Who is the author? There are four places in Revelation where the author identifies himself as John (1:1, 4, 9; 22:8). Justin Martyr, one of the early “church fathers” (he lived from 100-165 A.D.) promoted the idea that the author of book of Revelation was John the apostle, the son of Zebedee.
The book itself reveals that the author was a Jew, well versed in Scripture, and a church leader who was well known to the seven churches of Asia Minor.
For centuries, however, the identity of the author has been in controversy. As early as 200 A.D., scholars compared the language, style and thought of the book of Revelation with that of the other writings of John the Apostle in the New Testament and concluded that the book could not have been written by the same author. At that time, some suggested that the author was “John the Presbyter,” another prominent Christian leader of the same era. Many modern scripture scholars follow this view, while others conclude that we may never know exactly who the author is, other than his name was “John,” which, like today, was a very common name. There are also scholars who argue that it’s the other way around — that John the Apostle was the author of Revelation and the three letters that bear his name, but NOT the Gospel.
I tend to conclude that the author WAS John the apostle, the “disciple whom Jesus loved.” Church history and tradition hold that John wrote his gospel sometime around 60 AD as a response to the other gospels being circulated at that time (the other three gospels have earlier “release dates”). In my mind, that’s when he PUBLISHED his gospel. Knowing that even the poorest families in Jewish culture at the time of Christ had their male children educated from the early childhood in order to read and understand the scriptures, I have to conclude even as a young man, John was literate and able to write his experiences down. (I would think a follower of Jesus would find some way to take notes). The three New Testament letters attributed to John, which are very much in the same writing style as the gospel of John (very elementary Greek vocabulary, with broad use of contrasting language (e.g., light vs dark, life vs death, truth vs lies etc.) were written around 80 to 85 AD to confront the Gnostic heresy that was ravaging the churches.
Church history and tradition hold that John lived into his nineties and was a prominent leader in the church (particularly in Ephesus, a Greek metropolitan area in what is today western Turkey). History also pegs John to have been youthful when he followed Jesus — Catholic history has him born in 6 AD, putting him in his mid-20s as a follower of Jesus. Most scholars place the book of Revelation as being written around 95 AD, making John as the author still possible, as he would have been 89 or 90 at that time.
The political climate of that time adds credence to this. In 81 AD, Domitian took the throne as Roman Emperor. While an efficient administrator and successful ruler by Roman standards, he was ruthless. He was also firmly committed to traditional Roman values, such as the strength of family, and the veneration of ancestors. As such, he revived the imperial cult for the first time in generations — the concept that the emperor is to be revered as a god. This, of course, put imperial policy in contradiction with Christianity.
Revelation 1:9 states that the author received the visions contained in the book while on the island of Patmos, which, at that time, was the location of a Roman penal colony. Tradition holds that John and many other Christian leaders had been exiled to Patmos by Domitian. This would have been in keeping with a specific policy of Domitian’s at that time — while attempting to be tolerant of non-Roman culture and religion, Roman law did not allow for any “sorcerers, enchanters, or prophets” from undermining the worship of the emperor. Revelation is filled with imagery that would have been politically sensitive in that vein. Had John been teaching or preaching these sorts of things, he would have violated that law, and Domitian’s “more enlightened” policy of exile would have spared John’s life and perhaps given him the opportunity to write or dictate the Revelation while in prison. Church history and tradition also hold that John was released by Domitian’s successor, Emperor Nerva, who took the throne in 96 AD.
(Side note — Dean Jones, an actor popular in the sixties and seventies who starred in popular Disney films like “The Love Bug,” “The Shaggy D.A.,” and “Million Dollar Duck,” was a devoted Christian. Later in his career, he would be a big part of Christian cinema, playing the role of Charles Colson in the film version of “Born Again,” and starring in other films like “The Gospel According to Scrooge,” and “Don’t Ask Me, Ask God.” But he also appeared in a long running one-man theater show where he portrayed the Apostle John in his old age called “St. John in Exile.” It was a wonderful portrayal of John looking back at his experiences with Jesus and as a life-long evangelist. A video of the stage production was released — not sure if its available anymore. But I recall it being an inspirational interpretation of John’s life at the time when he wrote the Revelation.)
