A Witness –
A Church History that includes six of the seven churches that John wrote to but Eusebius never associates them with the Apocalypse. Victorinus doesn’t even mention them. Is it possible there is a version of the Apocalypse that doesn’t include the seven churches? It could be a reasonable explanation for what we are looking at.
A Witness –
A view of what was. We don’t know what the Apocalypse looked like in the third century. Victorinus knew and we know what his commentary looked like. It didn’t include the seven churches John wrote to. It did include the seven churches Paul wrote to. There is a reasonable explanation for this. He is not the only witness.
A Conjecture –
A reasonable explanation to address what is not settled. Who wrote it? When was it written? Why was the Apocalypse written? The Apocalypse has “a decidedly Jewish complexion” and it was suggested that John the Baptist was the first writer. Others have suggested multiple writers. All named John.
Home 23
A Third John –
A confirmation that the apostle wrote the Apocalypse was necessary to get it in the Bible which was being translated and defined by Jerome. Just before the Vulgate was completed John Chrysostom was in Ephesus replacing seven corrupt bishops. Jerome needed a reliable version of the Apocalypse. A third John who also am your brother.
Home 21
A Home For Doubt –
A necessary explanation for what we experience. We have to make sense of it. To ignore it is to deny reality. To deny objectivity. Call it speculation, conjecture, or whatever but please accept the fact that there must be a reason, a purpose, a meaning, etc. At least ask the question why. There may be a reasonable explanation.
Home 15
A Servant of God –
A “lamb” and the “bare record” ties John the Baptist to the Apocalypse. Vischer holds the Apocalypse to have been originally a purely Jewish composition. It would not have included the seven churches that Eusebius and Victorinus failed to recognize. There is a reasonable explanation why they didn’t.
A Witness –
A Church History that includes six of the seven churches that John wrote to but Eusebius never associates them with the Apocalypse. Victorinus doesn’t even mention them. Is it possible there is a version of the Apocalypse that doesn’t include the seven churches? It could be a reasonable explanation for what we are looking at.
A Witness –
A view of what was. We don’t know what the Apocalypse looked like in the third century. Victorinus knew and we know what his commentary looked like. It didn’t include the seven churches John wrote to. It did include the seven churches Paul wrote to. There is a reasonable explanation for this. He is not the only witness.
A History –
A witness to what no longer exists. What was Victorinus looking at when he wrote his Commentary on the Apocalypse? What was Eusebius looking at when he wrote his Church History? We can only speculate based on what they wrote, what they didn’t write, and what is reasonable. Can we make sense of it? It makes more sense than most interpretations.
Home 7
A Reasonable Explanation –
A history of the Apocalypse. John Chrysostom was in Ephesus when Jerome was finishing the Vulgate. It would become the official bible of the Church. It would confirm once and for all that the Apocalypse belonged in the bible. Before that the jury was out. Chrysostom was just one of those who didn’t accept the Apocalypse. What could be the reason?
Home 31
apocalypse 