The Muratorian Canon’s non-Domitianic exile tradition
The Muratorian Canon, which is usually dated to around 170 (before Irenaeus),* provides a list of canonical books that were accepted by the church at Rome at the time of writing.
Continue reading “The Muratorian Canon on the Date of Revelation”Jerome’s universal decree: is there any historical evidence?
In part 1, I quoted a passage from Jerome in which he states that presbyters and bishops were the same, and that a time came when it was universally decreed in the church that one presbyter should preside over the others, in order to remove the seeds of schism.
What was this “universal decree” that he alludes to?
Continue reading “Jerome on the Origin of Bishops (Part 3): The Decree”“A Bishop and a Presbyter are the Same”
As noted in Part 1, Jerome claimed that presbyters and bishops were the same office, and that a time came when it was universally decreed in the church that one presbyter should preside over the others, in order to remove the seeds of schism.
Did Jerome deny the apostolic origins of the monarchical episcopate?
Following up on my article discussing the origin of episcopacy in the early church, this series of posts will discuss the well-known quotation of Jerome which seems to suggest that bishops arose out of the presbytery, and were not a separate office in the line of succession to the apostles, as argued in the article.
Authorship as the key to the difference between John and the Synoptics
The Gospel of John presents a distinct picture of the life and ministry of Jesus. Whereas the Synoptics relate Jesus’ aphorisms delivered before the simple crowds in the rustic backcountry of Galilee, John’s Gospel attributes to Jesus lengthier theological discourses and elevated claims to God-like status (e.g. the “I am” statements).
Continue reading “Why is John’s Gospel Different? Some Thoughts”Were there two famous Johns at Ephesus?
According to Dionysius of Alexandria, writing in the third century, there were two memorials of John in Ephesus, and he suggested that there might have been two famous Johns who had lived in the province of Asia (whom he identifies as the authors of the Gospel of John and the book of Revelation respectively) (apud Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 7.25.16).
Continue reading “The Two Memorials of John in Ephesus”Examining the claim that “Domitian’s reign” in Irenaeus referred to Nero (Domitius), not Domitian
The most cited passage employed as evidence that the early Christians placed John’s exile and apocalyptic vision (of Revelation) late in the first century, late in Domitian’s reign, is found in Irenaeus:
While there are good reasons for supposing that the Beloved Disciple was not John the son of Zebedee (see here), the view that he was Lazarus also raises difficulties.
1. The Beloved Disciple is portrayed as an anonymous figure right up until the final chapter of the Fourth Gospel, whereas Lazarus is named. This fact alone seems to rule out Lazarus as the BD.
Continue reading “Was Lazarus the Beloved Disciple?”It’s commonly thought that John the son of Zebedee was the author of the Gospel of John, the figure spoken of in that Gospel as “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” The two are never explicitly identified, however, and there are reasons for questioning this identification.
Here are eight points to consider:
Continue reading “Were John son of Zebedee and the Beloved Disciple the same person?”Sources do not support a Domitianic Dating
Four factors have contributed to the consensus opinion that early sources dated John’s apocalyptic vision late in Domitian’s reign:
Continue reading “The Early Christians and the Dating of Revelation: Are We Too Late?”
