Nonsense.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Then why was it not scripture for hundreds of years?

From Wikipedia:

"Revelation was the last book to be accepted into the Christian biblical canon, and even at the present day some Nestorian churches reject it. It was tainted because the heretical sect of the Montanists relied on it and doubts were raised over its Jewishness and authorship. It was not included in the canon until 419.

Doubts resurfaced during the Protestant Reformation. Martin Luther called it "neither apostolic nor prophetic" and it was the only New Testament book on which John Calvin did not write a commentary. Even today, it is the only New Testament work not read in the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox Church, though it is included in Catholic and Protestant liturgies."



Risking understatement, it is a controversial book. There are many varied interpretations.
More from Wikipedia:

"Most of the interpretations fall into one or more of the following categories:

Historicist, which sees in Revelation a broad view of history;
Preterist, in which Revelation mostly refers to the events of the apostolic era (1st century), or—at the latest—the fall of the Roman Empire;
Amillennialist, which contends that the millennium has already begun and is identical with the current church age;
Futurist, which believes that Revelation describes future events (modern believers in this interpretation are often called "millennialists" ); and
Idealist, or Symbolic, which holds that Revelation does not refer to actual people or events, but is an allegory of the spiritual path and the ongoing struggle between good and evil."

I am in the Futurist camp on Interpretation. Your view would be the Preterist view.

My view on why it was finally included was set forth in my initial reply to you. It seems a no-brainer, given its content. Of course, this is the Futurist view, that it brings all the prophecy and stories of the Bible and its purpose to its rightful, obvious conclusion, and that this is yet to come.

It would be interesting to hear what other Christians here think of the Book and to what interpretive camp they belong.

Originally posted by finnegan
Bereft of hope?

HOPE. Pandora brought the box of ills and opened it. It was the gift of the gods to men, outwardly a beautiful and seductive gift, and called the Casket of Happiness. Out of it flew all the evils, living winged creatures, thence they now circulate and do men injury day and night. One single evil had not yet escaped from the box, ...[text shortened]... r such as those and pursues them

Daybreak, The Broken-Hearted Ones, Friedrich Nietzsche

Now here is a fool at his best. 😏

Originally posted by sonhouse
Well, there was this dude named Jesus.....

Don't get me wrong, I am not a theist, Atheist as far as the bible is concerned, perhaps an ANTItheist in that regard and for most of the rest of the organized religions rampant on Earth.

Isn't that book called The Revelation of Jesus Christ? He gave it to John to write down. Therefore it was scripture from that time. 😏

HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!

Originally posted by RJHinds
Isn't that book called The Revelation of Jesus Christ? He gave it to John to write down. Therefore it was scripture from that time. 😏

HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!

Wrong John, said the prostitute. The John that wrote Revelations was John of Patmos, And it WAS an anti Roman tract disguised as a religious document. It was well known the real purpose at that time. It was perverted later by that crazy ass bishop.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Wrong John, said the prostitute. The John that wrote Revelations was John of Patmos, And it WAS an anti Roman tract disguised as a religious document. It was well known the real purpose at that time. It was perverted later by that crazy ass bishop.

It appears that you don't know what you are talking about becasue the first verse of Revelation says the following:

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

(Revelation 1:1 KJV)

Originally posted by RJHinds
It appears that you don't know what you are talking about becasue the first verse of Revelation says the following:

[b]The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

(Revelation 1:1 KJV)[/b]

Right, 'shortly come to pass' What a joke. 2000 years later and you are still duped here in the 21st century.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Right, 'shortly come to pass' What a joke. 2000 years later and you are still duped here in the 21st century.

Right, 'shortly come to pass' What a joke. 2000 years later and you are still duped here in the 21st century.

The great changes that are to be established by God have such eternal consequences that we feel "shortly come to pass" is an appropriate phrase. After all for God 1,000 years is like one day. From His perspective it has been a two day delay.

I seriously think that when Christ does physically return most people will not think it is too late but rather too soon.

In the mean time He is building His church, allowing it to go through various trials of many ages. In this way He secures a quality of disciples to resurrect to reign with Him.

And He also demonstrates the indestructible nature of the Christian church. So though humanly speaking we may agree we are eager that a two thousand year old promise fully be fulfilled, on the other hand, seeing it through God's eyes, we understand great and cataclysmic modifications to the universe will come when the time is ready.

Actually, right under your unbelieving nose things are lining up quite strongly to indicate Jesus' words of prophecy are probably coming true as we speak.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Right, 'shortly come to pass' What a joke. 2000 years later and you are still duped here in the 21st century.

If you were not ignorant of history as Duchess64 stated, you would have known that some of it did begin to happen to those churches in a short amount of time. It does not mean that all of Revelation must be completed in a short time. Most of it will not be completed until the antichrist appears and Christ returns in His glory.

HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!

Originally posted by sonship

Right, 'shortly come to pass' What a joke. 2000 years later and you are still duped here in the 21st century.

The great changes that are to be established by God have such eternal consequences that we feel "shortly come to pass" is an appropriate phrase. After all for God 1,000 years is like one day. From His perspective it has been a tw ...[text shortened]... ing up quite strongly to indicate Jesus' words of prophecy are probably coming true as we speak.

So, 1000 years is like one day. Interesting. Maybe 1 billion years is also like one day to your alleged deity. That would make the Earth about 6 billion years old, not far off from the real # of 4.5.

It's been 2000 odd years and it will be 2 MILLION years, humans extinct and STILL no show for your beloved JC. AND no stupid ass antichrist.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So, 1000 years is like one day. Interesting. Maybe 1 billion years is also like one day to your alleged deity. That would make the Earth about 6 billion years old, not far off from the real # of 4.5.

It's been 2000 odd years and it will be 2 MILLION years, humans extinct and STILL no show for your beloved JC. AND no stupid ass antichrist.

Don't pay attention to sonship. Pay attention to me...

The Near Genius 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
Now here is a fool at his best. 😏

I have a terrible fear I shall one day be pronounced holy: . . . I do not want to be a saint, rather even a buffoon . . . And none the less, or rather not none the less — for there has hitherto been nothing more mendacious than saints — the truth speaks out of me. — But my truth is dreadful: for hitherto the lie has been called the truth. . . .

Nietzsche

If you mean John the Baptist, then yes, you're right: wrong John.

John of Patmos is widely considered to be the apostle John, although as in all things, there are those who disagree.

Originally posted by finnegan
"I have a terrible fear I shall one day be pronounced holy" -- Nietzsche

I'm pretty sure you can relax, then, Friedrich.



And one should probably be very careful whom one lionizes.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Wrong John, said the prostitute. The John that wrote Revelations was John of Patmos, And it WAS an anti Roman tract disguised as a religious document. It was well known the real purpose at that time. It was perverted later by that crazy ass bishop.

The gospel according to Monty Python?

Originally posted by Suzianne
I'm pretty sure you can relax, then, Friedrich.



And one should probably be very careful whom one lionizes.

Take care that a falling statue does not crush you.
Ecce Homo, Preface, Friedrich Nietzsche