The Book of Revelation is without doubt the most complicated, controversial, and esoteric of the entire Bible! Some even doubt that it should even be in the Bible at all, and assert that its place in the Bible Canon was controversial from the start. This is false. Why? The early acceptance of Revelation by the Christian Church is proof that the book is divinely inspired.
Although it is popular to do so, we should not measure the existence of the New Testament (NT) canon (authoritative, or inspired, books) just by the existence of lists, which came into being somewhat later than the NT canon’s coming into existence. When we examine the way the NT books were viewed and used in the very early days of Christianity, we can determine the de facto existence of a functioning canon by about 100 CE.
The views expressed here are admittedly a little different than the traditional, or orthodox, view of how the New Testament canon, in particular, and the Bible as a whole, came into acceptance. The views presented here actually stand in stark contrast to modern-day populist scholars, like the agnostic Bart Ehrman.
History says Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote the books with those titles. People seem to have a highly variable standard in their assessment of what ancient writings are genuine, especially the Bible. What do we mean? Here is an example:
Most people accept Alexander the Great as a real historical figure. Yet, the two earliest biographies of Alexander the Great were written by Arrian and Plutarch more than 400 years after the Great One’s death 323 BCE. Legends about him developed centuries after these two writers. Yet, Alexander’s true, accurate history is viewed as being preserved for hundreds of years prior to these legends.
The New Testament canon was established in the first century by Holy Spirit. Let’s examine some notes on the scriptures which confirm this fact:
2 Peter 1:16-21 – Peter affirms Old Testament prophets wrote God’s word. He puts himself and other apostles in the same category.
2 Peter 3:15-16 – Paul’s letters were on the same level as all the “rest of the scriptures.” That is, inspired of God. Early Greek manuscripts show Paul writing 14 letters.
2 Timothy 3:16-17 – The rest of the scriptures (the Old Testament) are inspired of God. We can broaden this now, and apply the principle to all 66 canonical books as shown below:
“He is not here, but He has been resurrected” (Luke 24:6 HCSB). Is there extraordinary proof of Jesus’ resurrection? The claim that Jesus rose from the dead is extraordinary. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. What is the strongest proof that Jesus was resurrected? Let’s start at the point of beginning, and work, or build from there.
This beginning point is that the universe, the earth, etc. very strongly witness to God’s existence as Creator. Psalm 19:1 says: “the heavens declare the glory of God.” (NIV)
Some have claimed the different accounts of Jesus’ resurrection appearances in the four Gospels and 1 Corinthians are “proofs” these Bible books are riddled with errors and contradictions. If true, these would, in turn,” prove” the Bible not to be inspired of God, or infallible, as many Christians believe that it is.
The Bible itself says that these different resurrection appearances confirm the Bible’s inspiration by God.
“To whom He also presented Himself alive after His suffering, by many infallible proofs, being seen by them during forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.” (Acts 1:3 NKJV, emphasis added)
Critics of the Bible claim there are no eyewitnesses of Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection. This article takes an objective look at the facts.
“[The Gospels] were written down thirty-five to sixty-five years after Jesus’ death . . . not by people who were eyewitnesses, but by people living later”—Jesus, Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millenneum, 2005, pages 44-45, by Bart Ehrman
“There is not a sentence concerning Jesus in the entire New Testament by anyone who had ever met the unwilling King of the Jews”—Jesus and Yahweh, 2005, page 19, by H. Bloom
Critics claim that the temple cleansing in the Gospel of John is either the same temple cleansing reported by the three Synoptics, Matthew, Mark and Luke, or is out of place, therefore constituting a “contradiction” in the Gospels. Below are listed a number of reasons why the temple cleansing in John is accurate and was performed by Jesus around the time of the first Passover after his baptism, which was probably about six months earlier. John clearly states in John 20:31 and John 21:25 that he was highly selective in his reporting on the events of Jesus’ life. The other three Gospel writers had already reported on the second temple cleansing by the time John wrote his gospel. Upon close examination, it seems fairly obvious that John was very familiar with these other three Gospels, and quite possibly had copies of them in his possession as he wrote the fourth Gospel. John filled in many gaps that the Synoptics did not report on. In fact, 92% of his gospel is unique. John reports the following details about the first temple cleansing, that are omitted from the second temple cleansing recorded in Matthew, Mark, and Luke:
The early church is unanimous that the Gospel according to Mark was written by John Mark. (Acts 12:12; Acts 12:25; Acts 13:5; Acts 13:13; Acts 15:37; Colossians 4:10; 2 Timothy 4:11; Philemon 24)
Papias – c. 140 quotes an earlier source saying:
The title “According to Mark” appears in all the ancient canonical lists and many ancient manuscripts, and is thought to have been added very early in the history of the text.
Early church fathers all affirm Mark wrote the Gospel:
Second and third century books falsely claimed apostles as authors rather than secondary figures such as Mark.
Many “Bible scholars” claim that Matthew relied on Mark’s gospel as the primary source to write his gospel. Why would Matthew the tax collector, one of Jesus’ twelve apostles, rely so much on Mark’s account? The answer? He didn’t. He was an eyewitness of much of what he wrote, so there was no need for him rely on Mark, who was not an eyewitness, but a recorder of the apostle Peter’s memories (1 Peter 5:13). Both Matthew and Mark wrote their gospels “inspired by God” (2 Timothy 3:16).