Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
Many Christians attribute authorship of Revelation to the same human as the Gospel of John. Yet, as discussed in the article Book of Revelation on Wikipedia, citing Adela Collins’ book Crisis and Catharsis (1984),
"The author names himself as "John", but modern scholars consider it
unlikely that the author of Revelation also wrote the Gospel of John."
What is a general survey of the arguments, according to critical scholars, that suggest that the author of the Book of Revelation is different than the Gospel of John?
Note this similar question.
Philip Williams
Just ignore those liberals!
Troy Day
Philip Williams There’s definitely a long-standing scholarly debate about this! Language style, theological emphases, and historical context all suggest different authors for Revelation and the Gospel of John. The Gospel is more focused on Christ’s divinity and has a distinct Greek style, while Revelation’s language and imagery, along with its apocalyptic focus, point to someone writing in a different context, possibly at a later time in John’s life or even a different John. It’s always helpful to consider how early church historians also weighed these differences!
Philip Williams
Troy Day the Lord of Heaven with eyes of blazing fire, face like the sun, sword coming from his mouth, thundering voice suddenly appearing and ordering you to write will impact one’s style.
Glynn Brown
Because it’s two different writing styles and grammar.
The only argument in favor is church tradition.
Pentecostal Theology
Glynn Brown tell us more about it AND Philip Williams will call you liberal
BTW 4th gospel AND Rev do NOT have different writing styles and grammar
Anyone who has even looked @ the Greek knows this well
Glynn Brown
Pentecostal Theology the Greek scholars disagree with you. The Greek is different,as well as the grammar.
John of Patmos is not John of the 4th gospel (assuming that John wrote the gospel) the gospels are anonymous.
Those who label everyone liberal who disagrees with them are usually fanatics.
Pentecostal Theology
Glynn Brown I am a Greek scholar and beg to differ
WHICH Greek scholars disagree ?
Give us some examples
I’ve worked with Metzger @ HDS and Tubingen I am NOT aware of any leading text criticism scholar who has published 4th VS Rev Greek is different or the grammar. Philip Williams @john mushenhouse knwo this well but PLS DO give some examples of such scholars or passages
Glynn Brown
Pentecostal Theology then you differ from the mainstream Greek and bible scholars. The only scholars who believe it are the traditional fundamentalists. Metzger’s pupil Dr Erhman certainly doesn’t believe it.
The Greek of the gospel of John is better Greek than the book of Revelation.
Please give any examples of the authorship of the gospel of John.
Glynn Brown
Pentecostal Theology you also argue against the church fathers Dionysius of Alexandria,and Eusebius .
Glynn Brown
Pentecostal Theology
https://www.bartehrman.com/who-wrote-the-book-of-revelation/
Even though I disagree with Erhman’s theology and skepticism,his argument here is solid.
Glynn Brown
Pentecostal Theology
https://www.bartehrman.com/who-wrote-the-book-of-revelation/
Pentecostal Theology
Glynn Brown actually Dionysius of Alexandria and Eusebius believed JOHN the Apostle was NOT the author of Revelation but you need to check your sources carefully cause so far you have not really shown ANY proof
Glynn Brown
Pentecostal Theology they were correct. John the apostle didn’t write Revelation or the gospel. My sources have shown actual proof,unlike your baseless claims.
Troy Day
John Mushenhouse we agree OF COURSE but Glynn Brown is the one disagreeing with all church fathers and theological @highlight
Glynn Brown
Troy Day all church fathers? That’s dishonest. I mentioned two church fathers who believed a different John wrote Revelation than the Gospel.
Troy Day
Glynn Brown correct – all church fathers
have you read them all in their original tongue?
Glynn Brown
Troy Day it’s obvious that you haven’t,since I mentioned two that disagree with you. Yet you dishonestly claim that all church fathers are unanimous.
Pentecostal Theology
Glynn Brown have you read them all in their original tongue?
Glynn Brown
Pentecostal Theology I have the apostolic fathers in Greek and English. Are you still being dishonest about all of the church fathers agreeing with you? Have you read the two that I mentioned that rejected the authorship of John the apostle for Revelation in Greek or English? So far you have yet to refute them.
