How Many Prophecies Did Jesus Fulfill? (LIST)

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

How many prophecies did Jesus fulfill? This question reminds me of an evening about a year ago, at a friend’s book promotion event in downtown Zagreb. After it ended, a group of us (writers, academics, and a few students) wandered off to a local bar to celebrate over beer and conversation. 

At some point in the evening, one of my friend’s colleagues, who also happened to be a former student of mine, asked about my recent work with Bart Ehrman and his team. That one question opened the floodgates to a full-blown discussion about the historical-critical method and the academic study of the Bible.

What struck me most was how quickly the conversation turned toward prophecy. My former student was eager to demonstrate — beyond any doubt — that Jesus is the resurrected Son of God. His primary piece of evidence? The Old Testament prophecies that Jesus allegedly fulfilled. For him, “allegedly” didn’t apply.

He spoke with full conviction: Jesus had, in fact, fulfilled dozens of predictions laid down centuries before his birth. Our discussion lasted more than an hour and reminded me just how deeply rooted this idea of fulfilled prophecy is in the Christian imagination. 

For countless believers, prophecy isn’t only a theological affirmation but also proof, almost mathematical in its force, that Jesus must be who the Gospels claim he is.

And yet, from a historian’s point of view, the matter is far more complex. What do we mean by “prophecy”? Are we speaking of direct predictions and their literal fulfillment? Or are we dealing with more symbolic, typological, or retrospective interpretations?

In this article, we’ll take a close look at 12 specific prophecies that Christians traditionally believe Jesus fulfilled. We’ll begin by asking what ancient Jews during the Second Temple period expected from a messiah in the first place. 

Then we’ll walk through 12 passages often cited as predictions of Jesus’ birth, life, and death, including a couple of alleged prophecy fulfillments found within the New Testament narrative itself.

Throughout, we’ll explore not just what Christians have long believed, but also how modern historical-critical scholars interpret some of these texts, offering a clearer sense of how early followers of Jesus read (and sometimes re-read) their scriptures in light of what they had come to believe about him.

Jewish Expectations of the Messiah in the Second Temple Period

To understand how many prophecies Jesus fulfilled, we first need to step back and explore the historical and religious landscape in which those prophecies took shape. Specifically, we need to ask what Jewish expectations of the Messiah actually looked like before Jesus began his public ministry.

Contrary to popular assumptions, there was no uniform or universally held concept of the Messiah in ancient Judaism. Instead, messianic hopes evolved, shaped by shifting political conditions, theological developments, and scriptural interpretations.

The term “Messiah” comes from the Hebrew mashiach, meaning “anointed one.” It was originally used for kings, priests, and sometimes prophets: Those consecrated for divine service by ritual anointing.

In the earliest biblical texts, the word didn’t necessarily denote a future deliverer or eschatological figure. In fact, for much of the Second Temple period (ca. 516 B.C.E.-70 C.E.), messianism didn’t occupy a central role in Jewish religious life. 

It was only with the emergence of Jewish apocalypticism in the 2nd century B.C.E. (a worldview marked by cosmic dualism, divine judgment, and expectation of imminent intervention and resurrection) that messianic hopes crystallized in new and urgent ways.

The Jewish experience of foreign domination, especially under the Seleucid and later Roman empires, further intensified longings for deliverance. 

As Gershom Scholem insightfully observed, when the Messianic idea gains force within Judaism, it does so “in the closest connection with apocalypticism.” In such moments, messianism becomes more than just a theological category. Rather, it becomes a fervent, even existential, hope.

(Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

Yet even within this apocalyptic framework, there was no consensus about the Messiah’s identity or function. Jewish texts from the period offer a wide range of messianic portraits, often reflecting the diverse needs and imaginations of their communities.

Bart D. Ehrman and Hugo Mendez note:

These messianic expectations weren’t always mutually exclusive, but neither were they harmonized into a single, coherent doctrine. Instead, they coexisted in tension, offering a kind of open scriptural canvas onto which future hopes could be projected.

Understanding this diversity is important when evaluating how many prophecies Jesus fulfilled. If Jewish expectations were themselves varied and fluid, then any claim about Jesus fulfilling “the” messianic prophecies presumes a singular framework that didn’t exist at the time.

After briefly considering Jewish expectations of the Messiah during the Second Temple period, we can now turn to the next stage of our investigation: The specific prophecies Jesus fulfilled, at least according to traditional Christian belief.

How Many Prophecies Did Jesus Fulfill? A List of Notable Ones

How many prophecies did Jesus fulfill? For many Christian apologists, the answer is emphatic: A great many. In their book Evidence That Demands a Verdict, Josh and Sean McDowell summarize this view with a vivid metaphor:

Of course, the sheer number of proposed prophetic fulfillments varies widely depending on the interpreter: some count dozens, others claim hundreds. Given the constraints of space and the purpose of this article, we’ll not attempt to catalog every example.

What prophecies did Jesus fulfill? Here, we’ll focus on some of the most frequently cited examples, at least according to traditional Christian belief. Just as the early Christians did, we’ll start with the Old Testament prophecies.

But before we dive into the weeds, here’s a neat little cheat sheet: 12 of the most frequently mentioned prophecies Jesus is said to have fulfilled, served up in a tidy table (because who doesn’t love a good prophecy roundup?).

Old Testament Prophecies of Jesus

#1 – Isaiah 7:14

This Isaiah prophecy allegedly declared: “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.”

In the Gospel of Matthew (1:22-23), this verse is explicitly quoted in connection with the birth of Jesus. After narrating the angel’s announcement to Joseph that Mary has conceived by the Holy Spirit, Matthew writes, “All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet,” followed by a direct citation of Isaiah’s words. For Matthew, Jesus’ miraculous conception is the fulfillment of this ancient prophecy.

#2 – Micah 5:2

Micah 5:2 reads, “But you, O Bethlehem Ephratah… from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel.” This prophecy is cited directly in Matthew 2:5-6, when the magi arrive in Jerusalem asking where the Messiah is to be born.

The chief priests and scribes respond by quoting Micah to indicate that the Messiah must come from Bethlehem. Matthew presents this as a clear fulfillment: Jesus, born in Bethlehem of Judea, is the promised ruler anticipated in Micah’s words.

#3 – Hosea 11:1

Hosea 11:1 states, “Out of Egypt I called my son.” In Matthew 2:14-15, this verse is applied to Jesus after Joseph takes Mary and the child to Egypt to escape King Herod’s massacre. When they later return, Matthew writes, “This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, ‘Out of Egypt I called my son.’”

Though Hosea originally refers to Israel’s exodus, Matthew interprets the verse typologically, presenting Jesus as reliving and fulfilling the story of Israel.

#4 – Zechariah 9:9

Zechariah 9:9 proclaims: “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion… Behold, your king is coming to you… humble and mounted on a donkey.” This prophecy is directly linked to Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem in Matthew 21:4-5, where the evangelist quotes the verse as Jesus rides a donkey into the city.

This event, now celebrated as Palm Sunday, is presented by Matthew as a deliberate fulfillment of Zechariah’s words.

#5 – Isaiah 53: The Suffering Servant

This is probably the most famous prophecy that Jesus, according to the traditional Christian view, fulfilled. Isaiah 53 contains a vivid description of a servant who suffers on behalf of others: “He was despised and rejected by men… pierced for our transgressions… and with his wounds we are healed.”

Though Isaiah 53 is never quoted in full in one location, its language is woven throughout the New Testament to portray Jesus’ passion and crucifixion. Also, early Christians consistently viewed Jesus’ suffering and death as a realization of this servant’s fate.

#6 – Psalm 22: Pierced Hands and Feet

Psalm 22 is a lament that begins with the haunting cry, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” This is a line that Jesus utters from the cross in Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34. The psalm continues with striking imagery: “They have pierced my hands and feet,” and “They divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.”

These verses are echoed in the crucifixion narratives of John 19:23-24 and John 19:37, where the Gospel writer presents them as direct fulfillments of prophecy.

#7 – Malachi 3:1/Isaiah 40:3: John the Baptist as Forerunner

As we move into the New Testament, prophecy language doesn’t subside. We find the prophetic typology even before Jesus’ birth in none other than John the Baptist!

Malachi 3:1 declares, “Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me,” while Isaiah 40:3 speaks of “a voice crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord.’” These two texts are merged in Matthew 3:3, Mark 1:2-3, and Luke 3:4-6 to identify John the Baptist as the prophetic forerunner who prepares the way for Jesus.

#8 – Psalm 41:9: Betrayal by a Friend

Psalm 41:9 laments, “Even my close friend in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted his heel against me.” This verse is quoted in John 13:18 during the Last Supper, as Jesus predicts that one of his disciples will betray him.

By citing this psalm, the Gospel of John frames Judas Iscariot’s betrayal not merely as a tragic turn of events but as the fulfillment of Scripture.

#9 – Zechariah 11:12-13: Thirty Pieces of Silver

Zechariah 11:12-13 describes a shepherd being paid thirty pieces of silver, which he then throws into the house of the Lord. This passage is alluded to in Matthew 27:3-10, where Judas returns the silver he received for betraying Jesus and throws it into the temple.

Matthew presents this as a fulfillment of prophecy (though he attributes it mistakenly to Jeremiah rather than Zechariah), linking Judas’s remorse, the temple, and the purchase of the potter’s field to Zechariah’s imagery.

#10 – Isaiah 50:6/Micah 5:1: Spitting and Striking

Isaiah 50:6 says, “I gave my back to those who strike, and my cheeks to those who pull out the beard; I hid not my face from disgrace and spitting.” Similarly, Micah 5:1 includes the phrase, “With a rod they strike the judge of Israel on the cheek.”

These images of humiliation and violence are echoed in the Passion narratives, particularly in Matthew 26:67 and Mark 14:65, where Jesus is spit upon, beaten, and struck by the religious authorities. The Gospel writers implicitly connect these actions to the suffering servant mentioned in the Old Testament books.

#11 – Psalm 34:20/Exodus 12:46: Bones Not Broken

Psalm 34:20 declares, “He keeps all his bones; not one of them is broken,” and Exodus 12:46 instructs that the bones of the Passover lamb must not be broken. These verses converge in John 19:33-36, where the soldiers, finding Jesus already dead, refrain from breaking his legs.

John interprets this detail as a fulfillment of Scripture, linking Jesus both to the righteous sufferer of the Psalms and to the imagery of the Passover lamb, whose integrity was to be preserved in sacrifice.

#12 – Zechariah 12:10: “They Will Look on Him Whom They Have Pierced”

Zechariah 12:10 states, “They will look on me, on him whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him.” This verse is quoted in John 19:37, immediately following the account of Jesus being pierced by a soldier’s spear while on the cross.

The Gospel writer presents this moment as a direct fulfillment of Zechariah’s prophecy, emphasizing the physical piercing of Jesus and the emotional response it elicits.

How Many Prophecies Did Jesus Fulfill? Scholarly Answer

What do we make of these examples? Is it really possible to determine how many prophecies Jesus fulfilled? How many prophecies did Jesus not fulfill? For scholars like me, the answer to the second question is far less straightforward than many conservative apologists would suggest.

While traditional interpretations often present these connections as clear-cut fulfillments, the historical and literary contexts of the original texts paint a different picture.

Since we’re limited in space, we won’t examine each example in depth. Instead, we’ll focus on two of the most prominent and frequently cited cases: the virgin birth and the suffering servant from the Book of Isaiah.

Isaiah's Prophecy and the Virgin Birth

Before we begin our analysis, it’s important to clarify a common misunderstanding found in many conservative Christian readings of prophecy. Apologists often assume that the Old Testament prophets were predicting future events in a straightforward, predictive sense, anticipating specific details about Jesus centuries in advance.

In this view, Isaiah, for instance, knowingly foresaw and described the virgin birth of Christ. But this assumption runs counter to how Old Testament prophecies were understood and interpreted in the Second Temple Period and how modern scholars understand the historical contexts in which these texts were written.

As Peter Enns explains in his excellent book, Inspiration and Incarnation:

A prime example of this interpretive tension appears in Isaiah 7:14, one of the most famous so-called “messianic prophecies.” The verse is quoted in Matthew 1:23 to support the claim that Jesus’ birth fulfilled Scripture.

But here lies the crux of the problem. The Hebrew text of Isaiah doesn’t use the word for “virgin” (betulah), but instead uses ‘almah, a term that more generally means “young woman” and carries no necessary implication of virginity.

When the author of Matthew’s Gospel cited this passage, he relied not on the Hebrew Bible but on the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, in which the word parthenos (a term that can mean “virgin”) was used.

Thus, the idea of a miraculous virgin birth wasn’t present in Isaiah’s original Hebrew but rather emerged later through translation and retrospective theological interpretation.

The original context of Isaiah 7 is far removed from anything resembling a messianic prophecy. The historical setting involves a political crisis in the 8th century B.C.E.: The kings of Syria and Israel (also called Ephraim) have joined forces to invade Judah, causing panic in the court of King Ahaz.

The prophet Isaiah addresses Ahaz directly, urging him not to fear and assuring him that the alliance will fail. 

As a sign of divine reassurance, Isaiah points to a young woman (likely known to both Isaiah and Ahaz) who has already conceived a child. That child, he says, will be named Immanuel (“God with us”), and before the child is old enough to distinguish right from wrong, the immediate political threat will have passed.

Notably, there is no mention of the Messiah in this passage, no expectation of a future redeemer, and certainly no reference to a miraculous conception.

As the renowned scholar Raymond E. Brown explains in The Birth of the Messiah:

Isaiah 53 and the Suffering Servant

Another prominent example frequently cited as a prophecy Jesus fulfilled is Isaiah 53, a passage that has profoundly shaped Christian theology. This chapter belongs to a larger literary section known as Deutero-Isaiah (Isaiah 40-55), which scholars distinguish from the earlier chapters of the book. Deutero-Isaiah was likely composed during the Babylonian exile in the 6th century B.C.E. by a prophet whose name has not been preserved. 

This section is known for its emphasis on comfort, restoration, and divine deliverance, as well as for the so-called Servant Songs (poetic passages describing the mission and suffering of a mysterious “servant of the Lord”). 

Isaiah 53 is the fourth and most famous of these songs, presenting a vivid image of a servant who suffers unjustly and bears the consequences of others’ wrongdoing.

Early Christians found in this chapter a striking parallel to the life and death of Jesus. The themes of rejection, affliction, silence in the face of suffering, and being “pierced for our transgressions” seemed to resonate perfectly with the Passion narratives.

Thus, writing in the middle of the 2nd century, Justin Martyr notes:

As a result, Isaiah 53 became a cornerstone for the Christian understanding of atonement: That Jesus, though innocent, suffered and died for the sins of humanity. However, this interpretation relies heavily on retrospective reading: Reading the life of Jesus back into a text that, in its original historical and literary setting, had nothing to do with a future messiah.

In Second Temple Judaism before Christianity, there is no evidence of a belief in a messiah who would suffer and die for the sins of others. That concept simply didn’t exist in Jewish messianic expectation at the time.

Furthermore, a close reading reveals that the text isn’t about the future suffering at all. The suffering has already happened, and the author of Deutero-Isaiah predicts that the “person” who had suffered will eventually be vindicated by God! 

So who, then, was the “suffering servant” originally meant to be? One popular view among modern scholars of the Hebrew Bible is that the servant in Isaiah 53 was a symbolic or collective representation of Israel, the exiled nation that had endured humiliation, violence, and displacement at the hands of foreign powers.

Others argue that the servant may refer to a specific, historical individual. Joseph Blenkinsopp, in his Commentary on Isaiah, notes:

But in either case, the key point is that the servant’s suffering is understood within the framework of Israel’s national trauma and redemptive restoration. The servant suffers not as a substitutionary atonement in a future salvific drama, but as part of God's plan to vindicate and renew His people after exile.

Conclusion

How many messianic prophecies are there? The question always brings me back to that lively discussion I had a year ago in a crowded bar in downtown Zagreb. As I recall, my former student left that evening more convinced than ever that Jesus had fulfilled dozens (if not hundreds) of Old Testament prophecies in precise, predictive fashion:

OT prophecy predictions → Several hundred years pass → Prophecies are fulfilled by Jesus’ life, public ministry, and death

I didn’t begrudge him that conviction. I remember him saying repeatedly: “But Isaiah must have thought about Jesus!”

