Thus all the external evidence directly in favor of John the Presbyter resolves, itself into the authority of Dionysius, who rested his proofs not on the testimony of his predecessors, but on in ternal argument. Eusebius speaks so hesitatingly that nothing can be determined with respect to his real opinion.
4. No Direct Evidence for John the Presbyter. On the whole, there is no direct evi dence in favor of the opinion that John the Pres byter wrote the Apocalypse. Many internal con siderations have been adduced to show that John the Apostle was not the author; but no direct argument has been advanced to prove that John the Presbyter was the writer. Indeed. our exist ing accounts of the presbyter are so brief as to afford no data for associating the writing of this book with his name. All that we know from antiquity is, that both joAns wc:e contemporary, that they are called disciples of the Lord, that they resided in Asia Minor, and that their tombs were shown at Ephesus. It is vain to appeal to the second and third epistles of John for compar ing the Apocalypse with them, with Credner and Jaehmann (Pelt's Mitarbeiten, 1830, who think that they proceeded from the presbyter; since, to say the least, the hypothesis that these epistles were written by John the Presbyter has not yet been established. Still, however, notwithstanding this deficiency of evidence, Bleck, Credner, and Jachmann, following Dionysius, attribute the book to John the Presbyter.
Others think that a disciple of John undertook to write on a subject which he had received from the apostle; and that he thought himself justified in introducing his instructor as the speaker, be cause he wrote in his manner. So Ewald, Liicke, Schott, and Neander.
5. Not John Mart. Hitzig has lately writ ten a treatise to prove that the writer is John Mark, the same from whom the second gospel proceeded. His arguments are mainly based on parallelisms of language and construction (Uebcr I ohannes Marcus and seine Schrif ten, oder welcher Johannes hat die Offenbarung verfasstf Zurich, 8vo, 1843).
6. Evidence Supporting John the Apostle. In stating the evidence in favor of the apostle as the writer, we begin with the external.
Justin Martyr is the earliest writer who attri butes it to John the Apostle (Dial. cum Tryph.) Rettig, indeed, has endeavored to impugn the genuineness of the passage containing this testi mony, but he has been well answered by Lucke, and by Guerike (Tholuck's Literarischer An^ei ger, 1830). Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen, ascribe it to the apostle; and, as De Wette candidly remarks, the testimony of the last two is the more important, as they were not millennarians. When Irenwus says that it. was written by John the disciple of the Lord, it is uncertain whether he meant the apostle or the presbyter, although the former is far more prob. able.
(1) Regarding the Naming of Himself. Why should not a writer be at liberty to name him self or not as he pleases? Above all, why should not a writer, under the immediate inspiration of the Almighty, omit the particulars which he was not promoted to record? How could he refrain from doing so? The Holy Spirit must have had some good reason for leading the writer to set forth his name, although curiosity is not gratified by assigning the reason. The Old Testament prophets usually prefixed their names to the visions and predictions which they were prompted to record; and John does the same. But instead of styling himself an apostle, which carries with it an idea of dignity and official authority, he mod estly takes to himself the appellation of a servant of Christ, the brother and companion of the faith ful in tribulation. This corresponds with the re lation which he sustained to Christ in the receiving of such visions, as also with the condition of the Redeemer himself. In the Gospel, John is men tioned as the disciple whom Jesus loved, for then he stood in an intimate relation to Christ, as the Son of man appearing in the form of a servant; but in the book before us, Christ is announced as the glorified Redeemer who should quickly come to judgment, and John is his servant, entrusted with the secrets of his house. Well did it become the apostle to forget all the honor of his apostolic office, and to be abased before the Lord of glory.