John Vs. Revelations

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

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.

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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