After all, when beliefs are deeply tied to one's religious identity, no amount of historical nuance or literary context can easily shift them. And that’s okay. Faith often operates on a different wavelength than historical analysis.

Still, as a historian of early Christianity, I approach this topic from a different angle. I don’t believe that Jesus fulfilled the most famous Old Testament prophecies in the predictive sense that many conservative interpreters assume. 

The original authors of these texts weren’t envisioning Jesus of Nazareth or any future messianic figure like him. What did happen, however, is far more fascinating: Convinced that Jesus had been raised from the dead and exalted by God, his earliest followers began re-reading their Scriptures through the lens of that belief. 

They searched their sacred texts not to see what would happen, but to make sense of what had already happened. In doing so, they participated in a long-standing Jewish tradition of interpretive reappropriation — a tradition shared by other Jewish groups, including later rabbinic communities, who likewise found fresh and often contradictory meaning in Biblical words.

So, how many prophecies did Jesus fulfill? If you're looking for mathematical precision or airtight predictions, the scholarly answer won’t satisfy you. But if you’re interested in the rich and complex ways that Scripture was interpreted, repurposed, and brought to life by ancient believers, then the story becomes far more compelling.

If you’d like to explore this topic in more depth, I highly recommend Peter Enns’ online course “Jesus and the Old Testament,” available through our Biblical Studies Academy platform. It’s a fascinating deep dive into how early Christians used the Old Testament stories and verses, often finding new meanings and ways of understanding.

Ephesians: Summary, Dating, and Authorship (CHART)

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

The book of Ephesians is one of the most widely-read letters in the New Testament, partially because of its content but also due to debates over its authorship. Did Paul really write it as the letter claims, or was it someone else?

In this article I’ll investigate key aspects of the book of Ephesians, summarizing its content, dating, and authorship while also providing a chart to help outline its main themes and messages. Through examining the letter's theological teachings and ethical exhortations, I’ll explain why Ephesians continues to hold significance for scholars and modern Christian communities.

Background

Ephesians is the 10th book of the New Testament, a letter sent to a Christian community. The author claims to be the apostle Paul but the majority of scholars don’t believe Paul wrote the book. Instead, it is one of many biblical books known as pseudepigrapha, books claiming to be written by one person but actually written by another.

Who wrote Ephesians? Traditionally, the letter was thought to have been written by Paul around 62 CE when he was imprisoned in Rome. However, in The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, Bart Ehrman writes that most scholars have discarded this idea, believing instead that an anonymous author wrote the book long after Paul’s death, probably between the years 80 and 100 CE. However, the author clearly had a high regard for Paul and was probably a member of a Christian community founded by Paul, but likely never met him.

(Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

Another interesting point involves the name of the book. It is called “Ephesians” because most modern English translations of the letter begin with the author’s greeting to “the saints who are in Ephesus (1:1).” Ephesus was a major city in the province of Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey) where Paul was thought to have established a church. However, Ehrman notes that our earliest and best manuscripts of Ephesians lack the words “in Ephesus,” making it likely that it was not written to a specific Christian community but rather as a kind of general letter intended to circulate to many communities.

Having established a bit of background, I offer here a chart summarizing the book of Ephesians.

Next, I’ll summarize each chapter in a bit more detail. In the Jewish Annotated New Testament, Maxine Grossman points out that Ephesians is generally split into two halves. Chapters 1-3 contain theological teachings as the basis for unity between Jews and Gentiles, and chapters 4-6 contain appeals to the audience to behave righteously in order to manifest that unity.

Ephesians 1 Summary

The first chapter begins with a traditional epistolary greeting from the author claiming to be Paul. As I noted above, most translations say it’s written to a church in Ephesus, but older manuscripts lack this information, instead saying that the letter is intended for “the saints who are faithful.”

The letter next explains the manifold blessings coming to the Gentile audience of the letter through Christ. We know right away that the intended audience consists of Gentiles because the author writes that they were adopted by God and, therefore, not originally God’s chosen people, the Jews. The blessings they receive through this divine adoption include redemption through Jesus’ blood and the forgiveness of sins.

Ephesians 2 Summary

In chapter 2, the author writes that his audience were “dead” in their sins before they encountered Christ. For this author, living sinfully is a kind of death. However, thanks to Christ’s sacrifice and the faith of these believers, they are now raised from their former death, as Christ was raised, and are, in a way, already seated with Christ in heaven.

This, by the way, is one way scholars know that Paul didn’t write this book. In the SBL Study Bible, J. Paul Sampley notes that in Paul’s authentic letters, the resurrection and glorification of Christians was always a future event, not a current one (see Romans 6:5, 1 Corinthians 15:21-23, Philippians 3:10-11).

In the last section of chapter 2, the author writes that since Gentiles have been adopted by God through Christ, there should be unity between Jewish and Gentile members of the church. Through this adoption process, Gentiles have become “fellow citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God” along with Jews.

Ephesians 3 Summary

At the beginning of chapter 3, “Paul” says he is a prisoner for his mission to the Gentiles, a mission for which he was chosen by God. In fact, he says that he is a servant of the gospel message. He emphasizes again that Gentiles are included in God’s plan through Jesus, and exhorts them not to lose faith as they experience suffering for Christ’s sake.

He then says a prayer for these Gentile Christ-followers, asking God to give them strength through Christ who dwells in their hearts. He prays also that they may be grounded in love. He says the love of Christ goes beyond all knowledge, helping Christians to comprehend God at a depth not otherwise possible.

Ephesians 4 Summary

The author begins this chapter by exhorting the audience to live in unity as one single “body of Christ (4:11-12)” by being humble, gentle and patient with each other. Continuing this metaphor, he writes that each person in the community has a different gift, that “some are apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers.” Therefore, each plays a role in the community as body parts all have their own role in a single body. Working together as one, they serve “the head,” who the author says is Christ in this metaphor.

Next, the author says that since they are the body of Christ, the Gentiles who are his primary audience must change their ways, no longer sinning in greed and lust. Ancient Jewish stereotypes of Gentiles often depicted them living sinfully and selfishly (see, for example, Paul’s description in Rom 1:28-32). Instead they must put on holiness and righteousness, as they would put on new clothing, to fit with their new life in Christ. In fact, the final section details how to live this righteous life: don’t lie, steal, gossip, or act in anger. In addition, they should be kind and forgiving of each other.

Ephesians 5 Summary

Expanding further on the theme of righteous behavior, the author continues to equate non-Christian Gentiles with immoral behavior. He lists some of these behaviors, which his audience must now avoid, including sexual impurity and greed, as well as “obscene, silly, and vulgar talk (5:4)” and drunkenness. Steering clear of such behaviors is necessary in order to please God.

The final section of this chapter talks about how a Christian household should be run. The author begins with a statement that is controversial, if not offensive, to modern sensibilities: “Wives, be subject to your husbands as to the Lord, for the husband is the head of the wife just as Christ is the head of the church (5:22-23).” He goes on to say that husbands should also love their wives.

Ephesians 6 Summary

Chapter 6 continues the theme of the ideal Christian household, beginning with the relationship between parents and children. Children are told to obey their parents, as this is one of the Ten Commandments given to the Jewish people through Moses. Parents are told not to provoke their children to anger but to instruct and discipline them appropriately.

Next comes a discussion of how slaves and masters are to behave. Those of us living today can easily forget that, for the authors of the New Testament, slavery was considered a normal part of life. While there may have been some in the ancient world who criticized slavery as an immoral institution, none of the NT authors did. In Ephesians 6:5, the author simply says that slaves should “obey your earthly masters with respect and trembling, in singleness of heart, as you obey Christ.” It’s unfortunate, but in reading the Bible, we have to grapple with the uncomfortable and abhorrent realities of the ancient world. Masters, by the way, are told not to threaten their slaves.

The following section of chapter 6 speaks of spiritual warfare against evil, which the author calls “the cosmic powers of this present darkness (6:12).” Referring metaphorically to the armor worn by Roman soldiers in battle, the author writes that Christians must put on a belt of truth, a breastplate of righteousness, a shield of faith, a helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, “which is the word of God (6:14-17).”

The letter ends with the author commending someone named Tychicus to his audience, whom he will send as a messenger to them, after which there is a final benediction.

Conclusion

The book of Ephesians was written in Paul’s name by someone living long after Paul had died. Unfortunately, a lack of evidence prohibits us from knowing exactly who wrote Ephesians.

It was apparently written to Gentile Christians, possibly new converts, who are told that since they have been adopted through Christ into the family of God, they must change their behaviors and even their social identities. Accordingly, they must display unity with the Jewish members of their community since they are now all one “body of Christ.”

The letter’s first three chapters emphasize that Jesus’ sacrifice allowed them, the Gentile converts, to become one with God’s chosen people, the Jews. As such, they must follow the moral and ethical standards of the Jews rather than the (stereotypical) Gentile vices which lead to an impurity that is unacceptable to God.

The last three chapters then dictate this proper behavior in more detail. They include commands to maintain sexual purity, generosity, humbleness, and forbearance with each other. In addition, the letter says that through such behaviors, they are engaged in battle with evil forces for which they are metaphorically armed by righteous deeds and the word of God. It also details how spouses, parents and children, and slaves and masters are to treat each other in order to please God.

While most scholars do not believe this letter was written by Paul, it has remained an essential part of the biblical canon and is still widely read within Christian communities.

10 Surprising Facts About the First Book in the New Testament?

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

The Gospel of Matthew, the first book in the New Testament, is often regarded as the foundational account of Jesus’ life, teachings, and legacy. But beyond its well-known narrative, there are many surprising details about Matthew that challenge common assumptions and offer a deeper understanding of its context and significance.

Matthew presents a unique vision of Jesus and his mission. It also breaks with certain biblical traditions in fascinating ways. In this article, we’ll explore ten lesser-known facts about the Gospel of Matthew that shed light on its complex and distinctive role in the Christian tradition.

Gospel of Matthew Overview

The Gospel of Matthew was written to Jewish Christians about half a century after Jesus’ death. The author was not an original disciple of Jesus, nor did he likely live in the Palestine in which Jesus spent his entire life. He did, however, pass down many stories, sayings, and traditions from earlier times and texts.

Like the other three Gospels, Mark, Luke and John, the Gospel of Matthew is the story of Jesus’ birth, life, death, and resurrection. It also represents the significance of Jesus for the author and his community. It was written long before any definitive break between Judaism and Christianity and thus manages to be both distinctively Jewish and inviting to Gentiles.

Now that we know some general details about what book starts the New Testament, let’s look at 10 interesting facts about the Gospel of Matthew.

#1 It was originally written anonymously.

Although we know this particular version of Jesus’ life story as the Gospel of Matthew, that title was not part of the original writing. In fact, the book was originally written without any authorial attribution, as we know from our earliest manuscripts. Christians later added the title in the late 2nd century CE, about a century after the book was written.

In his commentary on Matthew, Walter Wilson suggests that the author may not have signed his work because he viewed it as a composition by his community rather than as a reflection of his individual perspective.

#2 It is not the earliest written Gospel in the Bible.

Because it is the first book in the New Testament and the first Gospel in our current biblical canon, many assume that Matthew was the first Gospel written. However, scholars have known for many years that our earliest written Gospel was Mark, composed 10-20 years before Matthew. So why does Matthew come first in the Bible?

In her Introduction to the Synoptic Gospels, Pheme Perkins notes that some early Christians believed Mark, which is shorter than Matthew, was merely a terse summary of the events in Matthew. In addition, while Mark has no birth story, beginning instead with Jesus’ baptism, Matthew contains one This may have suggested to early Christians that Matthew was privy to more information about the life of Jesus than Mark.

#3 It depicts Jesus as a new Moses.

In the Hebrew Bible, Moses is depicted as the liberator of the Israelites from their slavery in Egypt. However, he is also known as the lawgiver, the one who received the Ten Commandments directly from God and gave them to the Israelites so that they would know how to please God.

Matthew, which as John Kampen writes, is widely known as the most Jewish of the four canonical Gospels, portrays Jesus as a new Moses, reinterpreting the Jewish law for those who follow him. Unlike the Jesus of the other three Gospels, Matthew’s Jesus spends a lot of time discussing correct understandings of this law, even demanding that his followers be stricter about law observance than the Pharisees for whom interpretation and observance of the law was the principal focus.

#4 Its genealogy of Jesus includes five women.

Ancient genealogies generally traced family lineages only through men. In 1 Chronicles 1-9, for example, there is an extensive genealogy beginning with Adam which never mentions a single woman. However, the Gospel of Matthew begins with a genealogy of Jesus which includes five women. What is the significance of this?

In addition to Mary the mother of Jesus, four women from the Hebrew Bible are mentioned. As Bart Ehrman points out, all four “were involved with sexual activities that were viewed as scandalous by outsiders but that furthered the purposes of God.” These include Tamar, who disguised herself as a prostitute in order to deceive her father-in-law into having sex with her, Rahab, a prostitute in Jericho, Ruth, who seduced her kinsman, and Bathsheba who committed adultery with (or was raped by) King David. Perhaps, Ehrman suggests, Matthew wanted to show that God can use even sexual scandals — like a pregnant virgin who is suspected of infidelity by her husband — to advance his plans.

#5 It was probably written in Antioch, Syria.

The Gospel of Matthew was written in Koine Greek rather than the Aramaic language spoken in Israel at the time (and spoken by Jesus and his disciples). For this and other reasons, most scholars concur that Antioch, Syria is the most likely place where Matthew was written.

We know that Greek was the primary language spoken in Antioch, the result of the earlier spread of Greek language and culture by Alexander the Great. In addition, Aaron Gale, in the Jewish Annotated New Testament, writes that among the four Gospels, only Matthew mentions that during his lifetime, Jesus was acclaimed in Syria. Whether Jesus was known in Syria during his lifetime, this sole direct reference to his following in Syria seems unlikely to be a mere coincidence.

#6 It used Mark as a source.

Despite what some early Christians believed, Mark was not a summary of Matthew. In fact, in some ways, it was the other way around.

As Bart Ehrman notes, scholars have known for many years that Matthew (and Luke) used Mark, the earliest of the four written Gospels, as a source. In fact, in many cases, Matthew used the exact same Greek phrases to narrate events first written about in Mark. He also tells these events in the same order as Mark.

#7 Matthew’s primary audience were Jewish Christians.

Some early Jews believed the Hebrew Scriptures contained prophecies about the advent of the Messiah. The author of Matthew seems to have agreed with this. He thus claimed that certain prophecies from the Hebrew Bible were “fulfilled” by Jesus.

In fact, we know that several people in Jesus’ time and place claimed to be the Messiah, but Matthew used texts from the Hebrew Bible to maintain that Jesus was the true Messiah. It’s safe to assume, then, that Matthew’s principal audience were Jews who believed that Jesus was the Messiah. However, it’s clear from references to “all nations” becoming disciples in Matthew that gentiles were admitted to Matthew’s community as well, probably due to Jewish Christian conflicts with other Jewish groups.

#8 It’s the only Gospel that mentions the Magi.

The Magi, also known as the Wise Men or the Three Kings, are characterized as prominent foreign men who visit and honor Jesus just after his birth, bringing him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Despite the fact that tradition says there were three of them, Matthew never actually confirms this. That number is derived from the number of gifts they brought.

Scholars have long speculated about the identity of these Magi and their function in the story. It is interesting that they are not Jews, possibly an attempt by Matthew to note the universal significance of Jesus’ birth. The word Magi (singular: Magus) is a Persian-derived word for priests in the Zoroastrian tradition, lending further credence to Matthew’s notion that Jesus came not just for the Jews, but for all people.

#9 It’s the only Gospel that mentions the Slaughter of the Innocents.

Speaking of the Magi, Matthew says that after they inform King Herod that a new king of the Jews had been born, Herod decides to order the killing of all baby boys two years old or younger to eliminate royal competition — an event known as the Slaughter of the Innocents. Fortunately, an angel warns Joseph, and he and his wife and infant son flee to Egypt.

