Bible Query on New Testament Archaeology and History

Q: When did people start dating events by the year Jesus was supposedly born?

A: Prior to this, people generally dated events by the year of a king's reign. Other people dated things from the supposed year of Adam's creation, September 1, 5509 B.C. According to Manuscripts of the Greek Bible p.49 (footnote), dating events from the supposed year of Christ's birth was started by Hippolytus of Rome in the 3rd century. This was not universally accepted, as some Byzantine scribes did not do so until the 14th century.

The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.786 says that in Jesus' time Romans kept years in terms of "A.U.C." or years from the founding of the city [of Rome]. Rome was founded in 753 B.C. On p.787 Asimov says that it was erroneously thought that Christ was born in 1 A.D. by the astronomer Dionysius Exiguus of Rome.

Q: In the gospels, what are extra-Biblical references to Jesus prior to 200 A.D.?

One might expect Jesus' life and Christianity not to go unnoticed, even outside the Bible. One purpose of giving these quotes is to put to rest the claim that a few skeptical critics assert, that Jesus never existed.

Cornelius Tacitus (c.55-c.117 A.D.) was a Roman historian who wrote about events in Rome and Great Britain from 15-70 A.D. By his contemptuous tone, he certainly was no friend of Christianity. In Annals 15:44 he wrote: "...But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration [fire of Rome] was the result of an order [of the Emperor]. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most michievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired...."

Tacitus in Histories Book 5 lists differing speculations on the Jews being from Crete, or Egypt, or Ethiopia, or Assyrians, and then relates an interesting story. "Most writers, however, agree in stating that once a disease, which horribly disfigured the body, broke out in Egypt, that king Bocchoris, seeking a remedy, consulted the oracle of Hammon, and was bidden to cleanse his realm, and to convey into some foreign land this race detested by the gods. The people, who had been collected after diligent search, finding themselves left in a desert, sat for the most part in a stupor of grief, till one of the exiles, Moyses by name, warned them not to look for any relief from God or man, forsaken as they were of both, but to trust to themselves, taking for their heaven-sent leader that man who should first help them to be quit of the present misery.... Moyses, wishing to secure for the future his authority over the nation, gave them a novel form of worship, opposed to all that is practised by other men. ... They slay the ram, seemingly in derision of Hammon, and they sacrifice the ox, because the Egyptians worship it as Apis."

Tacitus in Histories book 5 also discusses in detail how various Roman legions, the 5th, 10th, 15th, 12th and some men from the 18th and 3rd put down the revolt in Judea and destroyed Jerusalem.

Quotes of Tacitus are takes from The Annals and The Histories by P. Cornelius Tacitus, Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc. 1952.

Mara Bar-Serapion was an ordinary Syrian man who wrote a letter to his son, Serapion, sometime after 73 A.D. He encourages him to emulate the wise men of history who died for what they believed in, such as Socrates, Pythagoras, and the wise King the Jews executed. The document is in the British Museum, and F.F. Bruce mentions this in The New Testament Documents : Are They Reliable.

Josephus was a Jewish scholar, born 37 A.D., who wrote rather positively about Christ.

"Now there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, - a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and then a thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." (Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3, written about 93-94 A.D.) (Taken from Josephus : Complete Works)

There also is an Arabic translation of Josephus that says even more positive things about Jesus. However, these likely were added later.

Lucian of Samosata, 2nd century satirist, wrote about Christ, "...the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult into the world....Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they were all brothers one of another after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and by worshipping that crucified sophist himself and living under his laws." (The Passing Peregrinus) (quoted from Evidence That Demands a Verdict vol. 1 p.82.)

Clement of Rome was a Christian bishop who wrote to the Corinthian church, basically asking them why they were not obeying what Paul wrote 50 years earlier. Clement's letter was written in 97 A.D..

Pliny the Younger was a governor of Bithynia who killed many Christians for their faith. He wrote Emperor Trajan in 112 A.D. asking if he should continue to kill the men, women, and children simply for not worshipping a statue of the Emperor. Pliny says of Christians, "they affirmed, however, that the whole of their guilt, or their error, was, that they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verse a hymn to Christ as to a god, and bound themselves to a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, adultery, never to falsify their word, not to deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up. Epistles 10.96. (quoted from Evidence that Demands a Verdict vol. 1 p.83.)

Papias was another bishop who was a disciple of John the apostle. He wrote many volumes, somewhere between 110 to 130 A.D. Unfortunately his writings have been lost, except for a short description by Eusebius (writing around 325 A.D.) Eusebius tells us that among other things, Papias says that the Gospel of Matthew was first written in Hebrew, Mark was the interpreter of Peter, and that Papias taught premillennialism. (Eusebius was an amillennialist.)

Ignatius was a disciple of John the Apostle. He wrote letters to many churches, and died by 116 A.D.

Polycarp was a Christian martyr and disciple of Ignatius who spoke of Christ. He died c.163 A.D.

Irenaeus, bishop of Lyon (in France), was a disciple of Polycarp, and a martyr who lived from 120/140-202 A.D. He wrote a long work against heresies of this time.

The Didache (or Constitutions of the Holy Apostles) was an anonymous church manual, written about 150 A.D., though it could be as early as 120 A.D.

Justin Martyr was a Greek philosopher who was born either 110 or 114 A.D. He converted between around 138 to 150 A.D.. He wrote a defense of Christianity and a Dialogue with Trypho the Jew where he talks of Jesus being God. The Chronicon Paschale tells us he was martyred for his faith in 165 A.D.

Suetonius, the Roman historian and court official who wrote about 120 A.D., says "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (another spelling of Christus, i.e. Christ], he expelled them from Rome. Life of Claudius 25.4 (Quoted from Evidence that Demands a Verdict volume 1 p.83.)

Theophilus, bishop of Antioch was the first writer we know of to use the term "Trinity". He wrote between 168 and 181 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria, not to be confused with the earlier Clement of Rome, lived from 153-217/220 A.D. He wrote extensively, including a hymn to Christ and a major work called The Miscellanies.

Hippolytus lived from 170-235 A.D. and wrote The Refutation of All Heresies. Hippolytus was a disciple of Irenaeus.

Tatian lived from 110-172 A.D. and wrote a harmony of the gospels. Unfortunately he later left the faith and joining the Encratites, a Gnostic heresy.

Jewish Talmuds refer to Jesus in a number of places. See Evidence That Demands a Verdict volume 1 p.85-87 for quotes from the Babylonian Talmud, Tol'doth Yeshu, Barailu, The Amoa 'Ulla', Yeb. IV 3, and Baraita.

Phlegon was a Greek writer from Caria, who wrote soon after 137 A.D. that in the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad [33 A.D.] there was "the greatest eclipse of the sun" and that "it became night in the sixth hour of the day [12:00 noon] so that star even appeared in the heavens. There was a great earthquake in Bithynia, and many things were overturned in Nicaea." (quoted from The Case for Christ p.111.)

Thales (or Thallus) was a Palestinian historian referenced by Julius Africanus (writing 232-245 A.D.) Julius says, "This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun." (quoted from The Ante-Nicene Fathers volume 6 p.136.) The context is Julius discussing how the time from Artaxerxes' decree to Christ's crucifixion, fulfilled Daniel 9.

The Shepherd of Hermas was an anonymous Christian work written about 160 A.D.

Athenagoras wrote to the Roman emperor a defense of Christianity about 177 A.D.

Aristides of Athens and Quadratus are also known to have written Apologies defending Christianity, but their works have been lost.

Q: In Lk 3:23 how old was Jesus when He began His ministry?

A: Luke 3:23 says "about thirty" which could be 25 to 35 years old. Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 B.C., and Jesus began his ministry after John the Baptist began his. John began his ministry in the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar, which was 28 A.D. Thus, if archaeological dates are considered precise enough, Jesus was about 34 or 35 years old. Also, Pontius Pilate was only prefect of Judea from 26 A.D. until 36/37 A.D., so Jesus had to have be crucified before then. The best guess we have is that Jesus began his ministry about 30 A.D. and died 33 A.D. See Today's Handbook for Solving Bible Difficulties p.61-62 for more info.

Q: In Mt 20:29-34 and Mk 10:34-52, did Jesus heal the blind while leaving Jericho, or entering it as Lk 18:35 says?

A: This probably was just one event that occurred while Jesus was traveling between the two towns named Jericho.

Old Jericho (Tell es-Sultan) is northwest of modern Jericho (er-Riha). It was destroyed by Joshua, but rebuilt in 1 Kings 16:34. Mainly Jews lived there in the time of Jesus.

