Revelation 1:9-11

February 8, 2025 • Steve Torres

Download PDF

Revelation 1:9-11

Text (ESV)

“I, John, your brother and partner in the tribulation and the kingdom and the patient endurance that are in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos on account of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus. I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet saying, ‘Write what you see in a book and send it to the seven churches, to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to Pergamum and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to Laodicea.’”

The Historical Context of Revelation:

Dating the Text

  1. Early Date (Pre-70 AD, usually around 64-68 AD):
    • This view holds that Revelation was written during the reign of Nero (54–68 AD) or possibly Galba (68-69 AD).
    • It is often supported by the belief that the book refers to events leading up to and including the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 AD.
    • Proponents argue that the internal evidence—such as references to the Beast (Revelation 13:18), possibly alluding to Nero, and the mention of the Temple (Revelation 11:1-2)—suggests the temple was still standing when John wrote.
    • This dating is favored by preterists, who interpret much of Revelation as a prophecy of the Jewish-Roman War (66-70 AD).
  2. Late Date (Around 95-96 AD):
    • The majority view among scholars places Revelation during the reign of Domitian (81–96 AD), particularly around 95-96 AD.
    • The strongest evidence for this comes from early church tradition, particularly from Irenaeus (c. 180 AD), who wrote that John received the vision “towards the end of Domitian’s reign” (Against Heresies 5.30.3).
    • Domitian is known for persecuting Christians, which aligns with the book’s themes of persecution and endurance (Revelation 2:10, 13:7).
    • This view is commonly held by futurists, who see Revelation as a prophecy of end-times events rather than a reference to the first-century church.

Both views impact how one interprets Revelation—whether primarily as a prophecy about Rome and Jerusalem’s fall (early date) or as an apocalyptic vision of the future tribulation and Christ’s return (late date).

Determining Authorship

  1. John the Apostle (Traditional View)
    • Description: The earliest Christian tradition, supported by figures like Justin Martyr (2nd century), Irenaeus, and Tertullian, identifies the author as John the Apostle, one of Jesus’ twelve disciples and the traditional author of the Gospel of John and the Johannine epistles.
    • Arguments For:
      • Early church fathers attributed Revelation to John the Apostle.
      • The author’s authority and familiarity with Christian teachings suggest an apostolic figure.
    • Arguments Against:
      • The Greek style of Revelation is markedly different from the Gospel of John and the epistles, being more Semitic and less polished.
      • The theological focus and imagery differ significantly from the Johannine literature.
    • Proponents
      • Early Church Fathers:
        • Justin Martyr (mid-2nd century): Identified the author as John, one of the apostles.
        • Irenaeus (late 2nd century): Explicitly attributed Revelation to John the Apostle, linking it to the reign of Domitian (81–96 CE).
        • Tertullian (early 3rd century): Supported apostolic authorship.
        • Clement of Alexandria and Origen: Also upheld the traditional view.
      • Modern Supporters:
        • Robert H. Mounce: Conservative scholar who defends apostolic authorship in his commentary on Revelation.
        • Leon Morris: Evangelical scholar who argued for John the Apostle as the author.
  2. John the Elder (Alternative Johannine Figure)
    • Description: Some scholars, following Eusebius of Caesaria, propose that the author was a different John, known as “John the Elder,” a prominent figure in the early church who may have been a disciple of the apostle.
    • Arguments For:
      • Papias (2nd century) mentions a “John the Elder” distinct from John the Apostle.
      • This view reconciles the differences in style and theology between Revelation and the Johannine corpus.
    • Arguments Against:
      • The evidence for John the Elder is sparse and debated.
      • Early church tradition overwhelmingly linked Revelation to John the Apostle.
    • Proponents:
      • Early Church Figures:
        • Eusebius of Caesarea (4th century): Cited Papias (2nd century) as distinguishing between John the Apostle and John the Elder, suggesting the latter wrote Revelation.
      • Modern Scholars:
        • R.H. Charles: In his critical commentary on Revelation, Charles argued for John the Elder as the author.
        • Martin Hengel: Suggested that John the Elder was a disciple of the apostle and the author of Revelation.
        • Raymond E. Brown: Catholic scholar who proposed that John the Elder may have been responsible for the Johannine literature, including Revelation.
  3. An Unknown Prophet Named John
    • Description: Some modern scholars argue that the author was an otherwise unknown Christian prophet named John, who was neither the apostle nor John the Elder.
    • Arguments For:
      • The name “John” was common in the 1st century, and the author does not claim apostolic authority.
      • The apocalyptic genre often features pseudonymous or obscure authors.
    • Arguments Against:
      • Early church tradition consistently associates the book with a significant figure named John.
      • The author’s authority suggests he was well-known to the seven churches.
    • Proponents:
      • Modern Scholars:
        • Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza: Feminist theologian who argued that the author was an unknown prophet named John, reflecting the prophetic tradition of early Christianity.
        • Adela Yarbro Collins: Scholar who views the author as a Christian prophet named John, not necessarily connected to the apostle or the Johannine community.
        • David E. Aune: In his commentary on Revelation, Aune suggests the author was a Jewish-Christian prophet named John, distinct from the apostle.
  4. Symbolic or Pseudonymous Author
    • Description: A minority view suggests that “John” is a symbolic or pseudonymous name, used to lend authority to the text, a common practice in apocalyptic literature (e.g., Daniel, Enoch).
    • Arguments For:
      • Apocalyptic texts often use pseudonyms to connect with revered figures of the past.
      • The author’s identity may have been intentionally obscured to protect him from persecution.
    • Arguments Against:
      • Revelation does not claim to be written by a figure from the distant past, unlike other pseudonymous works.
      • Early Christians accepted the book as written by a contemporary John.
    • Proponents:
      • Modern Scholars:
        • J. Massyngberde Ford: Proposed that Revelation was written by a follower of John the Baptist, with later Christian additions, making “John” a symbolic figure.
        • G.R. Beasley-Murray: While not fully endorsing pseudonymity, he acknowledged the possibility that “John” could be a symbolic name.
  5. Multiple Authors or Redactors
    • Description: Some critical scholars propose that Revelation is the work of multiple authors or editors, with John being the primary figure but others contributing to the final form.
    • Arguments For:
      • The text contains shifts in style, tone, and imagery that suggest multiple hands.
      • Apocalyptic literature often underwent editorial processes.
    • Arguments Against:
      • The book presents itself as a unified vision from a single author.
      • There is no manuscript evidence of multiple authorship.
    • Proponents:
      • Modern Scholars:
        • Eduard Lohse: Suggested that Revelation underwent editorial processes, with multiple contributors shaping the final text.
        • J. Christian Beker: Argued that the book reflects layers of tradition, possibly involving multiple authors.

