The book of Revelation seems to be very different from the other books included in the New Testament. What reasons are there that legitimatizes its place in Biblical canon?
closed as off topic by Jack Douglas♦, Shog9♦ Oct 15 '11 at 14:46
Questions on Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange are expected to relate to the analysis of biblical text within the scope defined by the community. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about reopening questions here.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
There was some opposition to its inclusion. One of the views against this was that it was one of the main books of Montanism, which was considered heretical at that the time. Gregory of Nazianzus argued against its inclusion due to the difficult in interpretation and the possibility of abuse.
However there was a precedence of it being included in the canon that extended back to the 2nd century.
Given the tradition of it being included in the early pre-cursors to the canon and it's generally accepted authorship from an apostle, the book was included in the canon.