New Testament Jericho (at Tulul Abu el-'Alayiq) primarily was a Gentile town built around the winter palace of Herod the Great, who died there around 4 B.C.. The site is about 3/4 to 1 mile south or southwest of old Jericho. The winter palace had two pools, a large Roman bath, and six private mikvahs, which were places of Jewish ritual washing. A map showing the palace and pools of new Jericho is in the New International Dictionary of the Bible p.511-512.

The different sites of Jericho also are mentioned in the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1440, Bible Difficulties & Seeming Contradictions p.179, the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.903 The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 8 p.1008, the New Geneva Study Bible p.1641, the NIV Study Bible p.1515-1516, the liberal Anchor Bible Dictionary volume 3 p.723, and the Encyclopedia Britannica (1956 edition) volume 13 p.1.

Q: In Mt 27:2-14, Mk 15:2-15; Lk 23:1-24 and Jn 19:1-15, outside of the Bible, what evidence is there that Pontius Pilate existed?

A: There are six independent pieces of evidence outside of the Bible.

1. The non-Christian Roman historian Tacitus (100 A.D.), in Annals 15:44 writes, "Christus, from whom the [Christians] got their name, had been executed by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate when Tiberius was emperor;"

2. The Bible As History p.373 has picture of the front and back of a coin issued by the Roman Procurator, Pontius Pilate.

3. An inscription that mentions Pontius Pilate was found at Caesarea in 1961. A picture of it is in the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1343.

4. Philo also says that Pontius Pilate had brought golden shields with the Emperor Tiberius' name on them and hung them up in Herod's palace. The Jews considered that offensive, and appealed to Tiberius, who ordered Pilate to remove the shields, which probably made Pilate lose face.

5. Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.1 (written about 93-94 A.D.) and Wars of the Jews 2.9.2 also mentions Pontius Pilate as governor.

6. The Christian church historian Eusebius (c.325 A.D.) mentions Pontius Pilate, and says that after he was removed from office he committed suicide.

Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, succeeding Gratus, from 26-36/37 A.D.

Q: In Mt 27:2-14, Mk 15:2-15; Lk 23:1-24 and Jn 19:1-15, apart from the Bible, what else do we know about Pontius Pilate?

A: "Pontius" was a Roman family. "Pilatus" means one armed with a pilum, or javelin. Most of what we know about Pontius Pilate comes from Josephus. The Emperor Tiberius Caesar had a friend name Sejanus, who wanted to destroy all the Jews, and Pontius Pilate and his contemporary Flaccus might have been the proteges of Sejanus. When Pontius Pilate became governor (or procurator) of the Jews in 26 A.D., he was the first to bring into Jerusalem the standards of the image of Caesar. When the Jews formerly asked that they be removed, Pilate surrounded them with soldiers and threatened to kill them. Josephus records that the Jews threw themselves on the ground to demonstrate they would rather die than break their law. Pilate removed the standards to Caesarea.

Pilate then took the money from the temple treasury to build an aqueduct to carry water to Jerusalem. When the Jews protested, Pilate had soldiers dressed as civilians among the crowds, who killed many in the crowd. Luke 13:1 also records that Pilate killed some Galileans, whose blood he mixed with their sacrifices.

When some Samaritans gathered on a mountain to view to sacred containers that Moses supposedly put there, Pilate sent troops to ambush them and kill them. The Samaritans appealed to Vitellius, the legate of Syria, who sent Marcellus to take temporary charge of Judea and ordered Pilate to go to Rome in 36/37 A.D. to give an account of his actions to Caesar. Sejanus had been executed on October 18, 31 A.D., and Tiberius was trying to reverse anti-Semitic policies. Tiberius Caesar died on March 16, 37 A.D., while Pilate was enroute to Rome. Pilate never returned to Judea. Traditions say he committed suicide in modern-day Austria or Switzerland by drowning.

Philo the Jew says that Herod Agrippa I called Pilate "naturally inflexible, a blend of self-will and relentlessness).

The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.891 also has information on Pontius Pilate. See the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1343-1344 The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.789-790, and the Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels p.615-617 for more info.

Q: In the Mt 27:26; Mk 15:15; Lk 23:20-25; Jn 19:16; Acts 2:23; Heb 12:2; what do we know about crucifixion prior to Christ?

A: Crucifixion was a gruesome but common form of execution among many peoples.

Who and When: It was practiced by the Phoenicians, Carthaginians, and Egyptians according to The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.242. Herodotus in his History 3.125 mentions the Persians using crucifixion of living people. In his History 3.159 Herodotus also says that Darius (512-485 B.C.) crucified 3000 leading citizens of Babylon. The Anchor Bible Dictionary volume 1 p.1207 also mentions that other sources, not necessarily reliable, mention the crucifixion was used by the people of India, Assyrians, Scythians, Taurians, Thracians, Celts, Germans, and Britons. Julius Caesar reported that the Numidians used crucifixion. When Alexander the Great finally captured the Phoenician city of Tyre in 332 B.C., he killed 6/8,000 immediately and crucified 2,000 later according to the Encyclopedia Britannica and the Anchor Bible Dictionary volume 6 p.687.

Jews were crucified by the Seleucid Antiochus IV (267 A.D.) according to Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews 12:256. In Antiquities of the Jews 13:380-383 he also says the Sadducee high priest Alexander Jannaeus (103-76 B.C.) crucified 800 Pharisees, and had their wives and kids killed before them

Among Romans, the Anchor Bible Dictionary volume 1 p.1206-1208 says Plautus (died in 184 B.C.) was the first writer who provides evidence of Roman crucifixion, and these were of people crucified before his time. For example, 25 male slave conspirators in Rome were crucified in 217 B.C. Josephus said there were three main forms of Roman execution: decapitation/thrown to animals, burning, and crucifixion, with being burned to death being considered more mild than crucifixion.

Where the Romans Learned of it: The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.404-405 says both the Greeks and Romans borrowed crucifixion from the Phoenicians. (Carthaginians can be considered as "western Phoenicians"). The Anchor Bible Dictionary volume 1 p.1207 also says numerous sources attest to Carthaginian crucifixion, and that the Romans might have taken over this practice from them.

As a Christian symbol: The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.404-405 also has some very interesting archaeological discoveries about the use of the cross as a symbol. Of course Paul (around 52 A.D.) "preached Jesus crucified" in 1 Corinthians 2:2, "gloried in the cross" in Galatians 6:14, and was persecuted for the cross in Galatians 5:7; 6:12. in When Herculaneaum was destroyed by Mount Vesuvius in 79 A.D., an excavated house shows a cross (a Latin cross like a lower-case t). In Talpioth, a suburb of Jerusalem, ossuaries (which stored bones) were found prior to 70 A.D. showing four sides marked with a cross that looked like a plus sign. According to Justin Martyr (110/114-165 A.D.), he compared the crucifix to the Greek letter Chi (like an X) in his First Apology chapter 60. Athanasius said in the Incarnation 25:3, that it is only on the cross that a man dies with his hands spread out.

Q: In the Gospels, what extra-Biblical evidence is there that "darkness was over the land" during Jesus' crucifixion?

A: The non-Christian Palestinian historian Thales (also spelled Thallus), wrote in 52 A.D., less than 20 years after the crucifixion. He wrote that darkness accompanied the crucifixion of Jesus.

Phlegon was a Carian Greek writer who wrote soon after 137 A.D.. He wrote that in the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad [33 A.D.] there was "the greatest eclipse of the sun" and that "it became night in the sixth hour of the day [12:00 noon] so that star even appeared in the heavens. There was a great earthquake in Bithynia, and many things were overturned in Nicaea." (quoted from The Case for Christ p.111.)

The Christian writer Tertullian, writing about 200 A.D., in On Fasting chapter 10, also mentions the darkness accompanying Jesus' crucifixion.

The heterodox Christian writer Origen (writing 230-254 A.D.) mentions the darkness over the land, and the tombs split open in Against Celsus book 2 chapter 33.

Arnobius in Against the Heathen 54 mentions the darkness during Jesus' death.

Q: In Mt 2:1-4,9-12, who were the magi?

A: The Magi were Mideastern religious men who practiced astrologers. While the Bible does not specify that there were three Magi, there are three views of who the "Christmas magi" were.

Originally, as the Levites were a tribe of priests among the Israelites, the later Magi were the tribe of priests among the Medes, according to Herodotus. This is analogous to the Levites being a tribe of priests among the Israelites. The Magi offered sacrifices before fires, interpreted dreams, and practiced astrology. While we get the English word "magician" from "Magi", except for a passage in Herodotus there is no evidence that they practiced magic. The Medes were polytheistic (not Zoroastrian). When Daniel 5:11 speaks of Magi, it is these Magi.

Later, after a Magi who was called "false Bardiya" took control of the Persian throne for seven months in 522 B.C., King Cambyses replaced many of the Median Magi with Persian Magi. The Persian Magi were Zoroastrians. Zoroastrians believed in equal and opposite divine beings, one good and represented by light and one evil and represented by darkness. During and after the fourth century B.C., Zoroastrians believed in resurrection The Greeks generally said the Magi were Zoroastrians. Clement of Alexandria believed the Magi who came to Bethlehem were Zoroastrians. The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.788 mentions only these as the Magi.

By the time of Christ, the Greeks also called Chaldeans who practiced astrology as Magi too. Many astrologers traveled west to teach, including the Babylonian Berossus, who taught on the Greek island of Cos after 281 B.C. Tacitus says the magi practiced sorcery, and Pliny claims magic started with Zoroaster. The church father Origen, among his many criticisms of the heretic Celsus, said Celsus failed to distinguish between the Magi and the Chaldeans. The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.612 mentions these as the Magi.

Regardless of the precise Mideastern origin of the "Christmas Magi", the Magi practiced astrology. See the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1067-1068, and especially the chapter on the Magi in Persia and the Bible p.467-491.

Q: In Mt 11:11 and Lk 7:28, what does it mean that he who is least in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than John the Baptist?

A: There are three viewpoints, and all three might be true.

Hebrew idiom: This expression is very similar to a rabbinic saying of Johanan ben Zakkai, one of the most respected scholars of the first century, being the "least of" Hillel's eighty disciples; this saying was not meant to diminish Johanan's status but to increase that of his contemporaries. See The IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament 1993 p.76 for more info.

None until Jesus: Even John the Baptist was not in the Kingdom of Heaven yet. No one was, until Jesus opened the way through His death and resurrection.

Relative position in Heaven: Remember that John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit from before birth. A speculation is that perhaps believers in Heaven, who had to be regenerated after they were born will have a higher position than one who did not have to go through this.

See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.459-460 for more info.

Q: In Mt 19:23, Mk 10:25, and Lk 18;25, what did Jesus mean by a camel going through the eye of a needle?

A: Some think "the needle" was a nickname for a narrow gate in Jerusalem. However according to Hard Sayings of the Bible p.437-439, while Jerusalem and other cities did have some very narrow gates, no gate of called "the needle's eye" is known to us. The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 8 p.425 also says that attempts to make this hyperbole refer to a gate in Jerusalem are misguided.

It is more likely that Jesus is using hyperbole here. It is totally impossible for a camel, especially a loaded camel, to go through the eye of a needle. Jesus used this comical analogy to say that. The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.698, Hard Sayings of the Bible p.438, and The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 8 p.425 mention that the Jews in the Babylonian Talmud (Babylonian Berakoth 55b) use a similar hyperbole, "an elephant going through a needle's eye.) (Elephants were more common in Babylon, and its use in Babylon shows that it was not a gate in Jerusalem.)

a) it is naturally impossible for a man who thinks himself rich to ever go to Heaven, and

b) all things, even a rich man going to heaven, are possible with God.

Q: In Mt 27:51 is it true that there is no evidence for this earthquake outside of Matthew?

A: No, this is false. Either Matthew made up a story with an inspiring point, which the early church was duped into believing was factual, or else there really was an earthquake, tombs were broken open, some dead people arose, and presumably went up to Heaven after Jesus' resurrection.

The statement that no one ever mentioned this outside of Matthew is incorrect. We have two extra-Biblical non-Christian sources and four extra-Biblical Christian sources that mention these events.

Phlegon was a Greek writer from Caria, who wrote soon after 137 A.D. that in the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad [33 A.D.]. There was "the greatest eclipse of the sun" and that "it became night in the sixth hour of the day [12:00 noon] so that star even appeared in the heavens. There was a great earthquake in Bithynia, and many things were overturned in Nicaea." (quoted from The Case for Christ p.111.)

Thales (or Thallus) was a Palestinian historian referenced by Julius Africanus (writing 232-245 A.D.) Julius says, "This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun." (quoted from The Ante-Nicene Fathers volume 6 p.136.) The context is Julius discussing how the time from Artaxerxes' decree to Christ's crucifixion, fulfilled Daniel 9. (We do not have any evidence that Thales mentioned an earthquake though.)

Origen (230-254 A.D.), the heterodox Christian, mentions the darkness over the land, and the tombs split open in Against Celsus book 2 chapter 33.

Irenaeus (120-202 A.D.), in "Fragments from the Lost Writings" chapter 28 (in the Ante-Nicene Fathers), mentions that "when Jesus descended, many souls ascended and were seen in their bodies."

Ignatius, a disciple of the apostle John, in his Letter to the Magnesians, chapter 9, mentions those whom Jesus raised.

Clement of Alexandria (193-217 A.D.) in the Stromata book 6 chapter 6 says "But those who had fallen asleep, descended dead, but ascended alive.' The Gospel says, 'that many bodies of those that slept arouse - plainly as having been translated to a better state. There took place, then, a universal movement and translation through the economy of the Savior."

These early writers were either "tricked and fooled" into thinking this occurred, according to the thinking of some skeptics. Likewise for other miracles, including the resurrection, either the early Christians were tricked and fooled into thinking this really happened or they were not. We do not have additional eyewitnesses, so either we trust what the gospel writers said, or we do not. That goes for Paul too, who said in 1 Cor. 15:13-19 that if the resurrection did not occur, then Paul said his preaching was useless, he would be a false witness, our faith is futile, and Christians should be pitied more than all men. Like the Apostle Paul, I do not see any middle ground.

To summarize, we have reason to take the account of selected individuals being resurrected because

1. Our trust in the Gospel writers and their reporting of other things.

2. The early church writers did mention this

3. This would be impossible for someone did not know the deceased person to verify anyway, so Jewish and Roman writers would not know of this.

4. Jewish writers would have no incentive to mention this,

5. The event of resurrected people would be overshadowed by the resurrection of Jesus.

I halfway agree with what you said on earthquakes. Rather than saying that gospel writers use these cataclysmic events to symbolize the enormous importance and consequences of God's intervention, I believe that God used these cataclysmic events. In addition to the gospels, do not forget the earthquakes in Revelation, or when Uzziah died in Isaiah 6. Also, in church history, when John Chrysostom was exiled from Constantinople in 403 A.D., there was an earthquake then. It would not be expected that early writers would record minor earthquakes. As for minor earthquakes occurring in this region, I only have details for Greece and Turkey. The Encyclopedia Britannica reports for Greece and Turkey that:

Between 1902 and 1946 there were 58 quakes

Between 1947 and 1966 there were 82 quakes

Between 1967 and 1976 there were 45 quakes

Between 1977 and 1981 there were 9 quakes

One other note is that archaeology at Qumran shows there was a damaging earthquake in 31 B.C. (before Christ), and yet no ancient writers record this event.

Conclusion: There seem to be two choices (and no middle ground)

1. No earthquake: The Gospel writers might be right in their fine moral teaching, but they reported earthquakes that did not occur. We cannot trust what they say, at least relating to real world events.

2. Earthquake: The Gospel writers can be trusted on what they say, and they reported earthquakes that did occur.

Q: In Mt 28:19, did the concept of the Trinity comes from Babylonian and Assyrian religions, which had triads of gods?

A: No. When, Jesus said to baptize in the ____ of the Father, Son, and Spirit, Jesus said "Name", not "names". A triad is polytheism with three separate beings and three separate gods. The Trinity is One inseparable God and three distinct beings.

Q: When was the Gospel of Mt written?

A: All we can say is that the Gospel of Matthew was written after 33 A.D. and a very high probability before 70 A.D. First here is what we know, and then what various scholars think.

Known facts on Gospel dating

Luke: In 1 Timothy 5:18, Paul quoted from the books of Deuteronomy [Dt 25:4] and Luke [Lk 10:7], calling them both Scripture. 1 Timothy was written in 63 A.D. according to most scholars. (However, Mark White dates 1 Timothy as "? ca. 100-125)"

The Lukan manuscript in Paris is dated around 100 A.D. Of course, the Gospel of Luke was written prior to Acts.

John: The ancient church historian Eusebius of Caesarea records that Papias, a disciple of the apostle John, mentions that Matthew and Mark wrote their gospels. He said that Matthew first wrote his gospel in Hebrew (Aramaic?). Some think this could mean only in a Hebrew literary style though this is highly doubtful.