The fact that this only occurs in Matthew is one reason why it’s unlikely that this mass murder is a historical fact. No other Gospel mentions it, nor do any of our other sources. Surely, such a heinous crime committed by a king would have been mentioned by someone else. Instead, Matthew uses the story to show how it further fulfills messianic prophecies that prove that Jesus is the Messiah.

#10 It uses more than 130 quotes and allusions to the Hebrew Bible.

In the time when Matthew was written (80-95 CE), Scripture meant the Hebrew Bible exclusively. In order to accomplish his task of proving that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, Matthew refers frequently to Hebrew Bible quotations and shows how Jesus fulfills them as prophecy.

For this purpose, he often says “so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.” In the flight to Egypt, for instance, he quotes a verse from Hosea 11:1, which says “Out of Egypt have I called my child.” For Matthew this, and other references to the Hebrew Bible, predicted the events of Jesus’ life and thus validated his claims that Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah.

Conclusion

The Gospel of Matthew is the first book in the New Testament. As such, it implicitly represents the life and teachings of Jesus as a transition from the ancient Judaism of the Hebrew Bible prophecies to the fulfillment of those prophecies in Jesus. Matthew is unique, even among the canonical Gospels, in several ways.

It is steadfastly Jewish, seeing Jesus as a new Moses who interprets the Jewish Law correctly and lives it strictly. It also refers frequently to Hebrew Bible prophecies as part of its overall claim that Jesus is the Messiah. However, it also approves the inclusion of Gentiles among Christian communities, as long as they follow Jesus’ interpretation of the Jewish Law.

Additionally, it is the only Gospel where we find the visit of the Magi to the infant Jesus, as well as the subsequent Slaughter of the Innocents by King Herod. It was likely written in the Syrian city of Antioch and definitely used the Gospel of Mark as its principal source for the events and chronology of Jesus’ life.

Koine Greek: What is Biblical Greek (and where can i learn?)

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

I vividly remember my conversation with a friend during our sophomore year. We were both studying history, but our interests couldn’t have been more different. While his passion was deeply rooted in the political events of the 20th century, mine had taken a sharp turn toward early Christian history.

When I told him that I planned to focus my Bachelor's thesis on the early church, he raised an eyebrow and smirked. “You’re good with English and German,” he said, “but that won’t be enough. You know you’ll have to learn Koine Greek, right?” His words felt like a challenge.

The thought of diving into a completely unfamiliar ancient language was daunting, especially since I had no background in Greek at all. Yet, despite the initial intimidation, I was resolute. That decision, which seemed like a small step at the time, ended up shaping much of my academic journey.

Fast forward to today, and that same Koine Greek — once a distant and mysterious language — has become an essential part of my work. Far from being just a linguistic hurdle, learning it opened up entire worlds of understanding within early Christian texts, revealing layers of meaning that are often obscured in translation.

In this article, we’ll explore what Koine Greek is and why it became the language of the New Testament. We’ll start by looking at the historical context that made the Greek language the lingua franca of the Mediterranean world.

We’ll then examine how Koine Greek evolved from its classical predecessor, outlining its basic features and how it differs from Modern Greek. For those interested in delving deeper, I’ll also recommend a few books and resources to help you start learning Koine Greek.

By the end of this exploration, I hope to show that understanding Koine Greek isn’t just about learning a dead language — it’s about gaining access to the original voice of the New Testament, with all its subtleties, complexities, and richness.

However, before we begin, I want to invite you to consider joining an excellent online course “The Unknown Gospels” by Dr. Bart D. Ehrman. While Dr. Ehrman doesn’t delve much into the Koine Greek, he does provide a scholarly analysis of Biblical Gospels, delineating between history, tradition, and myth!

And who knows? Learning more about the Gospels from a scholarly point of view could prove to be the first step in your journey into the world of Koine Greek! 

Cultural Background of the Koine Greek: Hellenization

Pick up any standard college textbook on the history of the New Testament, and you’re almost guaranteed to find at least one chapter devoted to the so-called “Greco-Roman world.” There’s a simple reason for this: Christianity was born into that world. 

When scholars refer to it, they’re talking about the lands surrounding the Mediterranean from roughly the time of Alexander the Great (c. 300 B.C.E.) to the reign of Emperor Constantine (c. 300 C.E.). This era was pivotal because of one key factor — Hellenization, the spread of Greek culture, language, and ideas.

Alexander the Great, often hailed as one of history’s most brilliant military tacticians, conquered vast stretches of the Mediterranean, extending from his native Macedonia to Egypt, Palestine, and Persia.

Yet, as Bart D. Ehrman explains in his book The New Testament: A Historical Introduction, “Alexander is particularly significant in the history of Western civilization because of his decision to impress a kind of cultural unity on the conquered lands of the eastern Mediterranean.”

(Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

In other words, Alexander wasn’t just content with military victories — he wanted to leave a lasting mark, a cultural stamp that would bind these diverse regions together. He actively promoted the use of the Greek language and established Greek-style cities, complete with gymnasiums, theaters, and public baths.

But it wasn’t just about fancy architecture and philosophy. Alexander’s push for cultural unity had far-reaching implications, especially when it came to language. By spreading Greek throughout his vast empire, he laid the groundwork for what would become the lingua franca of the Mediterranean world.

And while Alexander’s empire didn’t last forever, his cultural legacy did. Even when the Romans took control of these territories a few centuries later, they didn’t resist Hellenization. Far from it, they embraced it — especially the language.

In fact, speaking Greek became a status symbol among Roman elites, and Greek education was considered essential for any Roman aristocrat who wanted to be taken seriously. You could say that Greek culture became the Roman Empire’s intellectual fashion statement.

And then there’s Emperor Nero, whose enthusiasm for Greek culture pushed things to a whole new level. Not content with simply admiring Greece from afar, Nero famously decided to compete in the Olympic Games. Now, it wasn’t enough for him to merely participate — Nero went all out. 

He asked the organizers to, shall we say, “adjust” the timing of the games so that he could compete in every discipline. And compete he did — winning over 180 awards. 

That may seem impressive until you realize many of these accolades were given to him before the competitions even ended! His love for Greek culture extended beyond reason (and maybe fairness), but it illustrates just how deep Roman admiration for all things Greek could go.

However, it wasn’t just Greek statues and theater that the Romans embraced — it was the Greek language, particularly the dialect known as Koine Greek.

This form of Greek became the common tongue, spoken from the bustling marketplaces of Alexandria to the quiet villages of Judea. Koine Greek was so prevalent that, even as Latin dominated official Roman administration, Greek remained the language of commerce, education, and, most importantly for us, religious texts. 

When early Christians began writing down their gospels and epistles, they didn’t do it in Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke, or Latin, the language Pilate knew. They used Koine Greek — a language that had spread across the Mediterranean thanks to Alexander’s conquests.

As Everett Ferguson concludes in his book Backgrounds of Early Christianity, “It is hard to imagine Christianity succeeding in any other environment than that which resulted from the conquests of Alexander the Great.”

What Is Koine Greek?

What is Koine Greek? Koine Greek (“common Greek”) emerged as a distinct dialect from Classical Greek in the wake of Alexander the Great’s conquests in the 4th century B.C.E. The rapid expansion of Alexander’s empire created the need for a common language that could be understood across various regions and cultures.

While Classical Greek was the language of scholars and elites, the Greek spoken by soldiers, traders, and administrators evolved into a more accessible and unified form: Koine Greek. Unlike Classical Greek, which retained many regional variations (Attic, Ionic, Doric, etc.), Koine Greek was a simplified version that combined elements of various dialects, though it was primarily based on Attic Greek.

As James H. Moulton explains, Koine Greek’s historical development was deeply influenced by the socio-political changes of the Hellenistic period.

The Greek spoken during this period wasn’t intended to uphold the literary standards of the Classical period but to serve as an efficient medium of communication. Moulton notes that while Classical scholars often looked down on Koine Greek for its “deviations” from the elegance of Attic Greek, it was the living, practical language of the day, found in inscriptions, papyri, and non-literary texts. 

In terms of grammar, Koine Greek simplified many of the complexities that were characteristic of Classical Greek.

For instance, the use of the optative mood (a mood that indicates a wish or hope regarding a given action), common in Classical Greek, was largely diminished in Koine Greek, with writers favoring the indicative and subjunctive moods instead. This shift made the language easier to use and understand in everyday contexts.

Vocabulary in Koine Greek was also more straightforward, incorporating loanwords from other languages and reflecting the practical needs of communication across a multicultural empire. Syntax became less rigid, allowing for more flexibility in sentence structure.

Another key feature of Koine Greek is its vocabulary, which, while retaining many elements of Classical Greek, introduced new words and expressions to suit the evolving cultural context. The language incorporated loanwords from Aramaic, Hebrew, and Latin (e.g. “centurio” = “κεντυρίων”), reflecting the diverse influences within the Mediterranean region. 

However, it must be noted that the loanwords from Latin aren’t so strongly represented as those from Aramaic or Hebrew. Referring to the NT documents, Friedrich Blass and Albert Debrunner note that “Latinisms” are mostly found in military, legal, and administrative terminology.

When comparing Koine Greek to Modern Greek, several key differences stand out. Phonologically, the most significant shift is the pronunciation of vowels and diphthongs.

For instance, many vowels in Modern Greek have merged (e.g., the different vowel sounds represented by “η”, “ι”, and “ει” in Koine Greek are now pronounced identically in Modern Greek). 

Additionally, the grammar of Modern Greek has become even more streamlined. The complex case system of Koine Greek has been greatly reduced, with the dative case disappearing entirely in favor of simpler prepositional phrases.

Furthermore, while many words are shared between Koine and Modern Greek, others have either fallen out of use (e.g. “ἀγγεῖον”) or changed meaning (e.g. “secularization” of the noun “πνεῦμα”).

New words (e.g. “Υπολογιστής”) have also been introduced into Modern Greek, out of the need to describe innovations and concepts that simply didn’t exist during the time of Koine Greek.

Why Should You Learn Koine Greek?

Learning an ancient language like Koine Greek can feel like a daunting task, and I won’t sugarcoat it — it does come with its challenges. But, believe me, there are compelling reasons to embark on this journey, reasons that will depend on your background, interests, and goals. 

Whether you’re a Christian seeking to deepen your faith, a historian curious about the origins of Christianity, or simply someone who loves the beauty of languages, learning Koine Greek opens doors that no translation, however well-intended, can fully unlock.

For those who profess the Christian faith, learning Koine Greek is like stepping back in time and hearing the words of the New Testament as they were first written.

Imagine reading the letters of Paul or the Gospel of John, not as filtered through modern translations, but in the original language, with all its subtle nuances and emphases. Keep in mind that each translation is also an interpretation! If you ever translated anything from one language to another, you know what I’m talking about. 

Bradley H. McLean said it best: “Those who desire a deeper understanding of its message must strive to attain a thorough knowledge of this language. Learning Greek requires patience, perseverance, and the willingness to struggle. But those committed to understanding the Christian gospel should not view this task as an imposition, but as a blessing, for with it comes a deeper knowledge of Scriptures.”

But what if you’re not a believer? What if your interest in Koine Greek is driven by a passion for history, for understanding the origins of Christianity, or even for unraveling the historical figure of Jesus? Then, learning Koine Greek brings you to a whole new level of comprehension.

During my student years, it was drilled into us — over and over — that translations, no matter how good, are never enough if you want to fully grasp any ancient source. You simply can’t rely on someone else's interpretation of a text. Every serious scholar of antiquity must be familiar with at least Koine Greek and Latin.

Just consider the famous passage in Matthew 16:18, where Jesus says: “You are Peter, and on this rock, I will build my church.” At first glance, the sentence seems straightforward. However, when you look at the original Greek, subtle nuances begin to surface.

In Koine Greek, two distinct words are used: “Πέτρος” (Petros, a masculine noun) refers to Peter and is the word for a small stone or rock — something a person could pick up or throw. In contrast, “πέτρα” (petra, a feminine noun) refers to a massive rock, a foundational stone on which something significant could be built.

This raises important questions: Why did Jesus (according to the author of Matthew’s Gospel) use two different words? What exactly is being conveyed here? Is Jesus claiming to build his church upon Peter as the foundation, or is he claiming something entirely different? Or is the difference just that Petros, the masculine noun, is more appropriate for a man’s name than petra, the female noun?

This passage has sparked centuries of debate between Catholics and Protestants, with each interpreting it differently. In fact, the controversy surrounding this verse has even extended beyond religious circles — scholars such Karlfried Froehlich have written entire Ph.D. dissertations exploring the history of the interpretation of this verse! 

While I won’t dive into that debate here, my point is clear: without an understanding of Koine Greek, one might miss just how profound and complex this seemingly simple verse really is.

Finally, even if you don’t have a specific religious or academic interest, there’s still something to be said for learning a language, especially one as ancient as Koine Greek. Every language, whether it's "alive" or "dead," carries within it a unique world of ideas, culture, and history.

By learning Koine Greek, you gain access to a vast body of ancient texts, not just the New Testament, but also works of philosophy, history, and science that shaped the Mediterranean world for centuries. It’s a bridge into a world that feels distant but is, in many ways, deeply connected to the present.

Plus, there’s an undeniable satisfaction in being able to decipher and read a language that people haven’t spoken conversationally for centuries. Why not challenge yourself?

Where to Learn Koine Greek? Some Suggestions

This brings us to the practical question: Where should one start, and what resources are best for learning Koine Greek? Since I learned Koine Greek using a classical Croatian textbook, my experience with English-language resources is somewhat limited. However, I’ve explored a variety of excellent materials that can help beginners dive into the language.

First, I would highly recommend the online course “Greek 101: Learning an Ancient Language” by Hans-Friedrich Mueller. 

This course consists of 36 comprehensive lectures that provide a solid foundation in both Classical and Koine Greek. I’ve watched a few of these lectures myself, and I must say that Mueller’s teaching style is engaging and accessible, making the complex task of learning ancient Greek much more manageable.

Another fantastic resource is Stan Kondrat’s platform, which offers a wealth of tools, sources, and lectures specifically designed for learning Koine Greek. His platform is user-friendly and includes everything from beginner lessons to more advanced studies, covering grammar, vocabulary, and biblical texts.

For those who prefer traditional textbooks, Stanley E. Porter’s work in this field is invaluable. His book Fundamentals of New Testament Greek, co-authored with Jeffrey T. Reed and Matthew Brook O’Donnell, is a widely respected resource.

If you’re seeking a highly structured introduction, Basics of Biblical Greek by William D. Mounce is another popular choice. This textbook is particularly well-suited for those who are learning Greek with the specific goal of reading the New Testament.

In addition to textbooks, there are also several free resources available online, including Bible study tools (e.g. Bible Hub) that offer interlinear translations of the Greek New Testament, allowing you to see the original Greek alongside the English translation. Another user-friendly tool is the Online Greek Bible.

Now that you’ve got all the tools and resources at your fingertips, there’s really nothing stopping you — except maybe that stack of unread books on your desk! But seriously, why not dive in and start unlocking the mysteries of Koine Greek? You might just find yourself reading ancient texts like a pro before you know it!

Conclusion

Koine Greek, as we have seen, isn’t just a linguistic relic of the past but a living key to understanding the foundational texts of Christianity and the broader cultural history of the Mediterranean world.

Its emergence from Classical Greek, shaped by the political and social realities of the Hellenistic and Roman periods, made it the lingua franca for diverse communities, including early Christians who chose it as the language for the New Testament.

Whether one approaches Koine Greek from a religious, historical, or purely linguistic perspective, the benefits of learning the language are profound. It offers a direct connection to ancient texts, revealing nuances and layers of meaning that no translation can fully capture.

When Was the New Testament Written? (Dates for All 27 Books)

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

The New Testament presents a fascinating paradox. On one hand, it’s a single book — one of the two distinct parts of the Christian Bible — giving the foundational authority for Christian thought and practice worldwide for centuries. 

On the other hand, it’s a collection of 27 different books, each reflecting the diverse views of early Christians living in various times and places.