Solecisms in Revelation 1:9-11 (Greek Analysis):

The Book of Revelation is noted for its non-standard Greek, often attributed to the author’s Semitic linguistic background (Hebrew/Aramaic) or the urgency of prophetic inspiration. While not necessarily “errors,” the passage contains stylistic and grammatical idiosyncrasies:

  1. Preposition Usage (Revelation 1:11):
    • The phrase γράψον εἰς βιβλίον (“write into a book”) uses εἰς (into) instead of the classical ἐν (in). While unconventional in Attic Greek, this is common in Koine Greek, especially with verbs of writing, and may reflect Semitic influence (Hebrew בְּ often merges “in” and “into”).
  2. Abrupt Discourse Shifts (1:10-11):
    • The sudden transition from narrative to direct speech (φωνὴ μεγάλη λέγων – “a loud voice saying”) lacks a connective particle, creating a jarring syntactic flow. This reflects the apocalyptic genre’s urgency rather than a grammatical error.
  3. Participle as Imperative (1:11):
    • The participle λέγων (“saying”) is used to introduce direct speech without a finite verb. This is atypical in classical Greek but common in Septuagintal style, mimicking Hebrew narrative structure.
  4. Redundancy (1:10):
    • The phrase ἐν τῇ κυριακῇ ἡμέρᾳ (“on the Lord’s day”) is followed by a restatement of the command to write. While not a solecism, the repetition is stylistically uneven compared to polished Greek.

These features highlight John’s vernacular Koine Greek, shaped by Semitic thought patterns and the apocalyptic tradition’s spontaneity. Scholars debate whether these are true solecisms or intentional stylistic choices.

Key Scriptural Cross-References

  1. Revelation 1:9 (ESV):
    • Daniel 7:13-14 (ESV):

      “I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.”

    • Connection: The themes of tribulation, kingdom, and endurance in Revelation 1:9 echo Daniel’s vision of the Son of Man receiving an everlasting kingdom.
  2. Revelation 1:10 (ESV):
    • Exodus 19:16-19 (ESV):

      “On the morning of the third day there were thunders and lightnings and a thick cloud on the mountain and a very loud trumpet blast, so that all the people in the camp trembled. Then Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet God, and they took their stand at the foot of the mountain. Now Mount Sinai was wrapped in smoke because the Lord had descended on it in fire. The smoke of it went up like the smoke of a kiln, and the whole mountain trembled greatly. And as the sound of the trumpet grew louder and louder, Moses spoke, and God answered him in thunder.”

    • Connection: The loud voice like a trumpet in Revelation 1:10 recalls the trumpet blast at Mount Sinai, symbolizing divine revelation and the presence of God.
  3. Revelation 1:11 (ESV):
    • Ezekiel 2:9-10 (ESV):

      “And when I looked, behold, a hand was stretched out to me, and behold, a scroll of a book was in it. And he spread it before me. And it had writing on the front and on the back, and there were written on it words of lamentation and mourning and woe.”

    • Connection: The command to write in a book in Revelation 1:11 parallels Ezekiel’s commission to record his visions, emphasizing the prophetic nature of the message.

Interpretations Through Eschatological Lenses

1. Amillennialism

Understanding of Revelation 1:9-11:
Amillennialists interpret Revelation 1:9-11 as part of the broader vision of Christ’s reign during the present church age. They see John’s vision as symbolic of the spiritual reality of Christ’s kingdom, which is already present but not yet fully realized. The “kingdom and patient endurance” (v. 9) refer to the church’s current experience of suffering and hope in Christ’s ultimate victory. Amillennialists see Revelation 1:9-11 as setting the tone for the book, emphasizing that believers are already in the tribulation. John, as a fellow sufferer, is experiencing the tribulation that all Christians endure before Christ’s return. The “kingdom” mentioned is seen as the present reign of Christ (Col. 1:13; Rev. 5:10), and “patient endurance” reflects the ongoing suffering of the church (Acts 14:22). The vision John receives is meant to comfort the persecuted church rather than to outline a future earthly millennial reign.

Biblical Reasoning:

Theologians:

2. Historic Premillennialism

Understanding of Revelation 1:9-11:
Historic premillennialists view Revelation 1:9-11 as a prophetic introduction to the visions of Christ’s return and the establishment of His millennial kingdom. They view John’s tribulation in verse 9 as a foreshadowing of a future, intensified tribulation before Christ’s second coming. They see the “kingdom” as both a present reality (spiritual reign) and a future fulfillment in the millennial reign of Christ on earth. John’s command to write to the churches indicates that these messages have both immediate relevance and prophetic significance leading up to the millennial kingdom.

Biblical Reasoning:

Theologians:

3. Dispensational Premillennialism

Understanding of Revelation 1:9-11:
Dispensationalists interpret Revelation 1:9-11 as part of the church age, with John representing the church that will be raptured before the future tribulation. They see John’s vision as addressing the church in the present (Rev. 2-3) before shifting focus to Israel and the tribulation (Rev. 4-19). The kingdom mentioned in verse 9 is viewed as a future earthly millennial kingdom that will follow Christ’s return.

Biblical Reasoning:

Theologians:

4. Postmillennialism

Understanding of Revelation 1:9-11:
Postmillennialists interpret Revelation 1:9-11 as a call for the church to advance Christ’s kingdom through the gospel, leading to a golden age of peace and righteousness before Christ’s return. They see John’s vision as symbolic of the church’s mission to transform the world Postmillennialists see John’s suffering as an early phase of the church’s eventual triumph. The kingdom he shares in is the present advancing rule of Christ through the gospel. They believe Revelation ultimately points to a victorious church that will Christianize the world before Christ’s return.

Biblical Reasoning:

Theologians:

5. Partial-Preterist Postmillennialism

Understanding of Revelation 1:9-11:
Partial-preterist postmillennialists view Revelation 1:9-11 as primarily addressing the first-century church’s struggle against Roman persecution. They see John’s vision as a call to endure suffering while anticipating Christ’s spiritual victory, which began with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 and continues through the church’s mission. However, they also believe in a future golden age of Christianity before Christ’s return.

Biblical Reasoning:

Theologians:

Key Takeaway

Each eschatological view interprets Revelation 1:9-11 through its unique theological framework, emphasizing different aspects of Christ’s kingdom and the church’s role in history. While amillennialists and postmillennialists focus on the symbolic and spiritual nature of the text, historic and dispensational premillennialists emphasize a literal future fulfillment. Partial-preterist postmillennialists blend historical fulfillment with ongoing spiritual realities. Each view is supported by biblical reasoning and has been championed by notable theologians throughout church history.

Bibliography

Dating

Early Date (Pre-70 AD)

Chilton, David. The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation. Fort Worth, TX: Dominion Press, 1987.