(Side note #2 — John wrote Revelation when he was at least 89 or 90 years old. As I noted above, many scripture scholars cannot accept the concept that the man who wrote John’s gospels and the three letters later in the New Testament that bear his name also wrote the final book of the Bible. The writing style in John’s gospel, as far as the original language is concerned, is elementary. Think grade school level. When the ancient Greek language is taught at the seminary level, students are encouraged to try out their translation skills on the letters of John because the structure and vocabulary are more basic than the letters of Paul. The simpler nature of John’s writing when compared to Paul’s is excused because of their educational levels — John was just a “simple fisherman,” while Paul had the equivalent of doctorate level training at the school of Gamaliel, the great Jewish Rabbi and Teacher. But is it fair to denigrate John’s writing style like this? Both of John and Paul were raised in Jewish families. No doubt their primary language was Aramaic. Regardless of how extensive their schooling was, both men would have studied the scriptures in the ancient Hebrew language. Therefore, the Greek these letters were written in was a third language for both of them. Obviously, Paul was a master of Ancient Greek. John not as much.
Perhaps that can be attributed to the much simpler writing style of John. But if you consider that John’s gospels and letters were written 20 to 30 years before Revelation, and that John probably was regularly corresponding in Greek with the churches he was ministering to in Asia Minor (the region of western Turkey that had a primarily Greek population at that time), couldn’t it be possible his writing style matured? I look back at things I wrote 20 or 30 years ago — things that I wrote that were PUBLISHED 30 years ago — and I cringe. It is certainly within my scope of believability and acceptability that a 90-year-old man, mature in his faith, writing about visions that had cosmic significance for the entire world, would pen much more sophisticated prose when compared with a personal letter from decades prior or the compilation of what would essentially have been the notes from his diary).
What about the title of the Book? First off, it is the book of “Revelation,” (singular), not “Revelations” (plural). Y’all need to keep that straight. As a child, learning about God as I went to mass every Sunday with my mother at the local Roman Catholic Church, I was always trying to know more, and to research things as best I could — for a child. My mother had a family bible I would pull from the shelf where it was kept. It was the Douay Translation, an English language version of the Bible translated from the Vulgate, which was the official Bible translation of the Catholic Church originating in the third century.
The Vulgate itself was translated from the Greek, which included the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament that was in use in Jesus’ time. Looking at that bible language today, it was sort of like “playing telephone.” Most modern English translations of the Bible work directly from the original Greek languages.
My mother’s bible was full of pictures that were reproductions of famous paintings from the Vatican portraying biblical scenes. As a kid, I was often drawn to the last book of the Bible because of the graphic, other-worldly pictures of things like the four horsemen, the scarlet whore of Babylon, or Satan being chained and cast into hell. But the title of the book was also intriguing. In the Douay translation, the last book of the Bible was not “Revelation” or “The Revelation of John,” but was “The Apocalypse of St. John the Evangelist.” At the time, I thought that was one of the coolest words I had ever seen — “Apocalypse.” When I looked up the meaning of the word in the dictionary, and discovered it meant an event that would result in the complete destruction of the world, or a disaster resulting in destruction or damage on an awesome or catastrophic scale, that was even cooler! As a brooding teenage musician, filled with angst, I thought “Apocalypse” would be an awesome name for the rock band for which I would eventually be the front man.
But the title of the last book of the Bible in my mother’s bible is actually a more literal rendering of the original language. In Chapter 1, verse 1, where it says, “the revelation of Jesus Christ,” the Greek word for “revelation” is apokalypsis, which means “something that is made fully known” or “full disclosure.” A “revelation,” yes, to be sure, but its more. “Revelation,” to me, calls to mind the plot twist at the end of an Agatha Christie novel, or a “B-movie” fortune teller letting loose with a secret. “Apocalypse” is much, much bigger.