The New Testament’s dual nature has challenged scholars and believers alike since its inception, but it also gives numerous opportunities for exploration. By studying these texts, we can uncover intriguing insights into the origins of Christianity and how the first Christians lived.

When was the New Testament written? Knowing the answer in the appropriate context is crucial, not just for determining the historical context of these writings but also for appreciating their cultural significance within the broader history of the Western world. 

Having that in mind, with this article, we aim to provide estimated dates for each of the 27 books in the New Testament based on the views of critical scholars as depicted in widely acknowledged commentaries and scholarly studies. 

However, it's important to note that these dates are not set in stone, as there is ongoing debate among scholars regarding the exact dates and authorship of particular books.

Still, you might be surprised by what you find! For instance, many people find it surprising that although modern New Testament editions begin with the Gospel of Matthew, it wasn’t the earliest New Testament text written. In fact, the earliest writings are Paul’s letters, which predate the Gospels by several decades.

For those interested in exploring related topics, our previous articles delve deeper into questions such as “How Many Books Are There in the New Testament?” and “Who Wrote the New Testament?” These discussions provide further context and are valuable resources for understanding the multifaceted nature of the New Testament.

Dating the New Testament: Issues, Problems and Importance

Once I establish the historicity of Jesus in my classroom, one of the first questions students eagerly ask is: “When were the New Testament books written?” 

The dating of the Gospels, in particular, sparks keen interest. It's as if they think that nailing down the date will somehow unlock the mysteries of the universe — or at least give them a leg up in their next historical Jesus debate. 

But, to be honest, their curiosity is well-founded; understanding when was the New Testament written is crucial for piecing together the historical puzzle of early Christianity.

In historical investigation, dating sources are paramount. Imagine trying to reconstruct your family history but not knowing whether a letter from your great-grandmother was written in the 1920s or the 1960s. It makes a big difference!

Scholars employ various methods to determine the dates of ancient texts, including internal evidence (such as references to historical events within the text) and external attestation (how other contemporary sources reference or quote the text). Occasionally, archaeology lends a hand too — although finding a manuscript in an ancient jar is rarer than Indiana Jones would have you believe!

However, this scholarly pursuit of dating the New Testament isn’t just a dry academic exercise; it’s also a battleground of ideas, particularly when apologists get involved. These folks are often eager to push for earlier dates for the New Testament documents, especially the Gospels, in the hope that earlier dating might prove they were written by eyewitnesses of Jesus.

The underlying assumption here is that if, for instance, Matthew had front-row seats to the Sermon on the Mount (a scene from “Life of Brian” immediately comes to mind!), his accounts must be inherently reliable. 

But as Bart D. Ehrman points out in his excellent book Jesus Before the Gospels, this assumption doesn’t hold water. Even if Jesus’ disciples penned these texts (which I don’t believe at all), it doesn’t automatically make them factually accurate. Memories fade, perspectives shift, and, frankly, even eyewitnesses can get their stories mixed up — especially when recounting events years or decades later. (Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

And let's entertain for a moment the idea that these Gospels were written earlier, even by the apostles themselves. Would that be enough to conclude their historical reliability? Not by a long shot. The Gospels are riddled with discrepancies and outright inaccuracies — take the infamous Census of Quirinius as just one glaring example.

These issues underscore why critical scholars continue to peel back the layers of myth and tradition to uncover the historical core beneath — a process that began in earnest during the Enlightenment and remains as vibrant as ever today.

Moreover, the push to date the New Testament documents earlier rests on another shaky assumption: The belief that legendary material about a person requires a long time to develop. This, in my opinion, is flat-out wrong.

As the renowned orientalist Ernest Renan wisely noted in the book The Apostles: “It is the greatest of errors to suppose that legendary lore requires much time to mature; sometimes a legend is the product of a single day.” 

Dale C. Allison Jr. further emphasizes this by asking: “How long does it take to re-tell a story?” Legends can form in the blink of an eye, especially in a time when oral tradition was the primary mode of sharing stories.

With that in mind, let’s now turn our attention to the estimated dates of the New Testament documents, starting with the Gospels.

Due to the scope of this article, our presentations will be brief, but — rest assured — if you're eager for more detailed discussions, we’ve got you covered with separate articles on the dating of various New Testament books, all available on our amazing blog!

When Were the Gospels Written?

When was the New Testament written? Almost every discussion on the matter begins with the Gospels. These texts are theologically driven biographies, penned by four individuals whose names are lost to history, each addressing different communities of Jesus’ followers.

As Mark A. Powell notes in his book Introducing the New Testament:

When it comes to dating these theologically rich texts, most scholars agree that the Gospel of Mark is the earliest, likely composed around 70 C.E. Mark’s Gospel seems to have been completed near the end of the Jewish War and the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple — an event that appears to have influenced some of Mark’s apocalyptic themes. 

One key argument for this dating is Mark's reference to Jesus predicting the Temple's destruction, which many scholars believe reflects knowledge of the actual event, thus suggesting the Gospel was written shortly afterward.

Following Mark, both Matthew and Luke independently wrote their accounts, probably between 80 and 90 C.E., drawing on Mark as one of their primary sources. These three Gospels are often referred to as the “Synoptic Gospels” because they share a similar narrative framework and exhibit literary dependence. 

Then, there’s the Gospel of John — a text that stands apart as a theological deep dive into the nature of Jesus. 

With its distinct perspectives and a portrayal of Jesus that is markedly different from the Synoptics (John is the only Gospel where Jesus explicitly claims divinity!), it presents a new layer to the understanding of Jesus. Scholars believe John was written toward the end of the 1st century, around 95 C.E.

As Bart D. Ehrman aptly summarizes in Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium: “These Gospel writers were relatively highly educated, Greek-speaking Christians writing between 65 and 95 C.E.”

When Was the Book of Acts Written?

The Book of Acts is the second volume of a two-part work by the same author who penned the Gospel of Luke. While its title might suggest a detailed account of all the apostles' activities, that’s a bit of a misnomer. Instead, the book offers a theologically rich narrative focused primarily on the spread of Christianity after Jesus’ death.

The apostle Peter dominates the first half (chapters 1-12), while the newly converted apostle Paul takes center stage in the second half (chapters 13-28). However, the true central figure behind all the events is the Holy Spirit, who orchestrates the unfolding of the early Christian mission. 

What about the issue of the date? When was Acts written? Most scholars believe that Acts was composed shortly after the Gospel of Luke, thus placing its date of writing between 85 and 95 C.E. In contrast, some conservative scholars believe that Luke-Acts were written in the early 60s — a view that hasn’t caught the attention of the majority in academia.

The commonly accepted timing is significant because it situates the Book of Acts in a period when the early Christian movement was becoming more established, and its narratives were likely being shaped to address the theological and social concerns of that era.

When Were the Pauline Epistles Written?

Every time we ask ourselves the question “When was the New Testament written?,” we need to start by looking at Paul's epistles, as they are our earliest New Testament documents. But let’s just step back for a second and think about the social and living conditions in the ancient world! 

Imagine, for a moment, the challenge of sending a message in the ancient world. Today, you can fire off a text in seconds and know it’s reached its destination almost instantly. 

In contrast, when Christianity first emerged in the Roman world, communicating was a far more cumbersome affair. There were no computers, no internet, not even typewriters or ballpoint pens. Producing a letter involved a lengthy process, and getting it to its intended recipient required navigating a complex and unreliable system of couriers.

Yet, despite these challenges, twenty-one of the twenty-seven books in our New Testament take the form of letters — a testament to the early Christians’ determination to keep in touch! 

Of these twenty-one letters, thirteen claim the Apostle Paul as the author. However, modern scholarship suggests Paul himself likely penned only seven of them. The others — known as the disputed letters — were probably written by later followers who “adopted” Paul’s name to lend authority to their writings. 

Nevertheless, for the sake of providing a comprehensive overview, we’ll consider the estimated dates of all the letters traditionally attributed to Paul, regardless of whether he actually wrote them. 

The Letter to the Hebrews is also included in this list, although it’s internally anonymous. Some early church fathers, such as St. Augustine, claimed Paul wrote it, although virtually all contemporary scholars reject this attribution. 

Scholars generally agree that the earliest of Paul’s letters is 1 Thessalonians. It was likely written around 50 C.E. This makes it the oldest surviving Christian document that is a direct glimpse into the thoughts and concerns of early believers. 

The last of the letters attributed to Paul are the Pastoral Epistles (1 & 2 Timothy, Titus), which most scholars believe were written much later, possibly as late as the early 2nd century C.E., though they are traditionally placed between 80-120 C.E.

Referring to the author of the Pastoral Epistles, Delbert Burkett notes in his Introduction to the New Testament: 

In sum, in considering when was the New Testament written, Paul's letters are essential, as some of them represent the earliest written expressions of Christian theology. As such, they provide invaluable insights into the development of the first Christian communities.

As we continue to unravel the question of when was the New Testament written, we now arrive at the so-called “General Epistles” — a term that, despite what it might sound like, has nothing to do with military correspondence or vague advice to “keep up the good work”.

When Were the General Epistles Written?

The General Epistles are a group of letters in the New Testament that stand apart from the Pauline Epistles. 

In The New Testament: A Historical Introduction, Bart D. Ehrman explains: “They are called “general” or “catholic” epistles — based on a Greek word that means “universal” — because they were traditionally thought to address general problems experienced by Christians everywhere, rather than specific issues within particular communities.”

The General Epistles include the Epistle of James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, and Jude. When it comes to dating these letters, scholars generally place their composition between the late first century and the early second century C.E., roughly 80-130 C.E.

Among these letters, 2 Peter stands out for its particularly late date, with most scholars placing its composition in the early second century, around 120-130 C.E. So, any debate on when was the New Testament written can easily end with 2 Peter — likely the last book of the New Testament.

This dating is largely based on the content and concerns of the letter. As Bart D. Ehrman points out in Forgery and Counterforgery: 

This concern with the delayed return of Christ suggests that 2 Peter was written at a time when early Christian communities were grappling with the realization that the promised Second Coming wasn’t as imminent as they had originally believed.

Just as 2 Peter’s late date has been a subject of considerable scholarly debate, so, too, has the dating of the Epistle of James. A lot of ink has been spilled over this issue, particularly because it’s closely tied to questions of authorship.

Some scholars have argued that if James, the brother of Jesus, was indeed the author, the letter must have been written before he died in 62 C.E. This early dating would make James one of the earliest New Testament writings. 

However, this notion has been met with skepticism by many critical scholars who propose a later date, detached from the apostolic authorship. In his highly acclaimed Commentary on James, Dale C. Allison provides a thorough examination of the evidence and concludes that the letter was likely written well into the first century, or even the early second century.

He notes: 

Before we dive into the last part of our article, let's continue showcasing our expertise with these timelines — because, really, who doesn't love a good table?

After all, nothing says "We've got this covered" like a well-organized comparison of the suggested composition dates. So, here's the table summarizing the General Epistles:

As our pursuit of finding an answer to the question of when was the New Testament written continues, we now arrive at the final section of our article, where we explore one of the most enigmatic and debated documents in the New Testament: the Book of Revelation.

When Was the Book of Revelation Written?

The Book of Revelation is a unique and complex New Testament work known as an apocalypse. This type of writing is characterized by its vivid, symbolic visions, meant to reveal divine truths about the future and the ultimate fate of the world.

The content of Revelation is as striking as its form. The book is filled with rich, often bewildering imagery — beasts with multiple heads, angelic messengers, and a final, cataclysmic battle between the forces of good and evil. 

Furthermore, Revelation wasn’t the last New Testament text to be written — not by a long shot. We’ve seen how 2 Peter was composed around 130 C.E. However, Revelation’s position as the New Testament’s last book aptly reflects its content: A revelation from Jesus to John about what will happen when the world ends. 

When it comes to dating the Book of Revelation, our earliest external attestation comes from bishop Irenaeus at the end of the 2nd century. He claims that Revelation was written near the end of the reign of the Roman emperor Domitian, around 95. C.E.

Most contemporary scholars agree with that statement. After analyzing all the available evidence, Adela Y. Collins concludes:

Conclusion: When Was the New Testament Written?

The New Testament, a collection of diverse texts, offers a fascinating glimpse into the early Christian world. Understanding when the New Testament was written not only helps us grasp the historical context of these writings but also deepens our scholarly appreciation for the development of the first Christian communities. 

From Paul's earliest epistles, likely penned around 50 C.E., to the later writings, such as 2 Peter, composed in the early second century, this culturally important collection spans decades of Christian thought and experience.

As we continue to explore the origins of these foundational texts, it's essential to approach them with a nuanced understanding of their historical context.

For those eager to delve deeper into the intricate distinctions between myth, tradition, and authentic history within the Gospels, I highly recommend Dr. Bart D. Ehrman’s online course, “The Unknown Gospels”. In this course, Dr. Ehrman offers a historical perspective that sheds light on the fascinating world of early Christian writings.

Hebrews: Summary of All 13 Chapters of the Book

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

Recently, while flipping through channels, I stumbled upon an interview with a well-known Catholic priest on a major TV network. As I settled in with my cup of coffee, the priest began discussing the ultimate destination of believers — heaven, of course. 

With a serene smile, he declared, “We aren’t meant to live on this Earth, but above in the heavens, alongside saints and angels.” My friend, who was watching with me, immediately quipped, “Ah, the Epistle to the Hebrews strikes again!” We both chuckled, but it got me thinking — how many people know that this celestial outlook is deeply rooted in the theology of Hebrews?

The Book of Hebrews is one of the most intriguing and theologically rich texts in the New Testament, and yet it remains an enigma. Whether you're a seasoned theologian or just someone who stumbled upon this article out of curiosity, Hebrews has something to offer.

It tackles big questions: Who is Jesus? What’s the deal with the old and new covenants? Where is Jesus Christ mentioned in Hebrews? And perhaps most importantly, what does it mean for us to keep our eyes on the heavens while navigating the trials of earthly life?

In this article, we’ll dive into the fascinating world of Hebrews, summarizing all 13 chapters while unpacking the key themes and ideas that have shaped Christian thought for centuries. Whether you’re new to the text or revisiting it, prepare to uncover the rich layers of this epistle and see how its messages resonate even today.

Summary of the Hebrews: The Very Basics

The New Testament text commonly referred to as the “Letter to the Hebrews” is, interestingly enough, neither a letter nor specifically addressed to Hebrews. In reality, it's more of a sermon — a “word of exhortation,” as the author himself puts it. 

Despite early church tradition, which largely relied on the authoritative endorsements of figures such as Jerome and Augustine in the 4th and 5th centuries, attributing the authorship to the apostle Paul, critical scholarship takes a different stance.

Today, the prevailing authorship view among scholars is one of agnosticism. The stylistic and theological differences between Hebrews and Paul's known writings strongly suggest Paul wasn’t the author. Simply put, it’s almost certain he didn’t write Hebrews. 

For a deeper dive into this fascinating authorship debate, you can explore our earlier article dedicated entirely to this topic!

As for the dating of Hebrews, scholars generally agree on a broad timeframe but avoid pinpointing a specific year.

Harold W. Attridge, in his Commentary on Hebrews, summarizes the scholarly consensus well: 

(Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

“Only a general date range can be established with any certainty for the composition of Hebrews. The development of the traditions evident in the text, the author’s reference to his dependence on the original hearers of the word of salvation (2:3), and his remark that the addressees had been believers for some time (5:12) would seem to suggest that at least several decades have elapsed since the beginning of the Christian movement... A somewhat more compressed date range of 90 to 120 may be assumed for the epistle.”

Regarding the audience, the Book of Hebrews seems to address a Christian community that had become disheartened and was possibly drifting away from faith. 

So, it wasn’t addressed to a specific Hebrew audience. And what is a Hebrew? The term “Hebrew” historically refers to the ancient people associated with the early Israelites, often identified as the descendants of the patriarch Abraham who allegedly lived during the early second millennium B.C.E.

In any case, it seems that some community members had been imprisoned, while others had their possessions confiscated. Faced with such hardships, it’s no wonder they began to question the value of their faith and how much longer they could endure.

