Biblical Inerrancy: Does the Bible Have Mistakes?

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

Few topics stir as much debate within Christian theology as the question of whether the Bible is completely without error. But what exactly qualifies as an “error”? Are we talking about contradictions, historical inaccuracies, or theological missteps? Which errors in the Bible matter most? And how have Christians throughout history understood these supposed flaws?

Understanding biblical inerrancy isn’t just about theology; it also touches on how we read ancient texts, approach questions of truth, and navigate the relationship between faith and reason. In this article, we’ll grasp what’s really at stake, exploring how the idea of biblical inerrancy developed and why it still matters today.

What Does Biblical Inerrancy Mean?

Inerrancy simply means without mistakes. The most basic definition of biblical inerrancy, then, is the notion that the Bible is entirely without errors. But what kind of errors? Do we mean untruths, contradictions, grammar mistakes, all of the above? It may seem like a simple point, but defining what is meant by errors in a biblical context is crucial for understanding the definitions of biblical inerrancy.

Unsurprisingly, there are many definitions of what qualifies as an error in a biblical context. But to understand these different ideas, we need to look at a little history.

By the way, perceived errors in Scripture come from many different causes. For example, ancient writers’ scientific knowledge was very limited, leading to errors of fact about natural phenomena. Additionally, since ancient writings were copied by hand, scribes could inadvertently (or sometimes purposely) make changes to an original writing. Finally, events could not be recorded as they were happening, as they often are now. So, writing about an occurrence long after it happened depended on memory and word of mouth, which we know to be unreliable at least some of the time. 

History of the Idea of the Inerrancy of Scripture

A New Testament verse that would become key to the notion of biblical inerrancy can be found in 2 Timothy 3:16, which says “All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness…” First of all, keep in mind that “Scripture” for the earliest Christians was simply the Hebrew Bible. Now let’s unpack this verse a little.

While the word “inspired” is a standard English translation of the original Greek, it turns out that the author, who claims to be Paul but was actually a later author writing in Paul’s name, used a Greek word that was a little more obscure than the English word “inspired.” That word was theopneustos.

This word is an adjective which literally means “God-breathed” and occurs only once in the entire Bible. How is this different from the usual understanding of the verse? When some  Christians say that the biblical writings and/or writers were inspired by God, they seem to think it was either a process of dictation, with God telling them exactly what words to write, or that the biblical authors were somehow guided by God to write what they did. This idea certainly implies that Scripture is without error since God is assumed to be incapable of making mistakes.

However, “God-breathed” probably had a different meaning for the author of 2 Timothy. Recall the second creation story from Genesis 2:7 where Adam is created:

Adam was formed from lifeless earth, only coming to life when God formed him and filled him with his divine breath. This is likely what the author of 2 Timothy was referring to, the notion that God’s breath breathes life into something. For this reason, John Poirier, in his book The Invention of the Inspired Text: Philological Windows on the Theopneustia of Scripture, argues that a better translation of theopneustos would be “life-giving.”

(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!)

Given this translation, could we still say that Scripture was error-free? Yes, but it may seem less mandatory given that the words themselves did not necessarily come from God but can nevertheless be filled with life in which the reader can partake.

Origen of Alexandria, a 3rd-century Christian philosopher, freely admitted that there were discrepancies in the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ life, with details often contradicting each other. However, rather than argue that they could all be explained away, he discounted these differences which he believed had no great theological significance. 

As he writes in his Commentary on the Gospel According to John, "let these four [Gospels] agree with each other concerning certain things revealed to them by the Spirit and let them disagree a little concerning other things."

Similarly, 4th-century bishop John Chrysostom wrote in his Homilies on Matthew that while there were errors of fact in the Gospels, they were not important:

However, it was foundational bishop and theologian Augustine of Hippo who seems to have laid the groundwork for the modern idea of biblical inerrancy. In a letter to Jerome, Augustine outlined his reasoning:

In other words, Augustine believed that if Christians admitted that there was even one error of any kind in the Bible, the whole book would cease to be authoritative. To see how this idea would catch on, we need to jump ahead to the rise of Protestantism and beyond.

Protestant reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin seem to have agreed with Origen and Chrysostom that discrepancies related to history in the Bible were common and completely unimportant. That is, they did not affect the theological matters on which they agreed the Bible had no errors.

However, with the rise of science and biblical criticism in the 18th and 19th centuries, Bible stories such as the biblical flood began to be seen by many as fables rather than facts. This would lead to a stern reaction by conservative Christians in the 20th century.

Modern Biblical Inerrancy

In 1978, at a meeting of 200 conservative evangelical leaders, a broad statement, The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, was produced. Among many articles of affirmation and denial, the statement contains the following assertions:

In other words, the Bible is absolutely correct about everything it addresses, including matters of history. This, of course, disagreed with prevailing scholarly views on the Bible, which was, in many ways, the whole point. Unlike Origen, Chrysostom, Luther, and Calvin, the evangelical leaders who produced the statement wrote that errors of any kind in the Bible are literally impossible. I say literally, because this virtually did away with any notion of allegorical or metaphorical readings, which had been common in Christianity since ancient times.

In Defending Inerrancy: Affirming the Accuracy of Scripture for a New Generation, Norman Geisler and William Roach explain inerrancy as the notion that the Bible "is without error or fault in all its teaching." Meanwhile, evangelical author Wayne Grudem in his book Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine adds that "Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact." But do we have those original manuscripts?

One thing that these two books and the Chicago Statement have in common is that they refer specifically to the original manuscripts of the Bible, the texts first inspired by God and written by their authors before being copied through the centuries. The problem, however, is that we don’t have a single original manuscript of any biblical book. 

We have, as you might expect, copies of copies of copies, ad infinitum. Biblical inerrantists, however, are comfortable with this, confident that the original meanings “in the providence of God can be ascertained from available manuscripts with great accuracy.” This may or may not be entirely true, but it has become an important article of faith among those who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture.

What larger effect can belief in the total inerrancy of the Bible have? One big example will suffice to show the impacts.

The Scopes Trial

In 1925, a Tennessee high school teacher named John T. Scopes was accused of violating a state law known as the Butler Act, which prohibited teaching evolution in schools because it contradicted the creation story in the Bible. Scopes had apparently defied the act purposely in order to mount a legal challenge against the Butler Act. He was defended in court by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The very public trial pitted modernist Christians, who claimed one could believe in science and evolution and still be a Christian and value the Bible, against fundamentalist Christians who insisted on the literal truth of every fact in the Bible, defending inerrancy. Keep in mind that the Butler Act, and thus the trial itself, could never have happened had not some Christians come to believe in the perfect inerrancy of the Bible on all matters.

Ultimately, since the law had already been passed and Scopes had knowingly violated it, the judge ruled against him, fining him $100. However, in his post-trial statement to the judge, Scopes said this:

This example simply goes to show that beliefs do real work in the world, for good or for ill. By the way, while many evangelicals and other conservative Christians still affirm biblical inerrancy, not every denomination does. Let’s take a look at other views on the inerrancy of Scripture.

Differing Christian Views on Biblical Inerrancy

The Catholic Church, for example, teaches that matters of history in the Bible need not be inerrant, although matters of theological significance are. For that reason, Pope Paul VI in his dogmatic constitution on divine revelation known as Dei Verbum, writes that although the Bible is without error in regard to its teachings on salvation, narrative histories and depictions of natural occurrences are not held to be inerrant, instead merely replicating the language and understanding ancient writers.

Similarly, in his book Credible Christianity: The Gospel in Contemporary Society, Anglican Bishop Hugh Montefiore writes that since modern people can see evident errors in the Bible and since the biblical canon took so long to form and finally close, it seems unlikely that it could be without errors. Moreover, he notes that the various books of the Bible were not written to recount events but to “promote a higher truth — the relationship of one people and their God.”

Finally, in his book The Barthian Revolt in Modern Theology: Theology without Weapons, Gary Dorrien says that the notion of biblical inerrancy can be seen as idolatry, worshipping the Bible above its supposed divine source. Instead, Dorrien recommends taking the Bible, mistakes and all, for what it is and keeping the focus on God.

Conclusion

Biblical Inerrancy is the doctrine which insists that the Bible is completely free from errors. However, it’s clear that throughout the history of Christianity, some errors have mattered more than others.

The verse from 2 Timothy which affirms that “all Scripture is inspired by God” is often seen as the basis for a concept of biblical inerrancy. How could God have made mistakes? However, the word usually translated as “inspired” literally means “God-breathed” and likely was meant to mean “life-giving.” If so, this idea says nothing about whether there can be errors of any kind in Scripture.

Some of the earliest Christian authors said that errors of history in the Bible, including major discrepancies between Gospel stories, were unimportant, the theological and spiritual material taking precedence. With the exception of Augustine of Hippo, this seems to have been the majority position until the modern era.

However, in the 20th century, conservative Christians began to assert, with ever-growing vehemence, that even the history and depictions of natural phenomena in the Bible had to be literally true. This ultimately produced the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, a document which is held sacred by many evangelicals and other conservative denominations.

Despite this position, many other Christian denominations do not insist on the inerrancy of the Bible, freely admitting contradictions and mistakes while still remaining faithful to its messages on salvation and other topics.

10 Times Archaeology Has Disagreed with the Biblical Narrative

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

For centuries, the Bible has been revered as a sacred text, guiding the beliefs of billions of people worldwide. Yet, as archaeology has advanced, many discoveries have challenged the historical accuracy of certain biblical narratives. The field of archaeology offers a lens through which we can scrutinize the events and figures described in the Bible, testing them against physical evidence from the past.

What can we determine regarding conflicting archeology and the Bible? In this article, I’ll explore ten instances where archaeological findings have contradicted or provided an alternative perspective to the biblical story, raising questions about the historical underpinnings of some of the most famous biblical tales. These archaeological revelations invite a reevaluation of how we interpret the ancient texts and their connection to history.

10 Examples of Conflicting Archeology and the Bible Narrative

#1 – History and identity of the Israelites

In the book of Joshua, the Israelites invade the land of Canaan, conquering the cities and then dividing the land between their own twelve tribes. However, archeologists have discovered a different story.

In Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From?, William Dever writes that the ancient settlements found in the land of Canaan show no sign of armed conflict. In addition, he says that large Canaanite towns such as Jericho show no evidence of having been destroyed contrary to depictions in the book of Joshua. Instead, Jonathan Laden writes that the Israelites were one group of Canaanites who gradually became their own social group.

(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!)

#2 – There was no mass exodus from Egypt

The book of Exodus begins with the Israelites enslaved in Egypt until God sends a charismatic prophet named Moses to liberate them. Is there evidence for this event?

In her commentary on Exodus, Carol Meyers notes that there is no archeological evidence, either for a large Israelite presence in Egypt or for a mass exodus. She writes that while there is some evidence for a small number of Canaanites living in Egypt, there is no indication that they left, which implies that they simply became assimilated Egyptians.

Furthermore, Stephen Russell argues in Images of Egypt in Early Biblical Literature that the stories of Exodus are the creation of the Jewish community both during and after exile, an origin story of sorts with little historical basis.

#3 – Jerusalem in the time of King David

In the books of Samuel and Kings, King David is portrayed as a powerful ruler over a vast and formidable territory. However, Israeli archeologists Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman say the data doesn’t support this claim.

In their book The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts, Finkelstein and Silberman write that there is little evidence to indicate that Jerusalem, David’s capital city according to the Bible, was "more than a typical hill country village" during David and of Solomon’s time. Additionally, David’s region, Judah, was a lightly populated rural region until long after David and Solomon’s time.

#4 – Monotheism in ancient Israel

In point of fact, there are very few actual references to monotheism — the notion that only one god exists – in the Bible. Instead, most biblical texts espouse henotheism — the belief that while there are many gods, our god is the best. However, it is usually clear that Israel was supposed to be faithful to only one God.

However, in 1968, William Devers discovered an ancient inscription in an Israelite cemetery that forced him to question this assumption. The inscription said of the deceased man “blessed may he be by YHWH and his Asherah.” Asherah was a Canaanite mother goddess. However, archeologists continued to find more and more Hebrew inscriptions linking YHWH and Asherah, leading them to conclude that in early Judaism, Asherah was considered YHWH’s consort and therefore an important deity in her own right.

#5 – Camels in the time of the Patriarchs

The Jewish patriarchs, Abraham, his son Isaac, and his grandson Jacob, are supposed to have lived in the 18th or 19th centuries BCE. However, at least one aspect of their existence as related in the book of Genesis has been refuted by archeology.

Genesis 12 and 24 both say that Abraham owned camels. However, Erez Ben-Yosef and Lidar Sapir-Hen of Tel Aviv University say that according to carbon dating of the earliest camel bones found in Israel, camels were not introduced into Israel until about the 9th century BCE, approximately 1,000 years after the patriarchs were said to have lived. Ben-Yosef and Sapir-Hen say that the inconsistency “is direct proof that the [Biblical] text was compiled well after the events it describes.”

#6 – The creation of human beings

Another instance of conflicting archeology and the Bible version of events appears in Genesis 1 and 2. There, we see God creating human beings as fully formed adults called Adam and Eve. However, there is abundant evidence to prove that this was not the case.

Human fossil evidence, for example, shows the development of changes in human bodies and brains as well as the way of life of early human species over the past 6 million years. In other words, humans did not arrive fully formed but changed and evolved over millions of years.

#7 – A global flood

While the Genesis story of Noah’s ark, as well as many other stories from the Near East, say that a flood covered the entire earth, archeologists have failed to unearth any evidence of this. There were certainly catastrophic floods in the ancient world, as there are now, but they never covered the entire surface of the earth.

In his book The Rocks Don't Lie: A Geologist Investigates Noah's Flood, geologist David Montgomery notes that “If you look at it as literally a global flood that covered the world's highest mountains, I'm sorry, there's just not enough water on Earth to do that.”

#8 – Erastus inscription at Corinth

In Romans 16:23, Paul sends these greetings to his Roman audience: “Gaius, who is host to me and to the whole church, greets you. Erastus, the city treasurer, and our brother Quartus greet you.” Then, archeologists unearthed an inscription on a paving stone in Corinth in 1929. It said “Erastus in return for his aedileship paved it at his own expense.” Was this the same Erastus mentioned by Paul?

Unfortunately, it wasn’t. Michael Flexsenhar III writes that this inscription was made much later in the 1st century after Paul’s death. This is not to say that Paul didn’t actually know someone named Erastus, just that the inscription was not referring to Paul’s Erastus.

#9 – Capernaum synagogue

In Mark 1:21-28, Jesus goes to the city of Capernaum where he teaches in the local synagogue. An ancient synagogue has been excavated in Capernaum in recent times. Was this the same synagogue?

Michael Flexsenhar III tells us that is another case of conflicting archeology and the Bible narrative causing a discrepancy that tells us this is an impossibility. It turns out that the synagogue unearthed in Capernaum was built centuries after the time of Jesus. Since no other synagogue has been discovered in Capernaum, we are left wondering whether the story is true or not.

#10 – How Jesus was crucified

Although none of the Gospel narratives of Jesus’ crucifixion (Matthew 27:27-44; Mark 15:16-32; Luke 23:26-43; John 19:16-37) tell us exactly what was used to affix Jesus to the cross, the Doubting Thomas scene in John 20:24-29 mentions “the mark of the nails in his feet.” So what was used to secure Jesus to the cross?

There is good textual evidence that victims of crucifixion may actually have been bound to  crosses with rope until the first Jewish revolt in 66 CE, long after Jesus’ death, according to Jeffrey P. Arroyo García. In addition, García notes that while most depictions of the crucifixion show nails going through the top of Jesus’ feet, a calcified heel bone of a crucifixion victim was found by archeologists in Israel. A nail was still stuck in the bone, but from the side rather than the top. So even when nails were used, they were likely driven into the side of the victim’s feet and nailed to the sides of the cross, a more stable position.

Conclusion

These instances of conflicting archeology and the Bible accounts show that the sacred text is full of exciting, thought-provoking, and baffling stories. There are heroes and villains, wars, and dramatic divine interventions. However, we must ask ourselves whether these stories are historical, in our modern sense of the term. Are they instead mythical, interesting but implausible stories about the origins of one’s people and faith which were common in the ancient Near East?

The answer seems to be both. There are certainly historical events recorded in the Bible, including war and exile, Jesus’ crucifixion, and a host of others. However, some of the historical wheat can be separated from the chaff through the discipline of archeology.

What archeological discoveries conflict with the Bible? There are quite a few that contradict the beloved biblical tales. The Israelites were merely a subset of the Canaanites, for example, not their conquerors. Additionally, there is no evidence that they were enslaved in Egypt en masse and then led out by a heroic figure. The list goes on and on.

Findings such as these, while they undoubtedly give us invaluable historical information, have to be reckoned with, whether one is a person of faith or a historian.

When Was the Bible Canonized? (TIMELINE)

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

When was the Bible canonized? This question cuts to the core of both Christianity and Judaism, as the Bible stands at the heart of these two monotheistic traditions that have profoundly shaped Western civilization.

(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!)

Today, more than two billion Christians and over fifteen million Jews look to the Bible — not as a single book, but as a collection of sacred texts that define their faith, ethics, and worldview. Yet, the Bible as we know it didn’t appear fully formed; rather, its canonization was a gradual, complex process spanning centuries.

While we have a separate article that explores how the Bible was canonized (the debates, theological considerations, and criteria for inclusion), this article will focus on when it happened. 

When was the Bible canonized and by whom? How did early Jewish and Christian communities decide which texts were authoritative? And what role did key historical figures, councils, and manuscripts play in shaping the Bible we have today?

To answer these questions, we’ll take a journey through history, examining the timeline of the Bible’s canonization. From the composition of the earliest biblical texts to the formal recognition of the canon by religious councils, this article will highlight the pivotal moments that defined the biblical tradition across centuries.

However, before we begin, let me invite you to check out a captivating lecture by Dr. Bart D. Ehrman. The title? “Did Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John Actually Write MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE, AND JOHN?” If you think they did, you’ll be surprised!

Following the historical-critical method, Dr. Ehrman provides a fresh and intriguing analysis of the New Testament Gospels, revealing the true identity of the authors behind these fundamental documents! And upon all of that, it’s completely free! Take a look. You won’t be disappointed.

When Was the Bible Canonized? A Helpful Timeline

Before we dive into the broader question of when the Bible was canonized and examine the complex process behind it, let’s first lay out a clear timeline.

By highlighting key dates and pivotal moments, we can better understand how both Jewish and Christian communities shaped their sacred scriptures over time. This timeline will walk you through the centuries-long development of the biblical canon, from the composition of the earliest texts to the official recognition of the books we now call the Bible.

When Was the Bible Canonized: An Overview of the Gradual Process

So, when was the Bible canonized? Asking this question leads us down two distinct historical paths — one shaped by Judaism and the other by Christianity. While both traditions developed sacred canons that would define their religious identities, the process unfolded in different ways, influenced by theological, social, and political factors.

The Jewish Bible (Tanakh) reached a state of relative stability by the early centuries of the Common Era, whereas the Christian canon took longer to crystallize, undergoing periods of debate, refinement, and controversy.

Judaism

By the end of the first century C.E., Jewish texts were already categorized into three categories: the Torah (Law), the Nevi’im (Prophets), and the Ketuvim (Writings). This division, which would later be formalized as the Tanakh, suggests that Jewish communities had a broad sense of scriptural authority. 

However, the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE marked a pivotal turning point. The loss of the sacrificial system and centralized worship in Jerusalem compelled Jewish leaders to place even greater emphasis on religious texts as the foundation of Jewish identity and practice.

Additionally, the collapse of the Second Temple sects (e.g. the Sadducees, who were closely tied to temple rituals) left the Pharisaic movement, with its strong emphasis on textual study and interpretation, as the dominant force in shaping post-Temple Judaism.

The emergence of Rabbinic Judaism in this period further reinforced the need for a defined scriptural canon, particularly as Christianity, which began as a sect within Judaism, started to diverge and gain followers among non-Jews. 

By drawing clearer boundaries around sacred texts, Jewish leaders solidified Judaism's identity in contrast to the emerging Christian movement.

Although no official council declared a closed Jewish canon at a specific moment, scholars generally agree that between 70 and 150 CE, fundamental decisions about the Jewish Bible were made.

As James A. Sanders explains:

The discovery of Torah scrolls at Wadi Murabba‘at (c. 135 CE) provides further evidence of informal textual standardization, supporting the idea that by the second century, Jewish communities largely recognized the threefold division of the Tanakh as authoritative.

When Was the New Testament Canonized?

The process of Bible canonization within Christianity unfolded more rapidly and was marked by greater internal conflict. In the earliest years of the movement, Christian communities naturally exchanged, copied, and read various letters and gospels, but there was no universally agreed-upon collection of sacred writings.

“From the beginning,” Lee M. McDonald writes, “the proclamation about the death and resurrection of Jesus, circulated among the Christian churches in oral form. Some of this tradition was written quite early (ca. 35-65), but much of it remained in oral form for a considerable period of time.”

A Christian community in Rome around the late first century, for example, might have had access to some of Paul’s epistles and one or two Gospels, but their collection would not have been necessarily identical to that of a Christian community in Asia Minor or Syria.

By the mid-second century, increasing theological disputes forced Christian leaders to take a more deliberate approach to defining authoritative texts. 

One challenge came from Marcion, a controversial figure who advocated for a drastically reduced canon. He rejected the Old Testament entirely and embraced only an edited version of Luke’s Gospel and select Pauline letters.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, certain Gnostic groups sought to expand the canon, incorporating esoteric texts such as the Gospel of Judas or the Gospel of Thomas as part of their spiritual framework. 

These competing perspectives forced Christian leaders to clarify which writings were truly representative of the teachings of Jesus and his first followers. 

By the late 2nd century, a mix of stability and fluidity defined the New Testament canon. Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 180 C.E.) firmly defended the authority of the fourfold Gospel tradition (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) and recognized Paul’s epistles as essential.

However, uncertainty remained over certain books. While Revelation, for instance, was accepted in some regions, it was disputed in others. The historian Eusebius (early 4th century) documented this tension, categorizing books as “acknowledged,” “disputed,” or even “spurious.”

By the end of the fourth century, greater consensus had emerged. The Paschal (or festal) Letter of Athanasius (367 C.E.) explicitly, for the first time in recorded history, listed the 27 books that would later be recognized as the New Testament.

In the book Athanase d'Alexandrie et l'Église d'Égypte au IVe siècle (Athanasius of Alexandria and the Egyptian Church in the 4th century) Annick Martin explains the historical significance of Athanasius’ letter and his public ministry: 

Shortly afterward, the (local) Councils of Hippo (393 C.E.) and Carthage (397 C.E.) affirmed this canon in a more official capacity. However, discussions did not fully end! Well into the 4th century, texts such as the Epistle of Barnabas were still included in some collections, while books like 2 Peter faced scrutiny.

In both Judaism and Christianity, the issue of when the Bible was canonized was as much about defining religious identity as it was about selecting sacred texts. Additionally, rather than a single moment or council deciding the issue, the canonization of the Bible was a gradual and dynamic process, shaped by theological disputes, religious reforms, and historical events. 

As we’ll see in the next section, debates over the biblical canon didn’t come to a halt in the 4th or 5th centuries. As new theological challenges emerged (particularly with the rise of various heretical movements in the High Middle Ages) the Catholic Church found itself reaffirming the boundaries of Scripture.

This issue became even more pressing during the Protestant Reformation (16th century) when differing views on Biblical authority led to a reshaping of the canon in certain Christian traditions. So, when was the Catholic Bible canonized? Let’s take a closer look!

When Was the Catholic Bible Canonized?

Throughout most of the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church held an unrivaled position as both a religious and, at times, political authority in Europe. It was the sole institution capable of defining orthodoxy and interpreting the Scriptures for the faithful. 

The Vulgate, the Latin translation of the Bible completed by Jerome in the late 4th and early 5th centuries, served as the Church’s official biblical text. 

Yet, the stability of Catholic dominance over the biblical tradition faced its first serious external challenge in the High Middle Ages (10th-13th centuries) with the emergence of heretical movements such as the Cathars in France and Waldensians in Italy. 

These groups not only questioned Church doctrine and ecclesiastical authority, but some of them also sought to establish alternative biblical traditions — rejecting certain books, promoting vernacular translations, or undermining the Church’s exclusive right to interpret Scripture.

By the Late Middle Ages (14th-15th centuries), new theological challenges emerged with John Wycliffe’s Lollards in England and Jan Hus’ followers in Bohemia, both of whom sought to restore biblical authority to the common people. 

By the time the Protestant Reformation erupted in the early 16th century, it was already too late for the Church to reverse these changes. The Reformation not only called for biblical translations in local languages, but it also fundamentally questioned the central doctrines of the Catholic church and which books belonged in the Bible. 

In response, the Council of Trent (1546 C.E.) took decisive action, formally confirming the Catholic Bible as including the Deuterocanonical books. This move solidified the Catholic canon and pushed the Catholic Church away from Protestantism. 

So, when was the Catholic Bible canonized? The canonization of the Catholic Bible was a gradual process spanning centuries (from late antiquity well into the medieval period). The culmination of that process came with the Council of Trent! 

Finally, in his analysis of medieval Europe, historian John H. Mundy noted that “clerks, monks or laymen, and laywomen, those who diverged from orthodoxy were to change the character of the Church.”

The rise of the Protestant Reformation proved that beyond a reasonable doubt! That brings us to the following question: When was the protestant Bible canonized?

When Was the Protestant Bible Canonized?

The Protestant Reformation, triggered by Martin Luther in the early 16th century, fundamentally changed the landscape of Western Christianity. What began as a protest against the sale of indulgences quickly developed into a theological revolution that challenged the authority of the Pope and the role of the Catholic Church as the interpreter of the Holy Scriptures.

Luther's study of the Bible led him to develop two key doctrines that would define Protestant thought: Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone), which rejected the idea that Church tradition held equal authority with the Bible, and Sola Fide (faith alone), which emphasized that salvation comes through faith in Christ rather than through works or sacraments.

Luther’s reevaluation of biblical authority extended to the Deuterocanonical books (sometimes referred to as the Apocrypha). While he didn’t remove them from the Bible entirely, he placed them in a separate section, arguing that, while they were useful for reading, they weren’t divinely inspired in the same way as the Old and New Testaments.

This distinction laid the groundwork for later Protestant traditions that would exclude these books altogether from their canon.

By the mid-17th century, Protestantism had further solidified its stance on the biblical canon. The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647 C.E.), a foundational document for Reformed Christianity, formally affirmed the 66-book canon — excluding the Deuterocanonical books entirely.

Conclusion

When was the Bible canonized? As we have seen, this question doesn’t have a simple answer. Rather than a single moment in history when an official canon was declared, the process of canonization was gradual, dynamic, and deeply influenced by theological, political, and social factors.

The Jewish canon took shape over centuries, shaped by the collapse of the Temple, the rise of Rabbinic Judaism, and the need to define religious boundaries in contrast to early Christianity.

Meanwhile, the Christian canon was forged through intense debates over which texts authentically preserved the teachings of Jesus and the apostles, culminating in the late 4th century with the canon lists of Athanasius, the Councils of Hippo and Carthage, and key early manuscripts.

Yet, this was far from the end of the story. Medieval heresies, the Protestant Reformation, and the Counter-Reformation continued to shape and solidify different versions of the biblical canon.

The Council of Trent (1546 C.E.) reaffirmed the Catholic canon, including the Deuterocanonical books, while the Protestant tradition ultimately removed these books, formally codifying the 66-book canon in the Westminster Confession of Faith (1647 C.E.).

Bible Summary: The Bible in 1,000 Words

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 Bible’s influence stretches across millennia, serving as the foundational Scripture for two of the world’s major religions. However, its complexity and variety can make it challenging to grasp in a concise way.

In this article I’ll offer a synopsis of the Protestant version of the Bible, condensing its vast narrative and teachings into a digestible overview of both the Old and New Testaments. The Bible tells a story of divine interaction with humanity—one that spans centuries, cultures, and genres. In a 1,000-word Bible summary, I’ll explore the key events, themes, and figures that make up this enduring collection of holy texts.

Bible Overview

The Bible is a set of religious texts sacred to Jews (Old Testament only) and Christians (both Old and New Testaments). In fact, though, in The Rise And Fall Of The Bible: The Unexpected History of an Accidental Book, Timothy Beal argues that it’s less a book and more a library, in that it contains many writings written by different people from different historical eras and places. In addition, some Christian denominations have different numbers of books they consider sacred. In this article, though, I’ll be summarizing the Protestant version of the Bible.

(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 books of the Old Testament, also known as the Hebrew Bible, were originally written in Hebrew, with a small amount in Aramaic. The entire New Testament was written in Koine Greek, an ancient dialect of Greek commonly used in the Hellenistic and Roman periods.

The Protestant Christian Bible consists of 66 books, with 39 books in the Old Testament and 27 in the New. Most of the 66 books were written anonymously, although they are traditionally attributed to well-known biblical figures. The various books of the Old Testament were written by approximately 21 authors between about 1200 and 165 BCE. The New Testament books, on the other hand, were written by 15 or possibly 16 authors between about 50 and 120 CE.

The places where the books of the Bible were written vary widely. The first five books, known as the Pentateuch, were written by Israelites who had returned to Israel after exile in Babylon. The next seven were likely written in Babylon during that exile. Most of the rest of the Old Testament books were written somewhere in Israel.

The New Testament’s authors composed its books in a number of different places within the Roman Empire, although they don’t always make it clear where they are. They include Rome, Syria, and various locations in Asia Minor (modern-day Türkiye).