We have a fragment of the Gospel of John (the John Rylands manuscript, from c.125 A.D.) John is usually thought to be the last Gospel written.

What Various Scholars Think

The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 8 p.20-21 says 66-100 A.D.. , and "perhaps the sixties are the most likely decade for its composition. It also adds that Gundry says 40-100 A.D., since he says Luke is based on Matthew, and Luke-acts was completed not later than 63 A.D.

The NIV Study Bible p.1439 says some think it written as early as 50 A.D., and others even after 70 A.D.

The New Geneva Study Bible p.1503 says that while some people date Matthew as extreme as 50 A.D. and 100 A.D., an appropriate date is 64-70 A.D. On p.1558 The New Geneva Study Bible it says that "It is generally thought that Matthew and Luke were written about A.D. 80-90. It also mentions that Luke and Acts might have been finished around 62 A.D., and some argue that all the books of the New Testament were written before 70 A.D.

The New International Bible Commentary says that except when Matthew is considered the earliest gospel, it is normally dated 75-80 A.D.

The Believer's Bible Commentary p.1202 says that Matthew might have written something in Aramaic as early as 45 A.D., and brought out a fuller, canonical Gospel in 50-55 A.D. or even later. It adds, "The view that the Gospel must have been written after the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70) rests largely on the disbelief in Christ's ability to predict that future event in detail, and other rationalistic theories that ignore or deny divine inspiration."

The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.631 says we do not know precisely, but its dependence on Mark and failure to mention the destruction of Jerusalem suggest a date shortly before 70 A.D.

The conservative Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1090 plays it says and says that it was written between 30-115 A.D.

C.I. Scofield said it could be as early as 37 A.D., according to The Bible Knowledge Commentary New Testament p.16.

The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.15-16 says pinpointing the specific year is impossible. Few scholars give a date after 70 A.D., adding that the reference to the "Holy City" in Matthew 4:5; 27:53 implies that Jerusalem is still standing. It says that a date somewhere around 50 A.D. would satisfy all the demands mentioned, and it holds to the view that Matthew was written first.

The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.771 says Matthew probably reached its final form just after 70 A.D.

The Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels p.528 is a mixture of liberal and conservative scholarship. It does not give a definitive answer either, but says "the earliest possible date for Matthew between 75-80 A.D., with a date of 75-85 A.D. being widely held (the commentators Bonnard, Grundmann, Davies, and Allison).

The non-conservative Matthew 1-7 : A Commentary p.93, after giving a detailed explanation, gives a tentative conclusion that "one should not put the date for the Gospel of Matthew long after 80."

The non-conservative professor Mark White of the University of Texas at Austin in his class notes states Matthew was written ca. 80-90 CE.

One liberal presupposition is that if Matthew borrowed verses in Mark, Mark had to have been circulating a number of years before Matthew was written. A second presupposition is denial that God could have given predictions of the fall of Jerusalem prior to its destruction in 70 A.D.

Q: In Mt, how do we know that what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three good reasons.

God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

Evidence of the early church. Many writers quoted or referred to the gospel of Matthew. Some of the earliest are as follows.

Ignatius in his letter to the Smyrnaeans 1:1 (110-115 A.D.), the Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians chapter 2 (110-155 A.D.),

The Didache (120-150 A.D.)

Papias a disciple of John the Apostle

Irenaeus (170-202 A.D.)

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

Earliest manuscripts we have of Matthew small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p1 Mt 1:1-9,12,14-20; 2:14? (c.200 A.D.) A photograph of part of p1 is in The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.29. It says that p1 rarely varies from Vaticanus.

p35 Mt 25:12-15,20-23 (3rd century)

p37 Mt 26:19-52 (middle 3rd century) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p37 on p.130.

p45 Chester Beatty (all 4 gospels and Acts) 200 A.D. (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41-26:39) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph showing part of p45 on p.146. On p.150-151 it says that the copy was a loose paraphrase, where he tries to bring out the thought of each phrase. A General Introduction to the Bible p.389 says the original scroll was about 220 leaves, of which we have 30 leaves. 2 of those 30 leaves are from Matthew.

p53 Mt 26:29-40 and Acts 9:33-10:1. (middle 3rd century) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph showing part of p653 on p.360.

p64, p67 200 A.D. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph showing part of p64 on p.32, and part of p67 on p.34. p4 (containing Luke), p64, and p67 are all part of the same manuscript.

p70 Mt 2:13-16; 2:22-3:1; 11:26-27; 12:4-5; 24:3-6,12-15. (3rd century) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph showing part of p464 on p.464.

p77/p103 contains Mt 23:30-39 (p77); 13:55-57; 14:3-5 (mid to late 2nd century)

p86 Mt 5:13-16,22-25 c.300

p101 third century contains Mt 3:10-12; 3:16-4:3

p102 c.300 A.D. Mt 4:11-12, 22-23

p103 contains Mt 13:55-57; 14:3-5

p104 (early to middle second century) contains Mt 21:34-37, 43, 45?

p.Antinopolis third century, contains the Lord's Prayer. Mt 6:10-12

0171 (c.300 A.D.) contains Mt 10:17-23, 25-32

Vaticanus (325-250 A.D.) and Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.) contain all of Matthew. A photograph of a page of the Gospel of Matthew from the Codex Sinaiticus is in the New International Dictionary of the Bible p.2004.

Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D.) has preserved only Matthew 25:7 to the end.

The Washington Codex (4th/5th century) has all of Matthew.

Freer Gospels Cambridge 5th/6th century

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Armenian 5th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Ethiopic 6th century

Fayummic Coptic 4th-7th century

Peshitta Syriac 4th-7th century

Georgian 5th century

Q: Are there any earlier manuscripts of Mt that still exist today?

A: There have been some claims, but these are disputed.

The Magdalene Manuscript of Matthew 26 could be the earliest known New Testament manuscript. It is dated about 60 A.D., and certainly earlier than 64/54 A.D. this is arguable though. The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 8 p.20 says that the view is now in the ascendancy that Matthew was written between 80 and 100 A.D.

70 A.D. is a possible date of a Greek copy of the Gospel of Matthew, according to a German papyrologist. He based this solely on handwriting analysis. This was in Time (January 23, 1995). See The Real Jesus p.78 for discussion, but not necessarily endorsement, of this.

Q: In Mk 12:19 and Lk 20:27, what is all the biblical and extra-biblical evidence we have about the Sadducees?

A: Here is nearly everything we know on the Sadducees.

1. 1 and 2 Maccabees give a detailed history of the external and internal struggles during the time the parties of the Pharisees and Sadducees were founded..

2. Josephus speaks of the Sadducees in four passages. The quotes are taken from Josephus : Complete Works.

Wars of the Jews 2.8.2,14 (2a) "For there are three philosophical sects among the Jews. The followers of the first of whom are the Pharisees; of the second the Sadducees; and the third sect, who pretends to a severer discipline, are called the Essens." (14f) [Essens is the spelling in the book] "But the Sadducees are those that compose the second order, and take away fate entirely, and suppose that God is not concerned in our doing or not doing what is evil; and they say, that to act what is good, or what is evil, is at men's own choice, and that the one or the other belongs to every one, that they may act as they please. They also take away the belief of the immortal duration of the soul, and the punishments and rewards in Hades. Moreover, the Pharisees are friendly to one another, and are for the exercise of concord and regard for the public. But the behaviour of the Sadducees one towards another is in some degrees wild; and their conversation with those that are of their own party is as barbarous as if they were strangers to them...." (Later in Antiquities of the Jews 18.1.6 Josephus mentions a fourth sect, which is like the Pharisees except they fight for liberty. He is referring to the Zealots.)

Antiquities of the Jews 13.5.9 In contrast to the Sadducees, the Pharisees were prone to not be severe in punishments.

Antiquities of the Jews 13.10.6 This is historically the first mention of the Sadducees, under the rule of John Hyrcanus I as both king and high priest (135-104 B.C.)

Antiquities of the Jews 18.1.4 "But the doctrine of the Sadducees is this: That souls die with the bodies; nor do they regard the observation of anything besides what the law [Torah?] enjoins them; for they think it an instance of virtue to dispute with those teachers of philosophy whom they frequent; but this doctrine is received but by few, yet by those still of the greatest dignity; but they are able to do almost nothing of themselves; for when they become magistrates, as they are unwillingly and by force sometimes obliged to be, they addict themselves to the notions of the Pharisees, because the multitude would not otherwise bear them." (Josephus wrote Antiquities of the Jews 93-94 A.D.)

