A. Misuse of "Satan"
In Hebrew, שָּׂטָן (satan) means "adversary" or "accuser," not a personal name.
Old Testament Uses of Satan:
Job 1-2 – "Ha-Satan" (הַשָּׂטָן) is a prosecutor in God’s court, not an enemy.
Numbers 22:22 – The Angel of the LORD is called a satan (adversary), yet he is God’s messenger.
Zechariah 3:1-2 – "Ha-Satan" acts as an accuser in God’s presence, not an independent force.
Revelation's Mistake:
Revelation 12:9 – "Satan" is treated as "the great dragon, the ancient serpent, the devil," which mixes ideas from Greek, Persian, and Gnostic traditions, not Hebrew thought.
Revelation 20:2-3 – Describes Satan as being bound for 1,000 years, but no where in the Hebrew Bible is Satan a ruler of evil.
👉 This shows the author of Revelation misunderstood Jewish theology.
B. The "Lamb" as Jesus (ἀρνίον)
Revelation calls Jesus "the Lamb" 28 times (e.g., Rev 5:6, 5:12, 7:10), but in Jewish thought:
Isaiah 53:7 – The lamb is a symbol of suffering, not a warrior.
Exodus 12 – The Passover lamb is sacrificed, but it is not a ruling figure.
👉 Revelation's portrayal of a conquering "Lamb" contradicts Jewish Messianic expectations.
C. The "New Jerusalem" Lacks a Temple
Revelation 21:22 – Says there is no temple in the New Jerusalem, contradicting:Ezekiel 40-48, which describes a future restored temple.
Jewish belief that the Messiah would rebuild the temple.
👉 The author ignores Jewish prophetic traditions, suggesting he was not a trained Jew.
2. Revelation Contains False Prophecies
Revelation 1:1 – "Things that must soon take place."
Revelation 22:20 – "Surely I am coming soon."
👉 Nearly 2,000 years later, these prophecies have not happened. If "soon" (ταχέως) meant immediate fulfillment, this is a failed prophecy.
B. Jerusalem’s Destruction Is Ignored
Revelation 11:2 – "The Gentiles will trample the holy city for 42 months."
If Revelation was written after 70 AD, the author should have known Jerusalem was already destroyed by the Romans.
But instead, Revelation describes a future event, showing the author was either:
Writing before 70 AD, but got it wrong.
Writing after 70 AD, but did not understand history.
👉 This is another failed prophecy.
3. Revelation’s Style Does Not Match Other Biblical Books
The Hebrew Bible and the New Testament books follow a certain linguistic and thematic style, but Revelation does not.
A. It Uses Pagan and Gnostic Imagery
Revelation 13:1 – A beast from the sea with seven heads and ten horns sounds like:
Leviathan (Babylonian myth)
Typhon (Greek myth)
Persian dualistic "evil forces"
👉 This shows influence from non-Hebrew sources.
The Gospel of John vs. Revelation: A Stark Contrast
The Gospel of John and 1 John share strong similarities in language, themes, and theological focus, suggesting they were written by the same author—John the Apostle.
Both emphasize love, light, truth, and abiding in God, using similar phrasing and structure.
The Gospel of John contains Hebraic expressions and thought patterns, suggesting that John may have originally preached in Aramaic or Hebrew.
👉 However, Revelation’s Greek is drastically different:
Poor grammar and awkward phrasing—unlike John’s polished Greek in the Gospel and 1 John.
Heavy reliance on apocalyptic symbolism that aligns more with non-Jewish traditions (Persian, Greek, Gnostic).
No emphasis on love, light, or truth—instead, it presents violent imagery and a vengeful Messiah.
4. Early Christians Rejected Revelation
Many early church leaders doubted Revelation’s authenticity.
A. Church Fathers Who Rejected ItDionysius of Alexandria (3rd century AD) – Said Revelation was not written by John the Apostle.
Eusebius (4th century AD) – Listed Revelation as disputed (antilegomena).
Caius of Rome (200 AD) – Said Revelation was written by a heretic, not an apostle.
Martin Luther (16th century) – Called it “neither apostolic nor prophetic.”
B. The Syriac Church Left It Out
The Syriac Church did not accept Revelation until the 5th century.
The Council of Laodicea (363 AD) excluded it from the canon.
👉 If Revelation was truly from John the Apostle, why did so many early Christians reject it?
5. Revelation Resembles Non-Canonical Writings
Revelation shares themes with the Apocrypha and Gnostic writings:
Book of Enoch – Cosmic battles between angels and demons.
Apocalypse of Peter – Visions of the afterlife.
Gnostic texts – Dualistic struggle of light vs. darkness.
👉 This suggests Revelation belongs to the genre of apocryphal literature, not inspired Scripture.
Conclusion: Revelation is Not a Genuine Apostolic Book
Reasons Revelation is Not Authentic:
1. It Misunderstands Jewish Concepts
"Satan" is misused.
The "Lamb" as a warrior is unbiblical.
The "New Jerusalem" contradicts Ezekiel’s prophecy.
2. It Contains Failed Prophecies
"Soon" never happened.
Jerusalem was already destroyed, but the author didn't know.
3. It Uses Pagan & Gnostic Imagery
Beasts, dragons, and cosmic battles match Babylonian and Persian myths.
4. Its Style is Unlike Other Biblical Books
Poor Greek grammar.
Different from John’s Gospel and Epistles.
5. Early Christians Rejected It
Many church fathers doubted it.
The Syriac Church left it out.
The Council of Laodicea did not include it.
👉 Final Verdict: Revelation was likely written by a non-Jewish author with poor Greek skills, heavily influenced by apocalyptic traditions outside of biblical thought. The early church doubted it, and its failed prophecies prove it is not divinely inspired.