John Vs. Revelations

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Patriot, Aug 17, 2003.

  1. Patriot

    Patriot
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've heard that the author of the book of John is not the same one as that of the book of Revelations. From what I heard, it is not the same style of writing. What do you all think?
     
  2. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    It's Revelation... Just one... not RevelationS. Mark 3:17 refers to sons of thunder which includes this beloved disciple and there are many parallels in the Gospel of John and Revelation. I believe they were written by the same John but at different stages of his life.

    Diane
     
  3. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,348
    Likes Received:
    14
    Revelation was not meant to be written like the other gospels. It is full of figurative and symbolic language often used in the Old Testament. I believe much Revelation is John's account of the Olivet Discourse.
     
  4. John Wells

    John Wells
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2001
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    0
    Only the gospel of John and Revelation refer to Jesus as the Word and Lamb. The writer identifies himself as John in 1:1,4,9; 22:8. Early tradition unanimously identified him as John the apostle. Second century witnesses to the Apostle John's authorship include Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian, who interacted with readers of the original writings.
     
  5. Patriot

    Patriot
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lol, sorry for my error Diane. Spanish is my native language and I attend a spanish-speaking Baptist congregation, and therefore my Bible is in spanish. Revelation is named as "Apocalipsis" or Apocalypse. Hehe, thanks for correcting me.
     
  6. Pete Richert

    Pete Richert
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2001
    Messages:
    1,283
    Likes Received:
    0
    At least this much is true, the author was named John. I have no reason to be church tradition was incorrect at labeling this John the apostle John.

    In the Greek, there is a great deal of stylist differences (as apposed to the Gospel of John and the episles of John which are very very similar). One reason attributed to this fact (already mentioned above) and the one I hold to is that John is utizing much Old Testmanet allusions if not quoting the OT, and the grammer of the septuagint was slightly different then that of 1st century Greek in that Greek was a living language that was changing over time (read Shakespear, or even the KJV, and see how English has shifted over a few hundred years).

    Ultimatly, the trust of Revelation does not rest on the fact that John the aposlte wrote it but that a John wrote it, is was included into the Canon by the believers of the time under the influence of the Holy Spirit and we believe it today. In comparison, nowhere in Matthew does it say Matthew wrote it and we don't usually complain about that.
     
  7. NeilUnreal

    NeilUnreal
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2001
    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've read many of the arguments on both sides of the issue, and I don't think either side has an airtight case. Some early church fathers said they were the same author, others said not. There are stylistic and other differences between the two, but are they too different to be from the same hand years apart -- who knows?

    Barring new documents being found by archaeologists, we may never know for sure. It's a fun mystery for NT scholars, though!

    -Neil
     
  8. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    Stylistic differences can possibly be explained by John using a scribe to help him write Revelation out. Personally, that is what I think makes I Peter and II Peter so different - the use of scribes was different, so the language was different as well.
     
  9. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,126
    Likes Received:
    320
    Exodus 3:14 in the LXX (ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew) has ego eime ho on for "I AM that I AM"

    John's Gospel has the first half of it for John 8:58 "I AM" ego eime the Revelation has the second half ho on.

    Not conclusive but interesting.

    ho on is hidden in the Revelation and I forget exactly where it's at but I can look it up tonight when I get home (if anyone wants to see it).

    HankD
     
  10. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,126
    Likes Received:
    320
    Revelation 1:8 I am (ego eime) Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, saith the Lord God, who is (ho on) and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.
     
  11. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    (1) Literary differences are not that drastic between Revelation and the other writing of John as contrasted with, say, Peter.

    Second year Greek students always work on John, I John, et al which would be "high school" Greek, as contrasted to PhD greek of Paul's writing or Baranabas', or 3rd grade writing of Peter.

    (2) Revelation was the first written, quite probably 5 years before the letters and, lastly, his Gospel. Just because they are in the reverse order in our canon has NOTHING to do with chronology.

    Of course, there are some who mythically try to segregate Revelation from the other writing BECAUSE of their bad theology (preterism) which would make a book written c. AD90 to be BEFORE AD70!

    Change the dates to fit your theology. Right. :eek: (You know I was born in 1830 and was contemporary with Charles Spurgeon!)
     
  12. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,348
    Likes Received:
    14
    Change the dates to fit your theology. Right.

    Would that be like changing the words and phrases: near, "at hand" soon, shortly, gerneration, "these last days", quickly, and the "last hour" to fit your theology?

    Revelation 1

    1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John;
    3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written therein: for the time is at hand .

    Lets not take it for face value, lets twist it to fit our eschatological point of view.
     
  13. Tim

    Tim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2001
    Messages:
    967
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dr. Bob,

    So if the majority view dates Revelation later than 70 AD, any textual challege to that date is "mythical"?

    Didn't know the dates next to the title of the books were inspired.

    Tim
     

Share This Page

Loading...