It certainly is in accordance with the mind and will of the Lord that the people of his church should read and understand the book known as the Revelation by John, to which reference is made here. In the very beginning of that remarkable literary production we are informed that it contains the revelation which God gave unto Jesus Christ, for the purpose of making future events known to his servants (Rev. 1:1). To this information is added this assurance: “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep the things that are written therein: for the time is at hand” (v. 3). Then, at the close of the book, the author warns against adding to, or taking away from it (22:18, 19). Any change would destroy the symbolism. Now, here Nephi is shown the sacred writing long before the time of John, and in our own day and age, in the month of March, 1832, the Prophet Joseph received a special revelation, containing a “key” to the first eleven chapters of the book. Not a detailed explanation, but a key that lets the reader in, as it were, and gives him an opportunity to study the details for himself, under the guidance of the Spirit of Truth. God wants us to study this book.
And no wonder. In the letters to the seven churches in Asia Minor, it contains the most solemn warnings against sin, false doctrines and lukewarmness in the faith. (Rev. 2:1-4:21) In the rest of the book is shown the gradual progress and development of the great apostasy, but also the final victory of the Lamb of God—the progress of the world through wars, famine, pestilence, earthquakes, etc., to the Millennial reign of peace, truth and righteousness. It is, we may say, the time-piece of the church, showing the hour of the day. It is a compass to consult on the stormy Main of human history.
The Apostle John is the author. This is clear from this vision of Nephi. Scholars now recognize that this is the unanimous testimony of the first and second centuries of our era, too. It is the view of Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria and Origen. But in the third century Dionysius, a disciple of Origen, asserted that its author was a presbyter, or Elder, by the name of John. Some even maintained that it was forged by Cerinthus, the notorious heretic against whom, according to Irenaeus, the Gospel of John was written. However, the book was finally accepted by the majority of the members of the church, as the work of the Apostle John.
At the time of the reformation the question of authenticity was again discussed. Martin Luther revived the controversy by asserting that the book was neither apostolic nor prophetic. But then, Luther, as a “higher critic,” also characterized the Epistle of James as “straw.” He even questioned the propriety of the conduct of our Lord in purifying the temple, as related by John in the Gospel. Referring to the expression, “And when he had made a scourge of small cords [or rather rushes], he drove them all out,” etc., Luther asks whether that is not an act of rebellion, and then he argues apologetically, as it were, that this act of our Lord is not to serve as something for others to imitate in as much as he made himself this time a servant, not of the New, but the Old Testament, and the disciples of Moses. 2 Luther was a mighty preacher and a masterful organizer, but not an authority on either textual or “higher” critcism. The Revelation has been accepted as authentic, notwithstanding the dictum of the great reformer. Scholarship has in this respect, as in others, vindicated the Book of Mormon.
The main objection to the same authorship of the Revelation and the Gospel is the alleged difference in style. But if the books were written at different times, and different secretaries were employed in the purely literary composition, the differences in style present no difficulty.