Should The Apocalypse Been Canonized?

[Bluefinger]

This is my response from another forum:

"I think it should be included for several reasons.

1) If the tradition behind it is wrong, then it could point to an earlier dating, as Sir Isaac Newton pointed out. One historian says it was written by John the Evangelist, another says it was written by John the Apostle. Who knows what passages Jerome removed from their quotes. If Revelation was written during the reign of Nero, and John actually died on Patmos, then the Apocalyspe holds intriguing information about the first century Jewish disciples that seemed to disappear around 64 CE. (See Matthew 20:20-23.)

2) The book quotes the Old Testament in a curious way: It quotes both the Hebrew Bible as well as the Septuagint. That shows that the author was familiar with both versions, leading me to believe that the author actually was Jewish and of Hebrew descent. This may lend credence to the argument that it was written before the Jewish War because Judaism of any sort would have been violently suppressed afterward and anyone who used to brag about their circumcision would have been hiding for fear of the secret Roman police. What kept Christians safe after the Jewish War with the Roman Empire was that they were not even considered Jews by their Jewish counterparts. So, I think the use of the Hebrew Bible and Hebrew expressions points to before the Jewish War when the Apostles Paul and Peter were either still alive or have just died. Seeing that 1 Peter uses expressions such as calling Rome by the name Babylon, it may be possible that Peter read the Apocalypse before he was executed.

3) It addresses an important issue in the Church as seen in Acts and the Epistles of St. Paul regarding the inclusion of the Gentiles into the promises of Abraham (see Galatians 3:13-14.) When a pseudononymous author writes a religious piece, it should includes topics pertinent to his/her time. An example of this is the writing of Susanna, which claims to have been written during the 6th century BCE or so while the writing likely took place during the Jewish Civil War that occurred around 100 BCE. 2 Peter and Jude address issues not relevant to the Church until the 2nd and 3rd centuries regarding heretics in the Church, showing that the writings are likely pseudononymous. But the Apocalypse addresses issues relevant to the first century Church, which was composed mainly of Jews up until the Roman-Jewish war of 66 CE. Revelation 12 explains that the elect disciples of Israel went into hiding, leaving her offspring. This makes sense when compared to Revelation 7 where 144,000 are sealed with protection from the Roman-Jewish war. Since we know that the first faithful disciples went to the Gentiles, the picture becomes complete for us when we consider the Great Gentile Multitude dressed in white that is mentioned in Revelation 7 immediately after the 144,000 are sealed. Basically, the Jewish disciples of Jesus fled Jerusalem when John of Gischala overthrew the high priesthood and they hid among the Gentiles. There, they brought the Gospel to more places than before and thousands of Gentiles came to believe because of their message."

What do you think?

[Zaphod222]

I think "why am I reading this".

[rashore]

I thought the apocalypse was already in the bible?

[Bluefinger]

I think "why am I reading this".

That's rude. Why waste my time by telling me that? Don't be a jerk. If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it.

And if you don't have an actual argument, please spare me your feelings.

Edited August 1, 2013 by Bluefinger

[Bluefinger]

I thought the apocalypse was already in the bible?

It is. The debate on the other forum I was at was asking, "Should it have been?"

[Ogbin]

2 Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is given by inspiration of God..."

The question here shouldn't be "should it have been?" It should be "why is it?"

The Apocalypse is prophecy about the times which are ahead and soon to be. The Tribulation, also known and the time of Jacobs trouble and the 70th week of Daniel. Prophecy is spoken so when it has come, even comes to pass, people will know that it was God who spoke these things and recognize, in this case the times in which they are living in, in hopes that they will come to repentance and not be fooled by the anti-christ.

[Copen]

2 Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is given by inspiration of God..."

The question here shouldn't be "should it have been?" It should be "why is it?"

The Apocalypse is prophecy about the times which are ahead and soon to be. The Tribulation, also known and the time of Jacobs trouble and the 70th week of Daniel. Prophecy is spoken so when it has come, even comes to pass, people will know that it was God who spoke these things and recognize, in this case the times in which they are living in, in hopes that they will come to repentance and not be fooled by the anti-christ.

Perhaps you should have finished the last part of that statement: 2 Timothy 3:17 "That the MAN OF GOD may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."

The natural man cannot receive or understand in order to accept the things in the Bible by reading it. (1 Corinthians 2:14) God has to first change the natural man into a spiritual man. After that time he can hear the gospel and accept it and decide whether to ENTER into God's kingdom (government) while on earth. He experiences more blessings while on earth if that is the route he/she decides to take.

God bless.