Bart D. Ehrman, in his book The New Testament: A Historical Introduction, offers an additional perspective: 

“Possibly he [the author] fears that members of his audience are being tempted to convert away from Christianity to non-Christian Judaism, perhaps to escape persecution. To abandon Christ for Judaism, in his judgment, would be a serious mistake. To do so would be to prefer the foreshadowing of God’s salvation to salvation itself and to opt for the imperfect and flawed religion of the Jewish Scriptures rather than its perfect and complete fulfillment in Christ.”

The Book of Hebrews: Key Verses

What is Hebrews about? Before we explore our way through Hebrews and find an answer, here is a handy table that highlights key verses from each chapter.

A Summary of Hebrews: Chapter by Chapter

Before diving into a detailed chapter-by-chapter summary of Hebrews, it's important to clarify that this overview is crafted from a scholarly perspective. As historians of the ancient world, we aim to treat Hebrews as a significant piece of literature, thus analyzing its themes and context rather than offering theological interpretations.

Additionally, given the depth and complexity of each chapter, a full exploration would extend beyond the scope of this article.

Therefore, we've focused on distilling each chapter's essential elements — literal and historical – to provide you with a concise yet comprehensive summary of Hebrews. What is Hebrews about? Let’s take a closer look!

Hebrews 1: Summary

Hebrews 1 begins by establishing the superiority of Christ over all previous revelations, emphasizing that, while God spoke to the ancestors through the prophets, He has now spoken through His son. This chapter also highlights Christ's divine nature, thus portraying him as the exact imprint of God's being and superior to angels.

However, Jesus’ superiority doesn’t mean tradition has been broken. As Harold W. Attridge explains: “While there is a clear contrast between the old and new, there is no sense that the two phases stand in contradiction to one another. In each case, it is the same God who speaks and the same message of salvation that he offers.” 

Hebrews 2: Summary

Chapter 2 of Hebrews focuses on the humanity of Christ and its significance. The author emphasizes that, although Christ is superior to angels, he temporarily became lower than them by taking on human form. This was, according to the author, necessary for him to suffer death and thus offer salvation to humanity.

In An Introduction to the New Testament, Raymond E. Brown notes: “Using Ps 8:5-7 the author points out that God's Son who was for a while made lower than the angels now has everything subject to him. To a community that is despondent because of hardship, the author holds up in Christ God's plan for humanity: not exaltation without suffering but exaltation through suffering.” 

Hebrews 3: Summary

In our exploration of the summary of Hebrews, Chapter 3 shifts focus to a comparison between Jesus and Moses. The author underscores that, while Moses was faithful as a servant in God’s house, Jesus is faithful as a son in God’s house, thereby elevating Christ’s status above that of Moses.

This chapter also serves as a warning to the audience. In it, the author encourages them to remain steadfast in their faith and not to harden their hearts, drawing on the example of the Israelites who, despite Moses’ leadership, failed to enter the promised rest due to their unbelief.

It’s likely that the community to which the Book of Hebrews was written experienced some sort of persecution — either from the Jews or pagans. 

Hebrews 4: Summary

Chapter 4 of Hebrews continues the theme of rest, drawing on the previous chapter's warning about the Israelites' failure to enter God's rest. The author emphasizes that the promise of entering God's rest still stands for believers today, but it requires faith and obedience.

This chapter also emphasizes the superiority of Jesus to Joshua. Bart D. Ehrman explains it in the following way: 

“Joshua gave the people of Israel peace (or “rest”) after the Promised Land had been conquered; but as the Scriptures themselves indicate, the people of Israel could not fully enjoy that peace (or “enter into their rest”) because they were disobedient. Christ brings a more perfect peace.”

The chapter concludes by introducing Jesus as the great high priest who provides believers with confidence to approach God's throne of grace.

Hebrews 5: Summary

Hebrews 5 delves into the qualifications and role of Jesus as the great high priest, comparing Him to the high priests of the Jewish tradition. The author explains that, like other high priests, Jesus was appointed by God and fully understands human weakness.

However, Jesus' priesthood is unique in that he is designated as a priest in the order of Melchizedek, which could signal a higher and eternal priesthood.

Referring to this chapter, Raymond E. Brown notes: 

“Like the Israelite high priest Christ has not exalted himself but was appointed by God, a point illustrated by royal coronation psalms (5: 1-6). Describing Jesus' suffering in the days of his flesh when he brought prayers and supplications to the One who had the power to save him from death (5:7-9), the writer affirms that Jesus learned obedience despite his being Son.”

Hebrews 6: Summary

Hebrews 6 continues the exhortation for believers to mature in their faith, urging them to move beyond basic teachings and strive for deeper spiritual understanding. The author warns against the dangers of falling away after having received the knowledge of the truth. He emphasizes that it’s impossible to restore those who deliberately turn away from their faith.

In his Commentary on Hebrews, Harold W. Attridge notes:

"Falling away refers not to sin in general but to the specific sin of apostasy (the abandonment or renunciation of a religious belief or faith). Our author does not accuse his addressees of being in this condition. As his following remarks will indicate, he has a higher opinion of them. Yet the fate of the apostate is something that they ought not forget. It is a warning that should remind them of the seriousness of their situation and the importance of renewing their commitment."

However, this chapter also offers encouragement, assuring the audience that God is just and won’t forget their work and love. The author concludes by reminding them of God's promises, encouraging them to persevere with the same diligence and to hold fast to the hope set before them. 

Our journey through the summary of Hebrews now leads us to the second section of the book, where the focus shifts to a profound doctrinal exposition.

As François Vouga aptly notes in Introduction au Nouveau Testament (An Introduction to the New Testament) this section is

“dedicated to the significance of the death and exaltation of Jesus, the great high priest according to the order of Melchizedek. As the eschatological and heavenly high priest, Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant (9:15), which grants believers access to the realm of the Father (7:1—10:18).” (my translation)

With this in mind, let's delve into Hebrews Chapter 7 to explore what is Hebrews about even further.

Hebrews 7: Summary

Chapter 7 of Hebrews centers on the figure of Melchizedek — a mysterious priest-king from Genesis. In this chapter, the author draws a comparison between his priesthood and that of Jesus. The author argues that Jesus, like Melchizedek, holds a priesthood that is eternal and superior to the Levitical priesthood, which was based on lineage.

By presenting Jesus as a high priest in the order of Melchizedek, the chapter emphasizes that Jesus' priesthood transcends the old covenant. I wonder if the historical Jesus (especially if he was anything like Matthew’s portrayal) would agree with that assessment!

François Vouga provides additional information on Melchizedek and its theological importance in the Book of Hebrews:

“It’s Psalm 110, cited in the introduction of the theme in Hebrews 5:6, that introduces the figure of Melchizedek. Melchizedek is a messianic figure; his priesthood is eternal, and the high priest of his order is eternal, holy, and without sin. The text of Genesis 14:18-20 is introduced as the starting point for the commentary in Hebrews 7:1-28: Melchizedek is the figure of the heavenly envoy of the Most High. The combination of these two texts makes Melchizedek the ideal prototype of a heavenly and perfect priesthood, which stands in contrast to the earthly and imperfect order of the Levitical ordinances.” (my translation)

Hebrews 8: Summary

Chapter 8 of Hebrews emphasizes the superiority of the new covenant established by Jesus, contrasting it with the old covenant made with Israel. The author highlights that Jesus, as the high priest, mediates a better covenant, which is founded on better promises.

This chapter also references a prophecy from Jeremiah, explaining that the new covenant involves a transformative internal relationship with God, where His laws are written on the hearts of believers.

Hebrews 9: Summary

Referring to the thematic transition seen at the beginning of chapter nine, Christian Rose, in Der Hebrerbrief (Epistle to the Hebrews) explains:

“Following the fundamental distinction (8:1–13), the preacher develops the comparison between the two orders in Chapter 9, first contrasting the sanctuary, the ritual sacrifices, and their effects (9:1–15), and then the enactment of each respective order (9:16–28). Throughout this discussion, the path to understanding these arguments is complex—not just for modern listeners of sermons. Nevertheless, only those who endure the intellectual effort that Hebrews demands of its readers will ultimately be able to grasp the high regard the author holds for the high priesthood of Jesus according to the order of Melchizedek.” (my translation)

So, Hebrews 9 delves into the contrasts between the old covenant's sacrificial system and the new covenant established through Christ.

The chapter describes the earthly Tabernacle and its rituals, emphasizing their limitations in achieving true purification. In contrast, Christ, as the high priest of the new covenant, entered the heavenly sanctuary, offering his blood rather than the blood of animals.

Hebrews 10: Summary

Chapter 10 of Hebrews continues to contrast the old covenant's sacrificial system with Christ's once-for-all sacrifice. The chapter emphasizes that the repeated sacrifices under the law could never fully remove sin, thus serving instead as a constant reminder of sin.

In contrast, Christ's single sacrifice (death on the cross), offered in obedience to God's will, perfects those who are sanctified and abolishes the need for further offerings.

Furthermore, this chapter also urges believers to remain steadfast in their faith, encouraging them to draw near to God with full assurance, hold fast to their hope, and support one another in love and good deeds.

Hebrews 11: Summary

Chapter 11 of Hebrews is often referred to as the “faith chapter” because it presents a series of Old Testament figures as exemplars of faith. The author highlights the faith of individuals such as Abel, Enoch, Noah, Moses, and others, showcasing their trust in God's promises despite not seeing them fulfilled in their lifetimes.

But undoubtedly, Abraham is a central figure in this chapter! The author recalls how Abraham left his homeland, journeying to an unknown destination, living in tents as a foreigner in the land God promised him. Abraham’s faith allowed him to look beyond his present circumstances, believing in God's promise of a future city with eternal foundations, designed and built by God.

Moreover, Abraham’s faith enabled him to overcome the seeming impossibility of him and Sarah having children and to trust in God's promise of numerous offspring. Even more remarkably, Abraham’s faith enabled him to sacrifice his son, Isaac, trusting in God's power to raise the dead.

The author presents this as a typological foreshadowing of Jesus' resurrection, making Abraham’s faith not just a model of trust in God, but also a symbol of greater truths revealed in Christ.

Hebrews 12: Summary

Chapter 12 of Hebrews focuses on the theme of perseverance and discipline in the Christian life. The author encourages believers to run the race of faith with endurance, drawing inspiration from the “great cloud of witnesses” mentioned in the previous chapter. 

Jesus is presented as the ultimate example, who endured the cross and is now seated at the right hand of God. This should surprise us since, as Justin Buol notes in his excellent study Martyred for the Church, one of the most common ways of portraying the death of Jesus in the NT texts is through the framework of sacrifice and example.

The chapter also addresses the concept of divine discipline, explaining that hardships and trials are part of God’s loving correction, intended to strengthen and mature believers in their faith. Just as a father disciplines his children, God disciplines his followers for their good, so that they may share in his holiness.

Hebrews 13: Summary

Our exploration into the summary of Hebrews has brought us to the last chapter. In it, the author provides his audience with the final exhortation, offering practical instructions for Christian living. He also encourages the community to continue in brotherly love, show hospitality to strangers, and remember those in prison and those who are mistreated.

In the closing verses, the author offers a benediction, asking for God's peace and strength to equip the believers to do His will. The letter concludes with personal greetings, a request for prayer, and a final word of grace. 

Hebrews: Key Themes

Before we wrap up our exploration of the Book of Hebrews, here is a handy table depicting key themes of this incredibly interesting piece of literature from the ancient world.

As you go through it, bear in mind the insightful summary of Hebrews that Ludovic Nobel offers in his Introduction au Nouveau Testament (An Introduction to the New Testament). He aptly observes: 

“To this believing but shaken community, the author [of the Hebrews] first seeks to demonstrate the superiority of the new covenant in Jesus Christ over the old covenant, which has become obsolete (Heb 8:6-13). He then shows them that Christian worship is superior to that of the Temple. Jesus Christ is the ultimate high priest (Heb 4:14 – 7:13), whose sacrifice surpasses that of the Temple. Indeed, while the priests had to repeatedly offer sacrifices daily, Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is unique and universal in nature (Heb 8:1 – 10:39). In light of the excellence of this sacrifice, Christians are encouraged to persevere in their Christian faith (Heb 11:1 – 13:25).” (my translation)

Conclusion

As I reflect on the interview I watched with the Catholic priest, I realize how connected his words were to the theology presented in the Book of Hebrews. His message about focusing on the heavens and the eternal destiny of believers echoes the themes we have explored throughout this article.

Hebrews, with its profound exploration of faith, covenant, and Christ's eternal priesthood, remains a cornerstone of Christian thought. Whether you're revisiting it or encountering it for the first time, its message is clear: perseverance, faith, and a focus on the ultimate sacrifice of Christ are key to navigating the trials of life.

If you're interested in deepening your understanding of the New Testament, we highly recommend checking out Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's online course, “The Unknown Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John”.

In this course, Dr. Ehrman provides an excellent and up-to-date scholarly analysis of the stories found in these Gospels, offering a historical perspective that will enrich your study of early Christianity. Don't miss this opportunity to learn from one of the leading experts in the field!

Sadducees: Who Are the Sadducees in the Bible? (PLUS VERSES)

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

The late Second Temple period (circa 165 B.C.E. to 70 C.E.) was marked by significant upheaval and transformation in Jewish history. 

This period witnessed a series of dramatic events: the temporary rededication of the Jerusalem temple to Olympian Zeus that triggered the Maccabean Revolt; the establishment of an independent Jewish kingdom under the Hasmoneans; and the reign of Herod the Great, who ruled Judea as a client king for Rome from 40 to 4 B.C.

Amidst this turmoil, various Jewish sects and movements emerged, each interpreting Mosaic Law in distinct ways. Among these groups were the Sadducees, a sect known for their unique beliefs and significant influence during the Second Temple period.

While all these groups adhered to Jewish law, their disagreements over interpretation and practice often set them apart, leading to considerable theological and political debates.

In this article, we’ll explore the Sadducees' origins, beliefs, and role in the religious and political landscape of their time. We’ll also delve into the primary sources that provide insights into their lives, examine their interactions with Jesus, and highlight notable figures within this sect. 

By understanding the Sadducees, we can gain a clearer picture of the complexities of Jewish society during one of its most pivotal periods.

For a deeper dive into the historical and mythical layers of the Gospels, consider enrolling in the online course “The Unknown Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John” by Dr. Bart D. Ehrman.

In this course, Dr. Ehrman offers a scholarly look at these fundamental texts, revealing the traces of history among the layers of myth. Don't miss this opportunity to expand your understanding of early Christian writings and their historical context.

The Sadducees: What Sources Do We Have?

Our understanding of the Sadducees is limited because they didn’t leave behind their writings. Instead, our knowledge comes from sources that were often hostile toward them. They include:

This inherent bias in the sources complicates our ability to construct an accurate historical picture of the Sadducees. Among the mentioned sources, Josephus provides some of the most detailed accounts, though his Pharisaic background often colors the descriptions.

In his works, such as The Jewish War and Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus portrays the Sadducees as aristocratic and conservative, holding significant power in the Temple priesthood but being less popular among the common people. Despite the value of Josephus' accounts, his negative portrayal necessitates a cautious approach to his descriptions.

The Sadducees in the Bible are primarily mentioned in the New Testament Gospels. Unfortunately, they are also depicted as opponents of Jesus, challenging his teachings and authority. For instance, Sadducees have debates with Jesus, particularly regarding the resurrection. We’ll see why in a later part of this article. 

Various passages, such as Matthew 22:23-33 and Mark 12:18-27, record these interactions. However, the New Testament's perspective is influenced by the early Christian community's conflicts with the Sadducees, affecting the objectivity of these accounts.

Rabbinic literature, including the Mishnah and Talmud, mentions the Sadducees sporadically and usually in a confrontational context. The Sadducees are often depicted in debates with the Pharisees (Perushim) and occasionally with a group called the Boethusians (Baitosim), who are sometimes associated with or considered a subset of the Sadducees.

