Why is revelation in the canon

Gaius opposed the chilastic teachings in the church, particularly the chiliasm he attributed to Cerinthus. Objections to Revelation Were Eventually Resolved. Even though Gaius is pretty much alone in his specific objections to Revelation, apparently it did have a negative affect in some quarters of the church.

Particularly in the East, there was a resurgence of doubt about the book in the fourth century and later. However, there were also many who supported the book. It was affirmed by the synods of Hippo c. It was also received by Philastrius of Brescia c. And the reason why these groups accepted the book was simple: it was an ancient book quoted by the early church fathers as authoritative. And for this reason, eventually their view prevailed.

In the end, the problematic canonical journey of Revelation reminds us that the development of the NT canon was not always a smooth, pristine affair.

However, it also remains that in the case of Revelation, the problems had little do with the historical merits of the book itself, but rather with the particular theological peccadillos of some in the early church.

When the actual history of the book is understood, its canonical status stands in little doubt. You hit the nail on the head. Gaius did not like the theology framework of his time and pushed against it. Augustine was key in forming the new theology which carried over into the Reformation and today. It would surely appear that a teaching that Jesus Christ will return to the earth and destroy ALL the kingdoms of the earth is diametrically opposed to the Roman church and the Emperor.

Surely a pastor of a state church cannot preach such things! I always think of Satan and his activities in a warfare perspective. I consider his works to be much greater than just against one man, or one family on even one generation. Elaine Pagels, the Princeton University professor of religion, famous for infusing old religious debates with new urgency, packed the Radcliffe Gymnasium, where she shared her latest thinking on Revelation, its cultural impact, and its historical underpinnings.

Date December 7, The Princeton University professor of religion, famous for infusing old religious debates with new urgency, was at Harvard Dec. Over the centuries, it continued to draw the ire of critics, from theologian Martin Luther to author D. To this day, Eastern Orthodox Christian sects decline to use Revelation in public worship. Christ appears as a terrifying warrior clad in white. Satan is a great red dragon waiting to devour a newborn child.

A great lake of fire and brimstone opens up, ready to consume a long catalog of unbelievers. Pagels is exploring a range of questions. Who wrote this book, and why? However, all seven lay along a major Roman trade route in the province of Asia Minor.

By writing to these seven, John's book would travel fastest and spread farther. Like other Apocalyptic works, Revelation comes from a time of crisis. Commentators usually fall within two dates for Revelation: A. Both dates require examination here. If Revelation is written late, the book aims to encourage Christians during an imperial persecution.

Those who argue for a late date to Revelation use both internal and external evidence. As external evidence they point to the early church writers like Iraneus A. First, several of the churches addressed had lost their ardor for Christ, and heresies had infected others.

Churches usually do not lose their ardor or find heresies in their first generation. The city took many years to rebuild its wealth. Third, the church at Smyrna was not founded until A. Likewise, those who claim a late date for Revelation point out that the emperor worship described in chapters matches best with Domitian. Another piece of evidence comes from the use of "Babylon" as a code word for a city in Revelation. Jews and Christians linked the cities together because both powers had sacked the holy city.

Both pieces of evidence point to a later first century date for Revelation. Those who argue for an early date tend to see Revelation as a polemic against the Jews who rejected the Messiah. Though they read Revelation literally with its temple measurements, the measurements better match Ezekiel's eschatological temple. Other problems come from the early date. For instance, the early daters insist that the number refers to taking the Hebrew letters of Caesar Nero n and adding them up in a gematria.

Though the arithmetic does indeed come to , such a view supposes a knowledge of Hebrew in a thoroughly gentile audience. Likewise, with little to no justification in the Greek, they tend to read Revelation 's "all the tribes of the earth will mourn Him" as "all the tribes of Israel will mourn Him. Based on the evidence, this paper concludes that John wrote Revelation about A. Thus, Revelation serves to encourage to Christians facing their first major persecution that the Messiah will be victorious over their enemies.

However, it also warns them of persecution for keeping the faith. Revelation had the longest and hardest fight of any book to be recognized as inspired. Though numerous early authors quoted and approved of it, others argued against Revelation. Revelation appears in canonical listings as early as the Muratorian fragment in the second century. Likewise, though Dionysius interprets the book allegorically and rejects apostolic authorship, he accepts it as canonical.

Marcion rejects Revelation because of the numerous Old Testament references in the book. Gaius and the Algoloi also reject it because the Montanists use Revelation so often. Both times he qualifies his judgement with "should it seem right. Gregory of Nanzianus, and Cyril leave it out of their listings of the canon.

Moreover, the Nestorian churches still leave Revelation out of their canon. The Syriac Peshitta omits it, and the Council of Laodicia did not recognize it.

They still do not read from Revelation regularly. Greek commentaries written in the fifth and sixth centuries probably helped Revelation gain acceptance in the Eastern empire. Even though the East had trouble with the book, the West recognized Revelation as inspired fairly early. Jerome, Ambrose, Rufinus, Augustine, and Innocent all accept it as canonical.

