New Testament

The order in which the books of the New Testament appear differs between some collections and ecclesiastical traditions. In the Latin West, prior to the Vulgate (an early 5th-century Latin version of the Bible), the four Gospels were arranged in the following order: Matthew, John, Luke, and Mark.^[f] The Syriac Peshitta places the major Catholic epistles (James, 1 Peter, and 1 John) immediately after Acts and before the Pauline epistles.

The order of an early edition of the letters of Paul is based on the size of the letters: longest to shortest, though keeping 1 and 2 Corinthians and 1 and 2 Thessalonians together. The Pastoral epistles were apparently not part of the Corpus Paulinum in which this order originated and were later inserted after 2 Thessalonians and before Philemon. Hebrews was variously incorporated into the Corpus Paulinum either after 2 Thessalonians, after Philemon (i.e. at the very end), or after Romans.

Luther's canon, found in the 16th-century Luther Bible, continues to place Hebrews, James, Jude, and the Apocalypse (Revelation) last. This reflects the thoughts of the Reformer Martin Luther on the canonicity of these books.^[64][g][65]

It is considered the books of the New Testament were all or nearly all written by

Authorship of the Gospels remains divided among both evangelical and critical scholars. The names of each Gospel stems from church tradition, and yet the authors of the Gospels do not identify themselves in their respective texts. All four gospels and the Acts of the Apostles are

Christian tradition identifies John the Apostle with John the Evangelist, the supposed author of the Gospel of John. Traditionalists tend to support the idea that the writer of the Gospel of John himself claimed to be an eyewitness in their commentaries of John 21:24 and therefore the gospel was written by an eyewitness.^[82][83] This idea is rejected by the majority of modern scholars, with most viewing the passage as a later addition, though a growing minority view it as part of the earliest text.^[84][85][86]

Most^[

]

Acts

Main article: Authorship of Luke–Acts

The same author appears to have written the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles, and most refer to them as the Lucan texts.

Theophilus, and the preface to the Acts of the Apostles references "my former book" about the ministry of Jesus.^[94] Furthermore, there are linguistic and theological similarities between the two works, suggesting that they have a common author.^{[95][96][97][98]}

Pauline epistles

Main article: Authorship of the Pauline epistles

The Pauline epistles are the thirteen books in the New Testament traditionally attributed to

Paul of Tarsus. Seven letters are generally classified as "undisputed", expressing contemporary scholarly near consensus that they are the work of Paul: Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon. Six additional letters bearing Paul's name do not currently enjoy the same academic consensus: Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy and Titus.^[h]

The anonymous Epistle to the Hebrews is, despite unlikely Pauline authorship, often functionally grouped with these thirteen to form a corpus of fourteen "Pauline" epistles.[i]

While many scholars uphold the traditional view, some question whether the first three, called the "Deutero-Pauline Epistles", are authentic letters of Paul. As for the latter three, the "Pastoral epistles", some scholars uphold the traditional view of these as the genuine writings of the Apostle Paul;

pseudepigrapha.^[101]

One might refer to the Epistle to the Laodiceans and the Third Epistle to the Corinthians as examples of works identified as pseudonymous. Since the early centuries of the church, there has been debate concerning the authorship of the anonymous Epistle to the Hebrews, and contemporary scholars generally reject Pauline authorship.^[102]

The epistles all share common themes, emphasis, vocabulary and style; they exhibit a uniformity of doctrine concerning the

Mosaic Law

, Jesus, faith, and various other issues. All of these letters easily fit into the chronology of Paul's journeys depicted in Acts of the Apostles.

Other epistles

The author of the

James the Just.^[103] Ancient and modern scholars have always been divided on the issue of authorship. Many consider the epistle to be written in the late 1st or early 2nd centuries.^[104]

The author of the

The Second Epistle of Peter, the authorship of which was debated in antiquity, there was little debate about Peter's authorship of this first epistle until the 18th century. Although 2 Peter internally purports to be a work of the apostle, many biblical scholars have concluded that Peter is not the author.^[105] For an early date and (usually) for a defense of the Apostle Peter's authorship see Kruger,^[106] Zahn,^[107] Spitta,^{[108][full citation needed]} Bigg,^[109] and Green.^[110]

The Epistle of Jude title is written as follows: "Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James".[111] The debate has continued over the author's identity as the apostle, the brother of Jesus, both, or neither.^[112]

Johannine works

Main article: Authorship of the Johannine works

The Gospel of John, the three Johannine epistles, and the Book of Revelation, exhibit marked similarities, although more so between the gospel and the epistles (especially the gospel and 1 John) than between those and Revelation.^[113] Most scholars therefore treat the five as a single corpus of Johannine literature, albeit not from the same author.^[114]

Burkett argues the gospel went through two or three "editions" before reaching its current form around AD 90–110, though more recent scholars tend to be less interested in theories about hypothetical editions or sources of the gospel.

apostle John, but while this idea still has supporters, for a variety of reasons the majority of modern scholars have abandoned it or hold it only tenuously.^[118] It is significantly different from the synoptic gospels, with major variations in material, theological emphasis, chronology, and literary style, sometimes amounting to contradictions.^[119]

The author of the

Ben Witherington points out that linguistic evidence makes it unlikely that the books were written by the same person.^[124]

Dating the New Testament

Main article: Dating the Bible § Table IV: New Testament

There is no

First Century is very likely statistically.^[132] Markus Bockmuehl finds this structure of lifetime memory in various early Christian traditions.^[133]

External evidence

The earliest manuscripts of New Testament books date from the late second to early third centuries (although see Papyrus 52 for a possible exception).^[134]

Internal evidence

Literary analysis of the New Testament texts themselves can be used to date many of the books of the New Testament to the mid-to-late first century. The earliest works of the New Testament are the letters of the Apostle Paul. It can be determined that 1 Thessalonians is likely the earliest of these letters, written around 52 AD.^[135]

Language

Main article: Language of the New Testament

The major languages spoken by both Jews and Greeks in the

Aramaic and Koine Greek, and also a colloquial dialect of Mishnaic Hebrew. It is generally agreed by most scholars that the historical Jesus primarily spoke Aramaic,^[136] perhaps also some Hebrew and Koine Greek. The majority view is that all of the books that would eventually form the New Testament were written in the Koine Greek language.^[3][137]

Aramaic, and then soon after was written in Koine Greek. Nevertheless, some scholars believe the Gospel of Matthew known today was composed in Greek and is neither directly dependent upon nor a translation of a text in a Semitic language.^[139]

Style

The style of Koine Greek in which the New Testament is written differs from the general Koine Greek used by Greek writers of the same era, a difference that some scholars have explained by the fact that the authors of the New Testament, nearly all Jews and deeply familiar with the Septuagint, wrote in a Jewish-Greek dialect strongly influenced by Aramaic and Hebrew^[140] (see Jewish Koine Greek, related to the Greek of the Septuagint). But other scholars say that this view is arrived at by comparing the linguistic style of the New Testament to the preserved writings of the literary men of the era, who imitated the style of the great Attic texts and as a result did not reflect the everyday spoken language, so that this difference in style could be explained by the New Testament being written, unlike other preserved literary material of the era, in the Koine Greek spoken in everyday life, in order to appeal to the common people, a style which has also been found in contemporary non-Jewish texts such as private letters, receipts and petitions discovered in Egypt (where the dry air has preserved these documents which, as everyday material not deemed of literary importance, had not been copied by subsequent generations).^[141]

Development of the New Testament canon

Main article: Development of the New Testament canon

The process of canonization of the New Testament was complex and lengthy. In the initial centuries of

earliest Christian communities and the Pauline epistles were circulating, perhaps in collected forms, by the end of the 1st century AD.^[144]

One of the earliest attempts at solidifying a canon was made by

Marcion, c. 140 AD, who accepted only a modified version of Luke (the Gospel of Marcion) and ten of Paul's letters, while rejecting the Old Testament entirely. His canon was largely rejected by other groups of Christians, notably the proto-orthodox Christians, as was his theology, Marcionism. Adolf von Harnack,^[145] John Knox,^[146] and David Trobisch,^[43]

among other scholars, have argued that the church formulated its New Testament canon partially in response to the challenge posed by Marcion.

2nd century, mentions "memoirs of the apostles" as being read on Sunday alongside the "writings of the prophets".^[150]

The

Anchor Bible Dictionary

The oldest clear endorsement of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John being the only legitimate gospels was written c. 180 AD. A four gospel canon (the Tetramorph) was asserted by Irenaeus, who refers to it directly[151]^[152] in his polemic Against Heresies:

It is not possible that the gospels can be either more or fewer in number than they are. For, since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds, while the church is scattered throughout all the world, and the "pillar and ground" of the church is the gospel and the spirit of life; it is fitting that she should have four pillars, breathing out immortality on every side, and vivifying men afresh.^[152]

— Irenaeus of Lyon (emphasis added)

The books considered to be authoritative by Irenaeus included the four gospels and many of the letters of Paul, although, based on the arguments Irenaeus made in support of only four authentic gospels, some interpreters deduce that the fourfold Gospel must have still been a novelty in Irenaeus's time.^[153]

By the early 200s,

Eusebius, c. 300, gave a detailed list of New Testament writings in his Ecclesiastical History Book 3, Chapter XXV:

"1... First then must be put the holy quaternion of the gospels; following them the Acts of the Apostles... the epistles of Paul... the epistle of John... the epistle of Peter... After them is to be placed, if it really seem proper, the Book of Revelation, concerning which we shall give the different opinions at the proper time. These then belong among the accepted writings."

"3 Among the disputed writings, which are nevertheless recognized by many, are extant the so-called epistle of James and that of Jude, also the second epistle of Peter, and those that are called the second and third of John, whether they belong to the evangelist or to another person of the same name. Among the rejected [Kirsopp Lake translation: "not genuine"] writings must be reckoned also the

Shepherd, and the Apocalypse of Peter, and in addition to these the extant epistle of Barnabas, and the so-called Teachings of the Apostles; and besides, as I said, the Apocalypse of John, if it seem proper, which some, as I said, reject, but which others class with the accepted books. And among these some have placed also the Gospel according to the Hebrews

... And all these may be reckoned among the disputed books."

"6... such books as the Gospels of Peter, of Thomas, of Matthias, or of any others besides them, and the Acts of Andrew and John and the other apostles... they clearly show themselves to be the fictions of heretics. Wherefore they are not to be placed even among the rejected writings, but are all of them to be cast aside as absurd and impious."

The Book of Revelation is counted as both accepted (Kirsopp Lake translation: "recognized") and disputed, which has caused some confusion over what exactly Eusebius meant by doing so. From other writings of the church fathers, it was disputed with several canon lists rejecting its canonicity. EH 3.3.5 adds further detail on Paul: "Paul's fourteen epistles are well known and undisputed. It is not indeed right to overlook the fact that some have rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews, saying that it is disputed by the church of Rome, on the ground that it was not written by Paul." EH 4.29.6 mentions the Diatessaron: "But their original founder, Tatian, formed a certain combination and collection of the gospels, I know not how, to which he gave the title Diatessaron, and which is still in the hands of some. But they say that he ventured to paraphrase certain words of the apostle Paul, in order to improve their style."

In his Easter letter of 367,

On the question of NT Canon formation generally, New Testament scholar Lee Martin McDonald has written that:[172]

Although a number of Christians have thought that

church councils

determined what books were to be included in the biblical canons, a more accurate reflection of the matter is that the councils recognized or acknowledged those books that had already obtained prominence from usage among the various early Christian communities.

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia article on the Canon of the New Testament: "The idea of a complete and clear-cut canon of the New Testament existing from the beginning, that is from Apostolic times, has no foundation in history. The Canon of the New Testament, like that of the Old, is the result of a development, of a process at once stimulated by disputes with doubters, both within and without the Church, and retarded by certain obscurities and natural hesitations, and which did not reach its final term until the dogmatic definition of the Tridentine Council."^[173]

In 331,

Like other literature from

In attempting to determine the original text of the New Testament books, some modern textual critics have identified sections as additions of material, centuries after the gospel was written. These are called interpolations. In modern translations of the Bible, the results of textual criticism have led to certain verses, words and phrases being left out or marked as not original. According to Bart D. Ehrman, "These scribal additions are often found in late medieval manuscripts of the New Testament, but not in the manuscripts of the earlier centuries."^[179]

Most modern Bibles have footnotes to indicate passages that have disputed source documents. Bible commentaries also discuss these, sometimes in great detail. While many variations have been discovered between early copies of biblical texts, almost all have no importance, as they are variations in spelling, punctuation, or grammar. Also, many of these variants are so particular to the Greek language that they would not appear in translations into other languages. For example, order of words (i.e. "man bites dog" versus "dog bites man") often does not matter in Greek, so textual variants that flip the order of words often have no consequences.^[177]

Outside of these unimportant variants, there are a couple variants of some importance. The two most commonly cited examples are the last verses of the Gospel of Mark^{[180][181][182]} and the story of Jesus and the woman taken in adultery in the Gospel of John.^{[183][184][185]} Many scholars and critics also believe that the Johannine Comma reference supporting the Trinity doctrine in the First Epistle of John to have been a later addition.^[186][187] According to Norman Geisler and William Nix, "The New Testament, then, has not only survived in more manuscripts than any other book from antiquity, but it has survived in a purer form than any other great book—a form that is 99.5% pure".^[188]

The often referred to Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, a book written to prove the validity of the New Testament, says: "A study of 150 Greek [manuscripts] of the Gospel of Luke has revealed more than 30,000 different readings... It is safe to say that there is not one sentence in the New Testament in which the [manuscript] is wholly uniform."^[189]

Biblical criticism is the scholarly "study and investigation of biblical writings that seeks to make discerning judgments about these writings."^[190]

The

Books that later formed the New Testament, like other Christian literature of the period, originated in a literary context that reveals relationships not only to other Christian writings, but also to

The first translations (usually called "versions") of the New Testament were made beginning already at the end of 2nd century. The earliest versions of the New Testament are the translations into the Syriac, Latin, and Coptic languages.^[192]

The

There are several dialects of the Coptic language:

A Bohairic translation was made later, but existed already in the 4th century. Though the translation makes less use of Greek words than the Sahidic, it does employ some Greek grammar (e.g., in word-order and the use of particles such as the syntactic construction μεν—δε). For this reason, the Bohairic translation can be helpful in the reconstruction of the early Greek text of the New Testament.[195]

The 16th century saw the rise of

Translations of the New Testament made since the appearance of critical editions of the Greek text (notably those of

According to Gary T. Meadors:

The self-witness of the Bible to its inspiration demands a commitment to its unity. The ultimate basis for unity is contained in the claim of divine inspiration in 2 Timothy 3:16^[197] that "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (KJV). The term "inspiration" renders the Greek word theopneustos. This term only occurs here in the New Testament and literally means "God-breathed" (the chosen translation of the NIV).^[198]

The notion of unity in diversity of Scripture claims that the Bible presents a noncontradictory and consistent message concerning God and redemptive history. The fact of diversity is observed in comparing the diversity of time, culture, authors' perspectives, literary genre, and the theological themes.^[198]

Studies from many theologians considering the "unity in diversity" to be found in the New Testament (and the Bible as a whole) have been collected and summarized by New Testament theologian Frank Stagg. He describes them as some basic presuppositions, tenets, and concerns common among the New Testament writers, giving to the New Testament its "unity in diversity":

1. The reality of God is never argued but is always assumed and affirmed
2. Jesus Christ is absolutely central: he is Lord and Savior, the foretold Prophet, the Messianic King, the Chosen, the way, the truth, and the light, the One through whom God the Father not only acted but through whom He came
3. The Holy Spirit came anew with Jesus Christ.
4. The Christian faith and life are a calling, rooted in divine election.
5. The plight of everyone as sinner means that each person is completely dependent upon the mercy and grace of God
6. Salvation is both God's gift and his demand through Jesus Christ, to be received by faith
7. The death and resurrection of Jesus are at the heart of the total event of which he was the center
8. God creates a people of his own, designated and described by varied terminology and analogies
9. History must be understood eschatologically, being brought along toward its ultimate goal when the kingdom of God, already present in Christ, is brought to its complete triumph
10. In Christ, all of God's work of creation, revelation, and redemption is brought to fulfillment^[199]

For the

In Catholic terminology the teaching office is called the Magisterium. The Catholic view should not be confused with the two-source theory. As the Catechism states in §§ 80 and 81, Revelation has "one common source ... two distinct modes of transmission."^[200]

While many Eastern Orthodox writers distinguish between Scripture and Tradition, Bishop Kallistos Ware says that for the Orthodox there is only one source of the Christian faith, Holy Tradition, within which Scripture exists.^[201]

Traditional Anglicans believe that "Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation", (Article VI), but also that the Catholic Creeds "ought thoroughly to be received and believed" (Article VIII), and that the Church "hath authority in Controversies of Faith" and is "a witness and keeper of Holy Writ" (Article XX).^[202]

In the famous words of Thomas Ken, Bishop of Bath and Wells: "As for my religion, I dye in the holy catholic and apostolic faith professed by the whole Church before the disunion of East and West, more particularly in the communion of the Church of England, as it stands distinguished from all Papal and Puritan innovations, and as it adheres to the doctrine of the Cross."^{[This quote needs a citation]}

Following the doctrine of

]

American evangelical and fundamentalist Protestantism

This section may lend create a more balanced presentation. Discuss and resolve this issue before removing this message. (May 2025)

The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline. Please help to demonstrate the notability of the topic by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond a mere trivial mention. If notability cannot be shown, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. Find sources: "New Testament" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (May 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Within the US, the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1978) articulates evangelical views on this issue.^{[citation needed][according to whom?]} Paragraph four of its summary states: "Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God's acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God's saving grace in individual lives."^[203]

American mainline and liberal Protestantism

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

This section may lend create a more balanced presentation. Discuss and resolve this issue before removing this message. (May 2025)

Officials of the Presbyterian Church USA report: "We acknowledge the role of scriptural authority in the Presbyterian Church, but Presbyterians generally do not believe in biblical inerrancy. Presbyterians do not insist that every detail of chronology or sequence or prescientific description in scripture be true in literal form. Our confessions do teach biblical infallibility. Infallibility affirms the entire truthfulness of scripture without depending on every exact detail."^[204]

Messianic Judaism

Messianic Judaism generally holds the same view of New Testament authority as evangelical Protestants.^[205] According to the view of some Messianic Jewish congregations, Jesus did not annul the Torah, but that its interpretation is revised and ultimately explained through the Apostolic Scriptures.^[206]

Jehovah's Witnesses

Kingdom of God, explaining and expounding the Hebrew Bible, not replacing but vitally supplementing it. They also view the New Testament as the primary instruction guide for Christian living, and church discipline. They generally call the New Testament the "Christian Greek Scriptures", and see only the "covenants" as "old" or "new", but not any part of the actual Scriptures themselves.^[207]

United Pentecostals

Oneness Pentecostalism subscribes to the common Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura. They view the Bible as the inspired Word of God, and as absolutely inerrant in its contents (though not necessarily in every translation).^[208][209] They regard the New Testament as perfect and inerrant in every way, revealing the Lord Jesus Christ in the Flesh, and his Atonement, and which also explains and illuminates the Old Testament perfectly, and is part of the Bible canon, not because church councils or decrees claimed it so, but by witness of the Holy Spirit.^[210][211]

Seventh-day Adventists

The

ATS members believe in verbal inerrancy".^[213]

How the

E. J. Waggoner looked at the problem addressed by Paul in Galatians as not the ceremonial law, but rather the wrong use of the law (legalism). They were opposed by Uriah Smith and George Butler at the 1888 Conference. Smith in particular thought the Galatians issue had been settled by Ellen White already, yet in 1890 she claimed that justification by faith is "the third angel's message in verity."^[214] White interpreted Colossians 2:14^[215] as saying that the ceremonial law was nailed to the cross.^[216]

Latter-day Saints

Members of

Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price are considered part of their scriptural canon.^[220][221]

In the arts

Further information:

Passion play

"Hallelujah" chorus

The text of the famous "Hallelujah" chorus in G. F. Händel's Messiah is drawn from three passages in the Book of Revelation: 19:6, 11:5, and 19:16 (audio clip from the German translation of the Messiah).

---

Problems playing this file? See media help.

Most of the influence of the New Testament upon

raising of Lazarus, the baptism of Jesus or the motif of the Good Shepherd

.

Passion of Jesus, as portrayed in one or more of the New Testament Gospels

, has also been a theme in film, almost since the inception of the medium (e.g., La Passion, France, 1903).

See also

• Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews
• Catalogue of Vices and Virtues
• Chronology of Jesus
• Earlier Epistle to the Ephesians
  Non-canonical books referenced in the New Testament
• Historical background of the New Testament
• Life of Jesus in the New Testament
• List of Gospels
• Novum Testamentum Graece

Notes

1. Latin: Novum Testamentum; Hebrew
   : הברית החדשה.
2. ^ For example, the pact between Jacob with Laban in Genesis (Genesis 31:44).
3. ^ For example, the covenant at Mount Sinai (Exodus 19:5) or the "new covenant" verse from Jeremiah 31:31 above (Jeremiah 31:31).
4. ^ See also Tertullian, Against Marcion, Book IV, chapters I, II, XIV. His meaning in chapter XX is less clear, and in chapters IX and XL he uses the term to mean 'new covenant'.
5. Joseph Barber Lightfoot in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians writes: "At this point^[45] the apostle takes the pen from his amanuensis, and the concluding paragraph is written with his own hand. From the time when letters began to be forged in his name^[46] it seems to have been his practice to close with a few words in his own handwriting, as a precaution against such forgeries.... In the present case he writes a whole paragraph, summing up the main lessons of the epistle in terse, eager, disjointed sentences. He writes it, too, in large, bold characters (Gr. pelikois grammasin), that his handwriting may reflect the energy and determination of his soul."^[47]
6. ^ The Gospels are in this order in many Old Latin manuscripts, as well as in the Greek manuscripts Codex Bezae and Codex Washingtonianus.
7. ^ See also the article on the Antilegomena.
8. ^ ^{a b} Donald Guthrie lists the following scholars as supporting authenticity: Wohlenberg, Lock, Meinertz, Thörnell, Schlatter, Spicq, Jeremias, Simpson, Kelly, and Fee^[99]
9. ^ Although Hebrews was almost certainly not written by Paul, it has been a part of the Pauline corpus "from the beginning of extant MS production".^[100]

1. ^ Sanders (2010): "John, however, is so different that it cannot be reconciled with the Synoptics except in very general ways [...] Scholars have unanimously chosen the Synoptic Gospels’ version of Jesus’ teaching [...] The Synoptic Gospels, then, are the primary sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus. They are not, however, the equivalent of an academic biography of a recent historical figure. Instead, the Synoptic Gospels are theological documents that provide information the authors regarded as necessary for the religious development of the Christian communities in which they worked."

