The New Testament, in order of appearance.

I have gathered together what looks like the New Testament, in order of appearance. I will be updating this whenever I get more confirmed information. Please feel free to add your two cents worth. If I need a correction, please give me your source. I will add that link to this page under the books info. I do feel that these dates are a little early but this is just a start.

According to the biblical scholar Bart Ehrman, at least 11 of the 27 New Testament books are forgeries, while only seven of the 13 epistles attributed to Paul were probably written by him.

"Virtually all scholars agree that seven of the Pauline letters are authentic: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon," - Bart Ehrman

New Testament manuscripts are fragmentary. Earliest complete manuscript is from ca. 350; lapse of event to complete manuscript is about 325 years. 


1. 1 Thessalonians. Written by Paul from Corinth around 50-60CE.
2. 2 Thessalonians. Maybe written by Paul as a follow-up to his previous letter 80-100CE
3. Jude. I’ll be bold and put this letter, said to be written by Judas, one of Jesus’ brothers mentioned in Mark 6.3, here.  Scholars are divided as to when this was written (or by whom) but they suggest that it may be one of the earliest of the writings of the New Testament, based on its raw Jewish roots and influence from apocryphal literature.
4. Galatians. Written by Paul 50-60CE
5. 1 Corinthians. Written by Paul in 50-60CE.
6. 2 Corinthians. Written by Paul sometime between 50-60CE and after a visit to Corint.
7. Romans. Written by Paul 50-60CE, in hopes of visiting a city he never ended up visiting.
8. Philippians. Written by Paul 50-60CE, presumably while imprisoned.
9. Philemon. Written by Paul, from prison, sometime between 50-60CE.
10. Colossians. Though it is disputed whether or not Paul actually wrote this, it echoes many Pauline themes and is assumed to be written by a follower, maybe after Paul’s death 50-80CE
11. Mark. Finally, a Gospel!  Attributed to Mark, though anonymously published in the late-60s, before the fall of Jerusalem in 70CE. 65-80CE
12. Matthew. Based on Mark w/ stories unique to itself.  Again, anonymously published but attributed to Matthew.  Dated sometime between 80-100CE.
13 & 14. Luke / Acts. Two volumes written by the same anonymous author, traditionally identified as Luke, around the same time as Matthew (80-130CE).  Here again, much of the Gospel is based on Mark, sharing some w/ Matthew, but also w/ stories unique to itself.  The Acts of the Apostles closely parallel that of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke.
15. Ephesians. The circulation of the Acts of the Apostles renewed interest in the Apostle Paul, leading someone to compose a letter using his name and reflecting some of his themes (though showing none of his literary style) somewhere around 80-100CE.
16. The Revelation of John. Written by a “John” who wasn't the same who wrote the Gospel as a response to the tyrannical reign of Caesar Nero (54-68CE) late in the first century.
17. Hebrews. Written anonymously, no later than 90-120CE.
18 & 19. 1 & 2 Peter. Attributed to Peter but in a high quality of Greek that would’ve been “above” Peter’s social standing.  Most likely, these letters were written as a “tribute” to the fallen Christian icon. 1 Peter 80-110CE & 2 Peter 100-160CE.
20. James. A letter attributed to James, the brother of Jesus, who was martyred before 70CE. Written somewhere between 70-100CE
21. The Gospel of John. Written w/in the context of the Christians’ expulsion from the synagogue, which took place in the decades following the fall of Jerusalem (80-90CE).  But its highly developed Greek may suggest an even later date, into the early-second-century. 90-100CE
22-24. The Letters of John. All of these were written in the tradition of and after the Gospel of John, placing them around or after the start of the second century. 90-120CE
25-27. The Pastoral Letters (1 & 2 Timothy and Titus).  Though these were written in the Pauline tradition, they reflect a knowledge of the book of Acts (written after Paul’s death) and the climate of the early second-century, which is when they were probably written. 100-150CE

Here's a great link of more in depth history of the New Testament - http://www.earlychristianwritings.com

Updated 1-7-2013

Mormons - Joseph Smith, The Beginning?

Evolution - Design Without A Designer

So You Think Homosexuality Is Sinful?

I believe this tells it all. No need to add to this.

A Few "Just Because" And "What If's"

 I chose to use the "Just because" & "What if" phrases to highlight some of those questions that have been eating at me lately. Of course some of them are silly but to me they are legitimate concerns.

Just because I try to look at life differently than you, doesn't mean we cannot get along.
Just because I like to use reason doesn't make my opinions not count.
Just because I try to use my brain doesn't mean I am wrong for doing so.
Just because I do not believe in God, doesn't make me a bad person.
Just because I do not agree with your idea of morality doesn't mean I have none.
Just because I am skeptical of the Bible, doesn't mean I am against it.
Just because I question your beliefs doesn't mean I do not understand them.
Just because I think evolution answers the question about the origins of life doesn't make me against Chritianity.
Just because I do not agree with your faith doesn't make me demon possessed. 
Just because we have our differences doesn't keep us from celebrating our agreements.
Just because the Bible says it doesn't make it true.
Just because Jesus was a real person doesn't make him the savior of the world.
Just because because you can quote scripture doesn't mean you actually read the bible.
Just because you heard it on Fox, doesn't make it a true statement.
Just because you can pretend that God exists doesn't mean he does.
Just because you go to church, doesn't make you holier than me.