Lester L. Grabbe, in An Introduction to Second Temple Judaism, encapsulates the challenge historians face: 

(Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

“The Sadducees have been everyone's whipping boy. No Jewish group today claims to be heirs of the Sadducees... There are a few passing statements in the NT (generally hostile), as well as a few brief references in Josephus (also not usually complimentary), and in a few rabbinic passages a group called the Saddugim are found in debate with the Perusim. The Perushim are also found in debate with the Boethusians (Baitosim), who have also often been identified or associated with the Sadducees. At best, the information is very meager, and most of the sources are hostile. This means that any historical reconstruction must be considered very uncertain.”

Given the paucity and partiality of the sources, reconstructing a reliable history of the Sadducees is fraught with challenges. Any historical analysis must be approached with caution.

However, before we delve deeper into their beliefs and practices, here is a table depicting New Testament verses where Sadducees are mentioned: 

This table highlights the contentious relationship between the Sadducees and early Christians as recorded in the New Testament, further illustrating the challenges in obtaining an unbiased understanding.

Now, let's roll up our sleeves, grab our historical magnifying glasses, and dive into the world of the Sadducees to uncover who they were and what they believed in!

Who Were the Sadducees?: Beliefs and Practices

The Sadducees were members of the priestly class and the aristocracy, comprising the wealthy elite of Judean society, particularly the influential families of Jerusalem. As Bart D. Ehrman notes in The New Testament: A Historical Introduction:

“During Jesus’ day, the Sadducees were the real power players in Palestine. They appear to have been, by and large, members of the Jewish aristocracy in Jerusalem who were closely connected with the Jewish priesthood in charge of the Temple cult.”

This connection to the Temple granted them significant religious authority and political influence.

Moreover, the Sadducees' primary concern was maintaining the “status quo.” They sought to preserve political and social stability to protect their economic interests and elite status. This conservative approach extended to their interactions with foreign rulers; they favored cooperation with the Romans to ensure their position of power remained unchallenged.

Their political conservatism was matched by a religious conservatism that emphasized strict adherence to the written Torah. 

Unlike the Pharisees, the Sadducees rejected the concept of oral law, which allowed for new interpretations and adaptations of the written scriptures. They adhered strictly to the Torah’s texts and dismissed any traditions not explicitly grounded in these writings.

This conservative stance manifested in several key theological positions. For example, the Sadducees denied the concept of bodily resurrection, a belief strongly advocated by the Pharisees. Acts 23:8 summarizes this view: “The Sadducees say there is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit.”

Since angels do appear in the Pentateuch (e.g. Genesis 19:1; Exodus 23:30), it’s possible, as Everett Ferguson notes, that Sadducees dismissed the elaborate angelology and demonology that developed after the composition of the Pentateuch. After all, their focus was on the plain meaning of the Pentateuch while eschewing later interpretative traditions. 

Moreover, they rejected the concept of fate or divine predestination. They believed in human free will and individual responsibility for actions, contrasting with the Pharisees, who acknowledged a balance between divine providence and free will.

The Sadducees also held a particular view on Temple worship and purity laws. As priests, they were deeply involved in the Temple's sacrificial system and rituals. They prioritized the Temple's central role in Jewish worship and saw themselves as the custodians of its practices and traditions.

However, with the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E., the Sadducees faced a significant loss. Jewish worship, previously centered around sacrifices in the Temple, shifted to synagogues, where prayer, hymn singing, and the study of the Law and the prophets under learned teachers became the new focuses.

In other words, the Sadducees, who had based their authority on roles as Temple priests, lost their influential positions. This shift marked the end of their characterization as a distinct group, as the Pharisaic traditions that adapted to the synagogue model came to dominate Jewish religious life.

To make it easier to understand the complex world of 1st-century Judaism, here is a table illustrating key differences between the Essenes, Pharisees, and Sadducees. 

Having explored who the Sadducees were and what they believed, let's now dive into their tumultuous relationship with Jesus. If you're expecting a tale of friendship and mutual admiration, well, you might want to grab some popcorn — because this is more of a dramatic showdown than a buddy comedy.

Jesus and the Sadducees in the Bible: Points of Conflict

Throughout the Gospels, Jesus frequently quotes the law and juxtaposes his interpretations against the Pharisees and Sadducees. In Matthew, for instance, Jesus warns his disciples, “Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (16:6). 

In his Commentary on Matthew, Richard T. France points out that Jesus’ warning is presumably to be understood as a follow-up to the encounter with the Pharisees and Sadducees in vv. 1-4. He notes: “Leaven here, in contrast to 13:33, is a symbol for the pervasiveness of something bad, as it is also in 1 Cor 5:6-8, where the imagery derives from the removal of leaven from the house to prepare for the Passover season.”

However, the most famous encounter between Jesus and the Sadducees is recorded in Mark 12:18-27. In this passage, the Sadducees, who deny any form of afterlife, pose a hypothetical question to Jesus about a woman who marries seven brothers in succession, each dying without leaving children. 

They ask Jesus whose wife she will be in the resurrection. Jesus responds by explaining that when people rise from the dead, they are “like angels in heaven,” thus indicating that earthly marital status is irrelevant in the afterlife.

In his study A Marginal Jew, John P. Meier comments on this encounter, stating:

“I maintain that, when the arguments from discontinuity are joined to the arguments from coherence, the most probable conclusion is that the debate with the Sadducees over the resurrection in Mark 12:18-27 does reflect an actual incident in the ministry of the historical Jesus that took place, naturally enough, in Jerusalem... Whether Jesus engaged in any other debates with the Sadducees we cannot say.”

Despite the uncertainty about additional debates, this particular exchange highlights the sharp theological divergence between Jesus and the Sadducees. Moreover, Jesus probably based his teachings on the resurrection primarily on his authority. 

As Meier notes: “We have here the peremptory, authoritative, ‘it-is-so-because-I-say-it-is-so’ style that is typical of the charismatic leader.” It isn’t surprising, therefore, that the Sadducees found this Galilean teacher difficult to tolerate. 

Furthermore, as an apocalyptic Jew with a message that strongly criticized the religious elite, including the Sadducees who managed the Temple, Jesus encountered significant resistance.

The episode known as the "cleansing of the Temple," recorded in all four Gospels, vividly reflects Jesus' view of the Temple authorities. He overturned the tables of the money changers and drove out those selling animals for sacrifice, condemning the commercialization of sacred space.

This act was more than a protest against corruption. To quote a great scholar Ed P. Sanders, this episode represented an “enacted parable,” symbolizing Jesus' belief in the imminent coming of Judgment Day when the Son of Man would destroy those opposed to God and establish His kingdom. 

The Sadducees, being staunch defenders of the Temple and its sacrificial system, found Jesus' actions and teachings particularly threatening.

Contrary to the common assumption that Jesus' legal disputes with the Pharisees led to his execution, many scholars now recognize the crucial role the Sadducees played in his arrest and trial. As the real power players in Judea, the Sadducees — particularly the chief priests — were alarmed by Jesus' disruptive potential during the politically sensitive Passover festival. 

Jesus' public display in the Temple and his apocalyptic message could have incited unrest among the gathered pilgrims. To prevent a potential uprising, the Sadducees decided to remove Jesus by handing him over to the Roman prefect, Pontius Pilate, who had little tolerance for troublemakers threatening public order.

The relationship between Jesus and the Sadducees was thus characterized by profound theological and political conflict. Jesus challenged their authority and interpretations of the law, while the Sadducees perceived him as a direct threat to their control over the Temple and their collaboration with the Roman rulers. 

Famous Sadducees in the Bible: A Brief Overview

Even though there are no Sadducees today, their role during the Second Temple Period was significant, and some individuals were particularly influential. Among them, two notable figures stand out.

Caiaphas

One of the most notable Sadducees during the time of Jesus was Joseph Caiaphas, commonly known simply as Caiaphas. He served as the high priest of the Jerusalem Temple from around 18 to 36 C.E., during the governorship of Pontius Pilate.

Caiaphas was a central figure in the events leading up to the crucifixion of Jesus. As a high priest, he was involved in the Sanhedrin's trial of Jesus and played a significant role in orchestrating Jesus' arrest and delivery to the Roman authorities. 

Most of my Christian friends see him, first and foremost, as a villain in the story of Jesus’ life and death. However, as a historian, I must warn against bias and anachronism. In The Historical Jesus, Helen Bond reminds us that there is no reason to assign particularly cynical motives to Caiaphas and his chief priestly advisers. 

She notes: “The maintenance of law and order, while good for Rome, was also good for the Jewish people. Realistically, the pursuance of a generally acquiescent policy towards Rome was the only way to survive — both for the priests and the people.”

In other words, Caiaphas’ collaboration with Roman authorities highlights the Sadducees' pragmatic approach to maintaining their power and influence. To learn more about this enigmatic figure, I recommend Helen Bond’s excellent study Caiaphas: Friend of Rome and Judge of Jesus?. 

Ananus ben Ananus (Annas)

Another prominent Sadducee was Ananus ben Ananus, also known as Annas. He served as high priest before Caiaphas, from 6 to 15 C.E., and continued to wield considerable influence even after his official term ended.

Annas was the father-in-law of Caiaphas and part of a powerful priestly family that dominated the high priesthood during the first century. 

In the New Testament, Annas is mentioned in the context of Jesus' arrest and trial. Although Caiaphas was the acting high priest, according to the Gospel of John (18:12-13), Jesus was first brought to Annas, potentially indicating his enduring authority and influence. 

Some have argued against the historicity of this episode, based on the fact that Annas retired more than 10 years before Jesus’ arrest. However, other scholars seem to think otherwise. 

In his Commentary on John, Craig S. Keener, for instance, asserts: 

"John’s report about Annas may well reflect historical tradition; it is independent from the Synoptics and not derived from John’s theology. John has no specific reason to preserve the names of high priests,196 but if he would preserve any, Caiaphas, who actually was a high priest at the time of the hearing, would make the most sense... Because Jewish law mandated the high priesthood for life, many Jews may have still considered Annas the appropriate official to decide important cases like this one.”

Furthermore, Annas played a role in the early persecution of Christians, as seen in Acts (4:5-7), where he is involved in the trial of the apostles Peter and John. 

These two figures, Caiaphas and Annas, exemplify the significant role the Sadducees played in the religious and political landscape of Judea during the time of Jesus and the early Christian movement.

Their actions and decisions were pivotal in shaping the course of events that led to the crucifixion of Jesus and the subsequent spread of Christianity.

Summing up

The Sadducees, despite their eventual disappearance from history, played a crucial role during the Second Temple period. Their influence extended beyond the religious realm, deeply impacting the political and social structures of Judean society.

Their pragmatic approach to cooperating with Roman authorities ensured their continued dominance until the Temple's destruction in 70 C.E. effectively ended their authority.

Throughout their interactions with Jesus, the Sadducees were in direct conflict with his teachings and actions. Their staunch adherence to the written Torah, rejection of the resurrection, and political conservatism put them at odds with Jesus' apocalyptic message and his critique of the Temple establishment.

In understanding the Sadducees, we gain valuable insights into the complexities of Jewish society during one of its most pivotal periods. Their story, though often overshadowed by other groups, is a testament to the diverse and dynamic nature of Second Temple Judaism.

Finally, as we reflect on the fall of the Sadducees and the rise of new Jewish traditions post-Temple, it’s worth noting that history has a way of humbling even the mightiest. After all, the most powerful groups can end up as just a footnote — or, in the Sadducees' case, a cautionary tale about the dangers of resisting change.

Pharisees: Who Are the Pharisees in the Bible? (PLUS VERSES)

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

In my classroom, students often ask whether the Jews of antiquity shared common beliefs. This question strikes me as peculiar, like asking if all Americans believe in the same things. Just as contemporary American society is diverse, ancient Judaism was far from monolithic.

Historical sources reveal that Judaism in antiquity consisted of various streams and schools of thought, each with distinct views on God, salvation, and the role of Scripture. Among these diverse groups were the Pharisees, a significant and influential sect.

The Pharisees in the Bible often appear in discussions and narratives, but understanding who they truly were requires looking beyond the scriptures. These individuals were deeply committed to the Torah and its interpretation, emphasizing piety, ritual purity, and adherence to traditions. 

Throughout this article, we will explore the Pharisees' beliefs, teachings, and their complex relationship with Jesus. We will also examine historical sources that mention them and discuss the controversial questions regarding their identities and roles.

By the end, we aim to provide a comprehensive scholarly perspective on who the Pharisees were and their significance not only for ancient Judaism but also for the historical Jesus and the origins of Christianity.

For a deeper dive into the historical context of the Gospels and an exploration of the distinction between history and myth in these narratives, consider enrolling in Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's online course “The Unknown Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.” You won't be disappointed! 

Pharisees: What Sources Do We Have?

The Pharisees are most familiar from the pages of the Gospels. In these texts, they frequently appear as opponents of Jesus, criticized for their excessive concern with legal technicalities and minor points of ritual law (e.g. Matthew 23:23–28; Luke 11:37–44). 

The Gospels particularly emphasize their hypocrisy, depicting them as individuals who seek admiration from others while failing to adhere to the burdensome laws they impose on their fellow Jews (e.g. Matthew 23:4). This portrayal, however, reflects the theological and narrative aims of the Gospel writers and must be understood within that context.

Another valuable source of information about the Pharisees comes from the Jewish historian Josephus. He frequently discusses the Pharisees, noting their distinctive beliefs and actions. According to him, the Pharisees had a reputation for their interpretation of traditional laws not explicitly found in the books of Moses.

He also highlights their attempts to gain political power in Judea and Galilee, though he suggests they were not particularly successful in this endeavor. 

Josephus’ accounts are important but must be approached critically, as his writings often serve apologetic purposes. To put it more bluntly, Josephus is known as a historian who often tried to present Judaism and the Jews in a positive light to a Roman audience, hoping to reduce tensions and animosities.

A third source of information comes from Rabbinic literature, such as the Mishnah. However, these sources are late, dating from the 3rd to the 5th centuries, and there is significant debate about whether they accurately reflect the Pharisees’ position before the Jewish revolts in 70 and 135 C.E. 

In other words, the Rabbinic texts are valuable for understanding the development of Jewish thought and practice, but the historical context in which they were written may have influenced their portrayal of the Pharisees 

Examining these sources, it becomes evident that our understanding of the Pharisees is fraught with challenges. 

The Rabbinic documents post-date the times of Jesus and Paul, the synoptic Gospels depict Pharisees as negative foils, and Josephus’ writings contain apologetic elements. Moreover, the only undisputed Pharisee from whom we have any written records is the apostle Paul (we’ll discuss this later in the article). 

As Joseph Sievers noted in an article: “After over two decades of research, there is at least one assured result: we know considerably less about the Pharisees than an earlier generation knew.” This caution is necessary, but it doesn’t render our efforts futile. (Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

Pharisees: A Look at Their Origins and Teachings

The name “Pharisee” likely derives from the Hebrew root “P-R-Sh,” meaning “to separate.” Others probably gave them this name, as the Pharisees themselves referred to their group using different terms, such as scribe or sage, which later evolved into the term rabbi (see: “Did you Know?” section). 

The Pharisaic movement was unique in that it wasn’t inherited like the roles of priests or village elders. This characteristic allowed it to transcend class boundaries to some extent. Pharisees were primarily householders from the “middle class,” including tradespeople and professionals. Their professions varied widely —  they included tent-makers such as Paul and educators such as Nicodemus.

Thus, one wasn’t a Pharisee by profession but rather by a commitment to the group's beliefs and practices.

Josephus, a key historical source, describes four major Jewish sects: Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, and the "Fourth Philosophy," which is comparable to the Zealots. He places the origins of the Pharisees around the time of Jonathan the high priest (c. 145 B.C.E.). 

According to Josephus, the Pharisees played significant roles in Hasmonean politics. They opposed King Janneaus but later allied with his wife, Queen Salome Alexandra. Their influence fluctuated under her son Aristobolus, and later under Herod, who favored them partly because the Pharisee Pollion advised the people to accept his rule. 

However, despite their earlier involvement in politics, the Pharisees of Jesus’ time were a voluntary association with limited influence. Josephus estimated their number at around 6,000 in an empire with over 4 million Jews.