Gentry, Kenneth L. Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation. Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 1998.

Robinson, John A. T. Redating the New Testament. London: SCM Press, 1976.

Sproul, R. C. The Last Days According to Jesus: When Did Jesus Say He Would Return? Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998.

Late Date (c. 95-96 AD)

Aune, David E. Revelation 1–5. Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 52A. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1997.

Beale, G. K. The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999.

Eusebius of Caesarea. The Church History. Translated by Paul L. Maier. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1999.

Irenaeus. Against Heresies. Translated by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. In Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1. Edited by Philip Schaff. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994.

Mounce, Robert H. The Book of Revelation. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998.

Authorship

John the Apostle (Traditional View)

Aune, David E. Revelation 1–5. Word Biblical Commentary 52A. Dallas: Word Books, 1997.

Beale, G.K. The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.

Morris, Leon. The Book of Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

Mounce, Robert H. The Book of Revelation. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

John the Elder (Alternative Johannine Figure)

Charles, R.H. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John. 2 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1920.

Hengel, Martin. The Johannine Question. Translated by John Bowden. London: SCM Press, 1989.

Brown, Raymond E. The Community of the Beloved Disciple. New York: Paulist Press, 1979.

Unknown Prophet Named John

Collins, Adela Yarbro. The Apocalypse. New Testament Message 22. Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1979.

Fiorenza, Elisabeth Schüssler. The Book of Revelation: Justice and Judgment. 2nd ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998.

Aune, David E. Revelation 6–16. Word Biblical Commentary 52B. Dallas: Word Books, 1998.

Symbolic or Pseudonymous Author

Ford, J. Massyngberde. Revelation: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible 38. Garden City: Doubleday, 1975.

Beasley-Murray, G.R. The Book of Revelation. New Century Bible Commentary. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1974.

Multiple Authors or Redactors

Lohse, Eduard. Die Offenbarung des Johannes. Das Neue Testament Deutsch 11. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1960.

Beker, J. Christian. The Triumph of God: The Essence of Paul’s Thought. Translated by Loren T. Stuckenbruck. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990.

General Works on Revelation and Authorship

Bauckham, Richard. The Theology of the Book of Revelation. New Testament Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

Koester, Craig R. Revelation: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Yale Bible 38A. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2014.

Metzger, Bruce M. The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987.

Journal Articles

Bauckham, Richard. “The Apocalypse of John and the Problem of Pseudonymity.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 37 (1989): 105–113.

Collins, Adela Yarbro. “The Apocalypse (Revelation).” In The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, edited by Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E. Murphy, 996–1016. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1990.

Hengel, Martin. “The Johannine Question: A Critical Review.” In The Johannine Writings, edited by Stanley E. Porter and Craig A. Evans, 15–56. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995.

Eschatological Lenses

General Works on Eschatology

Clouse, Robert G., ed. The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1977.

Gundry, Robert H. The Church and the Tribulation: A Biblical Examination of Posttribulationism. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1973.

Hoekema, Anthony A. The Bible and the Future. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979.

Amillennialism

Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1938.

Gentry, Kenneth L. He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology. Draper, VA: Apologetics Group Media, 2009. (Contains strong amillennial elements in its preterist arguments.)

Hoekema, Anthony A. Amillennialism: The Bible and the Future. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979.

Riddlebarger, Kim. A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2003.

Historic Premillennialism

Ladd, George Eldon. The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1956.

____. The Gospel of the Kingdom: Scriptural Studies in the Kingdom of God. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1959.

Mathison, Keith A. Dispensationalism: Rightly Dividing the People of God? Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1995.

Dispensational Premillennialism

Blaising, Craig A., and Darrell L. Bock. Progressive Dispensationalism. Wheaton, IL: BridgePoint, 1993.

MacArthur, John. The Second Coming: Signs of Christ’s Return and the End of the Age. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1999.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1958.

Ryrie, Charles C. Dispensationalism Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

Postmillennialism

Bahnsen, Greg L. Victory in Jesus: The Bright Hope of Postmillennialism. Texarkana, AR: Covenant Media Foundation, 1999.

Boettner, Loraine. The Millennium. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1958.

DeMar, Gary. Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church. Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 1999.

Gentry, Kenneth L. Postmillennialism Made Easy. Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2009.

Partial-Preterist Postmillennialism

Chilton, David. The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation. Fort Worth, TX: Dominion Press, 1987.

Gentry, Kenneth L. Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation. Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 1998.

Sproul, R.C. The Last Days According to Jesus. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998.

Share this post: