You’re correct. These are the only places it appears…. 1st John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 1st John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 1st John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. 2nd John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
@@Rowsey63 In the plural and in the present tense. "Antichrsists are among us now." They are also defined as those "who eny that Christ came in the flesh." This is talking about Docetic Christians. That was a sect that believed Jesus had only been a spirit without any physical substance.
Always helpful, Dan. Stoking fear is right out of the cult playbook. Bad guys are more important to religion than God. There are bad guys a plenty in Revelations.
The things you don't learn in Catholic school. Speaking as a writer, though, Revelations feels like a really good book as an "ending" for the Bible's collection.
@@koppite9600 "The books if the NT were always known and revelation was always among them." False. Revelation was one of the last books to be written by an author different from whomever wrote John. The Greek in Revelation is very sloppy whereas the Greek in John is masterful. Revelation was written at the end of the 1st century, decades after the letters of Paul and even after some of the forgeries written in Paul's name that later made it into the NT canon. Revelation was written long after most of the 1st generation Christians were dead on a different continent in a different language than their native Aramaic. It was NOT always known among them. Though Revelation was written before 2 Peter, which was written 120 CE or later by a lying forger pretending to be Paul to do damage control for the failed 2nd coming prophecies of Paul and Jesus. The names of who wrote the 4 gospels we have today weren't attached until the late 2nd century either. The many things ignorant and/or lying pastors won't teach in church.
In the sense that it's a vivid culmination of the petty, narcissistic and blood thirsty tendencies seen throughout the rest of the book? I guess so. There's a cartoon called Superjail! from the late 2000s that is the perfect encapsulation of this idea. Each episode starts with a bit of setup and then the whole thing spirals out into a Rube Goldbergian display of death and dismemberment. The orgiastic display inevitably ends when the parade of violence coincidentally results in the resolution of the conflict established in the setup. It's all very absurd and silly. It's like the hockey stick of plotlines. It carries on at a relatively steady state and then exponentially shoots off the chart before cratering to an abrupt end.
Your closed captions added something about revelation supporting trinitarianism. I can't help but be reminded of Dr Tabor's point that revelation works fine without all of the "and his son jesus christ" bits, suggesting that the text in its original form predates christianity. I can't help but wonder if those bits were added, pethaps in the time of Athenasius, to, as you say, aupport trinitarianism.
My understanding is that the way Revelation supports Trinitarianism is that Jesus and God the Father are both individually quoted as saying "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last".
@@Sewblon come on! It's clearly a diasporic Jew talking about the loss of the temple and Jerusalem! Thought that was fairly obvious tbh. This is the view of Dr James Tabor, by the way, a position which Dan McClellan continues to not engage with.
You accurately noted that Athanasius's Canon list is what would later be recognized as the Canon of the NT. What you do not note is how much later... as in The Council of Trent in the sixteenth century and lists produced by Luther and other reformers a few decades before that. I think most scholars would concur that Revelation likely existed in the Canon books of multiple Christian bishops prior to Athanasius, and that Athanasius's list in 367 was probably not as much definitive for others as in broad consensus. The data show Canon books with and without Revelation (and with some variations including Didache and/or the Shepherd of Hermas, and a non-zero number not including Hebrews for several centuries thereafter. Canon until the 16th C then, at least in the West, depended on one's bishop, not on a unified list from any centralized authority.
Will you be comparing the text with other apocalyptic Jewish literature of the time? Sometimes I’ve heard it said that the author is a hellenized Jew (because of his name and Greek) but I’ve also heard it’s possible that it could have been written by a Christian named AFTER John.
The Catholic church???? I think you mean the Orthodox church. The (Roman) Catholic church wasn't really a thing until 1054 or thereabouts -- and it never had much influence in Alexandria. But yeah, Athenasius stuck us with Revelations.
Enjoy how candid and knowledgeable of scripture you are. Would be interested if you were willing to offer critical critique of a scripture that actually claims to be from the creator of the heavens and the Earth. That actually has evidence of primary source material.
