I know thy works. Once more Christ's judgment is based upon intimate personal knowledge. A question arises whether the next sentence, introduced by "behold," should be parenthetical or not. It is possible, as in the Authorized Version and previous English versions, and also in the Vulgate, to avoid what is certainly an awkward parenthesis.
On the other hand, it seems clear that in Revelation 3:1 and Revelation 3:15 ὅτι depends upon οἷδα, "I know thy works, that thou," and does not introduce a fresh sentence; "I know thy works: for thou."
Then must not ὅτι depend upon οἷδα here? But either arrangement makes good sense, and perhaps the omission of the parenthesis makes the best sense: "Because thou hast little power, and hast made a good use of that little, I have given thee an opportunity of which none shall deprive thee."
This seems to be the obvious meaning of the"opened door," in accordance with 1 Corinthians 16:9; 2 Corinthians 2:12; Acts 14:27; Colossians 4:3. The Philadelphian Church, in spite of its small advantages, whether in numbers or prosperity, kept Christ's word when called upon to deny him; and for this it shall ever have the privilege of giving others an entrance into Christ's fold.
The aorists, ἐτήρησας and ἠρνήσω, appear to point to some definite occasion. On "keep my word," see notes on Revelation 1:3 and Revelation 2:26. The antithetic parallelism, "didst keep and didst not deny," is thoroughly in St.
John's style, and is one of many instances of the Hebrew cast of his language (comp. Revelation 2:13; John 1:3, John 1:20; John 3:16; John 10:5, John 10:18, etc.; 1 John 1:5, 1 John 1:6; 1 John 2:4, 1 John 2:10, 1 John 2:11, 1 John 2:27, 1 John 2:28).
The ungrammatical repetition involved in ἣν οὐδεὶς δύναται κλεῖσαι αὐτήν recurs in Revelation 7:2; Revelation 13:12; Revelation 20:8. Such frequent solecisms argue imperfect grasp of the language.