascription of praise is to God as ‘righteous,’ and it will be observed that He is described in three particulars; first, ‘which art,’ secondly, ‘which wast,’ thirdly, ‘the Holy One.’ ‘Which art to come’ can be no longer used, for God is come (comp. chap. Revelation 11:17). The particular method of judgment is also commended. It is again the lex talionis; those who had poured out blood shall drink blood.
• Schaff at 11:17
• Revelation 11:17. Contains the first part of their song of praise and thanksgiving. In reading, a comma is to be placed after the word Lord, which presents us with the name of Him who has thus triumphed, and brought the troubles of His Church to an end. The name ‘Lord’ is then followed by three appellations as at chap. Revelation 4:8, first. God; secondly, the Almighty; thirdly, which art and which wast, the third clause usually belonging to this last appellative, ‘which is to come,’ being left out because no longer needed: the Lord is come. This part of the song of praise deals with the general statement that the Lord has taken to Him His great power. That power had indeed been always His, but for a time He had permitted His enemies to contend against it. He is to permit this no longer.
• James Burton Coffman (d. 2006, Church of Christ minister)(link)
• Righteous art thou, who art and who wast … We might have expected the phrase "and who is to come" until it is remembered that this vision reveals the state of things when the coming of Christ has already begun.
• Thou Holy One, because thou didst thus judge … This with the next two verses is a kind of parenthesis to show that such terrible judgments are in no sense to be construed as unbecoming or out of character in the one true and living God who gave his Son for our redemption. No! These judgments are exactly what the God of love should do. "The pouring out of the bowls is not a series of arbitrary actions, but a solemn judgment."
• Albert Barnes (d. 1870,  studied at Princeton Theological Seminary)(link) 
• Which art, and wast, and shalt be - That is, who art eternal - existing now; who hast existed in all past time; and who will exist ever onward. See the notes on Revelation 1:8. The reason why this attribute of God is here referred to, seems to be that the mind of the angel adverts to it in the changes and desolations that were occurring around him. In such overturnings among people - such revolutions of kingdoms - such desolations of war - the mind naturally turns to one who is unchanging; to one whose throne is from everlasting to everlasting.
• Barnes at 1:4
• from him which is, and which was, and which is to come - From him who is everlasting - embracing all duration, past, present, and to come. No expression could more strikingly denote eternity than this. He now exists; he has existed in the past; he will exist in the future. There is an evident allusion here to the name Yahweh, the name by which the true God is appropriately designated in the Scriptures. That name יהוה Yahweh, from היה haayah, to be, to exist, seems to have been adopted because it denotes existence, or being, and as denoting simply one who exists; and has reference merely to the fact of existence. The word has no variation of form, and has no reference to time, and would embrace all time: that is, it is as true at one time as another that he exists. Such a word would not be inappropriately paraphrased by the phrase “who is, and who was, and who is to come,” or who is to be; and there can be no doubt that John referred to him here as being himself the eternal and uncreated existence, and as the great and original fountain of all being.
• They who desire to find a full discussion in regard to the origin of the name Yahweh, may consult an article by Prof. Tholuck, in the “Biblical Repository,” vol. iv., pp. 89-108. It is remarkable that there are some passages in pagan inscriptions and writings which bear a very strong resemblance to the language used here by John respecting God. Thus, Plutarch (De Isa. et Osir., p. 354.), speaking of a temple of Isis, at Sais, in Egypt, says, “It bore this inscription - ‘I am all that was, and is, and shall be, and my vail no mortal can remove’“ - Ἐγώ εἰμι πᾶν τὸ γεγονός, καὶ ὅν, καὶ ἐσόμενον καὶ τὸν ἐμὸν πέπλον οὐδείς τω θνητὸς ἀνεκάλυψεν Egō eimi pan to gegonos, kai hon, kai esomenon kai ton emon peplon oudeis tō thnētos anekalupsen. So Orpheus (in Auctor. Lib. de Mundo), “Jupiter is the head, Jupiter is the middle, and all things are made by Jupiter.” So in Pausanias (Phocic. 12), “Jupiter was; Jupiter is; Jupiter shall be.” The reference in the phrase before us is to God as such, or to God considered as the Father.
• John Nelson Darby (d. 1882, a Plymouth Brethren Founder)(link)
• 16:5 one, (l-19) Hosios . see Note b, ch. 15.4.
• Darby at 15:4
• 15:4 holy; (b-16) Hosios , not hagios . It is used for mercy, grace, and of Christ, as the One in whom all gracious qualities are concentrated. (Psalms 89:1 ,Psalms 89:2 ,Psalms 89:19 .) In men it means piety and uprightness. Chesed is so translated in the Old Testament. It is in general the sum of qualities which suit and form the divine character in man, as opposed to the human will. what God gives as consistent with himself, his character, and promise. The 'sure mercies ' of David is expressed by this word in the LXX, Isaiah 55:3 ; Acts 13:34 . God alone possesses the qualities which entitle him to worship as a pious man would understand it. Hosios is used in this general way for 'holy.' see Note i, Hebrews 7:26 . homage (c-24) See Note h, ch. 3.9. righteousnesses (d-29) See Note, ch. 19.8.
• Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary (Albert Garner and J.C. Howes) (link)
• 2) "Thou art righteous, 0 Lord, which art," (dikaios ei ho on ho hosios) "righteous art thou, the one who is the holy one," 0 Lord, as in Revelation 15:3.
• 3) "And wast and shalt be," (kai ho en) "and existed (was) and shall ever be;” the eternal God, the Master or Lord of all forever, Revelation 1:4; Revelation 1:8; Revelation 4:8; Revelation 11:17.

The significance of Keathley's observation is that indeed God's eternity is conveyed without the need for the addition of a future tense verb.  

Similarly, I found it interesting that Luscombe sees God as "Righteous and Holy" or "Holy and Just" here despite using the KJV wording of the text, which replaces "holy" with "and shall be."

Schaff's observation about why "is to come" is not present in Revelation 11:17 and 16:5 is similar to Beza's own analysis (link) at Revelation 16:5.  The reason why that description of God is not present in those passages is that by those places, He has come in judgment.  This, of course, ought to lead one to recognize that "the coming one" is not a periphrastic way of saying "who shall be".  Coffman's observation is the same.

Barnes, following Beza, has the future tense verb at Revelation 16:5 and gets the same idea of God's eternality.  Barnes also erroneously treats "is to come" as a periphrastic way of expressing God's future existence.  

Darby's note is of interest because it, quite correctly (and long before the work of Nelson and Peels) focuses on the significance of the use of hosios, not hagios, in Revelation 15:4 and 16:5, and its connection to Chesed in the Old Testament. I would slightly disagree with his way of getting to how God is hosios, because it is better to see God as being the only one possessing the true quality of hesed/hosios in his covenantal dealings with his people.

Garner and Howes have an odd blend of readings in their note.  Their first English does not match their first transliterated Greek, and their transliterated Greek while it matches their second English does not match any Greek text, because it omits "the having-been one". In bullet 3, again their English and Greek do not align.