The book of Revelation runs completely against the message of the gospels and the writings of Paul. From peace and reconciliation to fear and revenge. It portrays a totally different Jesus. It’s been great material for creating wild speculation and selling books for those who have the ‘true’ interpretation. Also great for the religious ruling class who want to keep the underclass in fear and subjugation.
If a man in the army is being thought by his sergent different scenarios that could happen during a war, is that fear or warnings? Its called "critical thinking". When you know these things, you less prone to lose your mind and make desperate mistakes. In the end we all must keep a strong faith. God bless you
Erasmus and Martin Luther refused to add 1John 5:7-8 "father son ghost" an admitted insertion by church fathers. Only after an obscure passage in Mathew was " found" in one koine Greek version did Erasmus insert it. Luther refused to add this Catholic insertion in his first German translation of the Christian bibles But it was added in after Luther died.
Are we children such that we can't write the word "whore" in the captions but instead write it as "W***e?? It's especially absurd given that he says the word. Why why why don't "preachers" know this? The damage the interpretation of Rev has done is incalculable. Sure appreciate Dan McC!
@@Anansi6y I agree of course. It just seems strange to have such knowledge and still follow the Mormon religion. That would be interesting hearing him talk about it.
Dan has been an Atheist for a long time. You know what LDS reputation is (cult social). So it's nearer to say he maintained the lie to protect himself, as do many in the middle east in a similar way for example (apostasy is dangerous to fanatical cults like religions). It's not ideal but it is understandable. Now that he's free - the stupid myths can finally go. And the best thing is even US retards like Lane Craig cant refute his facts. The end of the sky daddy freaks! Finally.
I do enjoy Revelation. IT has this god forcing humans to work for its supposed archenemy. And, after this god kills all non-christians, it is forced to release satan to corrupt the christians left. Now, what could force a supposedly omnipotent being to do that? all in all, it's rather ridiculous with the above, the nonsense of a star being able fall onto the earth, etc.
I suspect the Aryans were worshippers of Aries, after the age of Taurus the Apis bull. Stellar worship which was by conversion so not necessarily all of them were white blue eyed blonds. Perhaps the majority were at that time so the word became conflated with white blue eyed blonds only.
@@michaelanderson4849 they aren't. They loved these books a lot. Anything about the disciples, or any big name, they would keep. They even kept their bones, do you expect them to leave the books?
@@koppite9600 i think you should do some research on your own on how we got the bible.. dont believe evrything your church or priest tell you... start with the father of the new testament,, the very first who came up with the idea of a canon of scriptures for christians, the church declared heretic Marcion of sinope because it was he... who started it all!
@@koppite9600 Are you saying that the scholarly consensus is lying? None of what you said has any meaning without backing it up. Why are you right and they're wrong?
@@rosaeruber225 if scholarly consensus would consider tradition then they would be presenting a different conclusion, but they discard tradition and their consensus is flawed. Tell me your mind about people who fought to keep bones but their books were disorganised.. does it make sense? What about all the heresies they dealt with, does it make sense that they didn't read these books, that they were confused about them? You have a farmer and a gold prospector, a gold prospector doesn't see value with farming land, he loves gold rich places. Scholars don't value tradition. I have seen Dan wear a 'data over dogma' shirt.
Dan, you are being disingenuous in this video. You don't tell the whole story. Revelation was cited and quoted as Scripture by early church fathers such as Justin Martyr in the second century. Furthermore, the imagery and themes of revelation are thoroughly permeated by previous Scriptural imagery and themes, from both the OT to the New. You act as though Revelation is completely disjointed from the rest of Scripture and especially the Gospels, which is patently false. Jesus, in the gospels, speaks in apocalyptic language concerning ultimate divine judgement and the regeneration of creation. In the Gospels, He is depicted as the Head of the Church (as in the first chapters of Rev.), the glorified and ascended Christ, the judge of the nations, the lamb who was slain etc. etc. Revelation is also saturated with OT imagery, i.e the four living creatures, Temple imagery, the New Jerusalem and Creation. Revelation, in fact, is so infused with previous Biblical imagery and themes that even if the book wasn't included in the canon, nothing would essentially be lost. To say that it is simply the "fantasy" of some random writer and is out of unity with the Gospels is just bad scholarship and thinking.
