While modern-day Biblical scholars, so-called, have quibbled over who the writer of The Revelation was, it is generally accepted by most Christians that he was the apostle whom Jesus loved. However, modern Bible scholars choose to believe otherwise.
Following is a representative sampling of what scholars of the twentieth century have said of John:
“. . . from the beginning of the church’s history much speculation has been rife about him. It was the almost universal belief of the ancient church from the middle of the second century that the author was the apostle John. Justin and Hippolytus at Rome, Tertullian in North Africa, Clement and Origen of Alexandria, Irenaeus of Lyons, all spoke of this John as one of the Lord’s apostles (or disciples). Modern scholarship, however, has remained unconvinced, preferring to identify the John of Revelation rather with John Mark, John the Elder, an otherwise unknown John, or a pseudonymous writer claiming for his work the prestige attaching to the name of the apostle.” (The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, p. 60.)
“. . . it cannot be said that John the seer of Revelation has been identified with any known John in the first century of the church’s life. There must have been many Christians of this name in those early days, and there is no internal proof that the church’s tradition identifying the seer with the apostle of the same name is correct. We know the John of Revelation only as the seer or prophet and shepherd that he claims to be.” (ibid.)
“. . . the author could have been one of several people having the common name John (JOHN THE APOSTLE; JOHN THE BELOVED DISCIPLE; JOHN THE DIVINE). (The Family Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 17, p. 3216, Curtis Books, Inc., New York, 1972.)
And lastly:
“Was St. John the apostle and evangelist the writer of the Revelation? The evidence adduced in support of his being the author consists of (1) the assertions of the author, and (2) historical tradition. (1) The author’s description of himself in the 1st and 22d chapters is certainly equivalent to an assertion that he is the apostle. He names himself simply John, without prefix or addition. He is also described as a servant of Christ, one who had borne testimony as an eye-witness of the word of God and the testimony of Christ. He is in Patmos for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. He is also a fellow sufferer with those whom he addresses, and the authorized channel of the most direct and important communication that was ever made to the Seven Churches of Asia, of which churches John the apostle was at that time the spiritual governor and teacher. Lastly, the writer was a fellow servant of angels and a brother of prophets. All these marks are found united in the apostle John, and in him alone of all historical persons. (2) A long series of writers testify to St. John's authorship. Justin Martyr (cir. 150 A.D.), Eusebius, Irenaeus (A.D. 195), Clement of Alexandria (about 200), Tertullian (207), Origen (233). All the foregoing writers, testifying that the book came from an apostle, believed that it was part of Holy Scripture. (Smith’s Bible Dictionary, pp. 562-563, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1984.)
So, what it comes down to is this:
- We have modern-day Biblical scholars, who lived some two thousand years after the fact, arguing over who did and who did not write The Revelation; and
- We have near contemporary Christian authors’ assertions that John, the beloved apostle, wrote The Revelation.
Who am I therefore to believe? Who would you believe?
Setting my own prejudices aside, I would still have to believe the near contemporaries who were closer to the situation than our modern-day scholars. One would have to believe their knowledge exceeds the knowledge of those up to two thousand years removed. At least, I am convinced.
Therefore, it is my conclusion that John, the apostle whom Jesus loved, was indeed the author of the Book of Revelation.
10 comments:
Agreed. Scientifically, logically, or faithfully, it doesn't matter where you turn. They are all in concurrence. Also to note, in response to those who would be quick to claim that the writing styles of the Gospel of John and Revelation are too dissimilar, consider this: It was common during the times of the original gospel to employ the aid of a scribe in all writings. Especially for an uneducated Jewish fisherman such as John. When he was exiled to Patmos and penned Revelation as an old man, do you think they also exiled a scribe to accompany him? He was alone apart from Christ appearing to him.
Excellent point, John. That's something I hadn't thought of, even though it is fairly evident in the New Testament in the writings of Paul. Another point is that John, being unlettered, as you point out, saw a vision things for which he had no vocabulary for, even if he had been educated. Do we really think the locust he saw were insects? He could only speak with whatever the language he was in position of.
You might want to visit my blog at http://thebiblicalapologist.wordpress.com/ as that is where I have moved to, although there are some thing in here that I have yet to move over. In any event, I have rewritten much of what appears here.
Thanks for dropping by and commenting. You are very insightful.
This is the first time I've been to your website. Thanks for explaining more details.
Feel free to visit my web page; skip bins adelaide
It really does not matter what we think or state as an opinion on who wrote the book of Revelations.. It's what is written as to "who" is the author..
I believe the 1st verse is correct.. God in fact is the author of that book. A little egg on the face should not keep us from the truth.. Christianity often made the same errors and fail to heal them..
Obviously, God is the ultimate author of the Book of Revelation. It came to John through Jesus Christ. John wrote it down.
As for egg on my face, there is none. Most people know what I mean when I say John is the author of the Book of Revelation.
It may not matter to you who wrote the Book of Revelation, but you can't say that it doesn't matter to anyone, or shouldn't. You haven't that authority.
In an era in which there is much confustion as to whom this John was who "wrote" the Book of Revelation, this is just my little bit to throw into the mix.
Truly, the content is the most important thing of the Book of Revelation, but knowing just who it was who received is important as well.
I thank you for visiting and taking the time to write your comments. You are welcome anytime.
Sorry for taking so long to get back to you, as I am a bit slow of foot, so to speak, these days.