Having outlined some of the basic facts about the Bible, I’ll now attempt to summarize both the Old and New Testaments (which I’ll henceforth call OT and NT). Remember, though, that the Bible is actually an anthology of various books, so writing a Bible summary by book is a bit like trying to summarize the library.

It’s also important to remember that the books of the Bible are not always in chronological order. Sometimes an event happens in one book that is then predicted in a later one, for example.

Let’s dive into our synopsis of the Bible!

Old Testament Bible Summary

As I noted above, the first five books of the OT are called the Pentateuch. In these books, God creates the world and helps to establish the nation of Israel. The Israelites are later enslaved in Egypt but are liberated by a leader named Moses. Then God gives the Israelites their law or Torah as they wander the wilderness searching for a land God has promised them.

As John Collins notes in A Short Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, the next books narrate a mythicized history of the Israelites after they conquer and establish themselves in their new land. They are defeated, in turn, by other nations until God sends leaders called judges to save them. Later, a couple of widows, Ruth and Naomi come to Israel. Ruth will be the ancestor of Israel’s great King David.

The Israelites then ask God for a king. Their request is granted, but this king, Saul, turns out to be a letdown. After this, God chooses a young man named David to be a highly successful king. Later, when David’s son Solomon is king, there is a time of peace and prosperity that doesn’t last. The kingdom splits into two — one called Judah and the other called Israel. Both kingdoms stop following God, which results in their being conquered and exiled by several other nations.

The Babylonians capture the Israelites and take the elite members back to Babylon as captors, destroying God’s Temple in Jerusalem. When Babylon is conquered by Persia, the Israelites are allowed to return and rebuild the Temple.

After this historical section of the OT, there are several books of poetry. The book of Job is the poetic story of a righteous man to whom God allows various tragedies to happen in order to test his loyalty. The Psalms consist of 150 liturgical hymns attributed to David. Proverbs gives advice for those wanting to be wise, while Ecclesiastes is a (surprisingly negative) meditation on the meaning of life. Finally, the Song of Solomon (or Song of Songs) is an erotic love poem.

The rest of the OT books are prophetic. In Isaiah, God sends the titular prophet to warn Israel of future judgment, and the book of Jeremiah does the same, warning specifically about the Babylonian exile to come. Lamentations, as its title implies, is a series of songs bemoaning Israel’s fate at the hands of the Babylonians.

This theme of a coming divine judgment on Israel is repeated often within the prophetic books. They warn of conquest and exile, plagues of locusts, and all manner of suffering as a result of Israel’s faithlessness to God. Some of the shorter prophetic books also warn that if the Israelites treat each other unjustly, God will punish them. These books also carry God’s promises that if the people are faithful and just, he will reward them.

New Testament Bible Summary

The NT books were written much later than those of the OT and reflect a different historical phase. As Bart Ehrman notes, in The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, their historical backdrop is the Roman Empire, which had conquered and incorporated Israel. The impetus behind all the NT books is the interpretation of the life, death, and significance of Jesus of Nazareth.

The first four books are called the Gospels, a word which simply means “good news.” Each Gospel is the story of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection, but there are major differences between some of the details in them. The first Gospel in the NT, Matthew, focuses on Jesus’ role as a new Moses, reinterpreting the Jewish law. The second Gospel, Mark, portrays Jesus as the humble, suffering son adopted by God. Luke views Jesus as a prophet who is rejected by his people, while the last Gospel, John, sees Jesus as a divine being sent from heaven. There is some crossover in these stories — Matthew and Luke used Mark as one of their sources, for example — but the overall portrayals contain major differences, reflecting different ideas about Jesus.

The next book is called the Acts of the Apostles (or just Acts) and tells the story of the early church after Jesus’ death, resurrection, and ascension. It includes Paul, who is a major figure in the NT.

In fact, a number of letters written by Paul come next. There are 13 attributed to him in the NT. However, scholars have known for many years that only seven of them — Romans, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Philippians, and Philemon — were definitely written by Paul. The others were likely written in his name, trading on his authority in the early church.

Six of Paul’s authentic letters are written to Christian communities. He seems to have founded four of them, including those in Corinth, Thessaloniki, Philippi, and Galatia. They address questions and problems those communities are dealing with in Paul’s absence. The letter to Romans is Paul’s self-introduction to an already-established community, assuring them of his sound theology so that they will accept him when he visits them. Philemon, the shortest Pauline letter, is written to one person to advocate for that individual’s runaway slave.

Other letters attributed to Paul, including 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Colossians, Ephesians, and Titus, attempt to use Pauline language, but differ from Paul both on points of theology and developments in the church that occurred long after Paul’s death.

Then, there are a number of letters known as the general or Catholic epistles written by others to their own Christian communities. They encourage their people to remain faithful to Jesus despite persecution and warn them about false teachers.

The final book in this Bible summary of the NT is called Revelation. It concerns the apocalyptic visions of a Christian named John, who warns that those who persecute Christians in his time will receive divine punishment, while those who remain faithful will be rewarded.

Conclusion

The Bible has been Christians’ authoritative text for centuries. The Old Testament or Hebrew Bible has held that position for Jews for even longer. Although the various books were eventually collected, collated, and canonized into one large unit, it remains a library of diverse texts from different times and places and even espouses many conflicting ideas. Despite this, many believe the entire Bible has the sanction of divine authority.

Its 66 books were written and edited over a long period. The Old Testament was written between 1200 and 165 BCE, although it wasn’t entirely canonized within Judaism until at least the end of the 1st century CE. The New Testament was written between 50 and 120 CE and canonized around the 4th century CE by Christians, although Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox Christians still differ about which books can be defined as sacred Scripture.

50 Contradictions in the Bible: The Biggest, Most Shocking Differences

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

“Marko, what about the contradictions in the Bible? I’ve never read it, but I’ve heard there are a lot of inconsistencies.” A friend asked me this question a few months ago, sparking a conversation that reminded me of the Bible’s extraordinary influence.

It evokes strong opinions, even for those who have never opened its pages. To some, it’s a source of ultimate truth; others meet it with skepticism or distrust. Yet, both views often overlook an important reality: the Bible isn’t a single book but a collection of vastly different texts, written over centuries by multiple authors, reflecting diverse cultures, traditions, and theological concerns.

This diversity has inevitably led to biblical contradictions. For example, the Gospels offer differing accounts of the life of Jesus, and the Old Testament contains multiple perspectives on the same events or laws.

While these inconsistencies in the Bible are undeniable, they don’t necessarily diminish its religious significance. In fact, many fine scholars — both believers and skeptics — approach these contradictions not as flaws but as windows into the texts' historical, cultural, and theological development.

Therefore, this article will explore 50 biblical contradictions, ranging from the Old Testament to the New. Along the way, we’ll examine the significance of the biggest inconsistencies in the Bible, not only to understand the texts better but also to appreciate the complex tapestry of beliefs, traditions, and debates that shaped them.

Defining Our Terms: What is a Contradiction?

Before we explore biblical contradictions, we must first define what we mean by the term "contradiction." Understanding this concept is essential for our discussion. The Merriam-Webster dictionary offers the following definition: “A contradiction is a statement or phrase whose parts contradict each other (a round square is a contradiction in terms).”

In the context of the Bible, contradictions occur when there are two or more accounts of the same event or concept that differ so significantly they cannot both be true at the same time. It’s important to distinguish contradictions from mere differences (we’ll cover both categories).

For example, the fact that Matthew’s Gospel describes the visit of the Magi while Luke highlights the role of shepherds (in birth narratives) isn’t necessarily a contradiction. It’s simply a matter of differing emphases or perspectives. 

However, if two accounts of the same event directly conflict in a way that defies reconciliation, such as one, for instance, saying an event happened in Galilee and another placing it in Judea, then we are dealing with a true contradiction.

As noted, biblical contradictions are, first and foremost, a reminder of the complex and multifaceted history of the Bible's composition. To deny them is to undermine the literary significance of the Bible. Jon B. Gabel et. al. notes in the book The Bible as Literature:

(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!) 

After clearing the ground and defining our terms clearly, we can start looking at the biggest inconsistencies and differences in the Bible, reaching the number 50! Let’s get going.

But before we get right into it, I wanted to invite you to check out Bart D. Ehrman’s course In the Beginning: History, Legend, and Myth in Genesis. In the six online lectures, Dr. Ehrman provides scholarly insight into the Book of Genesis, demonstrating the fine line between authentic history and mythological elements! 

Biblical Contradictions: List of 50 Biblical Inconsistencies

Our exploration into the biggest contradictions in the Bible (and differences!) begins with an example that, in a sense, binds the Old Testament with the New Testament in a paradoxical way.

#1 - The Earth Does Not Last Forever

In Ecclesiastes 1:4, we read that “the earth remains forever,” a sentiment echoed in Psalm 104:5, which praises God for laying the foundations of the earth so firmly that “it should never be moved.”

However, this view contrasts sharply with certain passages in the New Testament that foresee the destruction of the current earth and the creation of a new one. For example, 2 Peter 3:13 describes the hope for “new heavens and a new earth, where righteousness dwells,” and Revelation 21:1 envisions “a new heaven and a new earth” after the first has passed away.

#2 - The Number of Animals Noah Took on the Ark

Another example that reminds us of the discrepancies in the Bible can be found in the story of Noah and the Ark. In Genesis 6:19-20, God commands Noah to take two of every kind of animal — one male and one female — onto the Ark to preserve their species. However, in Genesis 7:2-3, the instructions are more specific, stating that Noah should take seven pairs of clean animals (suitable for sacrifice) and one pair of unclean animals.

So, which is it? This discrepancy reflects differing traditions within the text, likely stemming from the merging of multiple sources behind the composition of Genesis. As Robert Alter explains in his Commentary:

#3 - Two Creation Stories

In exploring other biblical contradictions, we are (for now) staying with the Book of Genesis, which begins with two distinct accounts of creation. In Genesis 1:1-2:3, it unfolds in a structured, ordered sequence over six days, culminating in the creation of humanity (male and female) together on the sixth day.

In Genesis 2:4-25, however, the narrative is more focused on human formation. Here, man (Adam) is created first from the dust of the ground, followed by vegetation, animals, and finally, a woman (Eve) as a helper. This portrayal is more intimate and anthropocentric, with God personally shaping Adam and breathing life into him.

#4 – Does God Forgive People?

In 2 Kings 24:4, we encounter a stark declaration: “The LORD was not willing to forgive,” specifically regarding the sins of King Manasseh, who led Judah into idolatry and shed innocent blood. 

This statement stands in tension with the broader biblical theme of God’s mercy and willingness to forgive, as seen in passages like Psalms 103:3,10, which praise God for forgiving iniquities and not treating humanity as their sins deserve.

The contradiction deepens when we compare 2 Kings with 2 Chronicles. In the latter (2 Chronicles 33:19), we learn that Manasseh eventually repented, humbling himself before God, who then restored him.

However, repentance and restoration are entirely absent from the account in Kings, which portrays Manasseh’s sins as the ultimate reason for Judah’s destruction — a punishment that fell upon generations long after his reign.

#5 – How Many Items?

In the book of Ezra, we encounter a numerical inconsistency regarding the temple vessels that King Cyrus of Persia returned to the Jews for their use in rebuilding the temple in Jerusalem. Ezra 1:9-10 provides a detailed inventory:

This totals 2,469 items. Yet in Ezra 1:11, the text states that the total number of vessels returned was 5,400. This represents another example of the contradictions in the Bible, deriving from the difference between the listed items and the sum provided.

Attempts to harmonize this contradiction by suggesting that not all items were included in the detailed list seem unlikely. Verse 10 explicitly states, “and 1,000 other devices,” implying that all categories of vessels were accounted for.

#6 – Levite Cities: 11 or 13?

Another contradiction arises in the accounts of the Levite cities allocated to the descendants of Aaron. In 1 Chronicles 6:42-45, 11 cities are listed, but the text states there should be 13 in total. These cities include Hebron, Libna, Jattir, Eschtemoa, Holon, Debir, Aschan, Beth Shemesh, Geba, Alemet, and Anatot. The discrepancy between the stated total and the actual list creates an inconsistency within the text.

The parallel account in Joshua 21:13-19 provides a different list of 13 cities, with variations and additions. Notably, this list includes Ajin, Jutta, Gibeon, and Almon, which are absent in Chronicles, while Aschan and Alemet do not appear in Joshua’s account.

#7 – The Prophetess Huldah and Her Family: A Case of Differing Names

In 2 Kings 22:14, we read about Hilkiah the priest consulting the prophetess Huldah, who is described as the wife of Shallum, son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas. However, the parallel account in 2 Chronicles 34:22 provides slightly different details about Huldah’s family.

Here, her husband is named Shallum, but his lineage includes Tokhat and Hasra instead of Tikvah and Harhas. Even in the original Hebrew, these differences in names are clear and distinct.

#8 – The Passover Celebrations of Hezekiah and Josiah

A notable example of the contradictions in the Bible arises when comparing the accounts of Passover celebrations under the reigns of King Hezekiah and King Josiah. 

In 2 Kings 23:21-23, it’s stated that during Josiah’s reign, the Passover was celebrated for the first time since the era of the judges, explicitly noting that no such observance occurred during the time of the kings of Israel and Judah.

However, in 2 Chronicles 30, we find an account of an earlier Passover celebrated under King Hezekiah. This celebration is described as extraordinarily large and marked by great joy, involving participants from both Judah and remnants of the northern kingdom of Israel.

#9 – Who Was David’s Scribe? Three Different Answers

A fascinating example of a biblical mistake relates to the identity of the scribe who served during King David’s reign.

In 2 Samuel 8:17, the scribe is identified as Seraiah. Later, in 2 Samuel 20:25, the same position is ascribed to someone named Shevah. Meanwhile, 1 Chronicles 18:16 lists Shawsha as the scribe during David’s reign. The differences in names are evident even in the original Hebrew, which creates a clear inconsistency in the record of this key position.

This contradiction may be the result of scribal errors in the transmission of the texts, as the names are phonetically similar, suggesting possible confusion during copying.

#10 – The Mysterious Disappearance of Swords in Israel

A perplexing biblical contradiction emerges in the account of weaponry among the Israelites. In 1 Samuel 13:19-22, we are told that during Saul's reign, there was not a single sword or spear among the Israelites, except for those belonging to Saul and his son Jonathan.

However, this claim is difficult to reconcile with other passages. In the period of the judges, only a generation or so earlier, swords appear to have been commonplace. Judges 8:10 describes Gideon defeating 120,000 enemy swordsmen, and Judges 20:2,15,17 detail a vast Israelite army equipped for battle, implying they were well-armed.

#11 – Contradictions in the Story of Jacob and Esau: Method of Deception

The story of Jacob and Esau, as told in Genesis 27 and beyond, is a rich narrative full of theological and literary significance. However, as noted in Gabel’s Bible as Literature, it also exhibits several biblical contradictions and narrative inconsistencies, likely due to the blending of multiple sources.