Troy Day
Glynn Brown pls advise WHICH edition year publisher apostolic fathers in Greek – surely is NOT the Gnostic one online? Asking for my friends WHO pointed out that you dont seem to have read the Church Fathers in ORIGINAL @followers @highlight you see, some of them we do not have in Greek 🙂
John Mushenhouse
Troy Day I have problems with the Greek father’s books. First of all there was little textual criticism on them as there is on the Bible. Second, the RCC did some redaction and editing. Can they be academically considered reliable?
Troy Day
John Mushenhouse sure sure REMEMBER WHEN Link Hurtson was reading a gnostic trans claiming it was RCC – so funny A CHILD knows they are opposing BUT lets see which ed. print Glynn Brown is reading – note he stated he HAS it not he READS it
Here’s a summary of the latest posts from the Pentecostal Theology Facebook page:
Biblical Interpretation & Exegesis: Many posts pose nuanced questions about scriptural passages, such as:
Is “double honor” in 1 Timothy 5:17–18 about pastoral pay?
Are the 1290 days in Daniel 12 related to the 2300 evenings and mornings in Daniel 8? This one examined scholarly views on apocalyptic timing and prophecy fulfillment.
Differences in translating Luke 10:9–11’s Greek, and implications for meaning.
Textual Criticism & Theological Debate: Questions such as how to search the Septuagint for specific Greek phrases, and discussion around Lukan Priority (theory that Luke was the first synoptic gospel written).
Christology & Trinitarian Theology: Posts discuss distinctions within the Trinity, including:
Whether Psalm 45 and Hebrews teach that Jesus is different than the Father (polytheism or monotheism).
Questioning whether future sins are forgiven and the implications for atonement.
Old Testament History & Legal Custom: Topics include whether Rachel’s teraphim were deeds to property, and whether Aaron was honest about the golden calf in Exodus 32.
New Covenant & Covenant Theology: Posts analyze if passages like Jeremiah 32:40 are direct references to the New Covenant, their relationship to Jeremiah 31, and how those texts are interpreted.
Synoptic Gospel Source Criticism: Several posts examine how Mark and Luke relate in literary and source dependence (including the Q-source).
Ecclesiology & Sacraments: Why believers are asked to partake in communion emblems, examining Luke 22.
Other Notable Posts:
Angelology (Exodus 3: “angel of the LORD”).
Geography (“Where is Gedor in 1 Chronicles 4:39?”).
Passover typology (“It is finished” and priestly rituals).
Differences in interpretations of “sinful nature” among Gentiles, and perspectives on the law in Galatians.
Themes:
The page is highly engaged in academic, exegetical, and theological conversation, with most posts asking open-ended or scholarly questions inviting discussion and analysis.
Frequent cross-referencing of scholars, commentators, and followers, including tagging experts and inviting input.
Scriptures frequently referenced:
Daniel, Timothy, Luke, Mark, Exodus, Genesis, Hebrews, Jeremiah, Matthew, Galatians, Psalms, Ephesians, and Isaiah.
Community Engagement:
Many posts include direct commentary, shares, and responses from followers, showing vibrant discussions centered on biblical meaning, church practice, and doctrinal clarification
Troy Day
The current Facebook page features a post and vibrant discussion on whether the author of Revelation is the same as the author of the Gospel of John. Here are the key points:
Central Question: The post asks for arguments, both historical and linguistic, supporting different authors for Revelation and the Gospel of John, a topic debated in Christian scholarship.
Arguments for Different Authors:
Linguistic Differences: Revelation’s Greek is considered rougher with unique grammatical features, while the Gospel uses polished Koine Greek.
Stylistic and Theological Differences: Revelation is filled with apocalyptic imagery and Old Testament references, focusing on eschatological judgment, while the Gospel presents philosophical theology, focusing on Jesus as the Logos and realized eschatology.
Historical Source: Dionysius of Alexandria (3rd century) famously proposed “John the Elder” as the author of Revelation, sparking ongoing debate.
Arguments for Same Author:
Patristic Tradition: Early church fathers (e.g., Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen) attribute both books to John the Apostle.
Literary/Thematic Links: Both texts use symbolic language about Christ (e.g., the “Lamb,” the “Logos”) and have similar dualistic frameworks.