Indeed, at the time John was writing this work, an “Apocalypse” was a much bigger deal. An “Apocalypse” was a form of popular literature among Jewish people in John’s Day, based on the Hebrew Scriptures of the Old Testament (for example, Ezekiel and Daniel were often used) as well as the deuteron-canonical literature popularly circulating, like the book of Enoch, or the books of the Apocrypha, such as Maccabees or the Fourth book of Ezra. (This makes Revelation a perfect fit within the recent reading schedule, with the book of Daniel, and Jude’s use of similar material).
The content of a written Apocalypse at that time was the dreams and visions of a prophet, describing a heavenly perspective on history or current events, so that things presently happening could be interpreted in light of God’s overall concept and history’s final outcome. Chapter 1, verse 3 states that, “Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.” In the context of the apocalyptic literature of that era, “prophecy” meant a specific word from God through a prophet meant to warn or comfort in a time of crisis. By declaring his writing to be this kind of “prophecy,” John is implying this book is meant to be read in the tradition of the great prophetic writings of the Old Testament (like Ezekiel and Daniel), which, when brought together with the book of Revelation, brings the focus of God’s word to a climax.
This was also a message meant for a contemporary audience — people that John knew. In Chapter 1, verse 4, which is the traditional greeting we find in most of the letters of the New Testament, we see that Revelation is meant to be a letter, or at least a newsletter, addressed to “the seven churches in the province of Asia.”
(Another side bar — I tend to go on and on when I type out my thoughts on the Bible passages we are reading as a church together. This is the sort of thing I love to dig into, to meditate on and study God’s word. I don’t think people can have too much of the Bible. But, when it comes to the book of Revelation, things can get really, really complicated.
There are so many different ways to unpack and interpret the prophecies of this book. Some of them can get very controversial. Some people are constantly looking for the happenings of today’s news being the fulfillment of these predictions. There are self-proclaimed prophets and teachers all over the world and in every corner of the internet presenting sermon videos, podcasts, publishing books and articles that turn John’s visions into events that fit into their own political agendas.
Over the years, I have heard people tell me that it was obvious to them that Henry Kissinger, or Newt Gingrich, or Barack Obama was the anti-Christ predicted in Revelation. Martin Luther believed that the “scarlet whore of Babylon” was the Roman Catholic Church. There is a very popular internet preacher who has parsed out these prophecies with his own pin-point accuracy, confidently showing how most of the seals that were broken open in the book, or the trumpets that are sounded in the book have already been fulfilled, and how the different beasts portrayed represent modern European nations, or that anytime an eagle appears, it represents the United States.
The 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster is supposedly the fulfillment of the falling stars that poison the water supply in Revelation 8, because the star mentioned there is named “Wormwood,” and Chernobyl is the Ukrainian word for “wormwood.” Then again, Saddam Hussein (who was also proclaimed as the “anti-Christ”) — his name supposedly means “Wormwood,” so the Persian Gulf war was the fulfillment of Revelation 8 — something about the fires burning in the desert poisoning the air? The third horseman purportedly doesn’t represent famine, as tradition holds, but actually is a representation of the rise of Islam, which connects to the Persian Gulf war, etc. There was a cottage industry for this stuff (books, videos, tv shows) in the 1990s and early 2000s.
All of this is very interesting, and, in many ways, sometimes seems fun to speculate as to how these prophecies may have already been fulfilled or will be fulfilled. But there is great danger in all of this. It is foolish, and perhaps heretical, to project my political or cultural biases onto a prophetic word from the first century. Cult groups like the Jehovah Witnesses have grown out of just this kind of tomfoolery. I do not want to pursue that sort of thing as I look at the book of revelation. I pray that as we read the book together, as a church, to borrow a common phrase from the book of Revelation, we can all hear what the Holy Spirit is saying to the church).