References

Citations

1. ^ "BBC – Religions – Christianity: The Bible". www.bbc.co.uk. Retrieved 23 September 2020.
2. ISBN 979-12-80113-17-7
   .
3. ^ ^{a b c} Metzger & Ehrman 2005.
4. ^ "The Transmission of Divine Revelation". Catechism of the Catholic Church. 2nd ed. 1997.
5. ^ "The Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy". Center for Reformed Theology and Apologetics. Archived from the original on 1 March 2017. Retrieved 19 November 2010.
6. ^ ^{a b} "New Testament". Catholic Encyclopedia. 1912. Retrieved 16 February 2021 – via Catholic.com.
7. ^ Jeremiah 31–34
8. ^ Biddle 2007, p. 1074.
9. ^ Davidson 1993, p. 347.
10. ^ Definition of ברית in Brown-Driver-Briggs's lexicon: https://biblehub.com/hebrew/1285.htm Hebrew uses an unrelated word for testament: tsavaa (צַוָּאָה).
11. ^ "Inheritance – Holman Bible Dictionary – Bible Dictionary". StudyLight.org. Retrieved 12 August 2020.
12. ^ "testamentum: Latin Word Study Tool". www.perseus.tufts.edu. Retrieved 12 August 2020.
13. ^ "διαθήκη: Greek Word Study Tool". www.perseus.tufts.edu. Retrieved 12 August 2020.
14. ^ "G1242 – diathēkē – Strong's Greek Lexicon (KJV)". Blue Letter Bible. Retrieved 12 August 2020.
15. ^ ^{a b} "The meaning of "Covenant" (διαθηκη) in the Bible". www.bible-researcher.com. Retrieved 12 August 2020.
16. doi:10.31826/mjj-2013-090104
    .
17. ISBN 978-0-19-511240-5
    .
18. ^
    ISBN 978-1-58983-648-8
    .
19. ^ "If I fail in resolving this article (of our faith) by passages which may admit of dispute out of the Old Testament, I will take out of the New Testament a confirmation of our view, that you may not straightway attribute to the Father every possible (relation and condition) which I ascribe to the Son." – Tertullian, Against Praxeas 15
20. ^ Tertullian. "Chapter XIV". Against Marcion, Book III.
21. ^ Tertullian. "Chapter VI". Against Marcion, Book IV.
22. ^ Lactantius. "Chapter XX". "The Divine Institutes, Book IV".
23. ^ Jer 31:31–32
24. ^ "Gospel". Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Retrieved 10 May 2016.
25. ^ Cross & Livingstone 2005, "Gospel".
26. ^ Irenaeus, Against Heresies III.11
27. bishop of Rome, the work is usually dated c. 180. Schaff, Philip (2001) [c. 1885] "Introductory Note to Irenæus Against Heresies", Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume I, Against Heresies, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company
    .
28. ISBN 979-12-80113-17-7
    .
29. ISBN 979-12-80113-17-7
    .
30. ISBN 0-385-00515-6
    .
31. ^
    ISBN 979-12-80113-17-7
    .
32. ^ Luke 1:1–4
33. ^ Petersen 2010, p. 51.
34. ^ Culpepper 1999, p. 66.
35. ^ Sanders 2010.
36. ^ Burkett 2002, p. 196.
37. ^ Ehrman 2003, p. 235
38. ISBN 978-0801039898
    .
39. ISBN 978-0802874023
    .
40. ISBN 978-0300139822
    .
41. ISBN 978-0802837318
    .
42. ^ ^{a b} Pervo, Richard (2015). "Acts in Ephesus (and Environs) c. 115" (PDF). Forum. 3 (Fall 2015): 125–151. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2 March 2021.
43. ^ ^{a b c} Trobisch, David. "Who Published the New Testament?" (PDF). Free Inquiry. 28 (Dec. 2007/Jan. 2008): 30–33. Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 April 2021. ...Acts provides information that makes it possible to identify Luke, the author of the Gospel, as the doctor who travels with Paul and to identify Mark as someone close to Peter and Paul. This 'canon consciousness' suggests that the book of Acts was composed at a later date than is typically thought; this theory is supported by the first attestation of the book around 180 CE.
44. ^ Perkins 2009, pp. 250–53.
45. ^ Gal 6:11
46. ^ 2 Thess. 3:17; 2 Thess. 3:17
47. ^ Lightfoot, Joseph Barber (1866). St Paul's Epistle to the Galatians (2nd ed.). MacMillan & Co. p. 217.
48. ISBN 978-1-4443-1894-4
    .
49. ISBN 978-0-664-23392-1
50. ^ Heb. 1:1–10:18
51. ^ Heb. 10:19–13:25
52. ^ Attridge, Harold W. (1989). Hebrews. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress. pp. 1–6.
53. ^ Lane, William L. (1991). Hebrews 1–8. Word Biblical Commentary series, Vol. 47A. Dallas, Texas: Word Books. p. cliv.
54. ^ Eusebius. "Chapter 25". Church History, Book VI.
55. ^ Ehrman 2004a, p. 323: "Scholars in the ancient world went about detecting forgeries in much the same way that modern scholars do. They looked to see whether the ideas and writing style of a piece conformed with those used by the author in other writings, and they examined the text for any blatant anachronisms, that is, statements about things that could not have existed at the time the alleged author was writing (like the letter reputedly from an early seventeenth-century American colonist that mentions "the United States")- Arguments of this kind were used by some Christian scholars of the third century to show that Hebrews was not written by Paul or the Book of Revelation by John the son of Zebedee. Modern scholars, as we will see, concur with these judgments. To be sure, neither of these books can be considered a forgery. Hebrews does not claim to be written by Paul (it is anonymous), and the John who wrote Revelation does not claim to be the son of Zebedee (it is therefore homonymous). Are there other books in the New Testament, though, that can be considered forgeries?"
56. ^ Powell 2009, pp. 431–32.
57. OCLC 1244729487
    .
58. ISBN 0-8028-2537-0
    .
59. ^ For a detailed study of the Apocalypse of John, see Aune, David E. (1998). Revelation, 3 volumes. Word Biblical Commentary series. Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson.
60. ^ ^{a b} Nersessian 2001, p. 29.
61. doi:10.31826/hug-2010-050112
    .
62. ^ Carter, Nancy A. (2000). "The Acts of Thecla: A Pauline Tradition Linked to Women". Conflict and Community in the Corinthian Church. Archived from the original on 28 November 2014.
63. ^ Poole, Matthew (1852). "Annotations Upon the Holy Bible, Vol. III". Robert Carter and Brothers. p. 729.
64. ^ "Web Directory: German Bible Versions". Bible Research. Retrieved 17 February 2016.
65. ^ "Luther's Antilegomena". www.bible-researcher.com. Retrieved 15 July 2020.
66. ^ Powell 2009, p. 16.
67. ^ Strelan, Rick (2013). Luke the Priest: The Authority of the Author of the Third Gospel. Farnham, ENG: Routledege-Ashgate. pp. 102–05.
68. ^ For discussion of Mark, see Schröter, Jens (2010). "Gospel of Mark". In Aune, David. The Blackwell Companion to the New Testament. New York: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 281ff.
69. ^ For discussion of Mark, see Hare, Douglas R. A. (1996). Mark. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press. pp. 3–5.
70. ^ For discussion of Matthew, see Repschinski, Boris (1998). "Forschungbericht: Matthew and Judaism". The Controversy Stories in the Gospel of Matthew. Göttingen, GER: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. pp. 13–61.
71. ISBN 9781108883573
    .
72. ^ Harris 1985, p. 501.
73. ^ "A glance at recent extended treatments of the "we" passages and commentaries demonstrates that, within biblical scholarship, solutions in the historical eyewitness traditions continue to be the most influential explanations for the first-person plural style in Acts. Of the two latest full-length studies on the "we" passages, for example, one argues that the first-person accounts came from Silas, a companion of Paul but not the author, and the other proposes that first-person narration was Luke's (Paul's companion and the author of Acts) method of communicating his participation in the events narrated.17 17. Jurgen Wehnert, Die Wir-Passegen der Apostelgeschitchte: Ein lukanisches Stilmittel aus judischer Tradition (GTA 40; Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989); Claus-Jurgen Thornton, Der Zeuge des Zeugen: Lukas als Historiker der Paulus reisen (WUNT 56; Tugingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991). See also, Barrett, Acts of the Apostles, and Fitzmyer, Acts of the Apostles.", Campbell, "The "we" passages in the Acts of the Apostles: the narrator as narrative", p. 8 (2007). Society of Biblical Literature.
74. ^ "The principle essay in this regard is P. Vielhauer, 'On the "Paulinism" of Acts', in L.E. Keck and J. L. Martyn (eds.), Studies in Luke-Acts (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), 33-50, who suggests that Luke's presentation of Paul was, on several fronts, a contradiction of Paul's own letters (e.g. attitudes on natural theology, Jewish law, christology, eschatology). This has become the standard position in German scholarship, e.g., Conzelmann, Acts; J. Roloff, Die Apostelgeschichte (NTD; Berlin: Evangelische, 1981) 2-5; Schille, Apostelgeschichte des Lukas, 48-52. This position has been challenged most recently by Porter, "The Paul of Acts and the Paul of the Letters: Some Common Misconceptions', in his Paul of Acts, 187-206. See also I.H. Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles (TNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Leister: InterVarsity Press, 1980) 42-44; E.E. Ellis, The Gospel of Luke (NCB; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 2nd edn, 1974) 45-47.", Pearson, "Corresponding sense: Paul, dialectic, and Gadamer", Biblical Interpretation Series, p. 101 (2001). Brill.
75. ^ Ehrman 2003, p. 235: "The four Gospels that eventually made it into the New Testament, for example, are all anonymous, written in the third person about Jesus and his companions. None of them contains a first-person narrative ('One day, when Jesus and I went into Capernaum...'), or claims to be written by an eyewitness or companion of an eyewitness. ... Some scholars abandon these traditional identifications, and recognize that the books were written by otherwise unknown but relatively well-educated Greek-speaking (and writing) Christians during the second half of the first century."
76. ^ Ehrman 2004b, p. 110: "In fact, contrary to what you might think, these Gospels don't even claim to be written by eyewitnesses."
77. ^ Ehrman 2006, p. 143: "The Gospels of the New Testament are therefore our earliest accounts. These do not claim to be written by eyewitnesses to the life of Jesus, and historians have long recognized that they were produced by second- or third-generation Christians living in different countries than Jesus (and Judas) did, speaking a different language (Greek instead of Aramaic), experiencing different situations, and addressing different audiences."
78. ^ Ehrman 2006, p. 143.
79. ^ Ehrman 2009, pp. 102–04.
80. ISBN 978-0-664-22349-6
    .
81. ^ Theissen, Gerd (2004). The Gospels in Context. London, ENG: Bloomsbury-Continuum. p. 290.
82. ISBN 978-0825493713. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help
    )
83. ^ Henry, Matthew (1706). Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible. StudyLight.org.
84. ^ Brown 1988, p. 9.
85. ^ Schubert 2016, p. 16.
86. ^
    ISBN 978-0199384372
    .
87. ^ Kirby, Peter. "Gospel of Mark". Early Christian Writings. Retrieved 15 January 2008.
88. ISBN 978-0-385-19362-7
    .
89. ^ Easton, M. G. (1996) [ca. 1897] "Luke, Gospel According To". Easton's Bible Dictionary. Oak Harbor, Washington: Logos Research.
90. ISBN 978-0-385-46993-7
    .
91. ISBN 978-0-9655047-2-0
    .
92. ^ Horrell, D. G. (2006). An Introduction to the Study of Paul. 2nd ed. London, Bloomsbury-T&T Clark. p. 7.
93. ^ See Knox 1948, pp. 2–15 for detailed arguments.
94. ^ "Acts 1:1".
95. ISBN 978-9004242111
    Scholarly agreement of the single-author/editor theory of the Lucan texts is not without question, e.g. Patricia Walters, The Assumed Authorial Unity of Luke and Acts: A Reassessment of the Evidence (Cambridge University Press, 2009).
    ISBN 978-0521509749
96. ISBN 978-0-19-826178-0
    .
97. ^ Schnelle 1998, p. 259.
98. ^ Bruce 1952, p. 2.
99. ^ Guthrie 1990, p. 621–622.
100. ^ Wallace, Daniel B. (28 June 2004). "Hebrews: Introduction, Argument, and Outline". Bible.org.
101. ^ Ehrman 2004a, p. 385.
102. ^ Ehrman 2004a, p. 323
103. ^ "Epistle of St. James". 1914 Catholic Encyclopedia.
104. ^ "Epistle of James". Early Christian Writings. Retrieved 19 November 2010.
105. ISBN 978-0-8091-4188-3
     .
106. ^ Kruger, M.J. (1999). "The Authenticity of 2 Peter". Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. 42 (4): 645–71.
107. ^ Zahn, S. T. (1909). Introduction to the New Testament. Vol. II. Translated by Trout, John Moore; Mather, William Arnot; Hodous, Louis; Worcester, Edward Strong; Worrell, William Hoyt; Dodge, Rowland Backus (English translation of 3rd German ed.). New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. p. 250.
108. ^ Spitta, Friedrich (1885). Der zweite Brief des Petrus und der Brief des Judas: Eine geschichtliche Untersuchung [The Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of Jude: A Historical Investigation] (in German). Halle an der Saale: Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses..
109. ISBN 9780567050366. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help
     )
110. ^ e.g. Green, E. M. B. (8 July 1960). 2 Peter Reconsidered (PDF) (Speech). Meeting of the Tyndale Fellowship for Biblical Research. Cambridge. Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 August 2020.
111. ^ Jude 1:1 (NRSV)
112. ^ Bauckham, R. J. (1986). Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 50. Word (UK) Ltd. pp. 14ff.
113. ^ Van der Watt 2008, p. 1.
114. ^ Harris 2006, p. 479.
115. ^ Edwards 2015, p. ix.
116. ^ Lincoln 2005, p. 18.
117. ^ Burkett 2002, p. 214.
118. ^ Lindars, Edwards & Court 2000, p. 41.
119. ^ Burge 2014, pp. 236–37.
120. ^ Rev. 1:1, 4, 9; 22:8
121. ^ Rev. 1:9; 4:1–2
122. ^ Justin Martyr. Dialogue with Trypho. Chapter LXXXI.
123. ^ Tenney, Merrill C., gen. ed. (2009). "Revelation, Book of the". Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, Vol. 5 (Q–Z). Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan.
124. ^ Witherington, Ben (2003). Revelation. Cambridge University Press. p. 2.
125. ISBN 978-1-57910-527-3
     .
126. ISBN 978-0567645173
     .
127. ISBN 978-0567081957
     .
128. doi:10.5325/bullbiblrese.34.1.0118
     .
129. ^ Ehrman 1997, p. 8: "The New Testament contains twenty-seven books, written in Greek, by fifteen or sixteen different authors, who were addressing other Christian individuals or communities between the years 50 and 120 C.E. (see box 1.4). As we will see, it is difficult to know whether any of these books was written by Jesus' own disciples."
130. ^ Harris 2010, p. 20: Dates Jude and 2 Peter to 130–150 AD.
131. ^ Harris 1980, p. 295: Virtually no authorities defend the Petrine authorship of 2 Peter, which is believed to have been written by an anonymous churchman in Rome about 150 C.E.
132. ISBN 978-0567269515
     .
133. ISBN 978-0801027611
     .
134. ^ Ehrman 2004a, pp. 479–480.
135. ^ Brown 1997, pp. 456–466.
136. ISBN 978-0-8028-2402-8
     . It is generally agreed that Aramaic was the common language of Israel in the 1st century AD. Jesus and his disciples spoke the Galilean dialect, which was distinguished from that of Jerusalem (Matt. 26:73).
137. ISBN 978-0-8028-4098-1
     .
138. ^ Koester, Helmut (1982). Introduction to the New Testament, Volume 2. Philadelphia. p. 172.
139. ^ Davies, W. D.; Allison, Dale C. (1988). A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Gospel according to Saint Matthew, Vol. 1. Edinburgh: T&T Clark. pp. 33–58.
140. ^ Machen 1998, p. 5.
141. ^ Machen 1998, p. 4.
142. ^ Eusebius. "Chapter 25". Church History, Book III.
143. OCLC 1194914119
     .
144. ^ Three forms are postulated, from The Canon Debate, chapter 18, p. 300, note 21, attributed to Harry Y. Gamble: "(1) Marcion's collection that begins with Galatians and ends with Philemon; (2) Papyrus 46, dated about 200, that follows the order that became established except for reversing Ephesians and Galatians; and (3) the letters to seven churches, treating those to the same church as one letter and basing the order on length, so that Corinthians is first and Colossians (perhaps including Philemon) is last."