In the New Testament: A Historical Introduction, Bart Ehrman rightly points out: “Most Jews in Palestine did not belong to any of these groups… Pharisees claimed six thousand members, and Essenes claimed four thousand. The Sadducees probably had far fewer.”

What Did Pharisees Believe?

The Pharisees’ beliefs eventually became central to Rabbinic Judaism after 70 C.E. They upheld a synthesis of free will and determinism and strongly believed in the sanctity of the oral law.

Moreover, Pharisees believed in angels, spirits, and bodily resurrection. Josephus notes, “They also believe that souls have an immortal vigor in them. And that under the Earth, there will be rewards or punishments according as they have lived virtuously or viciously in this life.”

The Acts of the Apostles 23:8 corroborate this, stating: “For the Sadducees hold that there is no resurrection and that there are no angels or spirits, while the Pharisees believe in all three.”

Additionally, their belief in free will was nuanced. Josephus explains: 

“And when they determine that all things are done by fate, they do not take away the freedom of men acting as they see fit. Since their notion is that it has pleased God to make a temperament whereby what he wills is done, but so that the will of men can act virtuously or viciously.” Rabbi Akiva (c. 50-135 C.E.), a Pharisee, succinctly summarized this belief: “All is foreseen, but free will is given.” (Antiquities of the Jews, 18.13)

Lester L. Grabbe, in his Introduction to Second Temple Judaism, emphasizes the Pharisees’ attempt to replicate the temple cult in their own homes. He notes: 

“The Pharisees claimed to have traditions from the fathers which were not written in the Hebrew Bible... The best estimate about the content of these traditions is that they represented an attempt by a group to reproduce the temple cult in their own home. That is, the laws seemed to turn primarily on eating ordinary food in a state of cultic purity (normally required in the temple but not necessarily in the home) and thus involved questions of ritual purity, eating, tithing (since only properly tithed food could be eaten), the Sabbath, and festivals.”

Additionally, Ludovic Nobel summarizes the Pharisees' basic features: “Attaching great importance to the Law (written and oral), they were legalists and strictly observed the Sabbath, circumcision, and annual festivals. Many Pharisaic teachings were integrated into rabbinic tradition.” (my translation)

To further clarify the distinctions among Jewish groups, the table below compares the beliefs and practices of the Essenes, Pharisees, and Sadducees.

Now, having explored the Pharisees' origins and beliefs, let's turn our attention to one of the most controversial and intriguing aspects of their history: their relationship with Jesus. What was the nature of their interactions, and why did Jesus criticize them?

Jesus and the Pharisees in the Bible

In the Gospels, the Pharisees are often portrayed as Jesus' primary opponents. For example, in the Gospel of Mark, they frequently challenge Jesus, questioning his authority and actions (e.g. Mark 2:24; Mark 3:6).

However, we should not take these stories at face value. As Bart D. Ehrman notes: 

“We know that Pharisees interacted frequently with Christian churches after the death of Jesus. Is it possible that the opposition leveled against the church by Pharisees after Jesus’ death affected the ways that Christians told stories about his life?” 

Most historical Jesus scholars would agree with this assessment. Therefore, it’s a mistake to overemphasize the conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees, particularly in contrasting Pharisees and the Mosaic Law with the historical Jesus.

The Pharisees were a highly committed group of Jews dedicated to following God’s law, as revealed in the Torah, to the fullest extent possible. Where the written law was ambiguous, they relied on well-established oral traditions.

Contrary to the Gospel's portrayal of them as hypocrites, most Pharisees appear to have been sincere and devout, emphasizing the meticulous observance of God's law in all its detail. 

Historical Jesus, however, had a different perspective on what mattered to God. While the Pharisees focused on strict adherence to the law, Jesus emphasized the underlying principles and the “spirit of the law,” rather than its minute details.

The controversies between the historical Jesus and the Pharisees didn’t revolve around whether God's law should be followed, but rather the correct interpretation of that law.

Disagreements arose over moral decisions and interpretations of ambiguous aspects of the Mosaic law. For instance, regarding divorce, while Moses permitted a man to divorce his wife (Deut. 24:1–4), Jesus took a more radical stance, opposing divorce (Mark 10:2-9). Similarly, disputes over the proper interpretation of Sabbath laws were frequent and intense.

An illustrative example involves the law to keep the Sabbath day holy, one of the Ten Commandments. Contrary to accusations that Jesus broke the Sabbath and encouraged others to do likewise, it’s difficult to find, as E. P. Sanders notes in his study Jesus and Judaism, any instance in the Gospel traditions where Jesus actually violated Sabbath laws from the Hebrew Bible. 

Instead, Jesus often diverged from the Pharisees’ interpretation of the Sabbath laws. 

For example, he healed on the Sabbath or allowed his disciples to pluck grain to eat on the Sabbath. Healing on the Sabbath is nowhere forbidden in the Law of Moses, and Jesus himself never plucked grain on the Sabbath. For Jesus, an overarching principle guided what was appropriate on the Sabbath: “Sabbath was made for humans, not humans for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27).

Thus, the fundamental issue between Jesus and the Pharisees wasn’t whether the law should be kept, but how to interpret it. An additional point to remember is that these were internal Jewish debates, similar to the disputes between other Jewish groups such as the Essenes and the Sadducees.

As Bart Ehrman notes in his book Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium:

“These heated disagreements with the Pharisees were not particularly out of place in Jesus' world of first-century Palestinian Judaism… There were lots of internal disputes among Jewish teachers… It was not, as is sometimes thought among Christian readers, a case of Jesus against everyone else… There were lots of views that all contended with one another, each group insisting that it was right and that the others were, tragically, wrong.”

In summary, the conflicts between Jesus and the Pharisees reflected broader, ongoing debates within Judaism about the interpretation of the law. They were intense but not unique, mirroring the dynamic and diverse nature of first-century Jewish thought.

After reading about the heated controversies between Jesus and the Pharisees, you might assume that no follower of Jesus would ever come from a Pharisaic background. However, you would be wrong. One of the most influential figures in early Christianity, Paul of Tarsus, was himself a Pharisee!

Famous Pharisees: A Brief Overview

Our primary sources of information about Paul come from the Acts of the Apostles and his undisputed letters. These sources provide valuable insights into Paul's background and his relationship with the Pharisaic tradition.

In his letters, Paul explicitly identifies himself as a Pharisee. In Philippians 3:4-6, he writes: 

“If someone else thinks they have reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for righteousness based on the law, faultless.”

This passage indicates that Paul saw his Pharisaic background as a significant part of his identity and credentials.

Additionally, the Acts of the Apostles also confirm Paul's Pharisaic roots. In Acts 23:6, Paul allegedly declares before the Sanhedrin, “My brothers, I am a Pharisee, descended from Pharisees. I stand on trial because of the hope of the resurrection of the dead.”

This statement reinforces his identification with the Pharisaic tradition and highlights his belief in the resurrection, a key Pharisaic doctrine. 

Furthermore, Paul's respect for the Torah also aligns with Pharisaic teachings. His writings reflect a deep reverence for the Jewish law, even as he reinterprets it through the lens of his faith in the risen Jesus. 

Additionally, Paul often framed his religious hopes in messianic and apocalyptic language, especially after his transformative experience on the road to Damascus. This experience marked a profound shift in his mission but didn’t erase his Pharisaic roots.

Alan F. Segal, in his book Paul the Convert, captures the complexity of Paul's identity: “To read Paul properly, I maintain, one must recognize that Paul was a Pharisaic Jew who converted to a new apocalyptic, Jewish sect and then lived in a Hellenistic, gentile Christian community as a Jew among gentiles.”

This perspective highlights Paul's ability to navigate and integrate his Pharisaic background with his new faith in the risen Jesus, thus making him a unique bridge between Jewish and Gentile communities.

Beyond Paul, other notable Pharisaic teachers include, among others, Gamaliel and Nicodemus. Gamaliel, a respected Pharisee and a teacher of the law is mentioned in Acts 5:34-40 as a voice of moderation and wisdom within the Sanhedrin.

Nicodemus, who appears in the Gospel of John, is depicted as a Pharisee who engages in meaningful dialogue with Jesus and later assists in his burial (John 3:1-21; John 19:39-40). These figures exemplify the diversity and depth of the Pharisaic tradition and contribute to its rich legacy within Jewish history.

Conclusion

The Pharisees were a complex and influential sect within ancient Judaism, dedicated to the meticulous interpretation and practice of the Torah. While the Bible portrays the Pharisees negatively, historical evidence suggests that conflicts Jesus had with them revolved around differing interpretations of the law rather than its validity or authority.

Furthermore, Paul of Tarsus, a Pharisee who became a pivotal figure in early Christianity, exemplifies the intricate relationship between Pharisaic Judaism and the nascent Christian movement. His writings reflect a deep respect for the Torah, even as he reinterpreted it through his faith in Jesus.

Finally, the Pharisees and Sadducees, along with other Jewish groups, contributed to the rich tapestry of Jewish religious life in antiquity, providing a crucial context for understanding the origins and development of both Judaism and Christianity.

Romans: Summary of All 16 Chapters of the Book

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

One distinguishing feature of the Book of Romans, compared to most of Paul's letters, is that Paul addresses a community he didn’t personally establish. Despite not founding the Roman church, Paul was well-informed about the key issues, particularly the ethnic division between Greek-speaking Gentile believers and Jewish followers of Jesus.

Paul writes to unify these diverse groups, addressing both doctrinal and practical issues. His approach in Romans is pastoral and apologetic, thus aiming to bridge gaps within the Roman church.

What is Romans about in the Bible? In this article, we’ll provide a chapter-by-chapter summary, thus highlighting Paul's key themes and arguments. We'll see how Paul addresses the specific issues facing the Roman church and presents his systematic theology.

However, before that, we’ll take a look at the issues of authorship, and date to reveal key details. 

What Is Romans About in the Bible: An Overview

The Book of Romans is a foundational text in the New Testament, comprising 16 chapters. It’s traditionally attributed to the Apostle Paul, one of the most influential figures in early Christianity.

The consensus among scholars is that Paul genuinely authored Romans. In his Commentary on Romans, Joseph Fitzmyer notes: “Although the authorship of Romans has been questioned at times in the not-too-distant past, modern students of the letter almost unanimously agree about its Pauline authenticity.” (Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

That makes the Book of Romans one of seven of Paul’s undisputed letters — a compilation of the texts most scholars agree he wrote. 

Romans was written around 56-57 C.E., likely in Corinth, while Paul was preparing for his journey to Jerusalem. It was addressed to the Christian community in Rome. The primary purposes were to address the divisions between Jewish and Gentile believers and to articulate the gospel message clearly.

In broad terms, the Epistle to the Romans can be divided as follows: 

Additionally, key themes in Romans include:

For a more in-depth discussion of the authorship and dating of Romans, readers can refer to our separate articles (here and here) that delve into these topics more extensively. Here, we’ll summarize the content of each chapter to provide a comprehensive overview of this foundational New Testament book.

The Book of Romans: Summary of Each Chapter

Before we delve into a summary of each chapter, let's take a look at a brief overview of the main themes and key verses from each chapter of Paul’s epistle to the Romans. 

With this overall presentation of Romans in mind, we’ll now proceed to a detailed chapter-by-chapter summary. This summary will highlight Paul's theological arguments and practical exhortations aimed at fostering unity and understanding among the diverse members of the Roman church.

Romans 1: Summary

Paul begins his letter by uniquely identifying himself as an apostle devoted to God's gospel, thus emphasizing his authority and total commitment to Christ. He also humbly refers to himself as a “slave of Christ Jesus”.

As Philip Esler notes in his study Conflict and Identity in Romans: 

"His self-designation (v. 1) is unique among his correspondence in naming him alone as sender and in mentioning his status as an apostle devoted to God's gospel, a feature that implies at the outset that the letter will involve an elucidation of that gospel. This introduction underscores Paul's authority and his total commitment to his mission.”

Furthermore, Paul extends greetings to the Roman church, commends their renowned faith, and expresses his desire to visit them to share spiritual gifts and strengthen their faith. He also outlines the foundational theme of his letter: the righteousness of God revealed through faith.

Romans 2: Summary

In Romans 2, Paul critiques self-righteousness and moral superiority among both Jewish and Gentile believers, emphasizing that God's judgment is impartial and based on actions, not ethnic or religious background.

In his Commentary, James D. G. Dunn describes this chapter as a “spiral argument” aimed at deflating Jewish presumption. Paul dismantles the belief that possessing the law or Jewish heritage grants automatic favor with God, thus asserting that true righteousness comes from living according to God's will.

Romans 3: Summary

In 3rd chapter of Romans, Paul uses a diatribe (a rhetorical style that involves advancing an argument by stating a thesis, having an imaginary opponent raise possible objections to it, and then providing answers to these objections) to address arguments from a hypothetical Jewish interlocutor, demonstrating the universal tendency to evade God's righteousness revealed through Christ.

Robert Jewett, in his Commentary, describes this diatribe as a “brilliant tour de force” that effectively reveals the hypocrisy of those who claim to understand divine glory while evading accountability. 

Paul also asserts that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (3:23), thus highlighting the need for righteousness through faith in the risen Jesus rather than the law. He concludes by emphasizing the equality of all people, both Greeks and Jews, before God.

In the first three chapters, Paul hopes to establish that both Jews and Gentiles have sinned and, therefore, neither is better off than the other. Both must be made righteous through faith in the risen Jesus.

Romans 4: Summary

In Romans 4, Paul addresses the concern that righteousness through faith in Jesus might undermine the Mosaic Law. He asserts that faith and the law coexist harmoniously. Moreover, he views sin as a cosmic power that the law can’t overcome; only faith in the risen Jesus can deliver humanity from its grip.

Moreover, Paul uses Abraham as an example to illustrate that righteousness by faith is not a new concept. Abraham was considered righteous because of his faith long before the Law was given. This demonstrates that faith, not the law, has always been the basis for righteousness. 

Romans 5: Summary

In Chapter 5 of Romans, Paul explores the concept of justification by faith, emphasizing that a right relationship with God comes through faith in the risen Jesus, not by following the Mosaic law. 

As Bart D. Ehrman notes in The New Testament: A Historical Introduction, for Paul, faith means a "trusting acceptance of God’s act of salvation," which implies a wholehearted conviction and commitment rather than mere intellectual assent.

Paul also argues that justification by faith brings profound benefits, including peace with God and the hope of sharing in God's glory. This peace isn’t merely the absence of conflict, but a deep-seated reconciliation with God.

Romans 6: Summary

In this chapter, Paul addresses the transformative power of faith in Christ and its implications for believers' relationship with sin. He begins by refuting the idea that believers should continue sinning to experience more grace, thus emphasizing that those baptized into Christ are symbolically united with his death, breaking the power of sin.

James D. G. Dunn notes that while the grace of Christ overcomes sin and death, according to Paul, believers must actively choose to live under the reign of grace and embody righteousness daily.

Finally, the apostle of the Gentiles asserts that although believers are liberated from sin's dominion, they must continually choose to live righteously, reflecting their new life in Christ.

Romans 7: Summary

In Chapter 7, Paul explores the relationship between the law and sin, and the internal struggle believers face. He asserts that the law isn’t sinful but reveals sin by exposing humanity's inability to achieve righteousness independently.

Using the analogy of marriage, Paul explains that believers are released from the law through their union with Christ: “By law, a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him” (7:2).

Paul also vividly describes his internal conflict (living in sin) and concludes that the deliverance from this state comes only through faith in the risen Jesus. 

Romans 8: Summary

Chapter 8 of Romans is a strong exposition on the transformative life believers experience through the Holy Spirit (Greek: “πνεῦμα ἅγιον”). Paul begins with the declaration: “There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (8:1), thus reassuring believers that their union with Christ absolves them from guilt and sin's penalty.

In his Commentary on Romans, Ernest Best explains: “There is no condemnation for those who are united with Christ Jesus because in Christ Jesus the life-giving law of the Spirit has set you free from the law of sin and death.”

Paul elaborates that the Holy Spirit empowers believers to live according to God's will. The Spirit liberates believers from sin and death and assures them of their adoption as God's children.

