2. The Greek word apocalypsis ( Ἀποκάλυψις) has the same root from which we get the Latin word "Revelation."

4. While the title of the book as it stands in our 1901 A.V. translation is The Revelation of John this by no means indicates that the book is about John or the vision came from John. Christ is both the "revealer" and the "one revealed."

1. Apocalyptic literature was a type of literature which contained "secret" hidden meanings which was not to be disclosed to the uninitiated__ (only those who "belonged" could know).

2. The Apocalypse of John does not mean that this book belongs to the Apocrypha. Apocryphal literature is non-canonical or material that isn't allowed in the canon. Revelation does share some of the same traits as this genre of material but so does Ezekiel, Daniel and Zachariah. The basis of genre then is no reason to reject the book.

1. The first to refer definitely to this book as from John was Justin Martyr (c.140 A.D.).

2. Irenaeus (c.180) assigns the book to the Apostle repeatedly and without question. ___Irenaeus was the disciple of Polycarp, who in turn was the disciple of John.

4. It was questioned by the sect of the Alogoi (about 190 A.D.) who assigned it to Cerinthus the Gnostic.

5. Later Dionysius of Alexandria (250 A.D.) made a study of the language and style and asserted that it could have never been written by John.

8. However, we can be sure that the ancient tradition is overwhelmingly in favor of John the Apostle as the author.

9. The modern negative critical view admits several possibilities of authorship.

a. If John wrote the Gospel and Epistles of John, then John the Elder may have written the Apocalypse. ⁱ

b. If the Elder wrote the Gospel and Epistles of John, then John the Elder may have written the Apocalypse.

10. Because the style and grammar of the book, some have suggested as early date such as 68, 69 A.D. The presupposition is that by the time John wrote the gospel he had learned better Greek since the Greek of the Apocalypse is often to be considered poor quality.

a. Eusebius says that John was sent to Patmos during the latter part of Domitian's reign.

b. Irenaeus also places the book at the same time and so does Clement of Alexandria.

c. It fits the Domitianic type of persecution that grew out of the Christian refusal to participate in emperor worship.

a. Preterit__past__fulfilled largely in the destruction of Jerusalem and the fall of the Roman Empire.

b. Continuous__Historical__survey of history of the congregations of the Lord's.

d. Futurist__largely a predictor of "future events" with little relevance to the original recipient.

1. This is the last book of the Bible___the consummation of God's revelation and of God's plan of the ages.

2. This is one of the most difficult books in the Bible to interpret at least for some and yet it was meant to be an 'unveiling' (the definition of revelation).

1. The book is mainly made up of four series of sevens generally with different parenthetical sections interspersed.

2. The pattern of the presentation of the last three sets of sevens are the same.

b. These visions are symbols given not to show how things look but to teach truths concerning the event or thing pictured. We are not to see Christ standing encircled by literal candlesticks but the truth is that Christ is standing in the middle of the congregations.

b. We must go back to the O.T. books to fully grasp this letter. The writings of Ezekiel, Daniel, Zechariah, and Revelation are interwoven.

19. Further Preparations: Measuring the Temple; the Testimony of Many Witnesses. 11:1-14.

iJohn the Presbyter is a hypothetical elder in the early church, proposed 'a priori' by Eusebius, as an alternate author for 2nd John, 3rd John and Revelation who Eusebius distinguished from the Apostle John.

One of these fragments, quoted by Eusebius in his History of the Church (Book III, chapter 39), reads:

But I shall not be unwilling to put down, along with my interpretations, whatsoever instructions I received with care at any time from the elders, and stored up with care in my memory, assuring you at the same time of their truth. For I did not, like the multitude, take pleasure in those who spoke much, but in those who taught the truth; nor in those who related strange commandments, but in those who rehearsed the commandments given by the Lord to faith, and proceeding from truth itself. If, then, any one who had attended on the elders came, I asked minutely after their sayings,--what Andrew or Peter said, or what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, or by James, or by John, or by Matthew, or by any other of the Lord's disciples: which things Aristion and the presbyter John, the disciples of the Lord, say. For I imagined that what was to be got from books was not so profitable to me as what came from the living and abiding voice.

The interpretation of that text consists of two basic views: one view, first voiced by , distinguishes between two Johns, the Apostle and the presbyter, while the other view, in line with most of Church tradition identifies only one John.