The proximity in time of commentators to any event is rather important, as you said. Just look at what we have in our own day: Holocaust deniers are running around saying that this era of history--which is just 70 years ago--is being way overblown, that the Nazis never used poison gas, that far fewer were killed, etc. And yet we have photos and film of the concentration camps when they were liberated, and even survivors who are still alive who testify of it. History can get twisted by loud voices, but if they are far removed in time from the event in question, it must be evaluated with that in mind.
Jack, thank you for your comment. I am sorry to have taken so long ro respond, as I have been rather lazy, I'm afraid.
You are right, of course. Your example is well taken. That's a problem we have today: Everyone is rewriting all of our history.
It's said that the winners write the history, and I believe that to be true. When you see what kind of utter nonsense is written about our Founding Fathers, for instance, making them all out to be philanders, atheists, and all sorts of other things, it gives one pause to think: Just who has won here? I don't think it's the American people.
Thank you for taking the time to comment. I appreciate that. May God bless you.
O.K., here's what I found out:
1.)1st mention of authorship of Revelations is attributed to Justin Martyr, also known as Saint Justin (100–165), an early Christian apologist." Justin does not quote from the Book of Revelation directly, yet he clearly refers to it, naming John as its author (Dial. 81.4 "Moreover also among us a man named John, one of the apostles of Christ, prophesied in a revelation made to him that those who have believed on our Christ will spend a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that hereafter the general and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all will likewise take place")."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr#Dialogue_with_Trypho
2.)Early references to authorship (all of which post-date 100 C.E. or A.D.) are divided:
"The author of the Book of Revelation identifies himself as "John", and the book has been traditionally credited to John the Apostle.[21] Reference to the apostle's authorship is found as early as Justin Martyr, in his Dialogue with Trypho.[22] Other early witnesses to this tradition are Irenaeus,[23] Clement of Alexandria,[24] Tertullian,[25] Cyprian, and Hippolytus.[26] This identification, however, was denied by other Fathers, including Dionysius of Alexandria, Eusebius of Caesarea, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen, and John Chrysostom."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Johannine_works
3.)The more modern viewpoint is summed by:
"Mainstream scholars conclude that the author did not also write the Gospel of John because of wide differences in eschatology, language, and tone.[21] The Book of Revelation contains grammatical errors and stylistic abnormalities whereas the Gospel and Epistles are all stylistically consistent which indicate its author may not have been as familiar with the Greek language as the Gospel/Epistles's author.[35] Contemporary scholars note that when Revelation and the Gospel refer to Jesus as "lamb" they use different Greek words, and they spell "Jerusalem" differently. There are differing motifs between the book and the Gospel: use of allegory, symbolism, and similar metaphors, such as "living water", "shepherd", "lamb", and "manna". The Book of Revelation does not go into several typically Johannine themes, such as light, darkness, truth, love, and "the world" in a negative sense. The eschatology of the two works are also very different.[36] Still, the author uses the terms "Word of God" and "Lamb of God" for Jesus Christ, possibly indicating that the author had a common theological background with the author of John.[21]"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Johannine_works
A more conservative modern commentator notes that both the gospel and Revelations make extensive use of the term "Logos" and symbolism of the number seven suggesting some symbolic commonality. The view of the conservative commentators whose scholarship I find to be less compelling is that John the disciple is the author.
4.) For me the most telling argument is that the tone of the two books is quiet different. While I find the gospel to be ethereal, inspiring, & uplifting - the most theological of the gospels, I find Revelations to be dark and apocalyptic.
As is often the case in my researches, I checked several sources & found Wikipedia to be most useful.Support Wikipedia
Thank you, Janet, for your remarks. First, I wish to say thank you for taking the time to look into this on your own. Not many people are willing to do this, so I salute you.
#1 - I would agree with Justin Martyr, obviously. :)
All the people you mention in #2 who identify John the Apostle, or John the Beloved, are people I have more confidence in than the other ones you mentioned.
#3 - I generally don’t pay any attention to what modern “mainstream scholars” say because they are more interested in themselves than the message, picking at every little thing. Of course, the two books are going to be different: they’re two entirely different things. The grammatical errors are attributed to the translators, not to John. You have to remember that we don’t have any of the original documents. Those who ought to have preserved them as sacred relics have either lost them or destroyed them. And we both know who that is. So, to say different Greek words are used for lamb is ridiculous. If you’ve ever used Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, you would know that different Greek words are used for the same words in English all the time. Again, we don’t know what John actually wrote because we don’t have his manuscript. So, all modern comparisons are worthless. I have little respect for Biblical scholars, especially modern ones.
#4 - Of course the tone is going to be quite different, as the messages are quite different. If you had just seen a vision of the end of the world, I would imagine that would tend to change the way you look at things, especially when he’s not even able to adequately describe some of the things he saw because he has no words for them, let alone had any idea of what he was seeing, but he did see the results. Of course, it’s dark and apocalyptic; that’s the nature of the vision. Yet, there are uplifting parts to it as well.
I also use Wikipedia from time to time. It has it’s uses, but we must remember that anyone can put anything in there and we need to be careful about what we take out of there. I’ve even put something in there, and upon reflection, I’m not even sure it was 100 percent accurate. I obviously have an agenda when I write an article, but I do try and get a number of different viewpoints, although I don’t always use them. That’s how agendas work. :)
Thanks again for your comments. I do appreciate the time you put into them and the time you spent writing them up. Have a great day.
BLESSINGS I BELIEVE JOHN WAS THE WRITER OF REVELATION, WAS INSPIRED BY GOD.
I AM A LITTLE CONFUSE ABOUT WHICH OF THE JOHN IS THE WRITER OF REVELATION.
THANKS
PEARL BROWN
OCHO RIOS
JAMAICA W.I.
headleyandpearl@yahoo.com
Post a Comment