From: Adam <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near
the bridge">

Rich Gauszka wrote:
> "Tony Williams"  wrote in message
> news:43ac6c05$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>
>>Adam wrote:
>>
>>>>>If the are based on the study of Revelations, they are
not fantasy.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>They're based on the notion of the Rapture as a kind of prequel to
>>>>Revelations. I understand that the Rapture is a fairly
recent notion and
>>>>isn't widely accepted.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Revelation is a fairly recent notion and isn't widely accepted.
>>
>>I hadn't considered that, but I suppose Revelation is recent compared to
>>the rest of the Bible. BTW, thanks for reminding me of the correct
>>spelling.
>>
>>--
>>Tony
>
>
> In Catholicism the Book of Revelation has been argued about since at least
> 200 AD.
>
> http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01594b.htm
>
> Apocalypse, from the verb apokalypto, to reveal, is the name given to the
> last book in the Bible. It is also called the Book of Revelation.
>
> Although a Christian work, the Apocalypse belongs to a class of literature
> dealing with eschatological subjects and much in vogue among the Jews of the
> first century before, and after, Christ.
>
> .......
>
> It would be alike wearisome and useless to enumerate even the more prominent
> applications made of the Apocalypse. Racial hatred and religious rancour
> have at all times found in its vision much suitable and gratifying matter
>
>
If it wasn't John the divine who wrote it then it has no place in the canon.

Even if it was then I feel the real author was darkly angelic.

Luther was right.

"I can in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it".

Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5