Counterpoints to Stylistic Arguments: Variations are explained by genre differences, John’s age, Patmos exile conditions, or use of different secretaries.
Community Discussion: The comments display vigorous debate among participants, referencing Greek manuscripts, the reliability of church fathers’ writings, and the impact of church traditions, with some participants dismissing doubts as unnecessary for faith.
Broader Context: The page as a whole is devoted to deep exegetical, textual, and theological discussions, with frequent cross-references to scripture and scholarly sources, and high engagement from followers on similar biblical and doctrinal topics.
Summary:
The post and its comments reflect the unresolved scholarly debate about the authorship of Revelation and the Gospel of John, highlighting arguments from linguistic, stylistic, historical, and theological perspectives, as well as the role of early church tradition and ongoing modern critical scholarship. The tone is academic but actively engaged by a faith-based community
Troy Day
The webpage explores a theological question comparing two time periods mentioned in the Book of Daniel: the 1,290 days referenced in Daniel 12 and the 2,300 evenings and mornings in Daniel 8. It highlights direct biblical quotes from Daniel 12:6-11 and Daniel 8:13-14, pointing out strong textual parallels:
Both passages feature two angelic figures communicating.
Both mention the cessation of the daily sacrifice (“regular burnt offering”).
Both reference the “abomination of desolation.”
The author suggests there are clear connections between these texts and poses the question: Could the 1,290 days in Daniel 12 be part of the 2,300 evenings and mornings in Daniel 8? This invites readers to consider the relationship or overlap between these prophetic periods. The page is intended for discussion, prompting analysis among Pentecostal scholars and believers, and links to related discussions and resources on biblical prophecy and theology https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/are-the-1290-days-in-daniel-12-related-to-the-2300-evenings-and-mornings-in-daniel-8/?
Glynn Brown
John Mushenhouse many believe that the gospel of John was redacted.
I agree that there’s a great need for for more textual criticism for the patristic works. And there’s evidence that some scribes have corrupted certain New Testament MSS in order to conform them to the Byzantine text type.
We simply cannot merely follow tradition like Troy Day,or we will be no different than the Catholics.
John Mushenhouse
Glynn Brown well you used the fathers to knock the bible. Stick to the subject.
Glynn Brown
John Mushenhouse no one knocked the Bible. Stick to the evidence.
Troy Day
John Mushenhouse apart from more personal attacks you should not expect more from Glynn Brown but maybe Philip Williams ??
John Mushenhouse
Glynn Brown sure sure Glynn
Glynn Brown
Troy Day you’re the one who started the personal attacks and assumptions. You don’t know anything about me or where I stand. You just attack and assume everything about those who disagree with you.
Glynn Brown
John Mushenhouse if you have any evidence to support your claim, I would like to see it.
John Mushenhouse
Glynn Brown just the usual — there are no new thoughts —– just fodder for arguing
Troy Day
John Mushenhouse Glyyn has NO point here He grossly overstated 2 church fathers and ignored 22 others who said opposite to his point here
Philip Williams
Troy Day rebuke them with all authority!
Troy Day
@highlight Rasiah Thomas John Mushenhouse Here are detailed explanations for each major point about the authorship of the Book of Revelation, based on traditional scholarship and the major arguments found in the Christianity Stack Exchange summary and answers :
1. Traditional Authorship: John the Apostle
The earliest and most dominant tradition is that the Apostle John (“son of Zebedee”), who also wrote the Gospel of John and the epistles of John, authored Revelation.
Early church fathers like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus (who learned from Polycarp, a disciple of John), Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Victorinus, Origen, and the author of the Muratorian Fragment all attribute the book to John the Apostle.
Internal similarities, such as the image of Christ as the “Lamb” and the identification of Jesus as the “Logos/Word,” are often cited in support, alongside the strong tradition of John’s leadership in churches of Asia Minor (especially Ephesus).
2. Internal Evidence (Book’s Self-Identification)
The author identifies himself simply as “John” in several places (Revelation 1:1, 1:4, 1:9, 22:8), without further clarification or claim to be an apostle.
He addresses the “seven churches” of Asia, calling himself their brother and companion in tribulation, suggesting he was well-known and had authority among these communities.