He also speaks of the future glory awaiting believers, thus emphasizing that present sufferings are insignificant compared to the coming glory. This reflects Paul's strong apocalyptic worldview, which envisions Jesus’ imminent return and the establishment of God’s Kingdom on Earth.

Romans 9: Summary

In Chapters 9-11, Paul addresses profound theological questions, particularly the paradox of faith in the God of Israel despite many Jews not believing in Jesus. 

He begins by expressing his deep anguish: “I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my own people, my kindred according to the flesh” (9:2-3).

Paul emphasizes that the covenants, the Law, and God's promises are integral to Jewish identity, yet he is distressed by the fact that so few Jews recognize Jesus as the Messiah.

He then delves into the doctrine of God's sovereign choice. Paul illustrates God's selective process throughout Israel's history with examples such as Isaac and Ishmael, and Jacob and Esau.

Moreover, he underscores that God's mercy and election are based not on human effort or lineage but on his sovereign will, which sets the stage for understanding God's redemptive plan for both Jews and Gentiles.

Romans 10: Summary

In this chapter, Paul expresses his profound concern for the salvation of his fellow Jews, lamenting their misunderstanding of God's righteousness. Despite their zeal for the law, they fail to recognize the righteousness that comes from faith in the risen Jesus.

Franz J. Leenhardt, in  "L'Épître de Paul aux Romains" captures this sentiment, noting that while Paul is severe towards their theological errors, his deep attachment and clear judgment remain. He explains that, for Paul, zeal alone, without discernment, is insufficient and that Israel misuses the law, thinking it allows sinful man to merit grace.

Furthermore, Paul contrasts the righteousness based on the law, requiring complete adherence to commandments, with the righteousness based on faith, accessible to all who believe in Jesus’ resurrection.

Overall, this chapter underscores the apostle's deep sorrow over Israel's unbelief and his desire for them to embrace the righteousness that comes from the faith in the risen Jesus.

Romans 11: Summary

In Chapter 11, Paul explores the mystery of Israel’s partial hardening and the inclusion of the Gentiles in God's redemptive plan. He reassures readers that God has not rejected Israel, using himself as evidence — a faithful Israelite who believes in Christ. 

He also explains that Israel's stumbling has led to Gentile salvation, intended to provoke Israel to jealousy and ultimately lead to their salvation. He uses the metaphor of an olive tree to illustrate this: Gentile believers are grafted into Israel's olive tree, sharing in God's promises.

Paul concludes this chapter of Romans with a doxology (a short hymn of praise to God). He marvels at the depth of God’s wisdom and knowledge in his redemptive plan which eventually includes both the Jews and the Gentiles. 

Romans 12: Summary

In Chapter 12, Paul transitions from theological exposition to practical exhortation. He urges believers to live transformed lives in response to God’s mercy: “Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God — this is your true and proper worship” (12:1).

Paul further instructs believers to resist conforming to the patterns of this world, advocating, instead, for a renewal of the mind to discern and follow God's will. This transformation involves practical expressions of faith, such as humility, sincere love, and harmonious relationships within the Christian community.

Romans 13: Summary

In this chapter, Paul addresses the Christian's relationship to governing authorities, emphasizing the importance of submission and respect. He begins with a clear directive: “Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God” (13:1).

Ernest Best provides the possible context: “Some Christians, believing that Jesus was their king, may have argued that they were free from direction by earthly rulers. As Rome was the central seat of government, the church there may have been especially worried over this problem”.

However, for Paul, a “stable order of civil society which is controlled by government authorities who are God’s agents is something valuable; where there is anarchy everyone suffers. Stability requires that the Christian must accept the existing order of society by cooperating with it in his obedience.”

Romans 14: Summary

In the final chapters of his letter, Paul outlines the way of life that should naturally follow from a relationship with God based on promise and faith. He acknowledges that among believers, there are varying customs regarding dietary practices and the observance of certain days as holier than others.

This diversity likely reflects Rome's character as a “melting pot” of the ancient world, where the churches consisted of people from many different backgrounds, each bringing their unique customs and traditions. 

However, the apostle urges believers to accept one another despite these differences. He emphasizes that those who are strong in faith should not despise those who are weaker, and vice versa.

Furthermore, Paul also stresses that each person should be fully convinced in their mind and act according to their conscience, but they must do so in a way that honors the Lord.

Romans 15: Summary

In Chapter 15, Paul sums up the way of life that should follow from a relationship with God based on promise and faith, stating: “Welcome one another, therefore, just as Christ has welcomed you, for the glory of God" (15:7). He emphasizes that believers should accept one another in all their diversity, refraining from judgment, just as God has accepted them in Christ. This call to mutual acceptance and unity is central to Paul's vision for the Christian community.

Paul also discusses his plans to visit Jerusalem with a collection of money he has gathered from Gentile believers for the poor Jewish believers living in and around Jerusalem. It  is significant for symbolizing the gratitude and solidarity that the Gentiles should have for their Jewish brothers and sisters.

Romans 16: Summary

In the final chapter of Romans, Paul concludes his letter with personal greetings and final instructions to various members of the Roman church. He commends Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae, who likely carried the letter to Rome, and asks the Roman believers to receive her in a manner worthy of the saints.

Paul then sends greetings to many individuals by name, highlighting their contributions and roles within the Christian community. This personal touch underscores the close relationships and the network of support among the early Christians.

Finally, Paul ends with another doxology. He praised God for the revelation of the mystery kept hidden for long ages but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all nations might believe and obey him.

Conclusion

The Epistle to the Romans is known as Paul’s masterpiece epistle, famous in evangelical circles for offering the blueprint for salvation known as the “Romans Road.” Romans, with its profound theological insights and practical exhortations, serve as a cornerstone of Christian doctrine and practice.

As we saw, Paul addressed the divisions within the Roman church, articulated the necessity of faith in Jesus Christ, explored the relationship between the law and grace, and emphasized his hope for the future salvation of both the Gentiles and the Jews. 

Moreover, throughout the 16 chapters, Paul systematically presents his theology, emphasizing justification by faith, the universality of sin, and the transformative power of the Holy Spirit. His pastoral and apologetic approach aims to unify the diverse community of believers in Rome who were struggling because of their ethnic and social differences. 

Needless to say, there are many other fascinating and significant aspects to this letter, from its historical context to its influence on early Christian thought. We plan to explore these aspects in greater depth in our future articles, providing a comprehensive exploration of this foundational New Testament book.

Additionally, for those interested in a deeper historical analysis of the Gospels, we recommend Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's online lecture series, “The Unknown Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.”

In these eight 30-minute lectures, Dr. Ehrman examines the Gospels from a historical perspective, delineating between history and myth. Questions such as "Was Jesus born in Bethlehem?" and "What really happened at his trial and crucifixion?" are explored, providing valuable insights into the historical context of these texts. Don't miss this opportunity to enhance your understanding of the New Testament.

Philemon: Quick Summary of the Book of Philemon

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

Within the collection of Pauline epistles, the Epistle to Philemon stands out. Its brevity, single addressee, and specific occasion make it unusual among Paul’s authentic letters. Despite its conciseness, however, scholars have long debated the circumstances and intent of its composition.

In this article, I’ll address these uncertainties while explaining the context in terms of ancient Roman slavery and prisons. In addition, I’ll investigate why this letter is so different from other Pauline letters, and share Paul’s views on slavery.

How Is Philemon Unique?

Although the book of Philemon is among the undisputed letters of Paul, it is unusual compared to Paul’s other epistles in a couple of ways. First, it is the shortest of all Paul’s letters, with the Greek text coming in at only 335 words. This makes it the third shortest book in the entire Bible (the shortest is 3 John, at 219 words and the second is 2 John, at 245 words).

Although according to Eric Huntsman, the average length of letters in the ancient Mediterranean world was less than 100 words, 335 words is extremely short for a Pauline letter. To illustrate this, 1 Corinthians and Romans are each over 9,000 words.

Second, while the rest of Paul’s undisputed letters are addressed to communities (Galatians, Romans, etc.), Philemon is addressed to one person – sort of. In fact, Philemon is the principal addressee of the letter, but in his greeting, Paul includes a woman named Apphia – probably Philemon’s wife – and a man named Archippus, as well as the church hosted in Philemon’s house.

Who is Philemon? We don’t know much about him. He was clearly a Christian who Paul had converted. He must have been fairly wealthy since he had a house with enough space for church gatherings, and we know he owned at least one slave. That’s about the extent of our knowledge of him.

That said, the rest of the letter seems to be speaking to Philemon alone. We know this because any time Paul uses the pronoun “you” after the greeting, it is in the singular rather than the plural form. He’s talking to one guy.

Finally, while all Paul’s letters are written to address specific questions and/or problems, most of them deal with these issues using highly theological language. Philemon, while it does assume Paul’s commitment to Christ, never veers into theology at all.

Having understood the unique features of Philemon, let’s look at the letter’s general content.

Summary of Philemon

Since Paul doesn’t say where he is imprisoned, there are a couple of possible dates for the letter’s composition. If he is in Rome, the date is around 63-64 CE, not long before Paul’s death. If, instead, he’s writing from a prison in Ephesus, as many scholars believe, it was written in the mid 50s CE.

Verses 1-3 start us off, as most ancient letters did, with a formal greeting. The letter begins by saying that it is from Paul, specified as “a prisoner of Christ,” but also on behalf of Timothy, whom Paul calls “our brother.” When Paul says he is a prisoner of Christ, he simply means that he is in prison due to his activities for Christ.

Timothy was a missionary partner of Paul’s who traveled with him to several places (as noted in the openings of other Pauline epistles, such as Philippians and 2 Corinthians). He was probably imprisoned with Paul as well.

As I said above, Paul addresses his letter to Philemon, Apphia, and Archippus, but when he addresses “the church in your house,” the “your” is singular, indicating that the letter’s message is meant solely for Philemon.

Next, in verses 4-7 Paul says that he is thankful for Philemon’s love and faith. He says that he mentions Philemon in his prayers and that Philemon’s faithfulness has given him joy.

The body of the letter consists of verses 8-22. Here, Paul finally addresses the real occasion for writing to Philemon. He starts out by saying that, although he is bold (or outspoken) enough to command Philemon to do what is right, he prefers to gently ask this of Philemon in love.

Paul then speaks on behalf of a man named Onesimus, whom he says has become a kind of spiritual son to him. This may mean that Onesimus simply sought out Paul in prison or even that Onesimus himself is imprisoned. It’s already clear, however, that Philemon knows Onesimus, because in the next sentence, Paul says “Formerly he was useless to you, but now he is indeed useful to you and to me.” This is actually a bit of wordplay in Greek: “Onesimus” means “useful.”

Who was Onesimus in the Bible? He may have been a runaway slave belonging to Philemon. Paul says that, although he’d like to keep Onesimus with him, he’s instead sending him back to Philemon. He asks that Philemon receive Onesimus “no longer as a slave but more than a slave, a beloved brother.” This is an unusual demand in the ancient world, which I’ll discuss further later.

Paul then says that if Onesimus has wronged Philemon in any way or owes him anything, that Paul himself will repay it. Just to ensure Philemon’s compliance, Paul says he knows Philemon will obey his request since he owes Paul (presumably for teaching him about Christ).

Finally, Paul says Philemon should prepare a guest room since he hopes to visit him soon. The letter then ends with additional greetings from other missionaries who are either imprisoned with Paul (Epaphras) or helping him while he is in prison (Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke).

Now let’s look at some detailed interpretation of this book, short as it is.

Interpretation of the Book of Philemon

Although this authentic letter of Paul is short and to the point, scholars point out that readers throughout Christian history have assumed many things about it which are not as certain as they might seem. For example, it’s often assumed that Onesimus is a runaway slave, but as Barbara Geller notes in the Jewish Annotated New Testament, this is not entirely clear.

Perhaps, Geller suggests, Onesimus had simply sought out Paul, as Philemon’s friend, to act as a mediator between him and his master. Or, perhaps Philemon had sent Onesimus to Paul in prison to help him by bringing supplies. Given the actual words of the text, either of these is equally possible. To appreciate why Philemon might have sent Onesimus to Paul, it’s important to understand the Roman penal system.

In Penal Practice and Penal Policy in Ancient Rome, O.F. Robinson writes that Roman prisons were filthy, badly ventilated, and subterranean. Furthermore, the authorities provided no food or other necessities to prisoners, leaving that up to friends and families of the accused. It would make sense, then, that Philemon, hearing of Paul’s imprisonment, might have sent his slave to take care of Paul. On the other hand, it makes equal sense that Onesimus could have appealed to Paul for help, since Paul seems to have already had friends helping him, whom he names at the end of the letter.

Because we don’t fully know the circumstances which brought Onesimus to Paul, we can’t entirely know Paul’s intent in writing the letter, as Geller points out. Does he want to keep Onesimus to serve him, as he seems to imply in verses 13-14? Alternatively, is he appealing to Philemon to welcome his returned slave with forgiveness, as verses 17-18 suggest? Is he actually suggesting that Philemon free Onesimus from slavery altogether since he is now a Christian (verses 16 and 21)?

Despite centuries of assumptions and interpretation, all of these alternatives are possible but none are certain. In fact, Geller notes that another possibility is that Paul is simply applying pressure, not only to Philemon but also to his house church, to always love and forgive each other. But how did Paul feel about slavery?

In Galatians 3:28, Paul wrote that “there is neither slave nor free” in Christ. And yet, he never called for the abolition of slavery in any of his letters. For free citizens of Rome, slavery was such a common institution that they barely noticed it (of course slaves didn’t feel this way, and there are extensive records of slave rebellions). However, the treatment of slaves was left almost entirely to the master’s discretion.

On the one hand, masters could free their slaves and those freedmen, as they were called, could become Roman citizens. On the other hand, slaves, as the legal property of their owners, could be mistreated at will.

According to M.I. Finley in his book Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology, recaptured runaway slaves were punished harshly, sometimes even put to death. If Onesimus had indeed run away from Philemon, Philemon had every legal right to punish him. Perhaps this explains Paul’s advocacy for Onesimus — a plea for mercy.

In addition, Geller notes that since Paul seems to think Onesimus owes something which Paul offers to pay, Onesimus may have either stolen money from Philemon or merely deprived him of the value of his service in economic terms. Either way, Paul seems to be trying to placate Philemon so that Onesimus will be forgiven rather than punished.

Conclusion

While undoubtedly written by Paul, the Epistle to Philemon is unusual in several ways. It’s not nearly as concerned, for instance, with theology. While all Paul’s letters are occasional, most use theological language to address the concerns of particular groups. Not so with Philemon.

Perhaps because of this, the letter is also incredibly short (for Paul, at least). At a mere 335 letters in its original Greek, the letter is Paul’s shortest. It’s still far longer than the average letter in Paul’s time, but for the notoriously wordy Paul, it’s remarkably succinct.

In addition, while the letter greets Philemon, Apphia, Archippus, and the whole community that meets in Philemon’s house, the rest of the letter addresses just Philemon, as evidenced by the use of the singular “you”. All the other undisputed letters of Paul, on the other hand, are written to whole communities. Letters such as Titus and 1 and 2 Timothy are addressed to individuals in Paul’s name, but the vast majority of scholars, such as Bart Ehrman, believe that these were not written by Paul, but simply forged in his name.

While the letter to Philemon is often assumed to be about a runaway slave named Onesimus, scholars are not entirely sure that’s the case. Yes, Onesimus was somehow with Paul, either imprisoned with him or simply visiting him in prison. And yes, Onesimus was Philemon’s slave. But the actual circumstances that brought Paul and Onesimus together are unclear.

Why did Paul write the letter? One possibility is that Paul wanted Philemon’s permission to keep Onesimus for his own service. On the other hand, perhaps Onesimus had run away and, in doing so, had wronged Philemon by stealing from him. This is suggested by Paul who says that if Onesimus owes Philemon anything, he – Paul – will pay Philemon back.

While Paul says in several letters that in Christ slaves and free people are equal, he never calls for the abolition of slavery. However, his request for Philemon to take Onesimus back as “more than a slave, a beloved brother” hints at the possibility that he thinks Onesimus should be freed.