The sometimes poor Greek grammar, oddities & made-up Greek words in Greek Revelation indicate it is a translation of a Shemitic original. The Greek Text of Revelation is odd & has Yeshua saying that He is “the Alpha & the O [το Αλφα και το Ω] (English: the Alpha & the Omega)” (Rev. 1:8; 21:6; 22:13). The Greek Text of Revelation also has the made-up Greek word CHAL-KO-LI-BA-NOS [NMS], which was translated incorrectly as “fine brass” [2x] (Rev. 1:15; 2:18). Thus there is some indication that the Aramaic Text of Revelation, found in the Crawford Codex, is the original. The Aramaic is good & correct - I don’t think there are any errors. It has the First & Last letters of its Alphabet spelled out when Yeshua said: “I am the ALAP (Heb. “Aleph”) & TOW (Heb. "Tav") [ܐܸܢܳܐ ܐܳܠܲܦ ܘܬܲܘ].” It also has the full separate words: “Leḅanese Brass (Brass of Leḅanon).” There is a TITLE (heading or introduction) of Aramaic Revelation (Crawford Manuscript) at the beginning which indicates who the correct Yoḥannan (Joḥn) is. It says: *“The Revelation from God which WAS ON (came to) Yoḥannan (Joḥn) the Evangelist [when he was] IN (on) the island Patmos, to which he was CAST OUT (banished, expelled, exiled) by NERON (Nero) Caesar.”* "The Doctrine of ADDAI (Addi)" also indicates that it was Yoḥannan (Joḥn), the son of Zowdai (Zaḅdi, Zebedee) who was writing Scripture [i.e. the 4th Gospel & Letters] (Addai 46:8-13 [vs. 78-79]). The New Testament indicates all that as well. Yoḥannan (Joḥn) tells us that he wrote the Gospel of Joḥn at the end of that book: *"This is THE DISCIPLE [Yoḥannan] who testified about all these things, and also WROTE them; & we are knowing that his testimony is true. But there are also many other things that Yeshua did, those things which if they were being written one by one, neither is the world, as I am SUPPOSING (thinking), would be SUFFICIENT (enough) for the books that would be written. [Amen.]" (Joḥn **21:24**-25 P'shitta).* The same Joḥn that wrote the Gospel of Joḥn and the Letters also wrote Revelation (Rev. 1:1, 4, 9; etc.). Yoḥannan uses his same common expressions in His Gospel, his Letter & Revelation. He addresses Yeshua as "the Word," "the Word of Life," and "the Word of God" (Jn. 1:1, 1 Jn. 1:1; 5:7, Rev. 19:13). Some of the qualifications for a Book to be considered Canonical was if it was written EARLY, by an APOSTLE, didn’t contradict other Scripture, widely recognized as AUTHENTIC, etc. The REVELATION (APOKALUPSIS) claims to be written EARLY in the 1st Century by Joḥn. It probably was finished by A.D. 66 b/c it mentions Laodikeia (Rev. 3:14) still standing. Laodikeia, Kolossai (Colossae) & Hierapolis (Col. 4:13) were destroyed by an earthquake in A.D. 66. Laodikeia was not rebuilt until 120 years later by Marcus Aurelius. So Revelation must have been written before A.D. 66, else there would not have been any Laodikeia for Joḥn to write to. Also, as you pointed out, it was written EARLY b/c Justin Martyr makes reference to the Revelation in the middle of the 2nd century. It furthermore claims to be written by an APOSTLE. Moreover, it was probably passed down in a trustworthy chain & viewed by MANY [the majority] to be regarded as Scripture within the One Catholic Church. We also see that Revelation was regarded as Scripture by no later than the 4th Century b/c it appears in both the Sahidic Coptic & Latin Vulgate Translations (Codices). All of that shows that it has just as much right to be AUTHENTIC SCRIPTURE as the other NT Books.