One notable inconsistency lies in the methods Jacob uses to deceive his father, Isaac. The narrative presents two separate strategies: Jacob wears Esau’s clothes — which smell of the open country — and covers his arms with goatskins to mimic Esau’s hairy skin. While both methods are effective, the dual explanation seems redundant and suggests the merging of two versions of the story.

Each may have originally featured a single method of deception, but they were later combined into the unified account we have today.

#12 – Contradictions in the Bible: Jacob’s Departure from Home

Another contradiction emerges in Jacob’s departure from home after the deception. In one account, he flees to Harran to escape Esau’s wrath, acting on his mother Rebekah’s advice (Genesis 27:42-45). 

In another, Jacob travels to Harran to find a wife, following his father Isaac’s command (Genesis 28:1-5). These differing motivations for Jacob’s journey point to distinct narrative strands, each with its theological emphasis — one focusing on familial conflict and another on divine providence in securing the lineage of the patriarchs.

As we, in our exploration of the contradictions in the Bible, slowly shift focus to the New Testament, I'm reminded again of Gail Evans' assertion that each biblical contradiction “is not so much the hard and fast word of God, but a collection of scrolls, written by various people” who often had different views about the relationship between humans and what they consider to be the Supreme Being or God.

#13 – What Did the Voice at Jesus’ Baptism Say?

The accounts of Jesus’ baptism in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke reveal fascinating examples of discrepancy in the Bible regarding the words spoken by the divine voice from heaven. While all three narratives describe this pivotal event, the exact wording and audience of the voice differ, reflecting unique theological emphases and textual traditions.

In Matthew 3:17, the voice appears to address the gathered crowd, proclaiming: “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”

Bart Ehrman, in his book Jesus Interrupted (an excellent study of numerous contradictions in the Bible), notes: “The voice appears to be speaking to the people around Jesus, or possibly to John the Baptist, informing them who Jesus is.”

In Mark 1:11, however, the voice speaks directly to Jesus: “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.” Here, the statement is more intimate, suggesting a personal affirmation of Jesus’ identity and mission.

Luke 3:22 presents an even more intriguing variation. In some of the oldest manuscripts, the voice says: “You are my Son; today I have begotten you.” This wording echoes Psalm 2:7 and carries significant theological implications, suggesting a moment of divine appointment or recognition of Jesus’ sonship at his baptism.

#14 – Conflicting Accounts of Paul’s Journeys

The life of the apostle Paul provides another example of biblical contradiction when comparing his travel narrative in Galatians with that in the Acts of the Apostles. In Galatians 1:17-2:9, Paul emphasizes that, after his conversion, he did not go to Jerusalem immediately.

Instead, he traveled to Arabia and then returned to Damascus. He states that he visited Jerusalem only three years later, staying for 15 days and meeting only Cephas (Peter) and James. He explicitly notes that he did not meet any other apostles at that time. 

Afterward, he went to Syria and Cilicia, and 14 years later, he returned to Jerusalem for the apostolic council, possibly corresponding to the events of Acts 15.

In Acts 9, however, Paul’s movements after his conversion appear different. According to this account, Paul stayed in Damascus for many days, preaching the gospel before fleeing due to a plot against his life. He then traveled to Jerusalem, where he met Barnabas and was introduced to the apostles, with no mention of his journey to Arabia.

The text suggests he stayed in Jerusalem for a longer period, preaching openly before leaving for Caesarea and then Tarsus. Later, Barnabas brought him from Tarsus to Antioch, where Paul began his missionary work.

The two accounts differ significantly in timing, locations, and the people Paul met, creating challenges for harmonizing the narratives.

In his Commentary, therefore, Joseph Fitzmyer rightly points out that “Luke [Fitzmyer believes that the name of the author of Acts is Luke] says nothing about Paul's journey to Arabia or his return from there to Damascus (see Gal I: 17). Nor does he indicate that the "considerable time" (9:23) was actually "three years" (Gal 1:18).”

#15 – The Genealogy of Jesus

One of the most well-known examples of the contradictions in the Bible lies in the differing genealogies of Jesus presented in Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38. Both Gospels trace Jesus’ lineage, but they do so in significantly different ways, with notable discrepancies in names. 

The differences in the lists of names are striking. For example, Jesus' grandfather in Matthew is Jacob, whereas it’s Heli  in Luke (Matthew 1:16; Luke 3:23). 

Similarly, the genealogies diverge dramatically in the generations following David. Matthew traces Jesus' descent through Solomon, emphasizing the royal line, while Luke follows Nathan, another son of David, presenting a priestly or prophetic lineage.

Some have suggested that Matthew provides Joseph’s legal lineage, while Luke traces a biological or maternal line. However, Bart Ehrman, in Jesus Interrupted, notes: “It is an attractive solution, but it has a fatal flaw. Luke explicitly indicates that the family line is that of Joseph, not Mary (Luke 1:23; also Matthew 1:16).

#16 – Where Was Jesus the Day After His Baptism?

The Gospels present differing accounts of what happened to Jesus immediately after his baptism. In the Synoptic Gospels Jesus goes directly into the wilderness, where the Devil tempts him.

In contrast, the Gospel of John omits any mention of Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness. Instead, John describes a sequence of events in which John the Baptist, on the day after witnessing the Spirit descending on Jesus during his baptism, publicly identifies Jesus as the Lamb of God (John 1:29-34).

#17 – The Death of Judas: Two Contradictory Accounts

This is one of my favorite contradictions in the Bible, as it vividly illustrates the complexities of the Gospel and Acts narratives. The accounts of Judas Iscariot’s death in Matthew 27:3-10 and Acts 1:18-19 differ both in the details of what happened and the description of his death. 

In Matthew, Judas is said to have felt remorse after betraying Jesus, returned the 30 pieces of silver to the temple, and hanged himself in despair. The chief priests used the returned money to buy a potter’s field, which came to be known as the “Field of Blood.”

In Acts, however, Judas’ death is described quite differently. Here, Judas is said to have acquired a field with the payment he received for his betrayal, and his death occurs when he falls headlong (Greek: πρηνὴς γενόμενος), bursting open and spilling his intestines. The verb πρηνὴς indicates, without a doubt, a headfirst fall!

In his Commentary on Acts, Charles K. Barrett concludes:

#18 – Was Jairus’ Daughter Already Dead?

This example of biblical contradiction was at the heart of an online debate between Bart D. Ehrman and Matthew Firth that you can check out here! What is this inconsistency all about? 

In Mark 5:22-23 and Luke 8:41-42, Jairus approaches Jesus, pleading with him to heal his daughter, who is described as gravely ill but still alive. Jairus says: “My little daughter is dying” (Mark 5:23). However, while Jesus is on his way to Jairus’ house, a messenger arrives to report that the girl has died, leading to the dramatic miracle where Jesus raises her from the dead.

In Matthew 9:18, the story takes a different turn. Here, Jairus tells Jesus from the outset that his daughter has already died: “My daughter has just died. But come and put your hand on her, and she will live” (Matthew 9:18). It’s a small contradiction, but indeed a contradiction!

#19 – On What Day Did Jesus Die?

We know that Jesus died by crucifixion. However, on what day?  In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus is crucified on the day of Passover (Nisan 15), following the Last Supper, which is described as a Passover meal. This timeline situates Jesus' death after the Passover lambs were sacrificed.

In contrast, John’s Gospel places Jesus’ crucifixion on the day before Passover (Nisan 14), at the same time the Passover lambs were being slaughtered in preparation for the festival (John 19:14).

#20 – The High Priest Abiathar in Mark 2:26

Another biblical mistake comes from Mark 2:26, where Jesus references an event from 1 Samuel 21:1-6. In Mark’s account, Jesus recalls how David, in need of food, entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, “in the days of Abiathar the high priest.” 

The problem lies in that, according to 1 Samuel, the high priest at the time of this event was Ahimelech, Abiathar’s father. Abiathar became high priest later, following Ahimelech’s death. This discrepancy has prompted much scholarly debate.

However, most critical scholars, unburdened by the radical understanding of inerrancy, see it as a simple error or misattribution by the author of Mark.

#21 – Was the Curtain in the Temple Torn Before or After Jesus’ Death?

There is another contradiction in the Bible related to Jesus’ death. It centers on the timing of the tearing of the temple curtain. In Matthew 27:50-51, the moment is described as happening immediately after Jesus' death: “And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. At that moment, the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.”

However, in Luke’s account, a slight difference in the sequence arises. Luke 23:45 mentions the tearing of the curtain just before Jesus cries out: “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” This subtle shift in timing creates a discrepancy between Luke and the other Synoptic Gospels.

#22 – How Many Times Will the Rooster Crow Before Peter Denies Jesus?

A subtle and funny contradiction emerges in the accounts of Peter’s denial of Jesus and the role of the rooster’s crowing. 

In Mark 14:30, Jesus predicts: “Truly I tell you, today – yes, tonight – before the rooster crows twice you yourself will disown me three times.” True to the prediction, Mark’s Gospel records the rooster crowing twice as Peter denies Jesus three times (Mark 14:68, 72).

In contrast, the other Gospels — Matthew (26:34), Luke (22:34), and John (13:38) — simplify the prediction, stating that Peter will deny Jesus three times before the rooster crows, with no mention of a second crowing.

Jesus' birth stories in Matthew and Luke contain several examples of the contradictions in the Bible that scholars have noted since the work of Enlightenment thinkers in the 18th century. Let’s take a look!

#23 – The Hometown of Mary and Joseph

In Matthew’s Gospel, the hometown of Mary and Joseph is implied to be Bethlehem. The narrative begins with Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem and continues with the family fleeing to Egypt to escape Herod’s massacre (Matthew 2:1-15). Only later, after returning from Egypt, do they settle in Nazareth, presented as a new location chosen to avoid Herod’s successor (Matthew 2:22-23).

Luke, however, explicitly states that Mary and Joseph were living in Nazareth before Jesus’ birth. The couple travels to Bethlehem for a census, as Joseph is said to be of the house of David (Luke 2:4-5). After Jesus is born in Bethlehem, the family returns directly to Nazareth, with no mention of Egypt or Herod’s massacre (Luke 2:39-40).

#24 – Where Did the Family Go After Jesus’ Birth?

Another notable contradiction between Matthew and Luke concerns the family’s movements after Jesus was born. In Matthew, the Holy Family doesn’t return to Nazareth immediately. Instead, they flee to Egypt to escape King Herod’s order to kill all the male infants in Bethlehem.

In Luke’s Gospel, however, there is no mention of Herod’s massacre or a flight to Egypt. After Jesus is born, the family completes the required purification rites in Jerusalem (Luke 2:22-24) and then returns directly to their home in Nazareth.

#25 – Who Visited Baby Jesus?

The visitors who come to see baby Jesus differ significantly between Matthew and Luke. In Matthew’s account, magi (wise men) from the East follow a star to Bethlehem, bringing gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh to honor the newborn “King of the Jews” (Matthew 2:1-12).

Luke, on the other hand, introduces humble shepherds who are visited by an angel announcing the birth of the Savior. The shepherds then go to Bethlehem to see Jesus, glorifying and praising God for what they had witnessed (Luke 2:8-20).

This difference but also other contradictory elements are analyzed in depth by Raymond E. Brown in his magnificent and enormous book The Birth of the Messiah. For those ready to immerse themselves in all the nuances and details of the birth narratives, it is a must-read.

#26 – Who Is For Jesus and Who Is Against Him?

Another discrepancy that Bart Ehrman highlights in his book Jesus Interrupted involves two seemingly contradictory sayings of Jesus as recorded in Matthew and Mark. In Matthew 12:30, Jesus states, “Whoever is not with me is against me,” drawing a clear line between allegiance and opposition. Yet, in Mark 9:40, he appears to express the opposite sentiment: “Whoever is not against us is for us.” These sayings, while similar in structure, convey starkly different messages.

#27 – The Council of Jerusalem

The description of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 differs in emphasis from Paul’s account in Galatians 2:1-10. In Galatians, Paul emphasizes his independence from the Jerusalem apostles, presenting the council as a private meeting where his mission to the Gentiles was endorsed.

The book of Acts, however, portrays the event as a public council where the apostles collectively and in harmony decide on guidelines for Gentile converts, such as abstaining from food sacrificed to idols.

#28 – Gamaliel’s Speech in Acts

Among the inconsistencies in the Bible, one stands out! In Acts 5:34-39, Gamaliel, a Pharisee, refers to Theudas and Judas the Galilean as examples of failed revolutionary leaders. However, this raises a historical issue, as Josephus, the Jewish historian, places Theudas after Judas the Galilean, suggesting that Luke (the author of Acts) may have confused the chronological order.

#29 – Paul’s Views on Women: Silence or Leadership?

One of the most interesting examples of the contradictions in the Bible emerges when comparing Paul’s seemingly supportive views on women’s roles in the church with a passage often attributed to him but suspected by scholars to be a later interpolation.

In 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, Paul is quoted as saying: “Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says.” In Romans 16, however, Paul commends several women for their roles in the early Christian community. He praises Phoebe as a deacon (Romans 16:1), Junia as “outstanding among the apostles” (16:7), and others such as Priscilla, who worked alongside him in ministry.

Many scholars argue that may not be original to Paul’s letter. They note that the verses disrupt the flow of the surrounding text, where Paul discusses orderly worship, and that some manuscripts place the passage in different locations.

#30 – Stephen’s Account of Abraham’s Tomb in Acts: A Historical and Textual Contradiction

In Acts 7:15-16, Stephen, during his speech before the Sanhedrin, claims that Abraham purchased a burial place in Shechem from the sons of Hamor. This account introduces several significant problems when compared to the Old Testament narrative. 

According to Genesis 23, Abraham purchased a family tomb in Machpelah near Mamre from Ephron the Hittite, where Sarah, Abraham, Isaac, Rebekah, Leah, and Jacob were all eventually buried.

On the other hand, Genesis 33:18-19 and Joshua 24:32 state that the burial site in Shechem was purchased by Jacob from the sons of Hamor and that it was Joseph, not Jacob, who was buried there.

#31 – Stephen’s Account of Abraham’s Tomb in Acts: A Historical and Textual Contradiction

Another possible biblical contradiction is related to the historical implausibility of Abraham interacting with the sons of Hamor. 

According to Genesis 34, Hamor and his son Shechem lived during Jacob’s lifetime, a period long after Abraham’s death. This discrepancy makes it unlikely Abraham could have purchased land from them.

Additionally, the text of Genesis 23 does not indicate that Abraham owned other burial sites, and it seems illogical that Jacob would buy a tomb already owned by his grandfather.

#32 – Did the Arameans Stop Invading Israel?

In 2 Kings 6:23, we read that after a miraculous intervention where the prophet Elisha spares captured Aramean soldiers, the text concludes: “So the bands of Aram stopped raiding Israel’s territory.”

This statement suggests a cessation of hostilities between Aram (Syria) and Israel. However, in the very next verse (2 Kings 6:24), the narrative takes an opposite turn, as Ben-Hadad, king of Aram, gathers his entire army and lays siege to Samaria, the capital of Israel.

#33 – Who Instigated the Census: God or Satan?

In our journey through differences and contradictions in the Bible, we are driven back to the time of King David and his census.

In 2 Samuel 24:1, it is the Lord who incites David to number Israel, reflecting a theological perspective in which God is sovereign over all events, even those leading to judgment. In contrast, 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the incitement to Satan which introduces a distinct shift in theological interpretation.

#34 – Differing Numbers in the Census

The reported results of the census differ significantly between the two accounts. 2 Samuel 24:9 records 800,000 swordsmen in Israel and 500,000 men in Judah, while 1 Chronicles 21:5 lists 1,100,000 swordsmen in Israel and 470,000 in Judah.

#35 – The Death of Saul’s Sons vs. Deuteronomy’s Law

The execution of seven of Saul’s sons (2 Samuel 21:7-14) to atone for his actions contradicts Deuteronomy 24:16, which explicitly states that children shouldn’t be punished for the sins of their fathers. This lex talionis violation suggests a tension between the moral and legal principles outlined in the Torah and the actions described in the narrative.

#36 – The Number of Saul’s Sons

Another example of the contradiction in the Bible arises concerning the number of Saul’s sons. In 1 Samuel 31:2 and 1 Chronicles 10:5, Saul and all his sons are said to have died in battle, yet 2 Samuel 21:1-14 introduces seven additional sons whose deaths are required to atone for Saul’s sin.

#37 – Michal or Merab?

In 2 Samuel 21:8, the text states that five of the executed sons were Michal’s. However, this conflicts with 2 Samuel 6:23, which explicitly states that Michal, David’s wife, had no children.

Scholars argue this is likely a scribal error and that the text should read “Merab” (Michal’s sister) instead of Michal. This correction aligns with 1 Samuel 18:17, where Merab is mentioned as Saul’s daughter.

#38 – Did Saul See Samuel Again After His Rejection?

An apparent biblical contradiction is also seen in 1 Samuel 15:35. There, it’s  explicitly stated that after Saul was rejected by God: “Samuel did not see Saul again until the day of his death.” The Hebrew word used (ra’a), clearly indicates physical sight or meeting.

However, in 1 Samuel 19:24, Saul encounters Samuel during an episode in which Saul is overcome by the Spirit of God and prophesies in Samuel’s presence at Naioth in Ramah.

#39 – How Long Did Saul Reign?

An example of a time-based discrepancy in the Bible revolves around Saul’s reign as described in 1 Samuel 13:1. The verse famously omits Saul’s age and states that he reigned for only two years.

This short time frame contradicts Acts 13:21, where Paul declares that Saul ruled for 40 years. Additionally, if 1 Samuel 13:1 is taken as part of the narrative, verse 8 becomes problematic, as it suggests only seven days have passed, not two years.

#40 – How Many Men Were in the Ambush Against Ai?

In Joshua 8, a numerical error arises concerning the ambush Joshua planned against the city of Ai. In verse 3, Joshua selects 30,000 warriors for the ambush, clearly distinguishing this group from those engaged in the direct attack.

However, in verse 12, the text states that only 5,000 men were placed in ambush. The inconsistency between these two numbers is further complicated by verses 9 and 12, which indicate there was only one ambush force hidden west of the city.

#41 – What Livestock? The Plagues of Egypt

As we are getting close to the end of our journey through the contradictions in the Bible, one thing pops out! It seems that keeping track of livestock was as challenging for the ancient authors as it might have been for Pharaoh! 

In Exodus 9:5, during the fifth plague, a pestilence is said to kill “all of the livestock of the Egyptians.”

Yet, just a few days later, in Exodus 9:21-22, the seventh plague of hail threatens to destroy “all the livestock in the fields.” The obvious question arises: what livestock? If the fifth plague wiped them all out, where did the animals for the seventh plague come from?

#42 – Did God Reveal His Name Yahweh to the Patriarchs?

It seems that even God can contradict himself — or at least, that’s how it appears in the Bible! In Exodus 6:3, God tells Moses: “I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty [El Shaddai], but by my name ‘The LORD’ [Yahweh], I did not make myself known to them.”

This statement suggests that Yahweh’s name was unknown to the patriarchs. But earlier in Genesis 15:7, God declares to Abraham: “I am The LORD [Yahweh], who brought you from Ur of the Chaldeans.” Additionally, the name Yahweh is used repeatedly throughout Genesis.

#43 – Where Did Aaron, the Brother of Moses, Die?

This is another possible example of a contradiction in the Bible! In Numbers 20:28 and Numbers 33:38, Aaron is said to have died and remained on the top of Mount Hor, a location emphasized as the site of his death and burial.

However, in Deuteronomy 10:6, Aaron is reported to have died and been buried at Moser (or Moseroth), a completely different location.

After a couple of Old Testament examples of the contradictions in the Bible and clear differences, let’s get back to the New Testament. After all, when it comes to the contradictions in the Bible, most people think of the Gospels and the story of Jesus’ life! 

#44 – Jesus’ Trial Before Pilate: Silent or Conversational?

The Gospel accounts of Jesus’ trial before Pilate reveal stark differences, particularly between Mark and John. In Mark 15:2-5, Jesus remains almost entirely silent during the interrogation, uttering only the cryptic phrase “You say so” when asked if he is the King of the Jews.

In contrast, John 18:33-38 presents a dramatically different scene where Jesus engages in an extended and profound dialogue with Pilate. Here, Jesus discusses the nature of his kingdom, truth, and authority, portraying him as a figure of wisdom and divine insight.

#45 – Pilate’s Declaration of Innocence: Present in John, Absent in Mark

Another important difference and a possible biblical contradiction concerns Pilate’s assessment of Jesus’ innocence. In John 18:38, 19:4, and 19:6, Pilate declares three separate times: “I find no basis for a charge against him.”

In stark contrast, Mark’s Gospel (15:1-15) contains no such declarations of innocence. Instead, Pilate’s role is portrayed as passive; he quickly succumbs to the demands of the crowd and authorizes Jesus’ crucifixion without protest or hesitation.

Why is that? Scholars have noted that the Gospel accounts of Jesus' trial and execution, when analyzed chronologically from Mark to John, become increasingly anti-Jewish. This progression likely reflects the evolving social dynamics and deteriorating relationship between Jews and Christians in the later part of the 1st century.

As Christopher Edwards, in his book Crucified: The Christian Invention of the Jewish Executioners of Jesus notes:

#46 – Did John the Baptist Recognize Jesus’ Identity?

Another example of the contradictions in the Bible emerges when comparing John the Baptist’s understanding of Jesus’ identity in John 1 with his actions in Matthew 11.

In John’s Gospel, John the Baptist unequivocally identifies Jesus as “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (1:29) and as the one upon whom the Spirit descended, confirming him as the chosen one of God. This portrayal suggests that John fully recognized Jesus’ divine role and identity from the outset.

However, in Matthew’s Gospel, John later sends his disciples to ask Jesus, “Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?” (11:3). This question reflects uncertainty or doubt on John’s part, which contradicts the confident declaration found in John 1.

#47 – Jesus’ Ministry: Apocalyptic Preacher or Divine Logos?

One striking difference and a possible contradiction between the Gospels lies in their portrayals of Jesus’ public ministry. In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus is primarily depicted as a Jewish apocalyptic preacher proclaiming the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God.

As Bart D. Ehrman explains in Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium:

In contrast, the Gospel of John presents a markedly different picture. Here, Jesus focuses less on the coming kingdom and more on his identity as the incarnate Logos (Word), the divine Son of God who came to reveal eternal truths and offer salvation through belief in him.

#48 – The Timing of Jesus’ Temple Cleansing: Early or Late?

In John (2:13-16), this dramatic event occurs early in Jesus’ ministry, shortly after his first miracle at the wedding in Cana. John uses this event to underscore Jesus’ divine authority and mission right from the start.

The Synoptic Gospels, however, place the temple cleansing near the end of Jesus’ ministry, during the final week of his life (Mark 11:15-17; Matthew 21:12-13; Luke 19:45-46). In these accounts, the cleansing is a catalyst for the events leading to Jesus’ arrest and crucifixion.

#49 – Who Went to Jesus’ Tomb?

It only seems natural to end our journey through the contradictions in the Bible by looking at the central element of Christianity: Jesus’ death and resurrection. These examples have been discussed for decades, even centuries, and are best explained in Bart Ehrman’s insightful and already mentioned book Jesus Interrupted.

A well-known contradiction involves the identities of those who visited Jesus’ tomb on Easter morning. John 20:1 mentions Mary Magdalene alone, while Matthew 28:1 lists Mary Magdalene and “the other Mary.” Mark 16:1 adds a third woman, Salome, to the group. Luke 24:1 expands it further to include Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and “other women.”

#50 – Where Did the Disciples Go After the Resurrection?

A final example concerns Jesus’ post-resurrection instructions to his disciples and their immediate actions. In Luke’s Gospel (24:49-53), Jesus explicitly tells his disciples to stay in Jerusalem until they are “clothed with power from on high,” referring to the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

In contrast, Matthew 28:10, 16-20 records Jesus instructing his disciples to go to Galilee, where they meet him on a mountain and receive the Great Commission: “Go and make disciples of all nations.”

Final Thoughts

As we reach the end of this exploration of contradictions in the Bible, one critical notion stands out. I’m a historian, and for the past decade, I’ve been trained to work with sources — whether ancient hagiographical texts, inscriptions, or normative documents — through rigorous academic methods. 

Throughout my education, from undergraduate to postgraduate levels, I’ve learned that historians approach their sources with a commitment to understanding them on their own terms, regardless of whether these sources are deemed sacred or inspired by God.

One thing I’ve learned is this: When confronted with conflicting accounts, the historian’s first responsibility isn’t to force them into agreement at all costs. Attempting to reconcile every discrepancy moves us out of the realm of history and into theology or apologetics.

For example, when I encounter conflicting accounts in the biographies of St. Pachomius, a prominent Egyptian monk from the 4th century, I don’t attempt to construct elaborate explanations to harmonize them. 

Such an effort would prioritize my personal preferences over the actual evidence. Yet, with religious texts, there’s often a unique drive — always by those invested in these texts as perfect and infallible — to create a harmony that may not exist.

At the end of the day, with enough effort (as I mentioned in the “Did You Know” box above), you can reconcile almost anything. But in doing so, you’re stepping outside the framework of critical historical inquiry and into the realm of apologetics. And while that might serve theological goals, it’s not the same as approaching these texts through the lens of historical scholarship.

50 Facts About the Bible (Fun Facts That Will Shock You!)

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 Bible is one of the most influential and widely read books in human history. Whether you're a devout believer or simply curious about its content, the Bible offers a vast array of fascinating stories, teachings, and historical data. It’s a complex text that has shaped cultures, laws, and civilizations for millennia. But beyond its religious significance, the Bible is also full of surprising details—many of which are often overlooked or misunderstood.

In this article, we dive into 50 intriguing facts about the Bible, including its characters, content, statistics, and even the mysterious history behind its authorship. From curious anecdotes about Bible figures like Sarah and King David, to the surprising reality of how the Bible was put together, these fun facts will shed new light on a text that has had an unparalleled impact on the world.

Shocking Facts About Bible Characters

#1 There is no physical description of Jesus in the Bible.

It’s difficult to believe, but we don’t really know what Jesus looked like. We can certainly infer general ideas about his appearance as a man living in 1st-century Palestine, but there’s no actual description of it in the Bible.

#2 Sarah gave birth at the age of 90.

In the book of Genesis, Abraham’s wife Sarah is said to be unable to bear children. However, an interesting fact about Sarah in the Bible is that she bore a son at the age of 90 (Abraham was 99!). This was the beginning of the fulfillment of God’s promise that Abraham would be the “father of nations.”

#3 Samuel is brought back from the dead to advise Saul.

Despite the fact that King Saul had expelled all mediums and sorcerers from Israel, he consulted a medium in 1 Samuel 28:3-25 in order to ask the advice of the recently-deceased prophet Samuel. Samuel wasn’t happy about being summoned, and told Saul that he would lose his impending battle with the Philistines.

#4 David has a man killed in order to take his wife.

In 2 Samuel 11, we find a shocking fact about King David in the Bible. He sleeps with Bathsheba, the wife of one of his soldiers and when she becomes pregnant, David makes sure her husband, Uriah, is sent to the battlefront, all but ensuring he will be killed. Bathsheba then becomes David’s wife.

#5 Elijah doesn’t actually die.

An interesting fact about Elijah in the Bible appears in 2 Kings 2:11 because he doesn’t die. Instead, the prophet Elijah and his successor Elisha are walking together when suddenly “a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them, and Elijah ascended in a whirlwind into heaven.”

#6 A snake, not the Devil, tempted Adam and Eve.

Shawna Dolansk writes of a surprising fact from the book of Genesis: when the Adam and Eve story was written, the notion of Satan had not yet been invented. While later readers would interpret the serpent as the Devil, this was not the intention of the authors of Genesis.

#7 Jesus was probably John the Baptist’s disciple.

Scholar Joel Marcus writes that John the Baptist’s baptism of Jesus in the Gospels shows that Jesus was probably John’s follower before his own ministry got started.

(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!)

# 8 The Paul of the Book of Acts often disagrees with the Paul of the Epistles.

In Reading Acts, Charles Talbert points out several ways in which Paul in his letters differs from the Paul of Acts, including his theology, his miracle-working in Acts, and his submission to the authority of the 12 apostles in Acts (in his letters, he claims to have the same authority as the original apostles).

Interesting Facts About Bible Statistics

#9 The Bible contains about 611,000 words (in its original languages).

This number differs, of course, in translations of the Bible into other languages.

#10 The shortest verse in the Bible Is two words (three in the original Greek).

John 11:35 says that after his friend Lazarus died, “Jesus wept.” In Greek, it’s actually three words, Edakrysen ho Iēsous, but it’s still the shortest.

#11 The longest verse in the Bible, in the original languages, is Revelation 20:4.

This verse has 58 words in the original Greek.

#12 The longest book in the Bible by word count is Jeremiah.

It contains 33,002 words in the original Hebrew.

#13 The shortest book in the Bible by word count is 3 John.

It contains only 219 words in the original Greek.

#14 The complete Christian Bible has been translated into 756 languages.

This is approximately 10% of all existing languages.

#15 The number of books in the Bible varies.

All Christian Bibles contain at least 39 books in the Old Testament and 27 books in the New Testament for a total of 66. However, numbers vary between different Christian denominations. The Catholic Bible contains 73 books, while Orthodox Bibles contain between 79-86 books since there is no universally sanctioned canon in the Orthodox churches.

#16 The Bible is the best-selling book in the world.

The Guinness Book of World Records says the Bible is both the best-selling and the most widely disseminated book in the world.

Surprising Facts About the Ideas in the Bible

#17 The word “trinity” never occurs in the Bible.

The Trinity is a doctrine developed by Christians long after the Bible had been written. As Bart Ehrman writes, “The doctrine of the Trinity is not taught anywhere in the Bible, even if later theologians read it into the Bible (as most Christians still do today).”

#18 God is never specifically alluded to in the Book of Esther.

In this book, Esther is a Jewish heroine who ultimately saves her people from a murderous plot. However, one interesting fact about the book of Esther is that God is never mentioned at all in the story, causing some, such as Protestant Reformer Martin Luther, to argue that it shouldn’t be included in the Bible at all. 

#19 Some biblical books disagree with each other.

Examples:

#20 The Bible doesn’t say how many wise men visited Jesus.

Although tradition says that there were three wise men or magi, Matthew 2 merely says they brought three gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

#21 Genesis contains two different stories of the creation of humans.

Genesis 1 says God created humans who merely appear at his insistence. But in Genesis 2, God forms a man (Hebrew: Adam) out of dust and breathes life into him. Later, he takes a rib from Adam to create Eve.

#22 In the Old Testament, many characters live to extremely advanced ages.

Noah is said to live to the age of 950, and Adam dies at 930 years of age. The oldest figure mentioned is Methuselah, Noah’s grandfather, who lives to the ripe old age of 969.

#23 The feeding of the 5,000 is the only one of Jesus’ miracles repeated in all four Gospels.

The Synoptic Gospels — Matthew, Mark, and Luke — share a lot of material. John, on the other hand, often differs significantly on the details of Jesus’ life. This means that very few of Jesus' miracles are repeated in John, and the feeding of the multitude is in all four: (Matthew 14:13-21; Mark 6:31-44; Luke 9:12-17; John 6:1-14).

Fun Facts About the Bible

#24 Many common phrases in the modern world originated with the Bible.

"Apple of my eye" -- Deuteronomy 2:10
"Wolf in sheep's clothing" -- Matthew 7:15
"By the skin of our teeth" -- Job 19:20
"Drop in the bucket" -- Isaiah 40:15

#25 The “She Bible” includes an astonishing typo.

In an edition of the King James Bible from 1611, there is a significant typo in Ruth 3:15. It says "She went into the city.” However, because this verse refers to God, it is calling God female.

#26 There Is a shocking typo in the “Sinner’s Bible”.

One of the most famous of the Ten Commandments states “Thou shall not commit adultery.” Nevertheless, an unintentionally lurid typo in a 1631 copy of the King James Bible causes the commandment to read “Thou shalt commit adultery.”

#27 It wasn’t until the 13th century CE that chapters and verses were added.

The original writings of the Bible had no divisions between verses (or even letters!). However, Stephen Langton, an Archbishop of Canterbury, created the modern chapter divisions in 1227 CE.

#28 The Bible was written in three languages.

The vast majority of the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, with a small amount written in Aramaic. The entire New Testament was written in a form of Greek called Koine.

#29 The Bible was written on three continents.

Much of it was written in modern-day Israel (Asia) with some parts written in Egypt (Africa) and several New Testament epistles in cities in Europe.

#30 We have no original writings of any biblical book.

One shocking fact about the Bible is that the manuscripts we have of every book of the Bible are copies of copies of copies of copies, etc.

Surprising Facts About Later Additions to the Bible

#31 The original ending of Mark was shorter.

Originally, the Gospel of Mark ended at 16:8, where the women who found Jesus’ tomb empty “went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.” A much later scribe or scribes found this unsatisfying and added the rest of chapter 16.

#32 The story of the woman taken in adultery was not originally in John.

John 8:1-11 tells the story of a woman who is condemned to be stoned for the sin of adultery, only to have Jesus save her by telling her tormentors “Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” Our oldest manuscripts of John, however, don’t include this story. It was added much later.

#33 Paul probably didn’t say that women should be silent in church.

In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul is instructing the church at Corinth on how to worship in an orderly manner. Suddenly, though, in verses 34-35, he writes several sentences about how women should not speak in church. Scholars have long recognized that a later scribe probably added this to Paul’s letter. If you take out those sentences, the book makes more sense.

#34 Jesus probably didn’t sweat blood.

In Luke 22, with his arrest and crucifixion imminent, Jesus prays in anguish in the garden. Then, according to verses 43-44, an angel came to give him strength, after which “he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling down on the ground.” Scholars have long suspected that later scribes added these two verses since they don’t occur in the oldest manuscripts of Luke.

#35 John 21 was not originally the last chapter of John.

At the end of John chapter 20, the author encourages readers to “believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name.” This was probably the original ending until a later scribe added a whole other chapter after it.

Interesting Facts About Biblical Authors

#36 Not all the letters attributed to Paul were written by him.

In the New Testament, there are 13 letters attributed to Paul. However, most scholars agree that Paul actually only wrote 6 of them: 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, and Philemon.

#37 The authorship of Hebrews has remained anonymous for centuries.

While some early Christians attributed Hebrews to Paul, scholars have known since at least the 19th century that Paul did not write it.

#38 All four Gospels were written anonymously.

Although we have long called the canonical Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the oldest Gospel manuscripts have no author’s name or title. Instead, Christians of the 2nd century began attributing them to various figures related to the stories of the original apostles.

#39 The book of Genesis was written by three different authors.

Scholars call these authors J, E, and P. The J source called God “Yahweh” (J is the first letter in the German spelling of Yahweh). The E source called God “Elohim” and the P source stands for “priestly” since that author was mostly concerned with ceremonial rules and requirements for priests.

#40 Moses didn’t write the Pentateuch.

The first five books of the Bible — Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy — were traditionally attributed to Moses. However, scholars have instead identified several authors who contributed to those books and there is no evidence outside the Bible that Moses even existed.

General Facts About the Bible

#41 The oldest complete Bible dates to the 4th century.

It’s called Codex Sinaiticus and contains the entire Old and New Testaments, plus some books that were later excluded.

#42 The English word “bible” is derived from the Greek ta biblia, meaning “the books.”

The word comes from the name of an ancient Lebanese city, Byblos, which supplied paper products to the ancient Mediterranean world.

#43 The books of the Bible aren’t in chronological order.

The Bible was not arranged in the order in which each book was written. For example, Mark, our earliest Gospel, was written before Matthew but comes after it in the canon.

#44 There are at least 185 songs in the Bible.

Around 150 of these are found in the book of Psalms. There may, in fact, be more, but 185 is the number for passages specifically called songs, psalms, dirges, or chants.

#45 There are 21 dreams written about in the Bible.

Most of these are found in the books of Genesis and Matthew. Dreams are often messages from the divine in the Bible.

#46 Until the invention of the printing press, scribes copied biblical texts by hand.

As you can imagine, this was a long and arduous process. Due to human error (or sometimes to human intention), manuscripts would often differ from one another, leaving later scholars to wonder what the original writings had actually said.

#47 The authors of the New Testament read the Greek version of the Old Testament — called the Septuagint —rather than the Hebrew.

This led to some interesting mistranslations. One of the most interesting was made in Isaiah 7:14 which says “Look, the young woman is with child and shall bear a son and shall name him Immanuel.” The Greek translation, however, changed the word “almah,” meaning “young woman,” to “virgin.” This would later be used by the author of Matthew as proof of Jesus’ virgin birth.

#48 The Gospels of Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source.

Mark was our earliest written Gospel, written about 70 CE. The authors of Matthew and Luke, writing 10-20 years later, used most of the material from Mark and added material from other sources.

#49 The author of Luke also wrote the book of Acts.

Scholars have known for many years that Luke and Acts were actually two volumes of a large work about the early church. We can see that both books begin with a dedication to someone named Theophilus, possibly the author’s patron.

#50 The first word of the Bible is “beginning” and the last word is “amen”.

In the original Hebrew, Genesis begins with the word “beginning” (Hebrew: bereshit). The last word of the book of Revelation, “amen,” comes at the end of a benediction: “The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints. Amen.”

Conclusion

The Bible is a vast library of books written by many different people, in many different locations, at many different times, and with a variety of opinions. Its influence throughout the centuries is incalculable and yet most of us know very little about its history and composition.

It is an endlessly fascinating and complex text that continues to capture the curiosity of millions, both for its spiritual teachings and its historical intricacies. It is a cultural and historical cornerstone that has shaped societies, laws, and the way people think for centuries.

However, the Bible did not come together overnight. It was written, revised, and reshaped over the course of centuries. It has been translated into every modern language and is the best-selling book in the world.

I hope that these 50 facts about the Bible offer a fresh perspective on a book that has left an indelible mark on human civilization.

24 Names of God: List of Every Name of God in the Bible (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

In the Bible, the names of God are not just titles but instead reveal deep theological beliefs about God’s character, nature, and relationship with humanity. Throughout both the Old and New Testaments, various names for God are used to highlight specific attributes.

This article explores 24 significant names of God in the Bible and their meanings, as well as  scriptural references. By understanding the many names of God, we can understand ancient people’s views of God's multifaceted nature.

NAMES OF GOD IN THE OLD TESTAMENT / HEBREW BIBLE

Looking at all the different names of God, you’ll notice that most of them begin with either El or YHWH. El was originally the name of the supreme god of the Canaanites, some of whom became the Israelites later. Once the Israelites separated themselves as a people, some continued to call their own supreme deity El.

YHWH, on the other hand, is a set of four consonants in Hebrew (Yod, He, Waw, He) often called the tetragrammaton, Greek for “four letters,” and is the most common name of God in the Hebrew Bible, occurring 5,410 times. At the time the name first appeared, Hebrew had no written vowels. Instead, those who could read and write the language simply knew which vowel sounds occurred in the relation between certain consonants.

In his commentary on the Hebrew Bible, Robert Alter argues that the original pronunciation of the tetragrammaton would have been “YAH-way.” However, there is no perfect scholarly consensus on this pronunciation.  In The Invention of God, Thomas Römer claims people would have pronounced the Tetragrammaton as 'Yahô' or 'Yahû. 

(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!)

However, Max Reisel argues in The Mysterious Name of Y.H.W.H that YHWH would instead have been pronounced YeHūàH. In addition, some Christian groups, starting in the Middle Ages, pronounced the name as “Jehovah,” a pronunciation that some, like Jehovah’s Witnesses, continue to this day. As far as I’m aware, no biblical scholar agrees that this is the correct pronunciation of the tetragrammaton.

Another interesting point about the tetragrammaton is that Jews are forbidden to pronounce it out of reverence, a practice that goes back centuries. When reading biblical passages in which YHWH is written, the most common practice is to substitute either the word Adonai, the Hebrew word for Lord or Master, or HaShem meaning simply “the name.”

Technically, Elohim is the plural of El and would thus mean “gods.” However, it is clear in the Old Testament that despite its grammatical plurality, the word is meant to signify a singular God since it’s used with singular verbs and adjectives.

Another interesting divine name is I Am, found only in Exodus 3:14. In this verse, after Moses has asked God’s name, God says “I am what I am (other translations say “I will be what I will be).” He then tells Moses to tell the Israelites “I am has sent me.” This could be understood as signifying that God is being itself, a metaphysical interpretation that both Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas derived from the name.

Qanna, Jealous God, is used by God himself in Exodus to command the Israelites not to worship any of the other gods which exist. This demonstrates, by the way, that the earliest parts of the Old Testament are not monotheistic, meaning that only one God exists, but henotheistic, meaning that although many gods exist, our God is the greatest.

Many of the YHWH names above are given to sacred places or things in the Old Testament. For example, YHWH Shalom, God is Peace, is given as a name to an altar made by Gideon in the book of Judges. YHWH Jireh, the Lord Provides, is given to Mount Moriah by Abraham after God intervenes to prevent the sacrifice of Isaac and YHWH Shammah, The Lord Is There, is a symbolic name given to Jerusalem in the book of Ezekiel to indicate God’s presence in the holy city.

When the Hebrew Bible was translated into a Greek version called the Septuagint, the word YHWH was most often translated as Kyrios, the Greek word for Lord or Master. Interestingly, the Hebrew name YHWH never appears in the New Testament. This makes sense, though, because the New Testament authors read the Septuagint rather than the original Hebrew version of the Old Testament, and would thus have used the Greek word themselves in their writings.

Speaking of the New Testament, let’s look now at the names of God and their meaning, which changes depending on the verse.

NAMES OF GOD IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

Theos is by far the most common name for God in the New Testament, occurring 1,318 times. This makes sense since we know the authors of the New Testament were reading the Septuagint, where the Hebrew name Elohim had been translated into Theos. As such, the New Testament authors most often used this term to refer to God the Father.

The word Kyrios is also used to refer to God the Father but also refers often to Jesus. Like the Hebrew word Adonai, Kyrios can simply mean lord or master over anyone, a problem solved in the English version by capitalizing Lord when it refers to the divine.

Pater or Father seems to be Jesus’ preferred designation for God. In Harper's Bible Dictionary, it says that many ancient civilizations called their supreme gods father. This includes the ancient Greeks who called Zeus their father, as well as many near-eastern civilizations adjacent to the ancient Israelites. In the New Testament, the word Father also reinforces, of course, the notion that Jesus is God’s son.

When God is called “the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” in the New Testament, it is a conscious effort to emphasize that the God of Jesus is the same God who intervened in the history of the Israelites.

 Pantokrator, literally “ruler over all,” is used mostly in the book of Revelation. This makes sense since Revelation is about God’s vindication of Christians despite the seemingly all-powerful rule of Rome. In the Septuagint, it is used as a translation of the Hebrew El Shaddai.

Alpha and Omega are the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet. As such, they signify the first and the last as a designation for God. This is made clear in Revelation 22:13 when Jesus claims the title for himself, adding that he is “The first and the last, the beginning and the end.” As a divine name, it emphasizes the eternality of God who existed before everything else and will exist after everything else has passed away, according to Revelation.

Ho Hosios or The Holy One refers to God the Father explicitly only once (Rev 16:5). It refers to Jesus several times (Mark 1:24; Luke 4:34; and John 6:69) and could refer to either God or Jesus in 1 John 2:20.

Conclusion

There are many names of God in the Bible. In the ancient near-east, gods were always named and never simply called “god.” The Israelites of the Hebrew Bible inherited some of the names for their God from other near-eastern civilizations such as the Canaanites (El). Other names attributed characteristics to God such as peace, strength, everlastingness, and power.

The names for God in the New Testament weren’t nearly as prolific. The generic Greek word theos simply meant “God” and was the name used most often for the divine. Other names indicated how Christians and Jews viewed God — as a Father, as a ruler, as holy.

What Does the Bible Actually Say About Heaven? (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 idea of heaven has been a powerful and enduring aspect of religious belief for millennia, shaping everything from personal hope to grand theological doctrines. But what exactly do people mean when they talk about heaven? Where do our modern concepts of this celestial realm come from, and how have they changed over time? What does the Bible say about heaven?

In this article, I’ll examine the evolution of the idea of heaven — from ancient Judaism and Greek thought to the teachings of Jesus and later Christian theology — and show how the concept of heaven has shifted and adapted to fit various cultural, spiritual, and philosophical contexts. I’ll also look into the linguistic and historical origins of heaven and the profound hopes and questions it continues to evoke today.

Etymology and Meaning

A 2023 Pew Research study found that 71% of Americans believe in heaven as a literal place one can go after death (61% believed the same about hell). But what is heaven? Where did our ideas about it come from? Let’s start with the word itself.

The word heaven comes from the Old English word heofan which originally meant simply “sky or firmament.” Interestingly, other languages also used words for heaven which originally meant sky. The Hebrew word, for instance, shamayim, can also mean either heaven or sky and the Greek word for heaven used throughout the New Testament is ouranós, which can also mean sky. What is the significance of this?

Clearly, when people conceived of heaven as the home of God, they envisaged it as above the earth. This makes sense on several levels: since heaven is not visible to human beings, it must be somewhere other than the earthly plain. And since God is believed to be higher than humans in every way, heaven must be literally higher than the earth. However, there was a time when the concept of heaven did not yet exist in Judaism or elsewhere.

In Heaven and Hell: A History of the Afterlife, Bart Ehrman notes that our oldest biblical writings about the afterlife “do not talk about ‘life after death’ but simply the state of death, as all people, righteous and wicked, reside in their graves or in a mysterious entity called Sheol.” Sheol could either mean the literal grave or the abode of the dead, described in Job 10:21 as “the land of gloom and deep darkness.”

(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!)

Ancient Greek thinkers had a similar idea of the destination of the dead, which they called Hades (Hades was also the name of the god of the dead). This was the land of all departed souls, good or bad, and, like Sheol, a dark, dismal place. That was how Homer’s Odyssey described it, for example. Later Greek authors, however, had a different view.

Ancient Greek philosopher Plato, living about 500 years before Jesus, wrote that there were two options in the afterlife. In Plato’s dialogue The Phaedo, Socrates says that after death, all people are led by a guide to the other world where they are judged. Those who led evil lives are guided to a dark place under the earth, while those who lived good lives get taken to a better place and rewarded.

Ehrman writes that, similarly, the Hebrew Bible view of the afterlife changed in the 6th century BCE, when the Hebrew Prophets claimed that the nation of Israel, destroyed by other nations, would be brought back to life by God. Eventually, some Jews began to believe that the same thing would happen to righteous individuals who had died. This was a common view in the time of Jesus, and Jesus himself seems to have held it.

But where would these resurrected people live? In The Historical Figure of Jesus, E.P. Sanders writes that while most Jews believed that God reigned in heaven, some, Jesus among them, also believed that God would bring this heavenly kingdom to earth, effectively blurring the line between the two realms.

According to this idea, the wicked had controlled the world for too long, and God was about to intervene to restore the world to its original purity. He would punish the wicked and reward the righteous, establishing a divine, heavenly kingdom on the earth. So what does the Bible say about heaven within this context? How is it described?

What Does the Bible Say About Heaven?

While heaven is certainly mentioned in the Bible, quotations about it are often quite vague. Paul’s letters are the earliest Christian writings we have, so let’s start by looking at what Paul says about heaven.

In Philippians 3:20, Paul says that for enemies of Christ,

Paul makes a major distinction here between “earthly things,” or the crude material world, and heavenly things. He is certain that Jesus resides now in heaven and that those who are on Christ’s side will live there permanently as well. In Jesus of Nazareth: An Independent Historian's Account of his Life and Teaching, Maurice Casey writes that Paul, like most Jews of his day, believed that the heavenly kingdom would extend onto the earth. While the implication is that heaven is a wonderful place, Paul’s letters lack an actual description. What does Jesus say about heaven in the Gospels?

In Matthew 6:19-20, Jesus says something interesting:

According to Jesus, in heaven nothing decays, nor are there thieves to steal what is valuable (presumably they would not get into heaven). While this isn’t a detailed description of heaven, it does tell us that what is valuable on earth may not be valuable in heaven and that there are no forces of decay or destruction there. If taken literally, this seems to describe a physical place, although later Christians would believe that, if so, heaven was not physical in the same way as the earthly realm.

In John 3:16, one of the most famous verses in the New Testament, Jesus says “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.” Although the word heaven isn’t mentioned here, the implication is that for those whom God judges worthy, heavenly life will never end. Further on, in John 14:2-3, Jesus says

Here, Jesus describes heaven as God’s house, and within that house, many other houses prepared for those who believe in Jesus. Again, these seem to be physical descriptions, although there is plenty of room for metaphorical interpretation as well. Apparently, then, going to heaven means one receives a permanent dwelling place for all eternity.

Revelation 21:2 describes the New Jerusalem, another word for the Kingdom of Heaven, descending from heaven to the earth. Then in verse 4, a voice tells the author that, for those worthy of citizenship in this kingdom, God

In this heavenly place, then, there will be no more suffering, either physical or emotional. Revelation 22:1-5, though, gives what appears to be the most vivid description of this new heavenly kingdom:

The majority of Revelation is allegorical in nature, with each physical thing representing an idea, so we can’t necessarily count on the literal truth of this description. However, a few things about this conception of heaven are clear from these verses. First, there will be abundance, represented by a divine river and endlessly-producing fruit trees. Second, nothing evil or accursed will be allowed in, signifying that heaven will be unfailingly safe. Third, heaven will be a place in which God is endlessly worshiped. Finally, there will be only light, representing holiness and goodness, without the darkness that represents evil and suffering.

This description corresponds quite nicely with descriptions of the Garden of Eden before Adam and Eve had sinned (there are even trees of life). Just as many early Christians saw Jesus as the new Adam, the author of Revelation saw heaven as the renewed paradise into which human beings were first placed. Heaven, then, is not just an end but also a return.

These verses constitute much of what people assume about heaven. Notice, though, that in all these verses, the heavenly kingdom will descend to the earth, erasing the line between the two realms. Modern conceptions of heaven rarely include this, thinking instead of heaven as an otherworldly place beyond the stars.

While there are other references to heaven in the New Testament, they all generally reinforce what the above verses say. Having looked at biblical descriptions of heaven, I’d like to compare them with some modern notions of heaven and see if they fit together.

Modern Views of Heaven vs. the Bible

What does the bible say about seeing loved ones in heaven? Well, not everyone is granted access to heaven, according to the Bible. In fact, NT books give different requirements that must be met in order to enter. Matthew 25:34-37, for instance, says that only those who give to the needy and care for the sick will be allowed into the kingdom. John 3:16 says that merely believing in Jesus is enough. In short, those loved ones who meet the criteria, whatever they are, for being divinely rewarded will apparently be there. Those who don’t will be excluded.

Will heaven be a utopia without war, famine, or disease? The description from Revelation 22 above certainly indicates that there will be no poverty, which rules out famine. Since Jesus says that nothing can corrupt what is in heaven, we must accept that disease, which corrupts our bodies, will not be there either. And since Revelation also has a description of a final battle before the heavenly kingdom comes, it’s likely that a biblical heaven will have no war either.

What does the Bible say we will do in heaven? This is a good question, given that much of our lives on earth entail dealing with challenges. In a perfect heaven where all needs are met, what do people do? The only description we have of this in the Bible is the quote from Revelation 22, in which the citizens of heaven simply worship God.

What does the Bible say about dogs going to heaven, or pets in general? It does not mention whether there will be animals or not. I have to believe that the modern idea of our beloved pets meeting us in heaven is simply derived from the idea that it will be an ideal place. Many of us (myself included) can’t imagine an ideal place without our furry friends.

Conclusion

As you can see, much of what modern people believe about heaven (well, those who believe in heaven) is, of course, conjecture. Even the Bible is fairly vague about what it will be like, prompting people throughout history to make guesses based on that scant information.

The earliest forms of Judaism had no heavenly reward. Instead all people either were simply buried — meaning their lives simply ended — or gone to a dark, gloomy place under the earth, despite their deeds or character. Likewise, Greek mythology described Hades, a gloomy place under the earth where souls of the departed ended up.

Later, some Jews decided that God would resurrect the righteous dead. This led to the idea of heaven, God’s dwelling place where these righteous souls would also dwell. Greek philosophy came to a similar conclusion, adding that those who were not good in this life would be punished in the next.

What does the Bible say about heaven? While the Bible isn’t entirely clear on what heaven is like, it does give us some information: heaven is a completely different realm from earth (at least until the heavenly kingdom comes). It is the dwelling place of God and Jesus and where believers will go when they die. In heaven, there is no decay and thus the people or souls there will live forever without growing old or dying. Since it will be filled with only righteous people, heaven will also be entirely safe. No one will experience physical or emotional pain and there will be endless abundance for everyone as they eternally worship God.

Books Removed from the Bible: A List of All 17 Books (With Summaries)

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 still remember sitting in class as a sophomore, staring at the ancient text of the Codex Sinaiticus for the first time. For those unfamiliar, the Codex Sinaiticus is one of the oldest and most complete manuscripts of the Christian Bible, dating back to the 4th century C.E. It contains significant portions of both the Old and New Testaments.

But as I pored over the text of the New Testament for an assignment, something unusual jumped out at me. Alongside the familiar 27 books we all recognize as canonical today, there were two unexpected additions: the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas.

I remember thinking, “Wait, I didn’t sign up for extra homework!” But, jokes aside, that moment marked the first time I seriously considered the complexity behind the emergence of the Christian Scriptures — and more specifically, the books removed from the Bible.

What I had always assumed was a neatly defined collection of sacred texts had, at one point in history, included other writings that I’d never even heard of. What books were removed from the Bible? What determined whether a book was worthy of being “canonical” or destined to be forgotten? What is the content of these “lost books of the Bible”? 

In this article, we’re going to delve into just that. We’ll start by exploring the Old Testament Apocrypha — books that Protestants, following the Jewish canon, decided to remove from their version of the Bible. 

Then, we’ll shift to early Christian writings that, for a time, were considered part of the Christian canon but were eventually excluded. These writings, such as the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas, once held a revered place among some early Christian communities but were later discarded from the Bible as we know it today.

But before we dive into the world of Biblical canon, asking what books were removed from the Bible, I want to invite you to check out Bart D. Ehrman’s excellent online course “In the Beginning: History, Legend, and Myth in Genesis.”

Did you ever wonder if the stories from the Book of Genesis are historical? Did they really happen? If you are curious, then this course is the right place to go! In it, Dr. Ehrman provides a scholarly analysis of the first book in the Old Testament known for its fascinating stories.

Books Removed From the Bible: Old Testament Apocrypha

Our exploration into the mysteries of the books removed from the Bible begins with the Old Testament Apocrypha or the Deuterocanonical books. If this is your first encounter with these terms, don't worry!

In his Introduction to the Old Testament Apocrypha, Otto Kaiser provides a clear definition: "The terms 'Deuterocanonical books' or 'Old Testament Apocrypha' refer to the Jewish documents that originated between the third century B.C.E. and the first century C.E. and that were incorporated into the Greek [Septuagint] but not the Hebrew Bible.

(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!)

However, within the Protestant traditions and following the precedent set by the Jewish canon that was mainly fixed by the end of the 2nd century C.E., these books were excluded. Today, most Protestants (unlike Catholics) don’t accept the canonical status of Deuterocanonical books.

These writings, many of which were composed in Greek during a later period than the rest of the Hebrew Bible, were excluded due to concerns about their language, authorship, and the era in which they were composed.

Below, you will find a table of these books along with brief explanations as to why they were excluded from the Protestant Biblical canon. 

Old Testament Apocrypha: Summaries

#1 – Judith 

Judith tells the story of a Jewish widow who saves her people by assassinating an Assyrian general named Holofernes. The book combines elements of historical narrative and fiction to emphasize themes of faith, courage, and divine intervention.

#2 – Tobit

Tobit is a religious novel that follows the righteous Israelite Tobit and his son Tobias. The story explores themes of piety, charity, and divine justice, and includes the intervention of the archangel Raphael, who aids Tobias in healing his father’s blindness and defeating a demon.

In his Commentary on Shorter Books of the Apocrypha, John C. Dancy provided additional information about the content of this fascinating book: 

#3 – 1 Maccabees

1 Maccabees is a historical account of the Jewish revolt against the Seleucid Empire led by the Maccabee family, focusing on Judas Maccabeus. The book covers the struggle for Jewish independence and the rededication of the Jerusalem Temple, which is commemorated in Hanukkah.

However, the adjective “historical” should be taken “cum grano salis” (“with a grain of salt”). As Daniel R. Swartz explains in his Commentary on 1 Maccabees: 

#4 – 2 Maccabees

Unlike 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees is more theological and focuses on God's role in the Jewish revolt. It emphasizes martyrdom, divine justice, and resurrection, and retells some events from a more religious perspective.

#5 – Wisdom of Solomon 

Wisdom of Solomon is a philosophical and theological text that praises wisdom as a divine gift. It addresses themes like the immortality of the soul and divine retribution, blending Jewish beliefs with Hellenistic philosophy.

#6 – Sirach

Sirach, also known as Ecclesiasticus, is a collection of proverbs and ethical teachings. Written by Ben Sira around 180 B.C.E., it focuses on wisdom, proper conduct, and the importance of honoring God, with practical advice for daily life.

Michael D. Coogan, in The New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha, notes the historical importance of this book: 

#7 – Baruch 

Baruch is presented as a work by the secretary of the prophet Jeremiah. It includes prayers, reflections on the Babylonian exile, and an exhortation for the people of Israel to turn back to God.

Referring to the possible authorship of Baruch, Otto Kaiser notes: 

It’s possible that the mystery surrounding its authorship was one of the reasons why Baruch was removed from the Bible!

#8 – Additions to Esther

The Additions to Esther consist of six extra chapters that expand the narrative with more religious elements, including prayers and the visible hand of God, which are largely absent from the original Hebrew version.

#9 – Additions to Daniel

The Additions to Daniel include stories such as Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, and the Song of the Three Jews. They contain further examples of Daniel's wisdom and deliverance by God, thus reinforcing the themes of faith and divine intervention.

As our exploration into the books removed from the Bible goes further, we now turn to another category of excluded writings — early Christian books that were once considered canonical by some communities but were ultimately left out of the New Testament. 

Early Christian Writings: Books Once Considered Canonical

The infamous Lee Teebing, a character from Dan Brown’s bestselling novel The Da Vinci Code, was right in at least one regard: The New Testament as we know it didn’t drop out of heaven fully formed. Rather, it was the result of a centuries-long process, shaped by a variety of social, theological, and historical circumstances.

As Bart D. Ehrman points out in The New Testament: A Historical Introduction: 

The formation of the New Testament wasn’t only lengthy but also complex, with some books being considered canonical by different Christian communities before eventually being removed from the Bible. 

In his book Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code, Bart D. Ehrman reminds us about bishop Eusebius’ (4th century C.E.) categorization of early Christian writings. The first category Eusebius mentions are the books which he calls “acknowledged.” These include the four Gospels, Acts, Paul’s epistles (including Hebrews), 1 Peter, 1 John, and the Book of Revelation.

Ehrman further explains: 

In this section, we’ll, therefore, explore some of these early Christian writings that were once considered part of the New Testament canon but were later excluded.