The earliest manuscript titles, like those in the important Codex Sinaiticus, acknowledge “John” as the author, showing recognition of his identity among early Christians.
3. External Evidence
Widespread and early acceptance by major church figures: Justin Martyr (mid-2nd century), who lived in Ephesus, directly states that “John, one of the apostles of Christ, prophesied by revelation.”
Irenaeus (late 2nd century) refers to the author as the “Lord’s disciple” (a term reserved for apostles) and describes John as the one who “saw the Revelation.”
Clement of Alexandria and Origen both say John wrote Revelation after being exiled to Patmos.
Later traditions also uphold this view, with Eastern traditions (like the Aramaic Crawford Codex) explicitly titling the book as the Revelation given to “John the Evangelist…in Patmos Island to which he was exiled by Nero Caesar.”
4. Alternative Authorship Theory: John the Elder (The Presbyter)
Dionysius of Alexandria (mid-3rd century) was the first significant figure to question apostolic authorship, citing differences in Greek literary style, theology, and the lack of apostolic self-claim in Revelation.
He suggested another John, called the “Presbyter” or Elder (possibly referenced by Papias), wrote the book instead of the apostle.
This theory was bolstered by reports of two different “Johns” in Ephesus and differences between Revelation and the Gospel in use of Greek and theological focus.
5. Linguistic and Stylistic Arguments
Critics point out that Revelation’s Greek is regarded as “rough” or grammatically poor, distinct from the simple but correct Greek of the Gospel of John.
John of Revelation makes extensive use of Old Testament imagery (about 245 allusions), and his language often appears to be “thinking in Hebrew” while writing in Greek.
Some scholars claim these contrast with the Gospel’s themes and style, suggesting different authors. Others argue these differences are due to John’s age, situation (exile on Patmos), or use of different scribes.
6. Modern Scholarship
Opinions are divided: many modern scholars accept the differences in style and content as evidence of different authors (the “John the Elder” theory), while others defend single authorship by John the Apostle, citing theological and symbolic overlaps.
The diversity of views reflects changing methodologies: some focus on external tradition, others strictly on literary analysis.
7. Eastern Christian (Syriac/Aramaic) Traditions
Some Eastern churches, based on ancient manuscripts, maintain that the Apostle John wrote Revelation, and place its composition during the reign of Nero Caesar (earlier than the typical dating in the West).
This adds complexity to the authorship debate but reinforces the longstanding connection between John the Apostle and the Book of Revelation in many Christian communities.
8. Summary and Canonical Acceptance
Despite debates over the precise identity of the author, Revelation was very widely accepted in the early Christian canon, as evidenced by its appearance and use in both Western and Eastern church traditions.
The historical evidence for apostolic authorship is strong up to the third century, with doubts only surfacing later due to literary and theological criticisms.
The “two Johns” theory remains influential but is not universally accepted; most ancient authorities and many moderns still favor John the Apostle as author.
In summary: The strongest and most ancient Christian traditions attribute the Book of Revelation to John the Apostle, but debates over linguistic style, theology, and internal claims led to alternative theories (especially after the third century) suggesting a different John, such as “John the Elder.” The question remains open in contemporary scholarship, but early authoritative support for apostolic authorship is considerable and forms the basis for most canonical traditions.
Tom Torbeyns
Troy Day the Assyrian Church of the East does not consider Revelation / Apocalypse to be canonical.
Pentecostal Theology
Tom Torbeyns where U been?
Rasiah Thomas
As for me, the writer of the Gospel teaches the children of God-in-Christ, and the revelation is exposed for the elders of God-in-Christ to be ready for the Second Coming of Jesus, the terror of the Lord. Amen!
Troy Day
Rasiah Thomas Both views have deep roots in church history. Some emphasize differences in style and vocabulary, suggesting “John the Elder” or another John may have written Revelation. Others point to early church fathers, like Irenaeus and Justin Martyr, who directly attribute both the Gospel and Revelation to John the Apostle. Internal evidence, such as the symbolic language and shared themes about Christ, also supports this. Ultimately, the debate highlights the richness of early Christian tradition and the complexity of how Scripture was received and understood.
