John the Revelator
Is Revelation a prophecy about coming events, or are they events that have already occurred in history? For most of Christian history, they were thought to be events coming, whenever the end of the age actually arrived. Some argue that the book was written pre-AD 70 and that the cataclysmic events of the book found their fulfillment there. This is predicated on the fact that John the Apostle was indeed its scribe, but he wrote it much earlier than the historical record tells us he did. However, there are some who argue that the John who wrote the book down wasn’t the Apostle! This is done to get away from the fact that history clearly tells us that it was John the Apostle on Patmos, and not some other John.
Whatever your take on time designations within the text, Revelation, like any work, cannot be decoupled from history! If we are going to take the Bible seriously, we must also view it historically! So, does history, definitively tell us who wrote Revelation, and when? The answer is yes, on both counts.
Let’s start at the beginning.
Justin Martyr, (155-160 AD), The Dialogue with Trypho, Ch. LXXXI – We have perceived, moreover, that the expression, ‘The day of the Lord is as a thousand years,’ is connected with this subject. And further, there was a certain man with us, WHOSE NAME WAS JOHN, ONE OF THE APOSTLES OF CHRIST, who prophesied, BY A REVELATION that was made to him, that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all men would likewise take place.
READ MORE
Justin Martyr, who was born not long after the Apostle John died, wrote this less than a century later. He clearly says that the author of Revelation was John the Apostle! Now, this doesn’t date the book itself, but it does give us a very, early historical reference to its author: John, the Apostle.
Irenaeus, (AD 174 – 189), Against Heresies, Book 5, Ch. XXVII – For when he (Antichrist) comes, and of his own accord concentrates in his own person the apostasy, and accomplishes whatever he shall do according to his own will and choice, sitting also in the temple of God, so that his dupes may adore him as the Christ; wherefore also shall he deservedly “be cast into the lake of fire:”… WHOSE COMING JOHN HAS THUS DESCRIBED IN THE APOCALYPSE: “And the beast which I had seen was like unto a leopard, and his feet as of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion; and the dragon conferred his own power upon him, and his throne, and great might…
Irenaeus only mentions a John who wrote Revelation, so this isn’t that helpful. However, considering he came after Justin Martyr, it would stand to reason that he is clearly thinking of John the Apostle as well.
Book 5, Ch. XXX – Such, then, being the state of the case, and this number being found in all the most approved and ancient copies [of the Apocalypse], AND THOSE MEN WHO SAW JOHN FACE TO FACE BEARING THEIR TESTIMONY [to it]; while reason also leads us to conclude that the number of the name of the beast, [if reckoned] according to the Greek mode of calculation by the [value of] the letters contained in it, will amount to six hundred and sixty and six… We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. FOR THAT WAS SEEN NO VERY LONG TIME SINCE, BUT ALMOST IN OUR DAY, TOWARDS THE END OF DOMITIAN’S REIGN…
Irenaeus refers to the author of Revelation as John, again. Now, since other, later Christian leaders suggested that another John had actually written it, I will leave it that Irenaeus is not necessarily referring to the Apostle John, as the immediate context doesn’t explicitly state that. It is hinted at though, because he references those who saw him face to face, which suggests that he wasn’t some mere Christian man named John, rather he was of some importance in Christianity. Also, the discussion is about approved manuscripts. The only approved manuscripts were those that were considered to be equal to Scripture. Though there were a variety of disputed texts that did not make it into the NT canon, Revelation was one that, though disputed, did make it into the received canon, primarily because the vast majority of Christian leaders believed it to be the work of the Apostle John!
However, though Irenaeus did not name John as an Apostle, he clearly places the writing of Revelation in the time of Domitian! Domitian was the Emperor from AD 81 – AD 96. Without any dispute then, even if one wanted to contend that the book was written before AD 70, this testimony from Irenaeus is devastating as to its dating.
Book 5, Ch. XXXVI – JOHN, THEREFORE, DID DISTINCTLY FORESEE THE FIRST “RESURRECTION OF THE JUST,” AND THE INHERITANCE IN THE KINGDOM OF THE EARTH; and what the prophets have prophesied concerning it harmonize [with his vision]. For the Lord also taught these things, when He promised that He would have the mixed cup new with His disciples in the kingdom. THE APOSTLE, TOO, has confessed that the creation shall be free from the bondage of corruption, [so as to pass] into the liberty of the sons of God.
It might be tempting here to see Irenaeus clearly calling John “the Apostle”. However, he is referencing the Apostle Paul in Romans 8:21, so this is NOT an example of Irenaeus clearly stating that his John is an Apostle, as Justin Martyr did.
Tertullian, (late 2nd Century), Against Marcion, Ch. XXIV – …At present, too, it would be superfluous for this reason, that our inquiry relates to what is promised in heaven, not on earth. But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem, “let down from heaven,” which the apostle also calls “our mother from above;” and, while declaring that our πολίτευμα , or citizenship, is in heaven, he predicates of it that it is really a city in heaven. THIS BOTH EZEKIEL HAD KNOWLEDGE OF AND THE APOSTLE JOHN BEHELD.
