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?
Tell me more
×
Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for
professors, theologians, and those interested in exegetical analysis of biblical texts. It's 100% free, no registration required.
|
|
|||||||||
|
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 in the FAQ. 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 closed questions here.
|
The book was accepted into the canon at the Council of Carthage in 397 AD. It was, at the time when the canon was being constructed, believed to be authored by the Apostle John. Anything written by one of the disciples of Jesus tends to be held sacred. 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. SummaryGiven 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. |
||||
|
|
