Loading...Now that I have summarized the book of Revelation – it’s not that difficult to follow the basic structure of the narrative — we get to the thorny questions of who wrote it, when, and why. In this post we deal with the WHO.
The author of Revelation certainly claims to be John (1:1), but there were numerous “Johns” in the early Christian community. Which one was he?
He does give some information about himself (1:9): he is the “brother” of the Christians he is addressing and he shares their tribulation as he writes to them from the island of Patmos, off the west coast of Asia Minor. Since his readers knew him, he had no need to explain any further who he was. Later readers, however, have tried to figure out his identity.
John was a
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Learn More!
Could you comment a bit more on the quality of the Greek found in Revelation? In particular on the apparent semitisms and what they might imply about the author.
It’s truly awful. The problem is not that he writes Greek as a second language (being fluent in Aramaic), but tht he just doesn’t write well. And sometimes simply makes grammatical mistakes. I think I’ll post on this!
In Greece, where Christians (the majority of the population) retain a deeply conservative (you could call it fundamentalist, though this is a term we only use for Jihadists for some reason) view of Christianity and the New Testament, whenever the issue of the formation of the Canon is brought up, I always here or see the same -quite annoying, I must say- platitude that says “The Church Fathers sorted these things out”. People here ALWAYS say this thing, as if they’ve been programmed to say so.
I think Revelation is such a glaring case that refutes the aforementioned platitude. And I think the same applies to those who argue that the Holy Spirit guided the Church to the right decisions. If that’s so, they have to explain why did it take the Holy Spirit some decades (if not centuries) to make clear to the Church Fathers that the Revelation indeed belongs to the Canon.
And, additionally, why some prominent Church Fathers like Saint Gregory the Theologian or John Chrysostom (which, by the way, means “Gold mouth” in Greek), who are regarded saints in Greek Orthodox Church, did not think the Revelation should be in the Canon.
I’d like to hear your thoughts on my theory! Matthew 27:51–54 describes resurrected saints appearing to many. Matthew gives his source: a centurion and his men.
Regardless whether this was a collective vision or moment of hysteria, one detail stands out- a Roman centurion could sometimes command a larger unit; a cohort of ≈500.
In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul mentions Jesus appeared to 500 at once. That round number’s intriguing. Perhaps the group was this cohort of soldiers!
For what it’s worth, one of the earliest depictions of Jesus, the Alexamenos graffito (circa second century or earlier), shows a Roman soldier worshiping a crucified figure. It was found on the wall of what may have been a Roman barracks.
A major weakness in this theory is that, if such an event truly involved a centurion+cohort, it seems odd that it doesn’t receive greater emphasis. Yet it’s possible their experience was downplayed because it seemed too incredible. Even Matthew only gives it two verses (barely a footnote to the most extraordinary claim in history.) I wonder if Matthew himself treated it cautiously, aware that such a report appears too fantastical, and whether any excitement surrounding it faded once their testimony came under scrutiny.
It’s an interesting theory, but I don’t think it works.. Matthew 27:45-50 refers to the soldiers as witnesses to the raised saints — they are at the place of crucifixion outside the walls and the resurrections take place in jerusalem, and those who attest to it are those “in the holy city.” (The soliders see what had happened at the time: the curtain and earthquake) Moreover, they do not appear to whomever they appeared to until *after* the resurrection (not at the time the soldiers were at the place of crucifixion.” Moreover Matthew does not say a “cohort” of soldiers was at the place of crucifixionn. And finally, that would indeed have been very odd. 500 soldiers are there to crucify three people?
Good points. I’ve always been curious about the identity of the 500… Do you have any theories about who they might be?
I don’t think there was any such group, otherwise we almost certainly would have found it referenced in some other source. Paul maybe heard this; maybe he misheard/misunderstood? Don’t know. But the idea of 500 converting at once would surely have been a nighly significant event.
Interestingly, Mark 15:16 notes that during Jesus’s execution, an entire cohort of soldiers was assembled. While deploying 500 soldiers to oversee the execution of three criminals seems excessive, it’s likely they were already stationed in Jerusalem to maintain order during Passover. Given that the condemned men were labeled insurgents, the Romans may have placed the troops on high alert in case their followers attempted an uprising.
A detachment of this cohort could have oversaw the crucifixion under the supervision of a centurion commander. Later, another detachment may have been assigned to guard the tomb. Three days afterward, some of these soldiers may have come to believe, along with Peter, the Twelve, and James, that Jesus had risen and appeared to them.
Originally, the creed Paul cites might have said something like, “He appeared to Peter, then to the Twelve, and then to a group from the cohort.” In time, the word “cohort” may have been replaced with “500.”
I know this is speculative, but it’s intriguing that the Gospels specifically mention a cohort (a detail that aligns with the number Paul references) and that these soldiers from the same unit are described as being present near the very site of the resurrection.
Yes it does seem excessive doesn’t it? They are mentioned for the mockery (500 soldiers mocking Jesus in one place? OK then…). But I don’t believe any of the passages says anything about them on the third day, and Paul never says that the “500” were Roman soldiers. If 500 soldiers DID come to believe, you would expect to find some reference to it, probalby highlighted rather dramatically!
But do you think the more modest claim, that the original saying may have said “a group from the cohort” (perhaps something like “meris tēs speirēs” (which may have been much much smaller than 500) but later evolved to say “epanō pentakosiois“ is at least plausible?
While it does seem exaggerated to suggest that there was an entire cohort there just for the mocking of Jesus, I think it’s plausible that a cohort was there to provide security during the Passover. And Paul seems to indicate that the group that witnessed the appearance were people who really did exist- some of them had even died by the time of his writing. And it is curious that Paul refers to the number 500 and the gospels refer to a group of that size in conjunction with the passion story. Again, I know it’s speculative…
Not really. We don’t have any record of Roman soldiers converting, especially right off the bat just days after Jesus’ death. If there were such, I should think that there’d be at least some explicit reference to them.
Isn’t it ironic that John of Patmos, who could not have been John the son of Zebedee because the latter would be among the 24 elders standing around the throne seen by the former, is then distinguished from the disciple John by calling his name (that of the author of Revelation) the Elder John!
There might have been some logic to that name if it were to designate the author of 2 John and/or 3 John, who at least describe themselves as Elder (though not as John). Even though they must have been considerably younger than any disciple.
Yup, a great irony. (And) The one that claims to be written by John we don’t call John and the one that does not claim to be written by John we call John.