Note: Only the Dative Form [CHAL-KO-LI-BA-NO (DMS)] “to brass of Leḅanon” appears in Revelation or the whole Greek Bible. That dative form [spelling] is the same for masculine and neuter Greek words. However, I believe this MADE-UP composite word is masculine like Liddel & Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon shows & Thayer’s Greek Lexicon indicates because the WORDS that make-up this COMPOSITE WORD are both masculine nouns. Thus I believe James Strong’s Dictionary lists this word [entry] as a neuter word in error - as: CHAL-KO-LI-BA-NON [NNS - Nominative Neuter Singular]. - CHAL-KO-LI-BA-NOS is the [NMS - Nominative Masculine Singular].
Well that brings about a question Cause most scholars believe it was in 90AD from what I can tell. I’m struggling with this book, as it seems to be in conflict with the Jesus we see in the gospels. In the gospels we see a Jesus who died for and wanted to save the world. Here we see one who comes back to destroy and torture everyone in the end and throw them in a lake of fire. But yet Jesus condemned the acts of Elijah to consume people with fire. We also plainly know that passing children through the fire is not righteous. The mark of the beast is a problem for me. I found a mark on my hand which is terrifying. But it isn’t 666. It is 663. And above it looks like a cross covering up what could have been a 666. Maybe the devil is messing with my mind but I took a pic and can clearly see it thou the mind can see anything with enough subconscious persuasion. But it put me to the point of thinking if your hand offends the cut it off. Literally cut is off. Or if your eye offends thee pluck it out. But does Yeshu really advocate self mutilation. He does talk about becoming A Eunuch. He doesn’t say to castrate or advocate for it but he does say many have made themselves that way for the kingdom.
As a trivia fact, the word "antichrist" never appears in the book of Revelation. I have won bar bets with that.
You’re correct. These are the only places it appears….
1st John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
1st John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1st John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2nd John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
@@Rowsey63 In the plural and in the present tense. "Antichrsists are among us now." They are also defined as those "who eny that Christ came in the flesh." This is talking about Docetic Christians. That was a sect that believed Jesus had only been a spirit without any physical substance.
@@Ken_Scaletta I’m NOT disagreeing with you, sir.
@@Rowsey63 I know. I was just adding on.
But the concept is there. How strange you are looking for a word and not the concept.
Always helpful, Dan. Stoking fear is right out of the cult playbook. Bad guys are more important to religion than God. There are bad guys a plenty in Revelations.
Well
1. It’s Revelation, no S
2. Stoking fear? Where’d he talk about that?
Thank you , I signed up for the Revelation class. Excited.
very happy that your more on youtube now man, love your stuff. hope you can maybe monetize if thats your goal
The things you don't learn in Catholic school. Speaking as a writer, though, Revelations feels like a really good book as an "ending" for the Bible's collection.
Oh 'it was not known until this person'
That's some problem. The books if the NT were always known and revelation was always among them.
@@koppite9600 "The books if the NT were always known and revelation was always among them."
False. Revelation was one of the last books to be written by an author different from whomever wrote John. The Greek in Revelation is very sloppy whereas the Greek in John is masterful. Revelation was written at the end of the 1st century, decades after the letters of Paul and even after some of the forgeries written in Paul's name that later made it into the NT canon.
Revelation was written long after most of the 1st generation Christians were dead on a different continent in a different language than their native Aramaic. It was NOT always known among them.
Though Revelation was written before 2 Peter, which was written 120 CE or later by a lying forger pretending to be Paul to do damage control for the failed 2nd coming prophecies of Paul and Jesus.