Aurell Bloomer
There is no argument there’s no need to Google there’s no need to even entertain who wrote the book of Revelations for it established it in the opening verses from chapter one what are y’all calling yourselves Christians doubting your faith doubting the testimony of the apostle of Christ question his authenticacy if so you’re not a Christian you are one sowing discord among the brethren the child of confusion and I bid you to go back to the pit from once you came
Troy Day
Aurell Bloomer why? @followers John Mushenhouse
Tim Thompson
Troy Day
Troy Day
@highlight Aurell Bloomer Tim Thompson @ I appreciate your passion for Scripture’s authority. You’re absolutely right that Revelation 1:1 identifies “John” as the author – no faithful Christian disputes this. However, examining *which* John wrote it isn’t questioning Scripture’s truth or the apostolic witness; it’s actually honoring God’s Word by studying how He preserved it through history.
Consider this: the early church fathers themselves – Irenaeus, Origen, Tertullian – engaged these very questions while maintaining deep faith. Even Dionysius of Alexandria (3rd century), a devoted bishop, carefully examined Greek manuscripts not to undermine Scripture but to understand it better. Throughout church history, faithful scholars from Jerome to Calvin have wrestled with textual and historical questions precisely because they took God’s Word seriously.
Studying the historical transmission of Scripture – different writing styles, manuscript variations, ancient languages – actually deepens our appreciation for how miraculously God preserved His revelation. Understanding that John may have written the Gospel in his later years with a scribe’s help, while writing Revelation alone in exile on Patmos, doesn’t diminish either text’s inspiration. It shows us the human circumstances through which the Holy Spirit worked.
As Paul wrote in 1 Thessalonians 5:21, we’re called to “test everything; hold fast what is good.” Scholarly inquiry, when done in faith, strengthens rather than weakens our confidence in God’s Word. The questions being discussed here don’t challenge whether Scripture is God-breathed or authoritative – they explore how God’s Spirit guided different authors in different contexts to produce the unified message of salvation we treasure.
Let’s discuss these matters as brothers and sisters seeking deeper understanding, not as adversaries. Grace and peace to you!
Aurell Bloomer
Troy Day See those people you name where not Church fathers your people who would were trying to understand scripture was only one Church Father the father of the church Jesus the opinion is their opinion but John the apostle walked with Christ and I’ll take his testament over any latter-day Saint you might not understand this pon but Christ had a problem where the lord of the harvest said let it alone and in the end he was separated the wheat from the tear referring to the word
Troy Day
Aurell Bloomer pls read what I post so we dont need to RE-post it 2-3 times The most notable Church Father to argue John’s Gospel and Revelation were written by different men was Dionysius of Alexandria (mid-third century). He based his argument on the vastly different writing styles and theologically different eschatological views in the two books. While the traditional view held that John the Apostle wrote both, Dionysius proposed that Revelation was written by another John, an elder of Asia Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History: Dionysius’s views were documented by the church historian Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History.
Dionysius’s arguments against the Apostle John’s authorship of Revelation were part of a theological debate, specifically opposing the chiliasm (belief in a literal thousand-year reign) promoted by Nepos.
Troy Day
The authorship question of Revelation versus the Gospel of John represents a significant area of biblical scholarship. The primary arguments for different authorship include: (1) Linguistic distinctions – Revelation’s Greek contains grammatical irregularities and Semitisms, while the Gospel exhibits polished Koine Greek; (2) Stylistic divergence – Revelation employs apocalyptic imagery with extensive OT allusions (~245 references), contrasting with the Gospel’s philosophical Logos theology; (3) Theological emphasis – Revelation focuses on eschatological judgment while the Gospel emphasizes realized eschatology and divine immanence. Dionysius of Alexandria (3rd century) first systematically articulated these differences, proposing “John the Elder” as Revelation’s author. However, defenders of common authorship cite thematic continuities (Lamb Christology, dualistic framework) and attribute stylistic variations to contextual factors: genre differences, John’s advanced age, exile conditions on Patmos, or use of different amanuenses. The debate remains unresolved in contemporary scholarship, though patristic testimony strongly favored apostolic authorship until modern critical methods introduced alternative hypotheses.
