Revelation 1:9 "I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ."...

Again we have an oxymoron, mixing "tribulation" with "the kingdom of Jesus Christ", for Jesus Christ gave no place to great tribulation (Mt 24:21) and noted his kingdom was not of "this world", of this/that worlds, allegorcially law/grace. He also noted he hath overcome tribulation, which is a "ye" thing of ye/you. Tribulation gets recompensed on "them" who would trouble "you". Yet since we all are one, said tribulation is also said to be "our tribulation".

It's 'traditionally' thought John was 'exiled' to Patmos around 90 - 95 AD, but only from sources like Eusebius who contradict themselves. Yet it is plausible, for John stirred up plenty of trouble among Jews against Rome. It's also traditionally believed John authored Revelation, but from sources who fail their final exam. I like to let the Bible interpret the Bible, and find traditional beliefs more often err. It does not say John was exiled, rather he said he was in the isle of Patmos (my killing) for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

It's generally recorded John buried at Ephesus, likely home base where he resided as popish Peter's bishop over the region of Asia after first travelling with Paul, then with Barnabas; and oft returning to Jerusalem where he stirred up the Jews, even to a bloody war against Rome.

It reasons the book of Revelation was written by Paul, not John, and evidently some time before Jerusalem fell in 70AD, probably about 65AD. It reasons John wrote to seven angels of seven churches of Asia some time after James was killed (Acts 12: 41-44AD), and thereafter John travelled with Paul and Barnabas. It obviously reasons it was written after the churches were established in Asia (Acts 20: about 56 - 59AD). It reasons what John wrote was before the writing of Colossians (about 64AD), which seems to be written to counteract what John wrote; for Colossians were exhorted to have Laodiceans read their epistle written by Paul and Timothy, then also read what's written to Laodiceans (by John): Colossians 4:16. So, I'm guessing, by reasoning, John wrote to the churches about 56-60 AD.  And Paul, not John, wrote the book of Revelation (which is satirically about what John wrote) about 65AD.

So law(great voice behind as of a trumpet), saying I am (I exist). And what does such an I am say it is: both Alpha and Omerga, first and last. As for Alpha and Omega, first and last, we discussed such in Rev 1:8 as being an oxymoron; as much an oxymoron as saying God is both law and grace, killer and life giver, man and not man. What would JC say to such oxymoronic crap? Get behind me, which is to say it's dung. The unreal has no being, except in the imagination. Imaginations contrary to the knowledge of God (grace is sufficient), who is the I am, that I am (the only wise God), are to be cast down, and flushed as dung.

What John seest? It's obviously law giving him a throne. As noted elsewhere John's perception of what he saw wasn't so good. He saw himself more beloved, but only according to John; for there is no respect of persons with God nor with Son of God. Him and his brother James, sons of thunder, wanted to sit on left and right sides, not even knowing such were opposing sides.

Write in a book. So here we see there are not seven letters to seven churches as many say, but a book, one biblion, or one letter (which killeth), which would be as a book of the dead. But because Paul is writer of Revelation as a satire on John, patching in John's letter, and because such has Paul's salutation (signature) as end thereof, thereby both Revelation and the Holy Bible are as a book of life. As discussed earlier said writing of John is noted in 3John 1:9.

John's book is notably written unto Ephesus first, rather unto the angel (star, church leader) of Ephesus first, which I perceive to be Timothy. Paul had Timothy abide at Ephesus (1Tim 1:3) as first bishop over the region, which is noted at the end of 2Tim: "The second [epistle] unto Timotheus, ordained the first bishop of the church of the Ephesians, was written from Rome, when Paul was brought before Nero the second time". Paul also sent Tychius to Ephesus (2Tim 4:12), perhaps since Timothy got so depressed about churches of Galatia getting bewitched, and perhaps himself got somewhat subverted by Johnny Law. However we know that Timothy recovered, for at the end of To the Hebrews it says Timothy is set at liberty.


On the map, going from the isle of Patmos, we see Ephesus is closest of seven churches mentioned. Looking at historical data, it seems although one could arrive there via porting at Miletus and taking a road, the tradition, and binding rule, was Ephesus is 'first landing' for Asia.

Ramsay (about Ephesus): In the Roman province of Asia, Pergamum, the old capital of the kings, continued to be the titular capital, but Ephesus, as the chief harbour of Asia looking towards the west, was far more important than an ordinary city of the province. It was the gate of the province, both on the seaway to Rome, and also on the great central highway leading from Syria by Corinth and Brundisium to Rome. Roman governors naturally fell into the habit of entering the province by way of Ephesus, for there was, one might almost say, no other way at first, and this custom soon became a binding rule, with uninterrupted precedents to guarantee it. After the harbour of Ephesus had grown more difficult of access in the second century, other harbours (probably Smyrna in particular) began to contest its right to be the official port of entrance, Emperor Caracalla confirmed the custom of "First Landing" at Ephesus by the imperial rescript.

Revelation 1:12 And I turned ... (John turns back to law) continued on next page