TERRY ON JOHN IN PATMOS

PMW 2023-064 by Milton Terry

GENTRY INTRODUCTION
This study is taken from Milton S. Terry’s, The Apocalypse of John. Terry was an excellent scholar and historian. This material should be helpful for Revelation enthusiasts.

JOHN ON PATMOS

Why Was John on Patmos?

John’s own testimony is that he “was in the island which is called Patmos on account of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus” (Rev. 1:9). The phrase “on account of the word of God” (διὰ τὸν λόγον του θεου; dia ton logon tou theou), according to the well-established usage of διὰ (dia) with the accusative, means for the sake of the word. It gives the ground or reason for what is stated. So in chapter 2:3, it is said: “Thou didst endure for my name’s sake;” that is, the great objective reason for the endurance in the midst of trials was devotion to the name of Christ. So again in 4:11: “On account of thy will they were and were created;” that is, all things were brought into existence because that was the will of God. The same meaning inheres in this formula in 6:9; 7:15; 12:11,12; 13:14; 18:8, 10, 15; 20:4. Now, according to 1:2, “the word of God and the testimony of Jesus” are no other than this Revelation concerning all things which John saw.

The most obvious meaning, therefore, of verse 9 is that John was in Patmos for the sake of, or on account of, this Revelation of Jesus Christ. The first and most emphatic thing the writer tells us is that God gave this “revelation” (ἀποκάλυψις, apokalupsis) to Jesus and Jesus signified it through his angel unto John, who witnessed it accordingly as God’s word and Jesus’s testimony (vv. 1–2). It was on this account, not on account of “the tribulation and kingdom and patience” mentioned in the first part of verse 9, that John “was in the island which is called Patmos.”

THE APOCALYPSE OF JOHN
by Milton S. Terry
This book is Terry’s preterist commentary on the Book of Revelation. It was originally the last half of his much larger work, Biblical Apocalyptics. It is deeply-exegetical, tightly-argued, and clearly-presented.

For more study materials: https://www.kennethgentry.com/

But because John announces himself as a “brother and partaker” in the tribulation of the times, nearly all interpreters have jumped to the conclusion that he must have been in Patmos because of such tribulation. The fact, also, that criminals were banished to that barren island by the Roman emperors has seemed to confirm the tradition that John was dwelling there as an exile when he saw the visions of this Apocalypse. There is certainly nothing improbable in the tradition, but aside from what has been inferred from the single statement of Revelation 1:9, there appears to be no convincing evidence that John was ever an exile in Patmos.

Early Church Traditions

The traditions of the second and third centuries touching the movements of the first apostles are of very little value. Some of them may be true; but none of them are to be accepted as well-attested facts of history. The tradition of John’s banishment may be only a specimen of the manner in which a statement like that of Revelation 1:9, was taken up a century after it was written, given a particular meaning, and that meaning propagated without contradiction until it came to be accepted as an unquestionable fact. Aside from this passage there is no more authority for the tradition of John’s exile than there is for the statement of Victorinus that he was sent to Patmos to work in a mine; or of Tertullian that he was first plunged into burning oil at Rome and, having suffered no harm, was sent as a captive to Patmos; or of Polycrates that he was a martyr and teacher and also a priest who bore the sacerdotal plate; or of Simeon Metaphrastes that he was shipwrecked off the coast of Ephesus. These and a score of other similar stories illustrate the tendency of early times to take up a word or hint about an apostle and magnify it into a legend. Such legends can have no real value as trustworthy history.

The last reference to John in the Acts of the Apostles is in Revelation 12:2. It is not improbable that after the death of his brother James, there mentioned, John left Jerusalem and proceeded to found Christianity in some of the cities of western Asia. Perhaps one reason why Paul was forbidden of the Spirit to preach in Asia (Acts 16:6) was because John was already on that field. Or possibly John made a journey to Rome, as Tertullian says and was thence banished to Patmos at the time Claudius gave command for all Jews to depart from the imperial city (Acts 18:2). He may have subsequently visited Jerusalem as many times as Paul did.

It is worthy of note that the Muratorian Fragment, a very ancient and important document (A.D. 170), declares that “the blessed apostle Paul, following the manner of his predecessor John, wrote in like manner to seven churches expressly by name.” This testimony clearly puts John before Paul in writing epistles to the churches and tends to confirm the position taken above that Galatians 4:25–26, is an allusion to John’s picture of the heavenly Jerusalem. The apostle John might have been quietly laboring in Smyrna, or in some neighboring parts of Asia Minor, while Paul was at Ephesus. To assume that in such case we must have had some allusion to it in Paul’s writings, or in some other New Testament writing, is altogether baseless. The absence of any reference to John in the latter half of the Acts of the Apostles ought to be a sufficient admonition not to presume upon the silence of the New Testament on such matters.

BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL
Doctoral dissertation defending a pre-AD 70 date for Revelation’s writing (459 pp; paperback). Thoroughly covers internal evidence from Revelation, external evidence from history, and objections to the early date by scholars.

For more study materials: https://www.kennethgentry.com/

Our object in giving so much space to this question about John’s banishment to Patmos is to point out the worthlessness of much that has been written on such matters of little or no importance. Our contention is that the question of John’s actual residence in Patmos, whether as an exile, or by reason of shipwreck, or otherwise, is of no importance in the exposition of the Apocalypse. But some interpreters seem to think that a whole scheme of exposition might be based upon an inference drawn from such an incidental statement as that of Revelation 1:9 (cf., Alford’s Greek Testament with Notes, in loco). An impression is made to take the place of proof and often magnified to the neglect of other statements or inferences of equal value. Whether the author of this book went to Patmos as an exile, or for the purpose of receiving this “word of God and testimony of Jesus,” ought not to be treated as a question of any serious moment.

One might even go further and maintain that John’s being in Patmos may, like Daniel’s being “in Shushan the palace, which is in the province of Elam” (Dan. 8:2), have been ideal only. So Ezekiel was “brought in the visions of God to Jerusalem” (Eze. 8:3). John immediately tells us that he was “in spirit,” and as the visions he saw of seals, trumpets, beasts, and a woman sitting upon many waters had no external reality in the physical world, so his being in Patmos might be understood as a symbolical expression equivalent to being apart in a lonely desert place.

Whatever, then, the actual facts were, the great divine purpose of John’s being in Patmos was to receive this revelation of things then about to come to pass. If he were banished to that desert place because he had made himself obnoxious to the authority of Rome, such fact was but incidental to the great purpose of God thereby effected, namely, the reception of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ which are written in this book.

Click on the following images for more information on these studies: