How did the Book of Revelation join the canon?

first evidence of any real objection to the book of Revelation comes from the person of Gaius in the early third century who rejects the book on the grounds that it was a forgery of the heretic Cerinthus. ...
Dionysius of Alexandria, in the late third century, makes the argument that Revelation was written by another John besides the apostle. Eusebius appears to agree with him. But, it is worth noting that Dionysius does not reject the book on these grounds (despite the impression many give that he did), but still regards it as holy and inspired. ...
It was not the historical merits of the book, but rather Gaius’ objection to chiliasm (the belief in a literal millennial reign of Christ).

Click to expand...

Eusebius, in his Church History (c. AD 330) mentioned that the Apocalypse of John was accepted as a Canonical book and rejected at the same time.

Click to expand...

Cyril of Jerusalem (AD 348) does not name it among the canonical books

Click to expand...

The Council of Laodicea (AD 363) omits it as a canonical book.

Click to expand...

The Synod of Hippo (in AD 393),[36] followed by the Council of Carthage (397), the Council of Carthage (419), the Council of Florence (1442)[37] and the Council of Trent (1546)[38] classified it as a canonical book.

Click to expand...

Doubts resurfaced during the 16th-century Protestant Reformation. Martin Luther called Revelation "neither apostolic nor prophetic" in the 1522 preface to his translation of the New Testament (he revised his position with a much more favorable assessment in 1530),[41] Huldrych Zwingli labelled it "not a book of the Bible",[42] and it was the only New Testament book on which John Calvin did not write a commentary.[43] As of 2015 Revelation remains the only New Testament book not read in the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox Church,[44] though Catholic and Protestant liturgies include it.

Click to expand...