145. ^ Harnack, Adolf. "Appendix VI". Origin of the New Testament. Christian Classics Ethereal Library.
146. ISBN 978-0404161835. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help
     )
147. ^ Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, Chapter 12
148. ^ Against Heresies, inter alia, 3.12.12
149. ^ Adversus Marcionem, inter alia, V.14
150. ^ Justin Martyr. First Apology. Chapter 67.
151. ^ Ferguson 2002, p. 301ff.
152. ^ ^{a b} Irenaeus. "Chapter XI". Against Heresies, Book III. Section 8.
153. ^ McDonald & Sanders 2002, p. 277.
154. ^ Noll, Mark A. (1997). Turning Points. Baker Academic. pp. 36–37.
155. ^ de Jonge, H. J. (2003). "The New Testament Canon". In de Jonge, H. J.; Auwers, J. M (eds.). The Biblical Canons. Leuven University Press. p. 315.
156. ^ Ackroyd & Evans 1970, p. 308.
157. SSRN 1653073
     .
158. ^ McGuckin, John A. (2003). "Origen as Literary Critic in the Alexandrian Tradition". In Perrone, L. (ed.). Origeniana Octava: Origen and the Alexandrian Tradition, Vol. 1. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 164. Leuven: Leuven University Press. pp. 121–37.
159. ^
     ISBN 978-1-4051-1078-5
     .
160. S2CID 161779697
     .
161. ^ McDonald & Sanders 2002, Appendix D-2, note 19: "Revelation was added later in 419 at the subsequent synod of Carthage."
162. ^ ^{a b} Ferguson 2002, p. 320.
163. ^ Bruce 1988, p. 280.
164. ^ Augustine. De Civitate Dei. 22.8.
165. ^ Bruce 1988, p. 234.
166. ^ Bruce 1988, p. 225.
167. ^ Metzger 1987, pp. 237–238.
168. ^ Bruce 1988, p. 97.
169. ^ McDonald & Sanders 2002, Appendix D-2, note 19
170. ^ Bruce 1988, p. 215.
171. ^ Ackroyd & Evans 1970, p. 305.
172. ^ McDonald, Lee M. (1995). The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson. p. 116.
173. ^ Reid, George (1908). "Canon of the New Testament". The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
174. ^ McDonald & Sanders 2002, pp. 414–415.
175. ^ For the initial dating of P52, see Roberts 1935 and Bell & Skeat 1935. Though see now Nongbri 2005 and Martinez 2009.
176. ^ Ehrman 2005, p. 46.
177. ^
     Bruce Metzger
     .
178. ^ ^{a b} Bruce 1981, p. 14.
179. ^ Ehrman 2005, p. 265.
180. ^ Nave, Guy D. (2002). The Role and Function of Repentance in Luke-Acts. p. 194.
181. ^ Spong, John Shelby (26 September 1979). "The Continuing Christian Need for Judaism". Christian Century. p. 918. Archived from the original on 4 June 2011.
182. ^ Levine, Amy-Jill; Blickenstaff, Marianne (2001). A Feminist Companion to John, Vol. II. Feminist Companion to the New Testament and Early Christian Writings, Vol. 5. A&C Black. p. 175.
183. ^ "NETBible: John 7". Bible.org. Retrieved 17 October 2009. See note 139 on that page.
184. S2CID 145385075
     .
185. ^ Cross & Livingstone 2005, "Pericope adulterae".
186. ^ Ehrman 2005, p. 80-83: "on one condition: that his opponents produce a Greeks manuscript in which the verse could be found (finding it in Latin manuscripts was not enough). And so a Greek manuscript was produced. In fact, it was produced for the occasion. It appears that someone copied out the Greek text of the Epistles, and when he came to the passage in question, he translated the Latin text into Greek, giving the Johannine Comma in its familiar, theologically useful form. The manuscript provided to Erasmus, in other words, was a sixteenthcentury production, made to order."
187. ^ Metzger 1994.
188. ^ Metzger 1994, p. 367.
189. ISBN 978-0-687-19273-1. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help
     )
190. ISBN 0060698632
     .
191. ^ See Stendahl 1954; Marcus 1993; Smith 1972; Juel 1988; and Barr 1966.
192. ^ Võõbus 1954, pp. 1–128, 211–240.
193. ^ Metzger 1977, pp. 3–98.
194. ^ Võõbus 1954, pp. 216–229.
195. ^ Võõbus 1954, pp. 229–237; Metzger 1977, pp. 99–152.
196. ^ On the Armenian, Georgian, Ethiopic, Arabic, and Gothic, see Võõbus 1954, pp. 133–210, 243–309
197. ^ 2 Timothy 3:16
198. ^ ^{a b} Meadors, Gary T. (1997). "Scripture, Unity and Diversity of". In Elwell, Walter A. (ed.). Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Books.
199. ISBN 0-8054-1613-7
     .
200. ^ "The Transmission of Divine Revelation". Catechism of the Catholic Church. 2nd ed. 1997.
201. ^ Ware, Kallistos (1993). "Holy Tradition: The Source of the Orthodox Faith".The Orthodox Church. Penguin UK.
202. ^ "Articles of Religion". Anglicans Online. Retrieved 19 November 2010.
203. ^ "The Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy". Center for Reformed Theology and Apologetics. Archived from the original on 1 March 2017. Retrieved 19 November 2010.
204. ^ Chismar, Janet (20 June 2001). "Homosexual Ordination Vote Widens Gap Between Presbyterian Factions". Religion Today. Archived from the original on 24 May 2021 – via www.christianheadlines.com.
205. ^ "Our Beliefs". Beit Simcha. Retrieved 7 June 2012. To study the whole and authoritative Word of God, including the Tenach (Hebrew Scriptures) and the B'rit Chadasha (New Covenant) under the leading of the Holy Spirit.
206. ^ "Essential Statement of Faith". The Harvest: A Messianic Charismatic Congregation. Archived from the original on 27 November 2015. Retrieved 7 June 2012. We believe that the Torah (five books of Moses) is a comprehensive summary of God's foundational laws and ways, as found in both the Tanakh and Apostolic Scriptures. Additionally, the Bible teaches that without holiness no man can see God. We believe in the Doctrine of Sanctification as a definite, yet progressive work of grace, commencing at the time of regeneration and continuing until the consummation of salvation. Therefore we encourage all believers, both Jews and Gentiles, to affirm, embrace, and practice these foundational laws and ways as clarified through the teachings of Messiah Yeshua.
207. ^ Equipped for Every Good Work (PDF). Brooklyn, New York: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society & International Bible Students Association. 1946. pp. 12–13.
208. ^ See, for example, Raddatz, Tom (26 October 2000). "A Response to the Oneness-Trinity Debate". 1Lord1Faith.org. Archived from the original on 20 March 2005.
209. ^ Dulle, Jason. "How We Get Our Bible". Institute for Biblical Studies. Retrieved 15 April 2013.
210. ^ Dulle, Jason. "Defending the Inerrancy and Canon of Scripture". Institute for Biblical Studies. Retrieved 15 April 2013.
211. ^ Dulle, Jason. "The Nature of Inspiration". Institute for Biblical Studies. Retrieved 15 April 2013.
212. ^ Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists (2005). Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed.). Pacific Press Publishing Association. pp. 14–16.
213. ^ McLarty, John (15 November 2001). "The Adventist Theological Society". Adventist Today. Archived from the original on 25 December 2007.
214. ^ White, E. G. (1 April 1890). "Repentance the Gift of God" (PDF). Advent Review and Sabbath Herald. 67 (13): 193–94. Retrieved 30 December 2020. Several have written to me, inquiring if the message of justification by faith is the third angel's message, and I have answered, "it is the third angel's message in verity." ... Brightness, glory, and power are to be connected with the third angel's message, and conviction will follow wherever it is preached in demonstration of the Spirit.
215. ^ Colossians 2:14
216. ^ White, Ellen (2015). Patriarchs and Prophets. Start Publishing LLC. p. 365.
217. ^ "Articles of Faith". The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Archived from the original on 31 May 2013. Retrieved 17 February 2016.
218. ISBN 978-0-19-977836-2
     .
219. ^ "Bible, Inerrancy of". The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 2016. Retrieved 23 May 2016.
220. ISBN 0-02-879600-4
     .
221. ISBN 978-0-88146-083-4
     .