3. The Mishnah compares Sadducee teachings to those of the Pharisees in at least nine passages. (The earliest Mishnah's were written about 200 A.D.) According to the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1500-1502, here are some of the teachings given. However, it cautions us that these are from the perspective of the Pharisees, and we have no writings by the Sadducees themselves. Thus, the differences are from the perspective of what was important to the Pharisees, minor details about the law, and not necessarily what was most important to the Sadducees.

Baba Batra 115b - When a man died with no living sons, the Pharisees said that only a granddaughter and not a daughter could inherit, while the Sadducees said that both daughters and granddaughters could inherit if there were no sons.

Baba Kamma 84a - In applying "eye or an eye", the Pharisees often would accept monetary compensation, while the Sadducees would not.

Megillah Ta'anit 1 - While the Pharisees wanted offering paid by the treasury, the opponents of the Pharisees wanted the cost paid by freewill offerings.

Megillah Ta'anit 4 - Same as Baba Kamma 84a.

Makkot 1:5-8 - The Pharisees wanted all false witnesses put to death, while the Sadducees would only put a false witness to death if their testimony had already caused the execution of the falsely accused.

Tosefta Parah chapter 3 and Parah - The Sadducees did not have all the washings of the Pharisees, but the Sadducees were more strict in the purity of the red heifer.

Tosefta Sanhedrin 6:6 - The Pharisees wanted all false witnesses put to death, while the Sadducees would only put a false witness to death if their testimony had already caused the execution of the falsely accused.

Yadaim 4:7 - The Sadducees taught that an owner should be responsible for the damage a slave does, just as he is responsible for the damage his animal does. The Pharisees taught that a slave should be equally responsible, so that an unhappy slave would not get his master in trouble.

Yerushalmi Yevamot 1:6 - The Levirate marriage was only for a betrothed wife, not for one actually married.

4. A rabbinic tradition (Abot Rabbi Natan 5) says the Zadok, a disciple of Antigonus of Soko, started the Sadducees. See the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1500 for more info.

5. The New Testament tells us about the Sadducees in passing.

Matthew 3:7f - John the Baptist saw both Sadducees and Pharisees.

Not Matthew 15:1 - Some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus. Since these people were concerned with Jesus' disciples not washing their hands, they likely were no Sadducees among them.

Matthew 16:1-6 - Both the Pharisees and Sadducees asked Jesus for a sign from Heaven.

Matthew 16:11-12 - Jesus says to beware the teaching of the Sadducees and the Pharisees. Obviously they taught different things because they were different groups, but Jesus did not elaborate on the beliefs of either group in this verse.

Matthew 22:23-34; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-39, The Sadducees question Jesus about the resurrection. According to the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1501, the Mishnah in Yerushalmi Yevamot 1:6 shows that since Levirate marriage applies only to the betrothed in the eyes of the Sadducees, the woman would only have been married to the seventh husband.

Acts 4:1-2 - The Pharisees, priests, and Sadducees were united in opposing the apostles.

Acts 5:17-18 - This records that the high priest at this time was a Sadducee. (Josepus also says that the High Priest Ananias the Younger was a Sadducee.)

Acts 23:6-8 - The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, or angels or spirits.

6. Church writings

Epiphanius in Heresies 1,14 claims the term "Sadducees" came from the Hebrew word sadiq meaning "righteous". However, the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1500 says there is a problem explaining how the vowel would changes from i (carot) in sadiq to u (carot) in seduqim.

Hippolytus (222-236 A.D.) in The Refutation of All Heresies Book 9 chapter 22 has a whole chapter on the Sadducees. As Josephus says, they say that God does not affect earthly concerns. They deny the resurrection of the flesh, and say the soul does not continue to exist after death. He also gives other details that are found in Josephus. In addition to Josephus, Hippolytus also says that they are especially strong in Samaria. "They do not, however, devote attention to prophets, but neither do they to any other sages, except to the law of Moses only, in regard of which, however, they frame no interpretations."

Tertullian (200-220 A.D.) in On the Resurrection of the Flesh chapter 2, compares Christian heretics who deny the physical resurrection with the Sadducees with which Jesus had to contend.

Origen and Jerome, also apparently said the Sadducees only observed the Torah, according to The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.884-885. See the next question for more discussion on this.

Q: In Mk 12:19 and Lk 20:27, did the Sadducees totally reject all the Old Testament except the Torah, accept the rest of the Old Testament but on lesser authority, or accept everything as the Pharisees did?

A: Here is the evidence. The early church fathers Hippolytus, Tertullian, Origen, and Jerome said the Sadducees only believed in the Torah. However, The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.884-885 says they were in error, because

1) Josephus does not mention this

2) In the Talmud Sadducees use arguments from other books of the Old Testament,

3) They probably would not have been allowed on the Sanhedrin if they had not regarded the other books as canonical.

However against this are three points:

1r) Josephus wrote of the Sadducees, "...nor do they regard the observation of anything besides what the law enjoins..." in Antiquities of the Jews 18.1.4. (about 93-94 A.D.)

2r) Furthermore, even if the Sadducees did not totally reject the rest of the Old Testament, they might have only accepted the rest of the Old Testament books as less authoritative. This is similar to the view of some Christians as the apocrypha being godly writings that belong in Scripture, but having lesser authority than the rest of the Old Testament. Perhaps the Sadducees left open the question of just how authoritative the non-Torah books were.

3r) According to Josephus, Ananias (the younger) was a Sadducee who was appointed high priest by the Romans. It would detract from the Sanhedrin's authority if they excluded the high priest. Also, Josephus writes in Antiquities of the Jews 18.1.4, that when the Sadducees became magistrates, they adhered to what the Pharisees said, because otherwise the multitudes could not endure them. It is analogous to today, when many liberal "Christian" pastors, who themselves deny that Jesus died to pay for our sins, still celebrate the Lord's Supper every month, repeating the words "This is my blood shed for the forgiveness of sins", because otherwise the church members would not accept them as pastors.

Where did the early church fathers get their information? Since the Sadducees died out around 70 A.D., they did not get it from the Sadducees themselves. Perhaps they got the information from many early writings we do not have today. For example, Papias, a disciple of John the Apostle and the first extra-Biblical premillennialist, wrote a number of volumes which have been lost.

Therefore, while there is nothing to prove the early church writers wrong, there are arguments on both sides as to whether the Sadducees outright reject the rest of the Old Testament, or else just held these books as of lesser authority.

Q: In Mk 12:24, why did Jesus tell the Sadducees they did not know the Scriptures nor the power of God?

A: Jesus was correct in both a general sense and a specific sense He could demonstrate to them.

General: The Sadducees did not believe in afterlife or resurrection. According to early church writers, the Sadducees did not accept the Old Testament as Scripture except the first five books of the Law. See the previous question for more info.

Specific: As Jesus showed, even what they did accept as Scripture (the Torah) they did not really believe, about God still being the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Q: In Mk 15:14, why was Mark apparently so eager to try to place the blame on the Jews, as one liberal claimed?

A: First of all, archaeologists have found the courtyard where they think the crowd was, and it could not have held more than about 400 people. Thus, the crowd here was not all the residents and visitors to Jerusalem, but rather a very small subset the priests selected.

Judas, the Jewish leaders, the Jewish people, the Romans, and even Jesus not running away, all had a role in what was the predetermined will of God (Acts 2:23). Here is a listing of the role of each. As you can see, Mark is no more severe on the Jewish people than the other gospel writers.

Judas: Matthew 26:14-16, 49-50; Mark 14:17-21,42,44-45; Luke 22:3-6,47-48; John 13:18,21,27; 18:2

The Jewish leaders: Matthew 26:57-58; 27:20; Mark 14:43,46,53-65; 15:1,3,10-11,31; Luke 22:2,52; 22:66-23:2; John 18:3,12-14,19-24,30

The Jewish people: Matthew 27:20-23,25; Mark 15:11-15; Luke 23:18,21,23

The Romans: Matthew 27:11-31; Mark 15:15-20; 16:24; Luke 23:24; John 18:33-19:3; 1916

Jesus not running away: Matthew 26:39-46,53-54; Mark 14:35-42; Luke 22:39-46; John 18:4-11

Q: In Mk 15:17, what was the significance of clothing Jesus in purple?

A: Purple cloth was expensive, being dyed from murex shells. In the Roman Empire, only the Emperor and his family were supposed to wear purple, though the Emperor, as a favor, could give his old clothes to others. The purple robe was mocking the fact that Jesus claimed to be a king.