Like Justin Martyr, Tertullian clearly tells us the author of Revelation was John the Apostle! So, it would seem that Christians, through the first two centuries after the Apostles, had no questions about the authorship of Revelation.
Commodianus, (c. AD 250), Instructiones, Ch.XLIII – …Amen flames on the nations, and the Medes and Parthians burn for a thousand years, AS THE HIDDEN WORDS OF JOHN DECLARE. For then after a thousand years, they are delivered over to Gehenna; and he whose work they were, with them are burnt up.
Now, in the third century, John is still being held as the author of Revelation, but now, the text’s meaning seems to be shifting. Origen, who lived during this time clearly spiritualizes much of the text. So, though Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian, were advocating for the literalness of the book, by this time, Christians were beginning to spiritualize much of the text. This shift in thought toward the book also shifted attitudes as to its authorship, though not its dating.
Eusebius, (4th century), Ecclesiastical History, Book III Ch.17 – Domitian, having shown great cruelty toward many, and having unjustly put to death no small number of well-born and notable men at Rome, and having without cause exiled and confiscated the property of a great many other illustrious men, finally became a successor of Nero in his hatred and enmity toward God. He was in fact the second that stirred up a persecution against us, although his father Vespasian had undertaken nothing prejudicial to us.
Ch.18.1 -IT IS SAID THAT IN THIS PERSECUTION THE APOSTLE AND EVANGELIST JOHN, WHO WAS STILL ALIVE, WAS CONDEMNED TO DWELL ON THE ISLAND OF PATMOS in consequence of his testimony to the divine word.
Eusebius goes on to recount the famous quote from Irenaeus, already mentioned, that dates the Apocalypse to the time of Domitian. He later adds this:
Ch.23.1 – AT THAT TIME THE APOSTLE AND EVANGELIST JOHN, THE ONE WHOM JESUS LOVED, was still living in Asia, and governing the churches of that region, HAVING RETURNED AFTER THE DEATH OF DOMITIAN FROM HIS EXILE ON THE ISLAND.
Here, Eusebius, recounts church history that had been received, not only from Irenaeus, but others, whose traditions were not delivered in written form. It shows clearly that it was John the Apostle who was on Patmos, and this was NOT pre-AD 70, but at the end of the first century AD. But, by Eusebius’ time, the authorship of Revelation was in serious question, not due to the date, but due to its content. However, it was because of textual criticism that the Apostolic authorship was being questioned, not due to actual historical reference.
Ch.24.18 – In regard to the Apocalypse, the opinions of most men are still divided. But at the proper time, this question likewise shall be decided from the testimony of the ancients.
Ch.25.4 – Among the rejected writings must be reckoned also the Acts of Paul, and the so-called Shepherd, and the Apocalypse of Peter, and in addition to these the extant epistle of Barnabas, and the so-called Teachings of the Apostles; and besides, as I said, the Apocalypse of John, if it seems proper, which some, as I said, reject, but which others class with the accepted books.
Ch.25.6 – And further, the character of the style is at variance with apostolic usage, and both the thoughts and the purpose of the things that are related in them are so completely out of accord with true orthodoxy that they clearly show themselves to be the fictions of heretics. Wherefore they are not to be placed even among the rejected writings but are all of them to be cast aside as absurd and impious.
At this point in his writing, Eusebius switches to quoting from the works of a contemporary bishop, Dionysius, regarding a theory that another John had written Revelation. So, it would appear that this theory developed very late in Christian history because the earlier writers clearly attested to John the Apostle having written it. Dionysius lays the fault about a literal teaching about a thousand years at the feet of a heretic named Cerinthus, who he says John the Apostle had openly challenged! This opinion is to show that if John the Apostle was challenging this man, and by inference his teachings, then there is no way he composed Revelation, where the same teaching appears!
So, who wrote it? Dionysius claims that another early Christian, Papias, assigns it to another John and that he misunderstood him! Here, we are not given the writings of Papias, but Dionysius’ take on his writings, and that through the voice of Eusebius!!! This is total hearsay but read it for yourself:
Ch.39.5 – It is worthwhile observing here that the name John is twice enumerated by him [Papias]. The first one he mentions in connection with Peter and James and Matthew and the rest of the apostles, clearly meaning the evangelist; but the other John he mentions after an interval, and places him among others outside of the number of the apostles, putting Aristion before him, and he distinctly calls him a presbyter.
Ch.39.6 – This shows that the statement of those is true, who say that there were two persons in Asia that bore the same name, and that there were two tombs in Ephesus, each of which, even to the present day, is called John’s. It is important to notice this. For it is probable that it was the second, if one is not willing to admit that it was the first that saw the Revelation, which is ascribed by name to John.
Ch.39.7 – And Papias, of whom we are now speaking, confesses that he received the words of the apostles from those that followed them, but says that he was himself a hearer of Aristion and the presbyter John. At least he mentions them frequently by name and gives their traditions in his writings. These things, we hope, have not been uselessly adduced by us.