Below is a table listing these books, along with the reasons why early Church leaders ultimately decided they didn’t belong in the New Testament.

As we continue with our exploration into the books removed from the Bible, let’s take a brief look at the summaries of the early Christian writings that were once considered to be canonical by different communities in the Roman Empire.

Early Christian Writings Once Considered Canonical: Summaries

#1 – Epistle of Barnabas

The Epistle of Barnabas is an early Christian text that presents a theological interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures, emphasizing the rejection of Jewish rituals and the belief that Christianity represents the fulfillment of biblical prophecies. It was likely written in the late 1st or early 2nd century.

#2 – Shepherd of Hermas

The Shepherd of Hermas is an early Christian allegory presented as a series of visions and moral teachings, centering on themes of repentance and spiritual growth. Written in the 2nd century, it was highly regarded in some Christian communities (Origen called it "divinely inspired") but was ultimately excluded from the New Testament. Why?

It’s hard to say. Carolyn Osiek, in her Commentary, provides a possible (yet hypothetical) solution related to Montanism — an early Christian movement that emphasized the imminent return of Jesus, strict moral code, ecstatic visions, and direct inspiration from the Holy Spirit:

#3 – Acts of Paul

The Acts of Paul is an early Christian text that narrates the missionary journeys and martyrdom of the Apostle Paul, emphasizing themes of chastity and virtue. Written in the late 2nd century, it was excluded from the New Testament due to doubts about its apostolic authorship and (possibly) some of its more legendary elements.

#4 – Gospel of Peter

Even though Eusebius doesn’t include it within his second category, we know that some Christian communities used the Gospel of Peter as Scripture. Eusebius mentions bishop Serapion who, at the end of the 2nd century, wrote a pamphlet trying to persuade a community in Rhodos to exclude the Gospel of Peter from their canon. 

This fascinating writing, discovered in the 19th century, offers a distinctive account of Jesus' trial, crucifixion, and resurrection. Why was it removed from the Bible? Most scholars argue that traces of docetism in the text were the primary reason.

#5 – Apocalypse of Peter

The Apocalypse of Peter is an early Christian apocalyptic text that provides a vivid description of heaven and hell, detailing the rewards for the righteous and punishments for sinners. It was excluded from the New Testament due to doubts about its apostolic origin and debated theological themes.

Montague R. James proposed that the Apocalypse of Peter may have originally included the controversial idea of the eventual salvation of all sinners, a concept preserved in the later Sibylline Oracles. However, this idea was likely removed from the Apocalypse of Peter at some point, which may have contributed to its complete suppression from the Christian canon.

#6 – Didache

The Didache, or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, is an early Christian manual of ethics, rituals, and church practices. 

While it provides valuable insight into early Christian communities, it was excluded from the New Testament because it wasn’t considered to be of apostolic origin. Moreover, Didache shares a lot of material from the Gospel of Matthew so it’s possible that the former was seen as redundant by some early Christian leaders. 

#7 – 1 Clement

1 Clement is a letter thought to be written by Clement of Rome (c. 95 C.E.) to the church in Corinth, addressing issues of church leadership and unity. The letter emphasizes the importance of harmony and discipline within the Christian community, urging the Corinthians to resolve internal disputes peacefully. 

Although highly esteemed in early Christianity, it wasn’t included in the New Testament because it wasn’t authored by an apostle or a close companion of one.

#8 – The Gospel According to Hebrews

The Gospel According to Hebrews is a lost early Christian text known only through fragments and references in the writings of early church fathers. Judeo-Christian communities were probably using this gospel which contained stories about Jesus plus his alleged sayings.

Why was this book removed from the Bible? In his book The Canon of the New Testament, Bruce M. Metzger provides an answer: 

As our journey into the books removed from the Bible nears the finish line, it’s clear that the history of these texts is anything but straightforward — much like trying to assemble a puzzle with missing pieces! 

Reflecting on that moment in my sophomore year, when I first encountered the Codex Sinaiticus with its unexpected additions, it’s evident how complex and layered the process of forming the Biblical canon truly was.

The books removed from the Bible, whether from the Old Testament Apocrypha or early Christian writings, reveal a dynamic and evolving process driven by theological debates, questions of authenticity, and the shifting needs of early Jewish and Christian communities.

Excluded texts, however, continue to offer valuable insights into the religious and cultural context of their times. While they may not have made the final cut into the canon, their existence highlights the diversity of beliefs and practices that characterized early Christianity and Second Temple Judaism.

Deuterocanonical Books: Number and Why They Were Removed from the Bible

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 Bible is a vast collection of writings that span many centuries, cultures, and perspectives. From the epic tales of the ancient patriarchs to the thought-provoking parables of Jesus, its stories have captured people's imaginations for millennia.

Beyond the stories, however, lies a more complex truth: the Bible is not a singular, unified book but rather a compilation of different works, each written by various authors with unique theological insights. These authors, living in distinct socio-political contexts, shaped their writings to address the concerns of their time.

As with any anthology, the formation of the Bible was a gradual and contested process, one that took shape over many centuries. Some texts were embraced as sacred scripture, while others were set aside, and eventually excluded from the canonical Bible as we know it today. 

Among those excluded writings are the Deuterocanonical books — works that once held significant authority in many religious communities but were later removed from the Hebrew Bible and, eventually, from Protestant versions of the Old Testament.

Why were these books, which were revered by some and rejected by others, left out? What exactly are the Deuterocanonical books, and how did different traditions come to such varying conclusions about their place in the Bible?

In this article, we’ll explore the fascinating history behind the canonization of the Bible, focusing on the socio-political forces that shaped the creation of these texts and the reasons why certain groups ultimately excluded them.

We’ll also examine the Catholic Church’s perspective on these books, their theological importance, and how various opinions on the number of Deuterocanonical books (7, 10, or 12) contribute to ongoing debates over their number.

By the end, we hope to unravel the mystery surrounding these ancient writings and their journey from being part of the sacred canon to being relegated to the margins of the Bible. Let's dive into the story of the Deuterocanonical books!

But, wait a second! Before we immerse ourselves into the world of early Christianity, I want to invite you to join Bart D. Ehrman’s excellent course titled “In the Beginning: History, Legend, and Myth in Genesis.”

In it, Dr. Ehrman provides a scholarly analysis of the Book of Genesis, analyzing some of its most fascinating stories and providing a clear line between authentic history and mythology. 

Canonization of the Bible

Each journey into the fascinating world of the Deuterocanonical books must start with the issue of the emergence of the canon of Scripture. 

Understanding how certain books were included — and why others were excluded — gives us a clearer picture of the historical forces at play in shaping the Bible as we know it today.

The Emergence of the Hebrew Bible

The canonization of the Hebrew Bible, for instance, took a distinct path, influenced both by internal tradition and external pressures. As J. A. Sanders notes: “This process wasn't formalized by an official council but emerged organically within Jewish communities based on sociopolitical factors and community needs.”

(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!)

By the 1st century C.E., the Second Temple period literature suggests that there was a consensus about a three-part Jewish canon — Torah, Prophets, and Writings — although this canon was still quite fluid. 

Writing at the end of the 1st century, Josephus, in his work Against Apion, asserts: “We do not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with each other. Our books, those which are justly accredited, are but two and twenty, and contain the record of all time.”

While Josephus doesn’t specify the books, scholars such as Lee M. McDonald speculate that they likely included the five books of Moses, the historical books from Joshua to Kings, and the Psalms.

The destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 C.E. was a pivotal moment in Jewish history. Without the Temple, Judaism became more centered on its sacred texts, and the Pharisaic tradition became the dominant force shaping the religion.

By the 2nd century, the Jewish canon was largely fixed, with the number of compositions set at 24 (or 22, depending on how some books were grouped). The rise of Christianity and the early Christians' use of the Greek Old Testament known as Septuagint (which included the Deuterocanonical books) further solidified the boundaries of what constituted normative Judaism. 

Deuterocanonical Books and the Emergence of the Christian Canon

Canonization within Christianity followed a more rapid, and arguably more turbulent, trajectory. Early Christian communities naturally began collecting and exchanging letters, including the four Gospels. However, by the middle of the 2nd century, debates about Christian identity forced a clearer definition of authoritative writings. 

On one side, figures such as Marcion sought to limit the Christian canon, accepting only Luke’s Gospel and the Pauline epistles. 

On the other side, Gnostic groups pushed for the inclusion of an even wider array of texts, including writings such as the Gospel of Judas. As Bart D. Ehrman explains: “The battle for scripture really was a battle — a conflict among competing groups of Christians intent on determining the nature of Christianity for all posterity.”

It’s true, early Christian leaders weren’t exactly sipping tea while deciding which books to include. In contrast, they were embroiled in a full-on struggle for, to use Paul Veyne’s term, “l’impérialisme de leur vérité” (“the imperialism of their truth”).

In any case, by the late 2nd century, Bishop Irenaeus had devised a threefold strategy for defining Christianity: The rule of faith, the canon of Scripture, and apostolic succession. 

By the end of the 4th century, most of the Christian canon was in place, though there were still disputes over certain books, such as Revelation. Even today, different Christian denominations hold slightly different versions of the canon.

As we shift our focus to the Deuterocanonical books specifically, one might ask: Why were the Deuterocanonical books removed, and by whom? Let’s explore this intriguing part of biblical history in the next section.

Deuterocanonical Books: Etymology, History, and Significance

Each journey into the fascinating world of the Deuterocanonical books begins with understanding what these texts actually are. 

The term “Deuterocanonical” (from the Greek deutero, meaning “second”, and canon, meaning “rule” or “measure”) refers to those books that were included in the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Hebrew Scriptures, but were later excluded from the Jewish canon and, subsequently, from many Protestant versions of the Old Testament.

The Deuterocanonical books (bolded ones are part of the Catholic Bible!) usually include:

While Catholics and Orthodox Christians accept these books as part of the Old Testament, Protestants label them as “Apocrypha,” meaning “hidden” or “obscure.” This distinction between “Deuterocanonical” and “Apocryphal” may seem subtle, but it carries significant theological weight.

The term “Deuterocanonical” preserves the books' value within Christian tradition, particularly in the Catholic Church, which holds that these books, as stated in the Catechism, are as equally inspired as the rest of the books in the Bible.

By contrast, as Lee M. McDonald notes, Protestants use the term “Apocrypha” to downplay or even dismiss these books' historical and theological significance, subtly pushing them to the margins of sacred scripture.

The word “Apocrypha” comes from the Greek “apokryphos,” meaning “hidden away.” Originally, this term didn’t have the negative connotation it later took on in the Protestant tradition. However, during the Reformation, Martin Luther and other reformers sought to return to what they considered the “pure” Hebrew Bible, rejecting any texts not written in Hebrew.

By labeling these books as “Apocrypha,” they reduced their authority. In fact, Luther himself remarked that while these books are “useful and good to read,” they are not of the same status as the Hebrew scriptures. He saw them as edifying but not inspired by the Holy Spirit in the same way as the rest of the Old Testament.

Why Were the Deuterocanonical Books Removed?

The roots of the Deuterocanonical books trace back to the period before and after the establishment of Christianity. Early Christians, especially Greek-speaking ones, used the Septuagint as their scriptures. 

At this point, the Jewish canon was still somewhat fluid, and various Jewish communities in the Diaspora accepted different texts. 

Some of these communities embraced texts such as 1 and 2 Maccabees, which were written in Greek and reflected the historical struggles of the Jewish people under Hellenistic rule. However, when rabbinic Judaism began solidifying its canon after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 C.E., the Greek texts were excluded.

The reasons for this exclusion are complex. As Alison G. Salvesen explains: “The reasons for eventual Jewish rejection of such books may include a recognition of their late date of composition, the lack of a known Semitic text, and obvious historical or legal contradictions.” Josephus, for instance, believed that only books written by prophets should be included in the sacred canon.

The Deuterocanonical books, many of which were written in Greek, didn’t meet this prophetic standard, nor did they align with the Pharisaic emphasis on Hebrew-language texts. As a result, they were left out of the Jewish canon, which was eventually fixed at 24 or 22 books (depending on the way you group these texts).

However, unlike their Jewish counterparts, early Christians continued to include Deuterocanonical books. The Catholic Church, whose institutional framework was firmly established in the post-Constantine era, kept these books as part of its Bible. 

Again, Salvesen explains: “For many Christian authorities, the criterion for a book’s inclusion in the canon depended not on the language of composition, but on whether it was normative and authoritative for doctrine and public reading.”

While there was a certain amount of fluidity during the Middle Ages, the canon of the Catholic Bible was firmly fixed and officially accepted at the Council of Trent in the 16th century and it included the seven Deuterocanonical books. That brings us to the emergence of the Protestant Reformation.

Why were the Deuterocanonical books removed from Protestant Bibles? When reformers like Luther and Calvin began revising the Christian Bible, they, too, sought a return to what they believed to be the original Hebrew canon. 

For them, the Old Testament should only contain books that were part of the Hebrew Bible, which meant the Deuterocanonical books had to go. 

Thus, in Protestant Bibles, we often find the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Apocrypha, a section that includes books such as Tobit, Judith, and 1 and 2 Maccabees.

The creation of this category during the Reformation reflects the reformers' attempt to respect these ancient writings while reaffirming their commitment to sola scriptura — scripture alone, as defined by the Hebrew canon.

How Many Deuterocanonical Books Are There?

The question of how many Deuterocanonical books exist may seem straightforward, but the answer varies depending on which tradition you consult. In Catholic Bibles, the most commonly cited number is seven. These seven Deuterocanonical books are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), Baruch, and 1 and 2 Maccabees.

However, this number increases when we account for additional material found within some of the canonical books. For instance, Catholic Bibles include expanded portions of Esther and Daniel. 

The additions to Esther include prayers and other passages not found in the Hebrew version, while Daniel includes the Prayer of Azariah, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon. When these extended versions are counted separately, the total rises to around 10 or 12, depending on how the books are grouped.

Meanwhile, the Orthodox tradition often includes additional texts such as 3 Maccabees and Psalm 151, further increasing the number.

The confusion over the number of Deuterocanonical books, therefore, stems from the varied ways these texts have been viewed, categorized, and included (or excluded) in different traditions.

What remains consistent, however, is that these books held significant religious, historical, and cultural value in the Christian tradition — no matter their canonical status.

Conclusion

The journey of the Deuterocanonical books, from being included in the Septuagint to their exclusion in various Jewish and Protestant canons, highlights the dynamic and evolving nature of biblical scripture. 

These texts, though sidelined by some traditions, remain integral to the Catholic and Orthodox Christian faiths, where they continue to be valued for their theological insights and historical significance. 

The differences in the total number of the books — whether seven, ten, or twelve — illustrate the complexity of the canonization process, shaped by both religious convictions and socio-political contexts.

Ultimately, the Deuterocanonical books stand as a testament to the rich diversity within the biblical tradition. While their canonical status may vary across Christian denominations, their influence on the history of theology and biblical interpretation is undeniable.