The Chronological Order of the New Testament and why it matters.
Compositional Order
https://conciliarpost.com/theology-spirituality/the-new-testament-in-order/
A final way to think about the ordering of the New Testament is in the order in which these documents were written.
=====================
Personal Note and Reminder: Why it matters is because it shows that the Pauline Jesus was first Cosmic and Hallucinatory in nature to Paul. The Gospels to follow after Paul put Paul's Christ into a historical setting.
As we know, Paul never met Gospel Jesus nor quotes him. No sayings of Jesus. No miracles recounted and no tales of how he, as a Pharisee in Jerusalem, tormented Jesus with the others.
This seems odd to scholars if Paul was indeed a Pharisee of the Pharisees in Jerusalem at the time of the stories of Jesus in the Gospels. The Gospel writers never heard of any Apostle Paul or Saul of Tarsus
This is because the story of Gospel Jesus had not yet been brought down to Earth in the stories of the Gospels in Paul's lifetime. Paul's Jesus, or Christ was revelatory. Jesus talked to Paul and Paul heard Jesus in his mind.
Galatians 1:11 I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.Paul never heard of the stories, teachings or drama of Jesus life and death in the Gospels)
=====================
At first, you might imagine that this would parallel the chronological ordering, but that’s not quite correct.
Most scholars believe that either 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, or James was the first New Testament document written, all of which speak to events chronologically later than the Gospels.
This is largely due to the fact that the Gospels are not media reports or live tweets about Jesus: they are literary biographies, composed by followers of Jesus to tell the story of Jesus as the first generation of Christians got older.
The order in which the writings of the New Testament were composed is a topic of much scholarly debate. On the one hand, many contemporary scholars push the writing of certain documents well into the second century and speak extensively about anonymous and pseudonymous authorship of certain writings.
On the other hand, there are plenty of scholars who advocate for much earlier (and more traditional) datings, with some scholars even suggesting that the contents of the New Testament were written before the destruction of the Second Jewish Temple by Rome in 70 CE.9
Consider Marcus Borg’s listing of the New Testament books in the order they were written in The Evolution of the Word (including his likely dates10):
- 1 Thessalonians (50 CE)
- Galatians (50 CE)
- 1 Corinthians (50 CE)
- Philemon (mid-50s CE)
- Philippians (mid-50s CE)
- 2 Corinthians (mid-50s)
- Romans (58 CE)
- Mark (70 CE)
- James (70-80 CE)
- Colossians (80s CE)
- Matthew (80-90 CE)
- Hebrews (80-90 CE)
- John (90 CE)
- Ephesians (90s CE)
- Revelation (90s CE)
- Jude (90s CE)
- 1 John (100 CE)
- 2 John (100 CE)
- 3 John (100 CE)
- Luke (100 CE)
- Acts (100 CE)
- 2 Thessalonians (100 CE)
- 1 Peter (100 CE)
- 1 Timothy (100-110 CE)
- 2 Timothy (100-110 CE)
- Titus (100-110 CE)
- 2 Peter (120-150 CE)
==================
Bonus
Scholars normally break down the 13 Pauline letters as follows:
Undisputed letters of Paul: Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, Philemon.
These seven letters are normally thought to be written by Paul. That is why they are called “undisputed” letters.
- Disputed letters of Paul: Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus.
There is no scholarly consensus on whether these six letters are actually penned by Paul. That is why they are called “disputed” letters. Others use the term Deutero-Pauline to describe them, a sort of “second” canon of letters that are questionably attributed to Paul.
In this short post, we cannot go into the reasons why each of these letters are rejected by some, questioned by others, and accepted as Paul by yet other scholars.
Such inquiries of authorship developed from the Enlightenment period when biblical writings started to be critically examined. This took place through the process of reasoning rather than letting religious dogma of previous generations decide the issue.
Great overview for those so inclined
https://www.bartehrman.com/pauline-epistles/
4 comments:
What if God inspired the order in which they appear in the Bible?
What a stupid waste of blog space!
Why would an atheist who does not even believe the material he is discussing insist that it be arranged in chronological order, rather than in inspiring, cohesive, purpose-driven literary form??? Next thing you know, someone will insist on alphabetic order. If you don't like the way it's arranged, print it out in loose-leaf, and make your own New Testament.
Well, I guess this is further evidence that evangelizing atheists exist.
Dennis:
When it comes to real world timeline, I believe that if one considers only the written texts, one is considering only a part of the data. The texts existed in a milieu of actual experience and oral accounts. The First Century Ekklesia's understanding consisted of the accumulated oral knowledge plus the documents as they were generated.
There are no documents that I know of that survive from the very earliest period of the formation of the Ekklesia. This lack of documentation leads to the idea that Christianity was a word-of-mouth movement in the beginning. The writings came later.
In these modern times, we only know a piece of the elephant. For the most part we know what has been transmitted to us by document. It may be the most important piece doctrinally but may be deficient in historical detail and chronology.
A simple question is: How much knowledge did Paul understand that the typical Christian had when he wrote his epistles? This controls the tenor of what Paul wrote yet it is unknown to us. Paul's epistles were directed to people who were already established Christians. They are not missionary publications meant to introduce people to Christianity. This is a watershed difference. Absent the context for the writings, it is difficult to draw conclusions about the development of the Ekklesia.
Scout
I agree. As Bart Ehrman notes, we only have copies, of copies of copies of copies with plenty of edits along the way. The letters, real or pseudepigraphic were circulated and read because only a very small number of people could read much less write. Paul's being the first of the NT writers and his conflict with the Jerusalem Apostles was and is well known. James Tabor addresses this in his book on Jesus and Paul. "How Paul transformed Christianity" In reality, there never was, or not for long, one true church. Schism and splits began almost before the body cooled. We can know, for the most part, the evolution of Christianity beginning more in the 2nd Century CE. Thanks for commenting
Post a Comment