Q: When was the Gospel of Mk written?

A: The anti-Marcionic prolog to Mark also says "After the death of Peter himself, he [Mark] wrote down this same Gospel...." (taken from The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.99). Irenaeus in Against Heresies 3.1.1 (about 160-180 A.D.) says Mark wrote after "the departure" of Peter and Paul, which would be just after c.64-65 A.D. However, The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 8 p.608 says Irenaeus also wrote that Matthew was written while Peter and Paul were still alive, and we know that is incorrect.

However, according to Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History 6:14.5-7, Clement of Alexandria it was written while Peter was at Rome c.45-64 A.D. Origen also thought Peter was still alive.

Harnack thought it was written before 62 A.D.

The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.98 says dating Mark is problematic, and that the two best options are either 67-69 A.D., or 64-68 A.D.

In the New International Bible Commentary p.1157, Stephen S. Short says it was c.65 A.D. On p.1183 Laurence E. Porter says that it is clear Mark was written before Luke, and Luke might have written in the first half of the 60's.

The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 8 p.608 says the best estimate is 65-70 A.D., between the Great Fire in Rome and the destruction of the Temple. Jose O'Callaghan found a Papyrus in cave 7 at Qumran that might be fragments of the Gospel of Mark, dated about 50 A.D. However, The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 8 p.608 says this "has been largely rejected by NT scholars (cf. EBC 1:420-421, n.1). The evidence O'Callaghan presents is far too fragmentary to be reliable."

The New Geneva Study Bible p.1558 says that Mark had to have been written before 70 A.D. However, it adds that if Luke and Acts were finished around 62 A.D., then Mark would be even earlier than 62 A.D..

The NIV Study Bible p.1490 says that it might have been the 50's or 60's, or shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.622 says it was 65-70 A.D., though some conservatives hold to a date in the 50s.

The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1078 says that while the majority of interpreters date Mark 65-70 A.D., the most probable date is 67-70 A.D.

The Believer's Bible Commentary p.1318 says that while some give a date as early as the 50s, a date of 57-60 A.D. seems quite likely.

The Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels p.528 says it was written in the late 60's, say 68-70 A.D.

The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.903 says Mark may have been written shortly after 64 A.D. It might not have been written till after 66 A.D.,, but it could not have been long after 70 A.D., basing his argument on Matthew and Luke using material from Mark.

Q: In Mk, how do we know that scripture today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three good reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Many writers referred to Mark.

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Mark show there are small manuscript variations and one large variation, but zero theologically significant errors. The ending of Mark is the most notable manuscript variation in the entire New Testament.

p45 Chester Beatty (all 4 gospels and Acts) 200 A.D. (Mk 4:36-5:2; 5:16-26; 5:38-6:3; 6:15-25,36-50; 7:3-15; 7:25-8:1; 8:10-26; 8:34-9:9; 9:18-31; 11:27-12:1; 12:5-8,13-19,24-28) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph showing part of p45 on p.146. On p.150-151 it says that the copy was a loose paraphrase, where he tries to bring out the thought of each phrase. A General Introduction to the Bible p.389 says the original scroll is thought to be about 220 leaves, of which we have 30 leaves. 6 of those leaves are from Mark.

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.), Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.), and Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D.) have all of Mark.

The Washington Codex (4th/5th century) has preserved all of Mark except Mark 15:13-38.

In cave 7 at Qumran, Jose O'Callaghan found a papryus, dated 50 A.D., which might be fragments of the Gospel of Mark. However, The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 8 p.608 says this "has been largely rejected by NT scholars (cf. EBC 1:420-421, n.1). The evidence O'Callaghan presents is far too fragmentary to be reliable."

Q: In Lk 2, is Christmas a pagan holiday, and why is it celebrated on December 25th?

A: No, Christmas is not a pagan holiday. We do not know the month and day when Jesus was born. It would not be reasonable for all the farmers to have to go somewhere to be taxed at either harvest time or planting time, though. There are two views as to why Christmas is just after Saturnalia: coincidence, and not a coincidence. Here is supporting evidence for both views.

Coincidence: Various cultures had holidays at various times. For example, the later Greeks had more holidays than non-holidays. The Romans had a minor holiday every Ides (13th or 15th) of the month to Jupiter. Every six days prior was a sacrifice to Juno and Janus. Here is a partial list of Roman holidays.

Jan. 1 Sacred day to Janus

Jan. 9 Agonia (for Janus)

February Sabine (not just Roman) festival of purification called Februa

Feb. 15 Lupercalia (not to any god)

Feb. 17 Quirinalia (for Mars)

Feb. 27 First Equirria (for Mars)

Mar. 1 Matronalia (for Juno)

Mar. 14 Second Equirra (for Mars)

Mar. 19 Quinquatrus (for Minerva)

Mar. 23 Tubilustrium (purification of trumpets)

April Festival for Venus

Apr. 25 Robigalia (ask mildew to spare the grain)

Spring? Bachannalia (drunken, sexual festival)

May 15 Festival to Mercury and Maia

May 26 Ambarvalia (for good crops)

Jun. 9 Vestalia (to Vesta)

Jun. 13-14 Lesser Quinquatrus (for Minerva)

The month of July was renamed for Emperor Julius Caesar, who was proclaimed a god.

Jul. 23 Neptunalia (when water most wanted)

The month of August was renamed for Emperor Augustus, who was proclaimed a god.

Aug. 9 Vinalia rustica (for Venus)

Aug . 13 Festival to Diana (slaves freed for 1 day)

Aug. 23 Vulcania (for Vulcan)

Sep. 4 Ludi Magni in honor of Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva (Encyclopedia Britannica 1957 version)

Sep. 13 Feast of Jupiter (Roman State prominent)

Oct. 15 October Horse (sacrifice to Mars)

Nov. 1 Feast of Pomona, goddess of harvest

Dec. 17-24 Saturnalia (commemorate the golden age of Saturn. - Slaves freed for 8 days)

Tertullian (200-240 A.D.) in On Idolatry chapter 10 also mentions the Quintquatria, Minervalia, Saturnalia, Septimontium and the feast of Dear Kinmanship.

The point of listing the Roman holidays is that, whenever Christmas was celebrated, it would likely be close to some Roman holiday.

Not a Coincidence: Celebrating Christmas on December 25 was not a coincidence for three reasons.

N1. Not at these times: Some times were less appropriate than others for Christmas. Around March 9-24, there were many gladiatorial shows in honor of Minerva. The early Christians probably would not want to be out celebrating when Romans were looking for people to fight wild beasts. On September 13, worship of Mars, protector of the state, was prominent. Christians would not want to be conspicuous then, either.

N2. Competing with Saturnalia: Having Christmas just after Saturnalia might have been deliberate to "compete" with the Roman holiday. However, this view assumes Saturnalia was an extremely important holiday, which was not necessarily the case.

N3. Many Christians were slaves: Over half of the inhabitants of the Roman Empire were slaves, and probably even a greater percentage of Christians were slaves. The pagan holiday of Saturnalia gave Christian slaves more freedom than usual, since slaves were temporarily free during this time. Thus they had the free time to plan and gather for their holiday.

See Now That's a Good Question p.362-364 for more info.

Q: In Lk 2:1-5, why would Caesar Augustus cause chaos by allegedly making everyone return to their hometown?

A: First what the skeptic Isaac Asimov claims, and then two different answers.

Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.929 outright says, "The Romans couldn't possibly have conducted so queer a census as that. Why should they want every person present in the town of his ancestors rather than in the town in which he actually dwelt? ... No, it is hard to imagine a more complicated tissue of implausibilities and the Romans would certainly arrange no such census."

C. Vibius Maximus, prefect of Egypt in 104 A.D. apparently would disagree with Asimov. For the taxation edict of Maximus required everyone in the Egypt to return their hometown. This would not cause chaos if only the farmers and poorer people, who did not travel much anyway, had to return. See the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.414 for more info, and it says the decree is documented in Deiss LAE p.271.

Joseph's own choice: Scripture never claimed that Caesar Augustus required everyone in the Empire return to their hometown. Perhaps Joseph had his own reasons, and Joseph either thought it important to register himself as a descendant of the royal line on his own accord, or else he was told to do so by an angel. However, Joseph was not the only one who felt the need to travel for the census, as the inns in Bethlehem were full.

Q: In Lk 2:1, why did Joseph leave his home and return to his hometown?

A: There are two concurrent answers.

Heavenly reason: God in His providence made things this way so that the prophecy would be fulfilled that Jesus would be born at Bethlehem.