The names of who wrote the 4 gospels we have today weren't attached until the late 2nd century either. The many things ignorant and/or lying pastors won't teach in church.
In the sense that it's a vivid culmination of the petty, narcissistic and blood thirsty tendencies seen throughout the rest of the book? I guess so.
There's a cartoon called Superjail! from the late 2000s that is the perfect encapsulation of this idea.
Each episode starts with a bit of setup and then the whole thing spirals out into a Rube Goldbergian display of death and dismemberment.
The orgiastic display inevitably ends when the parade of violence coincidentally results in the resolution of the conflict established in the setup.
It's all very absurd and silly.
It's like the hockey stick of plotlines. It carries on at a relatively steady state and then exponentially shoots off the chart before cratering to an abrupt end.
@@koppite9600Out of curiosity, at what point in time do you think the books of the NT were always known?
@@carlasmith9093 by 140 all books should have circulated enough.
Your closed captions added something about revelation supporting trinitarianism. I can't help but be reminded of Dr Tabor's point that revelation works fine without all of the "and his son jesus christ" bits, suggesting that the text in its original form predates christianity. I can't help but wonder if those bits were added, pethaps in the time of Athenasius, to, as you say, aupport trinitarianism.
My understanding is that the way Revelation supports Trinitarianism is that Jesus and God the Father are both individually quoted as saying "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last".
But if it pre-dated Christianity, then it wasn't for Christians being persecuted by the Roman empire. So then who was it written for?
@@Sewblon come on! It's clearly a diasporic Jew talking about the loss of the temple and Jerusalem! Thought that was fairly obvious tbh.
This is the view of Dr James Tabor, by the way, a position which Dan McClellan continues to not engage with.
How do we find information on this class?
This is, in my opinion, one of the most important articles you have posted to date.
You accurately noted that Athanasius's Canon list is what would later be recognized as the Canon of the NT. What you do not note is how much later... as in The Council of Trent in the sixteenth century and lists produced by Luther and other reformers a few decades before that.
I think most scholars would concur that Revelation likely existed in the Canon books of multiple Christian bishops prior to Athanasius, and that Athanasius's list in 367 was probably not as much definitive for others as in broad consensus. The data show Canon books with and without Revelation (and with some variations including Didache and/or the Shepherd of Hermas, and a non-zero number not including Hebrews for several centuries thereafter.
Canon until the 16th C then, at least in the West, depended on one's bishop, not on a unified list from any centralized authority.
Could you do a video on Apolonias of Tianna? I understand he lived about the same time as Jesus, only up in Macedonia, and there are many parallels.
Will you be comparing the text with other apocalyptic Jewish literature of the time? Sometimes I’ve heard it said that the author is a hellenized Jew (because of his name and Greek) but I’ve also heard it’s possible that it could have been written by a Christian named AFTER John.
I’m a little skeptical of the latter, but it also does raise a lot of questions about how Jewish Christians saw other Jews if the former is true
Love your work Dan. Rich and succinct. Perfect for a doofus like me.
Rips, Reps and Revelations
The Catholic church???? I think you mean the Orthodox church. The (Roman) Catholic church wasn't really a thing until 1054 or thereabouts -- and it never had much influence in Alexandria. But yeah, Athenasius stuck us with Revelations.
Luther was not a fan 😂
Enjoy how candid and knowledgeable of scripture you are. Would be interested if you were willing to offer critical critique of a scripture that actually claims to be from the creator of the heavens and the Earth. That actually has evidence of primary source material.
I was going to leave a like but it’s already at the perfect number. It was added because it was a popular story.
Is AVP considered canon?
It wasn't until the year 2100 when Emperor Walt Disneus declared it canon to silence the uprising of the heretical Promethean Covenant
what about Peter's revelation?
Just a thought...
How is it that all these morons could see the end of the world but never saw the end of their own lives?