@followers @john mushenhouse @phillip williams @kyle williams
Troy Day
John Mushenhouse just wondering WHEN Jose Salinas and his sidekick Oscar Valdez would jump on this one to oppose Glynn Brown and Philip Williams It’s fascinating to see how the conversation around the authorship of Revelation continues to spark such passionate responses. The differences in linguistic style, theological emphasis, and historical tradition certainly give scholars much to consider. While early church fathers gave strong support for John the Apostle as author, the arguments for literary and contextual differences—like those raised by Dionysius of Alexandria—show this is an open, nuanced debate in biblical scholarship. Both perspectives help us better appreciate the richness and depth of these scriptural texts. Interested to hear how others integrate these arguments in their study or faith journey—what sources shape your view most?
Troy Day
just to RE-CAP for Aurell Bloomer Isara Mo Rasiah Thomas + Wangure’s Reflections The Facebook post from Pentecostal Theology discusses the scholarly debate over whether the author of the Book of Revelation is the same as the author of the Gospel of John. Key arguments revolve around differences in linguistic style (Revelation has rough Greek with Semitisms, while the Gospel is polished Koine), genre (apocalyptic vs. philosophical), and theological emphasis (eschatological judgment vs. realized eschatology). Dionysius of Alexandria first systematically raised the “two Johns” theory, suggesting John the Elder wrote Revelation, not John the Apostle. However, early church fathers and manuscript traditions strongly support John the Apostle as the author, citing continuity in themes like “Lamb Christology” and “Logos theology.” Modern scholarship remains divided, with some supporting stylistic and theological differences as grounds for different authors, while others favor traditional authorship, attributing differences to genre, age, and context. The post also includes a range of user comments, with some insisting authorship is settled by tradition and Revelation’s self-identification, while others highlight the unresolved and nuanced nature of the scholarship. https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/no-idf-soldier-has-to-die-in-the-gog-and-magog-war-by-keith-watts/
Glynn Brown
Troy Day patristic evidence is important , but also limited. Take for example that Papias supposedly wrote how Matthew was originally written in Hebrew then translated into Greek. But when we examine the evidence,none of this is true. We don’t have any direct quotes from Papias concerning this. All we have is a second hand quote from Eusebius centuries later. We also know that there’s was never a Hebrew (or Aramaic ) Matthew. And that the autograph was in Greek,and that the title was added sometime in the second century.
Troy Day
Glynn Brown WHAT? patristic evidence is important – what is your actual source of CHURCH FATHERS that you are referring to? Seems you dont have 1
Glynn Brown
Troy Day I trust the limited critical editions that are used by UBS/NA text.
I see you avoided the Papias point that I mentioned.
Glynn Brown
Troy Day the fathers were unanimous concerning the belief in the real presence of the Eucharist. But we can both disagree with that belief. Your arguments are simplistic.
Jose Salinas
Troy Day On one hand, the early church fathers (Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, etc.) clearly affirmed that the author was the Apostle John. That voice so close to the apostolic era carries significant weight and shouldn’t be dismissed lightly.
Kim Flink
Wow I’m blessed to be simple minded when it comes to exegesis, Lord knows us special need kids realize his ways are past finding out.
Study & rightly divide the word chapter upon chapter, precept upon precept, Holy Spirit is our teacher. Help us Lord to not get sucked in to doubtful disputations. I don’t get any of this yall. Quite frankly don’t want to.
Shalom
Troy Day
The Johannine authorship debate remains one of the most methodologically instructive controversies in New Testament scholarship. While traditional attribution to John the Apostle enjoys robust patristic support (Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian), the critical observations of Dionysius of Alexandria regarding linguistic and stylistic disparities merit serious consideration. The morphological irregularities in Revelation’s Greek, its prolific use of Hebraic constructions, and the stark contrast between apocalyptic eschatology and the realized eschatology of the Fourth Gospel present compelling evidence for the “two Johns” hypothesis. However, shared theological motifs—particularly Lamb Christology, water symbolism, and the Logos concept—suggest potential unity despite surface differences. Contemporary scholarship increasingly recognizes that genre conventions, sociopolitical context (Domitianic persecution vs. Ephesian community stability), and potential scribal mediation complicate simplistic attributions. This hermeneutical tension enriches our understanding of canonical diversity within the Johannine tradition. @followers @john mushenhouse Philip Williams Kyle Williams