At 17:49 -0400 6/20/97, DebsGaunt@aol.com wrote: >I'm creeping out of the shadows to ask the experts on here for an opinion. > I have been looking at these two books and am inclined to agree with the >opinion that the Greek used is pretty convincing evidence that the Revelation >was not written by the Evangelist. Can anybody comment on the pros and cons >of this position? I still find Greek difficult and have limited confidence >that I have made a valid judgement. See Robert L. Thomas, Revelation: An Exegetical Commentary (Vol 1) [Moody, 1992] for a raher lengthy discussion of the grammar of Revelation and the other Johnannine writings. He says in part: "Unusual grammatical phenomena are by no means limited to the Apocalypse in the apostle John's canonical writings. If John deviated from normal usage in 1 John, why could he have not done so in the Apocalypse? No writer can be put into a straightjacket and required to have no deviations or to practice the same kind of grammatical deviations in everything he writes. It is shallow thinking, therefore, on the basis of this aspect of writing style to exclude the last book of the canon from among those written by the apostle John" (p. 8). ======================================================= Dennis M. Swanson (dswanson@mastersem.edu) The Master's Seminary 13248 Roscoe Blvd. Sun Valley, California 91352 818-909-5643 Visit The Master's Seminary Homepage at http://www.mastersem.edu "Some think that this descent of the Lord will be postmillennial --that is after the thousand years of his reign. I cannot think so. I conceive that the advent will be premillenial--that he will come first, and then will come the millennium as the result of his personal reign upon the earth." -Charles H. Spurgeon, MTP 11:249 =======================================================