Earthly reason: Either Joseph himself just wanted to return to his hometown, or else people had to return to their hometown, to ensure that no one was missed in the taxation. A similar requirement, that everyone must return to their hometown, was in the taxation edict of Egypt in 104 A.D. The prefect, C. Vibius Maximus, wrote, 'The enrollment by household being at hand, it is necessary to notify all who for any cause whatsoever are away from their administrative divisions to return home in order to comply with the customary ordinance of enrollment, and to remain in their own agricultural land." See The New Testament Documents : Are They Reliable. by F.F. Bruce. IVP (p.86-87) for more info.

Q: In Lk 2:1-2, when was the decree to be taxed?

A: Luke himself when writing this apparently was aware of the possibility of confusion about Quirinius, for verse 2 says "This was the first census..." implying there was more than one census under Quirinius.

According to Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.366, we know of a census at 7 B.C. Josephus mentions a census by "Cyrenius" about 6/7 A.D. (Antiquities of the Jews 17.13:5 written about 93-94 A.D.).

According to the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.319,414 Papyrus Oxyrynchus 225 (in Milligan, Greek Papyri p.44-47) says that a census was taken every 14 years. Suetonius and Tacitus show that Augustus had three censuses for example, the second of which was 8-4 B.C.

Q: In Lk 2:2, what do we know about Quirinius?

A: An inscription shows that Quirinius was governor of Syria starting in 6 A.D. (which is too late for Jesus' birth). However, this was Quirinius' second time as a governor. The first time was between 12 and 6 B.C., when he led a campaign against the Homanadensians in Anatolia. However, we do not know which province Quirinius was governor of the first time. There are two views:

Sir William Ramsay advocates that Quirinius was governor of Syria the first time. (Syria is adjacent to the mountains of Anatolia). While we have a complete record of the governors of Syria during this time and Quirinius is not mentioned until 6 A.D., Quirinius might have been a special, additional governor for this military campaign.

F.F. Bruce advocates that Quirinius was governor of probably Galatia. Galatia is in Anatolia. In his The New Testament Documents : Are They Reliable?, (IVP) p.86-87 F.F. Bruce mentions that many grammarians translate Luke 2:2 as "before" Quirinius was governor of Syria, not "while".

Tertullian (200-240 A.D.) in Against Marcion 4:19 says that the name "Quirinius" was substituted for "Saturninus". Historically, we know that Saturninus was governor of Syria from 8 to 6 B.C.

As a side note, there is much about the ancient world we cannot prove. For example, Damascus coins are silent about Roman occupation of Damascus between 34 to 62 A.D. Yet, we are certain that the Romans ruled Damascus then.

See The New Testament Documents : Are They Reliable? by F.F. Bruce (p.86-87) for a discussion of all these views, and Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.365-366 and When Critics Ask p.383-385 for more info.

Q: In Lk 3:1, what extra-Biblical evidence is there of Lysanias, Tetrarch of Abilene in the fifteenth year of Tiberias (27-28 A.D.)?

A: A century ago there was none whatsoever. A Lysanias of Abilene who was executed in 34 B.C. lived too early to be relevant.

In the Twentieth century, the situation has changed. An inscription was found that said 'for the salvation of the Lords Imperial and their whole household, by Nymphaeus, a freedman of Lysanias the tetrarch." The words "Lords Imperial" date this inscription between 14 A.D. and 29 A.D. See The New Testament Documents : Are They Reliable by F.F. Bruce (IVP) p.87-88 for more info.

Q: In Lk 9:7,9, is this the same Herod who reigned when Jesus was born?

A: No. The Herod who killed the baby boys of Bethlehem was called Herod the Great. This Herod, called Herod Antipas, was the younger son of Herod the Great and one of his ten wives, Malthace.

Q: In Lk 16:6-8, why was the dishonest steward commended?

A: One needs to know some cultural background to see the answer. While the Israelites were commanded not to charge each other interest on loans (Leviticus 25:35, Exodus 22:25), the reality at this time was that they commonly did so. In addition, charging interest to foreigners was OK (Deuteronomy 23:20).

The steward gave back 50 out of 100 jugs of olive oil, and 20 out of 100 containers of wheat. The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1761 says that the going interest rate on grain was 25% to 33 1/3 %. 25% of 80 containers of wheat would be 100 containers. I have heard a teaching that the interest on olive oil was 100%, but I have not been able to corroborate this, though the New Geneva Study Bible p.1636 also offers this as a theory.

Thus, in giving these "discounts", perhaps the steward was not cheating the master, but rather taking off interest which he should not charge a fellow Israelite anyway.

Either the master knew of the discounts or he did not. The Believer's Bible Commentary p.1430-1431 indicates that the master knew, and commended the steward for his foresight. The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.246 also indicates the rich man knew and still commended the steward for his shrewdness.

Q: In Lk 22:70; 23:3, what did Jesus mean when He said, "you say that I am"?

A: This was an expression of strong affirmation of what was said. The NIV rightly translates this as, "You are right I saying I am".

The Dead Sea scrolls shed additional light on this question asked of Jesus. One belief of the sect at Qumran was that the Messiah will do miracles, and healings, but personally will kill the Roman Emperor. It would take years to bury all the dead from the Messiah's military victories. Thus, as the Christian News (11/23/1998) says, "So now we know that when Caiphas conducted the trial of Jesus, all he had to do was get Jesus to admit that he was the Messiah. As Jesus, who has performed the predicted miracles, made that admission, he was assumed to be guilty of treason against the emperor."

Q: In Lk 23:43, what exactly is paradise?

A: Since the thief on Jesus' right would be with Jesus that day in Paradise, Paradise is the place where Jesus went on that day. Prior to Jesus' birth, Jews understood that the grave "Sheol" was divided into two compartments, "prison" for the unrighteous and "paradise" for the righteous. Since Jesus used this term without any qualification, basically He had no correction for this doctrine.

The Jewish reference to two parts of Sheol is 1 Enoch 22:1-4. After judgment, the unrighteous would have pain and plague forever. Other Jewish references to eternal punishment for the wicked are:

Assumption of Moses 10:10

2 Esdras 7:36, when the Sons of the Maccabees were being burned to death, they said, "we will burn only for a little while, but you will burn for all eternity."

Judith 16:17 "fire and worms he will give to their flesh; they shall weep in pain for ever."

Psalms of Solomon 3:134 Macc. in the LXX use it for the Hebrew word s such as 'asam, for a reparation of guilt. In the Septuagint it is used in 1 Sam 6:3, f. 8, 17 as a guilt offering. It is translated for shame, disgrace in Ezekiel 16:52, 42; 32:24,30, and a cause of sin and misfortune in Ezekiel 3:20 and 7:19. Ezekiel 16:52,52 and 32:24,40 show God's punishments. Wisdom 3:1 says the righteous are untouched by any basanos.

2 Maccabees 7:13 and often in 4 Maccabees the noun and verb are used of the tortures of Jewish martyrs. It is used of the torture of Christian martyrs in 1 Clem 6:1,15, 2 Clem 17:7, Eusebius 5, 1, 20 & 24. Martyrdom of Polycarp 2,3.

See Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.367-368 and Hard Sayings of the Bible p.488-489 for more info.

Q: In Lk 23:44, when was the sixth hour?

A: The Jewish day started around 6:00 in the morning, so the sixth hour would be about noon. The NIV Study Bible p.1587 and New Geneva Study Bible p.1652, and The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.262 all say the same.

Q: When was the Gospel of Lk written?

A: We know for certain it was written after 33 A.D., before the Book of Acts, and probably before 70 A.D.

Views of Various Writers

The NIV Study Bible p.1533 says the two most common suggested periods are 59-63 A.D. and in the 70s or 80s.

The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.199 says that since Acts was written while Paul was still alive, and Luke was before that, it might have been written before 64 A.D. It suggests a date of 58-60 A.D.

The New Geneva Study Bible p.1599 says that Luke and Acts may have been written about 63 A.D.

The Believer's Bible Commentary p.1367-1368 says the most likely date is very early in the 60's. "While some put Luke between 75-85 (or even the second century), this is usually due at least partly to a denial that Christ could accurately predict the destruction of Jerusalem.

The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.605 says that the abrupt termination of Acts suggests that Luke did not long survive Paul's imprisonment. Also, it is not likely to have been written after the destruction of Jerusalem. It says that 58-59 A.D. would give abundant time for Luke to do his research.

The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1056-1057 simply says the second half of the first century.

The New International Bible Commentary p.1182 gives reasons for three views.