The book then follows a bumpy path into the modern world. Calvin could not understand the book and refused to write a commentary.

Though Luther leaves Revelation in his translation, he sees it as "unapostolic" and cannot find Christ. As said above, the early Church did not place any book in the canon haphazardly. In summary, a canonical work has to contain adaptable wisdom on how to live at any time. As discussed above, John the Apostle did write Revelation.

Though debated early, the view of John the Apostle as author prevailed, much to the delight of Justin Martyr, Bishop Melito of Sardis, and Theophilus of Antioch who all defended the Apostle as author. Having settled the question of authorship, Revelation also came under attack because of its theology. The Eastern church did not like the earthly eschatology taught in the book.

Many in the West viewed Revelation as obscure and used it to speculate the future. To combat these positions, the East interpreted it allegorically and Augustine argued that Revelation be included only with an admonition against using the book speculatively City of God XX. As with all books, inspiration determined Revelation's canonicity. Though one can never empirically prove inspiration, it can be disproven. For example, had Revelation attempted to deceive people by being pseudonymous, one could almost guarantee the non-inspiration.

However, the Church became convinced of the Apostolic origin of the book. Likewise, had Revelation contained doctrines contrary to already accepted Scripture, the Church would have seen the Holy Spirit was not behind it. On the other hand, Revelation contains much to recommend its inspiration. The book more than adequately fulfilled Luther's rule of "Does it teach Christ. Furthermore, the book contains adaptable wisdom on how to live at any time.

Revelation has a message for both its original audience and today's reader. Unlike First Enoch, which showed its lack of inspiration by contradicting orthodox doctrine and presenting a faulty soteriology, Revelation fulfilled the criteria for inspiration more than adequately.

The book comes from the first-century, Apostolic circle, sustains and expands orthodox teaching, and has a message for believers beyond its first audience. Beyond these three traits, Revelation has some undefinably characteristics commending it to Christian readers.

Eerdmans Publishing Company, , 9. Eerdmans Publishing Company, , Beale, The Book of Revelation , Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman Press, , Carson, Douglas J.

Moo, and Leon Morris. Luther later changed his mind. Wainwright, Mysterious Apocalpyse Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon Press, , for a history of the millennial interpretation to Revelation. The Book of Revelation had a mixed reception among the early Church Fathers. Some indeed of those before our time rejected and altogether impugned the book, examining it chapter by chapter and declaring it to be unintelligible and illogical, and its title fake.

But for my part I should not dare to reject the book, since many brethren hold that the interpretation of each several passages in some way hidden and more wonderful. We see in the comments of Dionysius that some Church Fathers were reluctant to reject the book, simply because they did not understand it. Not understanding it, they feared that it might contain hidden mysteries that should not be lost. For others, the fact that the book was signed by a man named John meant that this otherwise unknown author might be the apostle John, in which case they dared not reject the book.

In addition to the above quotation from Dionysius, Eusebius provided the first complete surviving list of what the Christian Bible should contain. He wrote:. It will be well, at this point, to classify the New Testament writings. We must, of course, put first the holy quartet of the Gospels, followed by the Acts of the Apostles. To these may be added, if thought proper, the Revelation of John …. These are classed as Recognised Books Moreover, some have found a place for the Gospel of the Hebrews ….

We can say that there were, from the beginning, objections to the inclusion of the Book of Revelation, but that it was eventually included in the canon at least partly because the Church Fathers were uncertain whether it contained an important hidden message and because of the possibility that the author, John, might be John, the son of Zebedee, or perhaps John the Elder. The book was accepted into the canon at the Council of Carthage in AD. It was, at the time when the canon was being constructed, believed to be authored by the Apostle John.

Anything written by one of the disciples of Jesus tends to be held sacred. There was some opposition to its inclusion. One of the views against this was that it was one of the main books of Montanism , which was considered heretical at that time. Gregory of Nazianzus argued against its inclusion due to the difficult in interpretation and the possibility of abuse.

However there was a precedent of it being included in the canon that extended back to the 2nd century. Given the tradition of it being included in the early precursors to the canon and its generally accepted authorship by an apostle, the book was included in the canon.

They didn't need to know everything in detail and it was supported by some early authorities. They had another problems - there were some doubts wheter Book of Revelation is not a forgery created by Cerinthus the Heresiarch and there were troubles with millenialistic beliefs which were derived from some interpretations of the book. When those issues were cleared, Book of Revelation was accepted into canon at the synod of Carthage in AD.

The Book of Revelations is one of the most controversial books of the Bible, given the Apocalyptic nature of the messages it carries. However, in regards to it's authenticity it has always been seen as being written by the Apostle John on the Isle of Patmos-a barren 30 sq. Rick Renner, a noted Greek scholar, as well as pastor of a church in Moscow, Russia, wrote a book called "A Light in the Darkness ", which described Patmos as the "Alcatraz of the 1st Century".