Ravings of a madman, yes. But John’s Revelations were not accepted for 350 years after they were put to paper. That would be like something written in New England in 1670 inally being accepted as truth today. My question to you is this: Given the Syrian Orthodox Church does not accept the Revelations is it truly Christian?
What do you mean John’s Revelations were not accepted for 350 years after they were put to paper?
You can only mean that it was not universally accepted as Scripture by all, yet which was also true of some other books even until Trent for RCs, including one of the most manifestly inspired writings, the Book of Hebrews
And whether something is universally accepted or not is not what makes such Scripture, though it establishes it as authoritative among men though who accept it.
And as far as the attestation of churchmen, though lacking some discernment, is concerned, then among others Athanasius (367 AD) in his Letter 39,[33] Augustine of Hippo (c. 397 AD) in his book On Christian Doctrine (Book II, Chapter 8),[34] Tyrannius Rufinus (c. 400 AD) in his Commentary on the Apostles' Creed,[35] Pope Innocent I (405 AD) in a letter to the bishop of Toulouse[36] and John of Damascus (about 730 AD) in his work An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith (Book IV:7)[37] listed "the Revelation of John the Evangelist" as a canonical book. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Revelation#Canonical_history
“Ravings of a madman, yes.”
If you are talking about the Koran.
“But John’s Revelations were not accepted for 350 years after they were put to paper.”
That’s not true. Revelation was written by John the apostle and was transmitted to the churches of Asia mentioned in the book while John was still alive. It was received by the church in accordance with its claims as a message from Christ to the churches.
Polycarp was personally mentored by John the apostle and was appointed bishop in Smyrna (one of the seven churches addressed in Revelation) by John. Polycarp mentored Irenaeus who cited Revelation as a Biblical text authored by John the apostle.
Besides Iranaeus, other early church fathers such as Justin Martyr, Melito, and Clement of Alexandria quote from Revelation in their writings.
The Muratorian fragment includes Revelation. And it is dated around 170 because it refers to Pius 1 “most recently in our time” along with his brother as if the writer is a contemporary. This fragment is not a complete list and also references some texts which do not sound like the names of books we recognize as canon today. So some do not consider this document to provide a definitive answer. However, it does show that Revelation was commonly accepted as Biblical at that time.
So, from the time of the apostles until the first church council, Revelation was clearly already in use as a Biblical text. At this first council (Nicea 325) Bibles were in use, but there is no record of discussion of what books were recognized as canon. So it is reasonably assumed that there was no significant debate on this matter.
Councils later included or disputed Revelation as canonical. Ironically, the Council of Laodicea—city of the lukewarm church of Revelation—rejected its canonicity.
Keep in mind that throughout these times the copying and transmitting of sacred texts was extremely difficult. They did not have computers, printers, Internet, or email. Just the ability for diverse groups separated by time and distance to have any degree of agreement is miraculous.
If you even are born again, you might want to go back and read your posts here. You are working for the antichrist spirit which is rising in our midst. “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” 1 Cor 1:18