It is part of the cyclic nature of this planet, Destruction and Impact Winter.
🤘
1
I think Justin Martyr was just making a guess and using the text itself To make that claim
When you say the Catholic church, what do you mean? This is long before the scism?
Is there any chance that a new kind of bible could be written that actually makes sense?
Isn't Revelation in the Codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus?
Wait, how do you exile someone several times? Is it like pro wrestling where the guy who loses a Loser Retires match comes back but wearing a mask?
online class on Revelation? Nah, I'm good.
Revelations seems to have been written for political purposes.
The book of Revelation runs completely against the message of the gospels and the writings of Paul. From peace and reconciliation to fear and revenge. It portrays a totally different Jesus. It’s been great material for creating wild speculation and selling books for those who have the ‘true’ interpretation. Also great for the religious ruling class who want to keep the underclass in fear and subjugation.
If a man in the army is being thought by his sergent different scenarios that could happen during a war, is that fear or warnings? Its called "critical thinking". When you know these things, you less prone to lose your mind and make desperate mistakes. In the end we all must keep a strong faith. God bless you
Erasmus and Martin Luther refused to add 1John 5:7-8 "father son ghost" an admitted insertion by church fathers.
Only after an obscure passage in Mathew was " found" in one koine Greek version did Erasmus insert it.
Luther refused to add this Catholic insertion in his first German translation of the Christian bibles
But it was added in after Luther died.
Are we children such that we can't write the word "whore" in the captions but instead write it as "W***e?? It's especially absurd given that he says the word.
Why why why don't "preachers" know this? The damage the interpretation of Rev has done is incalculable. Sure appreciate Dan McC!
Catholic Church? Didn't the church in Egypt become the Coptic Church?
Hey I've been looking for a video where you proclaim the means by which one can be saved. Can you point that out?
seem like we owe everything about christianity to the holy roman
catholic church!
That's the church of St Peter established by Jesus
Not so holy I would say.
@@michaelanderson4849 is anything perfect in this world? The Catholic church is Holy.
@@koppite9600
so says the holy roman catholic church...
@@ranilodicen4460 founded by Christ, yes.
Is Dan a Christian?
I think he's Mormon but he usually doesn't bring it up since his CZcams is more about education and data rather than dogma
@@Anansi6y how could someone be a scholar and a stay Mormon?
@@i.d.8347 I don't know, but it's up to Dan really
@@Anansi6y I agree of course. It just seems strange to have such knowledge and still follow the Mormon religion. That would be interesting hearing him talk about it.
Dan has been an Atheist for a long time. You know what LDS reputation is (cult social). So it's nearer to say he maintained the lie to protect himself, as do many in the middle east in a similar way for example (apostasy is dangerous to fanatical cults like religions). It's not ideal but it is understandable. Now that he's free - the stupid myths can finally go. And the best thing is even US retards like Lane Craig cant refute his facts. The end of the sky daddy freaks! Finally.
I do enjoy Revelation. IT has this god forcing humans to work for its supposed archenemy. And, after this god kills all non-christians, it is forced to release satan to corrupt the christians left. Now, what could force a supposedly omnipotent being to do that?
all in all, it's rather ridiculous with the above, the nonsense of a star being able fall onto the earth, etc.
I suspect the Aryans were worshippers of Aries, after the age of Taurus the Apis bull. Stellar worship which was by conversion so not necessarily all of them were white blue eyed blonds. Perhaps the majority were at that time so the word became conflated with white blue eyed blonds only.
Arianism was a form of nontrinitarian Christianity named after its founder, Arius. It has nothing to do with the word Aryan or astrology.
Almost like John went from using scribes to writing himself when he was banished to the island
You always look to wow the atheists in the comments by subconsciously suggesting the early Catholics were a mess about their books.
Are you suggesting the origins of the books aren't a mess?
@@michaelanderson4849 they aren't. They loved these books a lot. Anything about the disciples, or any big name, they would keep. They even kept their bones, do you expect them to leave the books?