Ch.39.12 – To these belongs his statement that there will be a period of some thousand years after the resurrection of the dead and that the kingdom of Christ will be set up in material form on this very earth. I suppose he got these ideas through a misunderstanding of the apostolic accounts, not perceiving that the things said by them were spoken mystically in figures.
Ch.25.1 – Afterward he [Dionysius] speaks in this manner of the Apocalypse of John. Some before us have set aside and rejected the book altogether, criticizing it chapter by chapter, and pronouncing it without sense or argument, and maintaining that the title is fraudulent.
Ch.25.2 – For they say that it is not the work of John, nor is it a revelation, because it is covered thickly and densely by a veil of obscurity. And they affirm that none of the apostles, and none of the saints, nor anyone in the Church is its author, but that Cerinthus, who founded the sect which was called after him the Cerinthian, desiring reputable authority for his fiction, prefixed the name.
Ch.25.6 – After this, he examines the entire Book of Revelation, and having proved that it is impossible to understand it according to the literal sense, proceeds as follows: Having finished all the prophecy, so to speak, the prophet pronounces those blessed who shall observe it, and also himself. For he says, ‘Blessed is he that keeps the words of the prophecy of this book, and I, John, who saw and heard these things.’
Ch.25.7 – Therefore that he was called John, and that this book is the work of one John, I do not deny. And I agree also that it is the work of a holy and inspired man. But I cannot readily admit that he was the apostle, the son of Zebedee, the brother of James, by whom the Gospel of John and the Catholic Epistle were written.
Ch.25.8 – For I judge from the character of both, and the forms of expression, and the entire execution of the book, that it is not his. For the evangelist nowhere gives his name, or proclaims himself, either in the Gospel or Epistle.
Ch.25.9 – Farther on he adds: But John never speaks as if referring to himself, or as if referring to another person. But the author of the Apocalypse introduces himself at the very beginning: ‘The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which he gave him to show unto his servants quickly; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John, who bore witness of the word of God and of his testimony, even of all things that he saw.’ Revelation 1:1-2
Ch.25.10 – Then he writes also an epistle: ‘John to the seven churches which are in Asia, grace be with you, and peace.’ Revelation 1:4 But the evangelist did not prefix his name even to the Catholic Epistle; but without introduction he begins with the mystery of the divine revelation itself: ‘That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes.’ 1 John 1:1 For because of such a revelation the Lord also blessed Peter, saying, ‘Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed it unto you, but my heavenly Father.’ Matthew 16:17
Ch.25.11 – But neither in the reputed second or third epistle of John, though they are very short, does the name John appear; but there is written the anonymous phrase, ‘the elder.’ But this author did not consider it sufficient to give his name once and to proceed with his work, but he takes it up again: ‘I, John, who also am your brother and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and in the patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos for the Word of God and the testimony of Jesus.’ Revelation 1:9 And toward the close he speaks thus: ‘Blessed is he that keeps the words of the prophecy of this book, and I, John, who saw and heard these things.’
Ch.25.12 – But that he who wrote these things was called John must be believed, as he says it; but who he was does not appear. For he did not say, as often in the Gospel, that he was the beloved disciple of the Lord, or the one who lay on his breast, or the brother of James, or the eyewitness and hearer of the Lord.
Ch.25.13 – For he would have spoken of these things if he had wished to show himself plainly. But he says none of them; but speaks of himself as our brother and companion, and a witness of Jesus, and blessed because he had seen and heard the revelations.
Ch.25.16 – But I [Dionysius] think that he was some other one of those in Asia; as they say that there are two monuments in Ephesus, each bearing the name of John.
Ch.25.22 – But the Apocalypse is different from these writings and foreign to them; not touching, nor in the least bordering upon them; almost, so to speak, without even a syllable in common with them.
Ch.25.26 – I do not deny that the other writer saw a revelation and received knowledge and prophecy. I perceive, however, that his dialect and language are not accurate Greek, but that he uses barbarous idioms, and, in some places, solecisms.
Despite the efforts of Eusebius to use hearsay evidence from a fellow bishop of his day to throw doubt upon the authorship of Revelation, Augustine, who came a century later, leaves little doubt as to who he thinks the author is.
Augustine, (early 5th century), City of God, Book 20, Ch.7 – The evangelist John has spoken of these two resurrections in the book which is called the Apocalypse, but in such a way that some Christians do not understand the first of the two, and so construe the passage into ridiculous fancies. FOR THE APOSTLE JOHN says in the foresaid book, “And I saw an angel come down from heaven
Ch.8 – For it is not without reason that JOHN, THE SAME APOSTLE AS WROTE THIS APOCALYPSE, SAYS IN HIS EPISTLE regarding certain persons, “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have remained with us.”
Having viewed the church fathers with a critical lens, it is clear that the historical evidence dates Revelation to the end of the first century AD and affirms that John the Apostle indeed wrote it all down. Any eschatological view that rejects this obvious historical truth is a total sham and must be rejected by the earnest student of the Bible.