Bibliography

• Ackroyd, P. R.; Evans, C. F., eds. (1970). The Cambridge History of the Bible, Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press.
• Barr, James (1966). Old and New in Interpretation: A Study of the Two Testaments. London: SCM.
• Bell, H. Idris; Skeat, T. C. (1935). Fragments of an Unknown Gospel and Other Early Christian Papyri. London: Trustees of the British Museum.
• Biddle, Mark E. (2007). "Jeremiah". In Coogan, Michael D.; Brettler, Mark Zvi; Newsom, Carol Ann (eds.). The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books: New Revised Standard Version. Oxford University Press.
  ISBN 9780199743919
  .
• OCLC 1035750767
  .
• ISBN 978-0-8146-1283-5
  .
• OCLC 1244214359
  .
• Bruce, F. F. (1981). The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?. InterVarsity Press.
• ISBN 9780830812585
  .
• ISBN 978-1-317-72224-3
  .
• Burkett, Delbert (2002). An Introduction to the New Testament and the Origins of Christianity. Cambridge University Press.
  ISBN 978-0-521-00720-7
  .
• Cousland, J.R.C. (2010). Coogan, Michael David; Brettler, Marc Zvi; Newsom, Carol Ann; Perkins, Pheme (eds.). The New Oxford Annotated Bible: New Revised Standard Version. Oxford University Press. p. 1744.
  ISBN 978-0-19-528955-8
  .
• Cousland, J.R.C. (1 March 2018). Coogan, Michael David; Brettler, Marc Zvi; Newsom, Carol Ann; Perkins, Pheme (eds.). The New Oxford Annotated Bible: New Revised Standard Version. Oxford University Press. p. 1380.
  ISBN 978-0-19-027605-8
  .
• ISBN 9780192802903
  .
• Culpepper, R. Alan (1999). "The Christology of the Johannine Writings". In Kingsbury, Jack Dean; Powell, Mark Allan Powell; Bauer, David R. (eds.). Who Do You Say that I Am?: Essays on Christology. Westminster John Knox Press.
  ISBN 9780664257521
  .
• Davidson, Robert (1993). "Jeremiah, Book of". In Metzger, Bruce M.; Coogan, Michael D. (eds.). The Oxford Companion to the Bible. Oxford University Press.
  ISBN 9780199743919
  .
• ISBN 978-0-8028-3735-6
  .
• ISBN 978-0-19-508481-8
  .
• Ehrman, Bart D. (1999). Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Ehrman, Bart D. (2000). The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to Early Christian Writings. Oxford University Press.
• ISBN 978-0-19-518249-1
  .
• ISBN 0-19-515462-2
  .
• ISBN 978-0-19-534616-9
  .
• ISBN 978-0-06-073817-4
  .
• ISBN 978-0-19-971104-8
  .
• ISBN 978-0-06-117393-6
  .
• ISBN 978-1-4412-4163-4
  .
• ISBN 0-85111-761-9
  .
• ISBN 978-0-87484-472-6
  .
• Harris, Stephen L. (1985). Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto, California: Mayfield.
• ISBN 978-0-07-296548-3
  .
• ISBN 978-0-07-340744-9
  .
• Juel, Donald (1988). Messianic Exegesis: Christological Interpretation of the Old Testament in Early Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress.
• Knox, Wilfred L. (1948). The Acts of the Apostles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• ISBN 978-1-4411-8822-9
  .
• ISBN 978-1841270814
  .
• ISBN 978-1579101800
  .
• Marcus, Joel (1993). The Way of the Lord: Christological Exegesis of the Old Testament in the Gospel of Mark. Studies of the New Testament and its World. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.
  ISBN 978-0567096371
  .
• Martinez, David G. (2009). "The Papyri and Early Christianity". In Bagnall, Roger S. (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Papyrology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 590–623.
• McDonald, Lee M;
  ISBN 1-56563-517-5
  .
• Metzger, Bruce M. (1977). The Early Versions of the New Testament. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• ISBN 0-19-826180-2
  .
• Metzger, Bruce M. (1994). A Textual Commentary on the New Testament (2nd ed.). German Bible Society.
• OCLC 1245822346
  .
• ISBN 978-0-89236-640-8
  .
• Nongbri, Brent (2005). "The Use and Abuse of P52: Papyrological Pitfalls in the Dating of the Fourth Gospel". Harvard Theological Review. 98: 23–52.
  S2CID 163128006
  .
• ISBN 978-0-8028-6553-3
  .
• Petersen, William L. (2010). "The Diatessaron and the Fourfold Gospel". In Horton, Charles (ed.). The Earliest Gospels. Bloomsbury.
  ISBN 9780567000972
  .
• ISBN 978-0-8010-2868-7
  .
• OCLC 1245905274
  .
• Sanders, E. P. (2010). "Jesus Christ". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 3 May 2015. Retrieved 27 November 2010.
• Schnelle, Udo (1998). The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
• Schubert, Judith (2016). The Gospel of John: Question by Question. Wipf & Stock Publishers.
  ISBN 978-1-5326-0727-1
  .
• Smith, D. Moody (1972). "The Use of the Old Testament in the New". The Use of the Old Testament in the New and Other Essays: Studies in Honor of William Franklin. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press. pp. 3–65.
• Stendahl, Krister (1954). The School of St. Matthew and Its Use of the Old Testament. Acta Seminarii Neotestamentici Upsaliensis. Vol. XX. Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksells.
• ISBN 978-0-567-52174-3
  .
• Võõbus, Arthur (1954). Early Versions of the New Testament. Papers of the Estonian Theological Society in Exile. Vol. 6. Stockholm.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)

Further reading

• Bultmann, Rudolf (1951–1955). Theology of the New Testament, English translation, 2 volumes. New York: Scribner.
• von Campenhausen, Hans (1972). The Formation of the Christian Bible, English translation. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
• Clark, Gordon (1990). "Logical Criticisms of Textual Criticism", The Trinity Foundation: Jefferson, Maryland
• Conzelmann, Hans; Lindemann, Andreas (1999). Interpreting the New Testament: An Introduction to the Principles and Methods of New Testament Exegesis, English translation. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson.
• Dormeyer, Detlev (1998). The New Testament among the Writings of Antiquity, English translation. Sheffield.
• Duling, Dennis C.; Perrin, Norman (1993). The New Testament: Proclamation and Parenesis, Myth and History, 3rd edition. New York: Harcourt Brace.
• Ehrman, Bart D. (2011). The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, 5th edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Goodspeed, Edgar J. (1937). An Introduction to the New Testament. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Levine, Amy-Jill; Brettler, Marc Z. (2011). The Jewish Annotated New Testament. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Koester, Helmut (1995 and 2000). Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd edition, 2 volumes. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
• Kümmel, Werner Georg (1996). Introduction to the New Testament, revised and enlarged English translation. Nashville: Abingdon Press.
• Mack, Burton L. (1995). Who Wrote the New Testament?. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco.
• Myles, Robert J. (2019). Class Struggle in the New Testament. Lanham: Fortress Academic.
  ISBN 978-1-9787-0209-7
  .
• Neill, Stephen; Wright, Tom (1988). The Interpretation of the New Testament, 1861–1986, new edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Thielman, Frank. Theology of the New Testament: a Canonical and Synthetic Approach, Zondervan, 2005.
• Wills, Garry, "A Wild and Indecent Book" (review of David Bentley Hart, The New Testament: A Translation, Yale University Press, 577 pp.), The New York Review of Books, vol. LXV, no. 2 (8 February 2018), pp. 34–35. Discusses some pitfalls in interpreting and translating the New Testament.
• Zahn, Theodor (1910). Introduction to the New Testament, English translation, 3 volumes. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to New Testament.

English Wikisource has original text related to this article:

"Scriptures" in Christianity portal

Greek Wikisource has original text related to this article:

New Testament

Wikiquote has quotations related to New Testament.

General references

• New Testament Gateway Annotated guide to academic New Testament Web resources including not only other Web sites, but articles and course materials
• Jewish Studies for Christians Archived 9 December 2019 at the Wayback Machine An Online Study Group exploring the Jewish setting of the early Jesus movement. (An Israeli blog led by Dr. Eliyahu Lizorkin-Eyzenberg).
• "Introduction to New Testament History and Literature" course materials "Open Yale course" taught at Yale University by Dale B. Martin
• New Testament Reading Room: Extensive on-line New Testament resources (including reference works, commentaries, translations, atlases, language tools, and works on New Testament theology), Tyndale Seminary
• Biblicalstudies.org.uk New Testament pages Bibliographies on the New Testament and its individual books
• New Testament Greek Lexicon Bible Study Tools offers two Bible versions, King James and New American Standard, for studying within the New Testament lexicons.
• Pastoral articles on the New Testament for ministerial training Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary (WELS)
• Jewish reading of the New Testament Haaretz essay on reclaiming the New Testament as an integral part of Jewish literature
• Guide to the University of Chicago New Testament Club Records 1894–1958 at the University of Chicago Special Collections Research Center

Development and authorship

• The Gospels in the official canon, and some that were not included in the Bible
• Dating the New Testament A compilation of the dates ascribed by various scholars to the composition of the New Testament documents, accompanied by an odd statistical average of the dates

Greek

• New Testament Koine Greek Original Side by side with the English (King James) and Russian (Synodal) translation Commentary by the Greek Fathers – Icons from Mount Athos
• New Testament, Greek Polytonic Text according to Ecumenical Patriarchate (Greek)
• Greek New Testament text (searchable only; no downloads) with lexical aids

Art

• Collection: "Christian New Testament" from the University of Michigan Museum of Art
• New Testament art from the Metropolitan Museum of Art