@@koppite9600
i think you should do some research on your own on how we got the bible..
dont believe evrything your church or priest tell you...
start with the father of the new testament,, the very first who came up with the idea of a canon of scriptures for christians, the church declared heretic Marcion of sinope
because it was he... who started it all!
@@koppite9600 Are you saying that the scholarly consensus is lying? None of what you said has any meaning without backing it up. Why are you right and they're wrong?
@@rosaeruber225 if scholarly consensus would consider tradition then they would be presenting a different conclusion, but they discard tradition and their consensus is flawed.
Tell me your mind about people who fought to keep bones but their books were disorganised.. does it make sense? What about all the heresies they dealt with, does it make sense that they didn't read these books, that they were confused about them?
You have a farmer and a gold prospector, a gold prospector doesn't see value with farming land, he loves gold rich places. Scholars don't value tradition. I have seen Dan wear a 'data over dogma' shirt.
Amazing. Everything you said was wrong. I couldn’t be more wrong if I was trying.
Dan, you are being disingenuous in this video. You don't tell the whole story. Revelation was cited and quoted as Scripture by early church fathers such as Justin Martyr in the second century. Furthermore, the imagery and themes of revelation are thoroughly permeated by previous Scriptural imagery and themes, from both the OT to the New. You act as though Revelation is completely disjointed from the rest of Scripture and especially the Gospels, which is patently false. Jesus, in the gospels, speaks in apocalyptic language concerning ultimate divine judgement and the regeneration of creation. In the Gospels, He is depicted as the Head of the Church (as in the first chapters of Rev.), the glorified and ascended Christ, the judge of the nations, the lamb who was slain etc. etc. Revelation is also saturated with OT imagery, i.e the four living creatures, Temple imagery, the New Jerusalem and Creation. Revelation, in fact, is so infused with previous Biblical imagery and themes that even if the book wasn't included in the canon, nothing would essentially be lost. To say that it is simply the "fantasy" of some random writer and is out of unity with the Gospels is just bad scholarship and thinking.
Yep. He doesn’t care about truth. Just his agenda.
Wolf in wolf’s clothing.
i dont think jesus ever said anything about coming back and murdering everyone who doesnt believe
The sometimes poor Greek grammar, oddities & made-up Greek words in Greek Revelation indicate it is a translation of a Shemitic original. The Greek Text of Revelation is odd & has Yeshua saying that He is “the Alpha & the O [το Αλφα και το Ω] (English: the Alpha & the Omega)” (Rev. 1:8; 21:6; 22:13). The Greek Text of Revelation also has the made-up Greek word CHAL-KO-LI-BA-NOS [NMS], which was translated incorrectly as “fine brass” [2x] (Rev. 1:15; 2:18). Thus there is some indication that the Aramaic Text of Revelation, found in the Crawford Codex, is the original. The Aramaic is good & correct - I don’t think there are any errors. It has the First & Last letters of its Alphabet spelled out when Yeshua said: “I am the ALAP (Heb. “Aleph”) & TOW (Heb. "Tav") [ܐܸܢܳܐ ܐܳܠܲܦ ܘܬܲܘ].” It also has the full separate words: “Leḅanese Brass (Brass of Leḅanon).”