What if you actually read the Bible with an open mind?
What if you lived your life the way the Bible wants you too, and you found out in the end you were wrong?
What if Evolution was right and you wasted your life believing in a fantasy?
What if Baal was the correct God and you chose differently?
What if you found out you had cancer, who would you blame?
What if your conspiracy theory was wrong and the world was really being run by Aliens?
What if we wasted our life on religion when we should've spent it advancing human knowledge for our future children?
What if Rush Limbaugh was really a closet homosexual?
What if Global warming is true and we were blinded by our religion so much that we help cause the problem?
What if that the Republican party was actually destroying our country?
What if the constitution was just meant for the 13 original colonies?
What if they banned guns, would you buy a pitch fork & a torch?
What if this was meant for you, would you even know it?


Please feel free to comment or add some of your own. My list will probably increase on a weekly basis. Stop by or follow this blog for future postings

Pascal's Wager....WTF? Baal? oops wrong god!

  Living in a super conservative area in northern Indiana does have it's complications, especially if you are a skeptic when it comes to Christianity. Most, if not all, of my friends are what they would call "Christian" but that is a pretty broad statement even for a Catholic. Most of them try to attend church and live a "biblical" life. Or at least an appearance one. Their quest for religion and meaning remind me of Pascal's Wager,

1. If you believe in God and God does exist, you will be rewarded with eternal life in heaven: thus an infinite gain.
2. If you do not believe in God and God does exist, you will be condemned to remain in hell forever: thus an infinite loss.
3. If you believe in God and God does not exist, you will not be rewarded: thus a finite loss.
4. If you do not believe in God and God does not exist, you will not be rewarded, but you have lived your own life: thus a finite gain. 

 or Secular Web puts it this way,

 "If you erroneously believe in God, you lose nothing (assuming that death is the absolute end), whereas if you correctly believe in God, you gain everything (eternal bliss). But if you correctly disbelieve in God, you gain nothing (death ends all), whereas if you erroneously disbelieve in God, you lose everything (eternal damnation).  - Keith Augustine

 I am sure that most of them have no clue to Pascal's wager but they live pretty much by this rule. This seems to be the norm. A few of my friends & some relatives go well beyond the norm but I will not get into that Hocus Pocus. As tempted as I am, I will only focus on my perceptions.

 I guess my biggest concern is what if they believe everything that they are being taught? Is that really faith or is it just following blindly? Even if you believe in God, how do you know it's the right one? What if you were faithful all of your life and died to find out that Baal was the correct God? Oops, that would be a real problem. According to the Bible in 1 Corinthians 8:6 NIV,

"6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live."
  
 
After experiencing this in my personal life for years, I have decided that it is better to be skeptical and learn than to be a sheeple and be led down a path of fear and guilt. After all, we only have one life and we need to make sure we get the best out of it. Who knows, we may all be wrong.

Do Christians Really Read Their Bibles? Really?

Drawing by The Naked Pastor

"By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out."
Richard Dawkins

I recently read the book "Why I Believed:Reflections of a Former Missionary" by Kenneth W. Daniels and was taken back by the authors reasoning for his deconversion from Christianity. The reason for his deconversion was not just one thing but years of questioning through observation. As he says in his book;

    "My own journey away from Christianity began within as I reflected on the contradictory elements in the Bible, and on the conflict between fundamentalist Christianity and my observations of the real world. It was only after my doubts began that I undertook to read materials written from a skeptical perspective, and I quickly became struck by the magnitude of the evidence corroborating my initial doubts. Doubt cannot be imposed from the outside; it must begin from within."

 Wow! Contradictory elements? Conflicts? How can this be true? My pastors all told me that the Bible was inerrant and flawless. Why would a Christian missionary come to such conclusions? As I read on, I was amazed at how he came to such conclusions. Those conclusions led me down a path of questioning my long held notion of the Bible. Of course my Christian friends would find that damning or yet worse, blasphemy. But for me it was a personal course I needed to take. I figured that at worse there would be a few misunderstood passages or even some small translation problems. What I come to find out is there are many problems in both the Old & New Testaments.

Kenneth goes on to say;

    "Those who cannot allow their views to be subject to revision by data or arguments they may not have yet considered live in a separate world from mine."

  I have often wondered why I did not receive more teachings on the history or the authors of the books of the Bible. I was told that they were not important and there was no need to worry.  Over the years as a Christian, I was taught that the Bible was the Word of God and everything in it was truth. No questions asked.

 My questions are important so why not ask those questions? After all, it is my life at stake & my future is on the line. If my eternity lies in the understanding of this book, I would need to make sure that what it said was irrefutable fact. In order for me to understand the, I would need to read books written by some critical scholars by Agnostic, Deists and Atheists. To understand the arguments against the inerrancy Bible, I needed to do this a little at a time so I could understand the reasoning and proof. Books that have helped me look at this subject more closely have been the following;

"The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins
"The God Virus: How Religion Infects Our Lives and Culture" by Darrel Ray
"Did Jesus Exist?; Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth" by Bart Ehrman

 I was amazed at my Christian friends reaction to my questioning. You would have thought I was out to convince everyone that the Bible was a lie and that we were all going to hell. Why is it that if you believe that the Bible is not errant, you are required to prove it yet if you believe it is inerrant, no proof is necessary? Shouldn't this be the other way around? Shouldn't we all be skeptical and not easily swayed to believe? Why should I be judged on my skepticism? We ask more questions when buying a house or a new car than we do of the Bible. Know wonder we are so divided in our "beliefs".

 My question to you is this, why do you believe the Bible is inerrant? For me, I am still skeptical.

"Do not consider it proof just because it is written in books, for a liar who will deceive with his tongue will not hesitate to do the same with his pen." - Maimonides