There is a TITLE (heading or introduction) of Aramaic Revelation (Crawford Manuscript) at the beginning which indicates who the correct Yoḥannan (Joḥn) is. It says: *“The Revelation from God which WAS ON (came to) Yoḥannan (Joḥn) the Evangelist [when he was] IN (on) the island Patmos, to which he was CAST OUT (banished, expelled, exiled) by NERON (Nero) Caesar.”* "The Doctrine of ADDAI (Addi)" also indicates that it was Yoḥannan (Joḥn), the son of Zowdai (Zaḅdi, Zebedee) who was writing Scripture [i.e. the 4th Gospel & Letters] (Addai 46:8-13 [vs. 78-79]). The New Testament indicates all that as well. Yoḥannan (Joḥn) tells us that he wrote the Gospel of Joḥn at the end of that book: *"This is THE DISCIPLE [Yoḥannan] who testified about all these things, and also WROTE them; & we are knowing that his testimony is true. But there are also many other things that Yeshua did, those things which if they were being written one by one, neither is the world, as I am SUPPOSING (thinking), would be SUFFICIENT (enough) for the books that would be written. [Amen.]" (Joḥn **21:24**-25 P'shitta).* The same Joḥn that wrote the Gospel of Joḥn and the Letters also wrote Revelation (Rev. 1:1, 4, 9; etc.). Yoḥannan uses his same common expressions in His Gospel, his Letter & Revelation. He addresses Yeshua as "the Word," "the Word of Life," and "the Word of God" (Jn. 1:1, 1 Jn. 1:1; 5:7, Rev. 19:13).
Some of the qualifications for a Book to be considered Canonical was if it was written EARLY, by an APOSTLE, didn’t contradict other Scripture, widely recognized as AUTHENTIC, etc. The REVELATION (APOKALUPSIS) claims to be written EARLY in the 1st Century by Joḥn. It probably was finished by A.D. 66 b/c it mentions Laodikeia (Rev. 3:14) still standing. Laodikeia, Kolossai (Colossae) & Hierapolis (Col. 4:13) were destroyed by an earthquake in A.D. 66. Laodikeia was not rebuilt until 120 years later by Marcus Aurelius. So Revelation must have been written before A.D. 66, else there would not have been any Laodikeia for Joḥn to write to. Also, as you pointed out, it was written EARLY b/c Justin Martyr makes reference to the Revelation in the middle of the 2nd century. It furthermore claims to be written by an APOSTLE. Moreover, it was probably passed down in a trustworthy chain & viewed by MANY [the majority] to be regarded as Scripture within the One Catholic Church. We also see that Revelation was regarded as Scripture by no later than the 4th Century b/c it appears in both the Sahidic Coptic & Latin Vulgate Translations (Codices).
All of that shows that it has just as much right to be AUTHENTIC SCRIPTURE as the other NT Books.
Note: Only the Dative Form [CHAL-KO-LI-BA-NO (DMS)] “to brass of Leḅanon” appears in Revelation or the whole Greek Bible. That dative form [spelling] is the same for masculine and neuter Greek words. However, I believe this MADE-UP composite word is masculine like Liddel & Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon shows & Thayer’s Greek Lexicon indicates because the WORDS that make-up this COMPOSITE WORD are both masculine nouns. Thus I believe James Strong’s Dictionary lists this word [entry] as a neuter word in error - as: CHAL-KO-LI-BA-NON [NNS - Nominative Neuter Singular]. - CHAL-KO-LI-BA-NOS is the [NMS - Nominative Masculine Singular].
Well that brings about a question Cause most scholars believe it was in 90AD from what I can tell.
I’m struggling with this book, as it seems to be in conflict with the Jesus we see in the gospels. In the gospels we see a Jesus who died for and wanted to save the world. Here we see one who comes back to destroy and torture everyone in the end and throw them in a lake of fire. But yet Jesus condemned the acts of Elijah to consume people with fire. We also plainly know that passing children through the fire is not righteous.
The mark of the beast is a problem for me. I found a mark on my hand which is terrifying. But it isn’t 666. It is 663. And above it looks like a cross covering up what could have been a 666. Maybe the devil is messing with my mind but I took a pic and can clearly see it thou the mind can see anything with enough subconscious persuasion.
But it put me to the point of thinking if your hand offends the cut it off. Literally cut is off. Or if your eye offends thee pluck it out. But does Yeshu really advocate self mutilation. He does talk about becoming A Eunuch. He doesn’t say to castrate or advocate for it but he does say many have made themselves that way for the kingdom.