80-85 A.D. if one denies prophecy: It says that this most commonly held view is based on Luke 21:20 saying "when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies" could not be a prophetic prediction.

100 A.D., if Luke and Acts are based on Josephus: Josephus and Luke record some of the same events, so some think Luke copied from Josephus.

Before 70 A.D., because Acts ends with Paul alive.

The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.912 says apparently some time after 70 A.D. Though some suggest dates as late as 100 A.D., 80 A.D. is more generally acceptable.

Q: How do we know that Luke today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three good reasons.

God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in Acts.

Constitutions of the Holy Apostles c.80-190 A.D.

Justin Martyr fl. 138-165 A.D.

Didache 120-150 A.D.

A: There are at least three good reasons. 130 A.D.

Theophilus 180 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217A.D.

Irenaeus 170-202 A.D.

Tertullian fl. 200-220A.D.

Cyprian 200-258 A.D.

Gregory Thamauturgus 270 A.D.

Origen 225-254 A.D.

Ephraim 373 A.D.

Athanasius 326-373 A.D

Eusebius c.360 A.D.

Basil 357-379 A.D.

Gregory of Nyssa 335-394 A.D

Gregory Nanzianzus 330-391 A.D.

Earliest manuscripts we have of John show there are small manuscript variations, but no theologically significant errors.

The Lukan manuscript in Paris is dated around 100 A.D.

p3 Luke 78:42 and other verses

p4 Luke 1:58-59; 1:62-2:1; 2:6-7; 3:8-4:2; 4:29-32, 34-35; 5:3-8; 5:30-6:17 (c.200 A.D.)A photograph of p4 is in The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.32. p4, p64, and p67 all come from the same manuscript.

p45 Chester Beatty (all 4 gospels and Acts) 200 A.D. (Lk 6:31-41; 6:45-7:7; 9:26-41; 9:45-10:1; 10:6-22; 10:26-11:1; 11:6-25,28-46; 11:50-12:13; 12:18-37; 12:42-13:1; 13:6-24; 13:29-14:10; 14:17-33) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph showing part of p45 on p.146. On p.150-151 it says that the copy was a loose paraphrase, where he tries to bring out the thought of each phrase. A General Introduction to the Bible p.389 says the original scroll was thought to have about 220 leaves, of which we have 30 leaves preserved. We have 7 leaves from Luke.

p69 Lk 22:41,45-48,58-61 (middle 3rd century) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph showing part of p69 on p.460.

p75 Bodmer 14/15 Papyrii (most of Luke and John) (Lk 3:18-22; 3:33-4:2; 4:34-5:10; 5:37-6:4; 6:10-7:32; 7:35-39,41-43; 7:46-9:2; 9:4-17:15; 17:19-18:18; 22:4-24:53) 175-200 A.D. Very similar to Vaticanus (A General Introduction to the Bible p.390) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of it on p.495 and says a professional scribe wrote this manuscript.

0171 (c.300 A.D.) contains Lk 22:44-50; 22:52-56

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.), Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.), and Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D.) contain all of Luke.

The Washington Codex (4th/5th century) contains all of Luke.

Cambridge 5th/6th century

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Armenian 5th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Ethiopic 6th century

Curetonian Syriac 4th-7th century

Sinaitic Syriac 4th-7th century

Georgian 5th century

There is a picture of Luke 16:16-21 from a Bodmer papyrus (c.180 A.D.) in the New International Dictionary of the Bible p.604. A photograph of part of the scroll of the Bodmer 14/15 Papyrii is in the New International Dictionary of the Bible p.706.

Q: In Jn 1:1, what did the early church teach about this verse and the Word being God?

A: It is insightful to hear what modern scholars, 2000 years later, say the Greek meant. However, what is more interesting what church leaders who lived 1700-1800 years ago, many of whom spoke New Testament Greek since they were babies, interpreted what John 1:1, in their own language, meant to them.

Justin Martyr (wrote about 138-165 A.D.)

"for when we give out some word, we beget the word; yet not by abscission, so as to lessen the word [which remains] in us, when we give it out; and just as we see also happening in the case of a fire, which is not lessened when it has kindled [another], but remains the same;... The Word of Wisdom, who is Himself this God begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter, will bear evidence to me..." Dialogue with Trypho ch. 61. See also chapters 55,56,59,62-64,66,74-78.

Theophilus bishop of Antioch (115-181 A.D.)

"For the divine writing itself teaches us that Adam said that he had heard the voice. But what else is this voice but the Word of God, who is also His Son?" Letter to Autolycus 2:22

Tertullian (200-220/240 A.D.)

"The Word, therefore, is both always in the Father, as He says, 'I am in the Father;' and is always with God, according to what is written, 'And the Word was with God;' and never separate from the Father, or other than the Father, since 'I and the Father are one.'" Against Praxeus chapter 8.

Irenaeus (120-202 A.D.)

"But that He [Jesus] is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, and Lord, and King Eternal, and the Incarnate Word, proclaimed by all the prophets, the apostles, and by the Spirit Himself, may be seen by all who have obtained to even a small portion of the truth." (Irenaeus Against Heresies 3:19:2).

"Know thou that every man is either empty or full. For if he has not the Holy Spirit, he has no knowledge of the Creator; he has not received Jesus Christ the life; he knows not the Father who is in heaven;..." (Against Heresies 3:16)

"She [the church] also believes these points [of doctrine] just as if she had but one soul.... For the churches which have been planted in Germany do not believe or hand down anything different nor do those in Spain nor those in Gaul, nor those in the East nor those in Egypt nor those in Libya, nor ..."

Hippolytus (225-236 A.D.) after quoting part of John 1:1

"If, then the Word was with God and was also God what follows? Would one say that he speaks of two Gods? I shall not indeed speak of two Gods but of one; of two Persons however and of a third economy (disposition), viz., the grace of the Holy Ghost. For the Father indeed is One but there are two Persons because there is also the Son; and then there is the third the Holy Spirit. The Father decrees, the Word executes and the Son is manifested, through whom the Father is believed on. The economy of the harmony is led back to one God; for God is One. It is the Father who commands and the Son who obeys and the Holy Spirit who gives understanding; the Father is above all, and the Son who is through all and the Holy Spirit who is in all. And we cannot otherwise think of one God, but by believing in truth in Father and Son and Holy Spirit." Against the Heresy of One Noetus chapter 14.

Q: In Jn 1:1, is it true that the doctrine that Jesus was God in human form was not finalized until after 300 A.D.?

A: No. Karen Armstrong categorically stated this in A History of God p.81, and it is amazing what some printed books can get away with saying. There are no Orthodox Christians or Arians who said Jesus was not God. Prior to 300 A.D., the five church fathers quoted in the previous question certainly did not think the doctrine of Jesus being God in human form needed any finalizing. Ignatius, who was a disciple of John the apostle, was fond of saying that "Jesus is God". Thomas the apostle did not need any council when he said to Jesus in John 20:28, "My Lord and My God!"

While it is true that Gnostics were heretics who had very strange views of God, they were never accepted as Christians by Orthodox Christians. Regardless, even they accepted Jesus was God, though in a very different and strange sense.

Arians were another heretical group that were condemned at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.. They had a "low" opinion of Jesus, believing there was a time when He was not, and that Jesus was of a different substance than the Father. However, even they agreed that Jesus was God; it was that they wrongly believed Jesus was not of the same nature as the Father.

I suppose a shortcoming of creeds is that some can misinterpret what they are for. The Nicene Controversy over Arianism was not whether or not Jesus was God, but over part of how Jesus was God.

Q: In Jn 1:1, was this concept of an eternal word borrowed from Greek philosophy?

A: No, there is no evidence for this. It is conceded that the Greek philosopher Plato did write of an eternal word "logos" prior to John's Gospel, but there is no evidence that John borrowed from this.

Rather than John borrowing from Greek philosophy, even a secular person could make a case that the concept of a powerful and living Word was borrowed from Old Testament thought, such as Genesis 1:1 in Hebrew.

The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.441 says that the Dead Sea scrolls indicate that the Gospel of John, rather than being a second century Hellenistic document, "is shown more clearly than eve to be a product of First Century Palestine by virtue of its many parallels with the Qumran texts."

Q: In Jn 5:2, is there any archaeological evidence for the Pool of Bethesda in Jerusalem?

A: Yes. This was actually twin pools in the northeast portion of the Old City. This section was called "Bezetha", or "new town" in the time of Christ. The Dead Sea scrolls mention the pools, a Christian pilgrim described them in 333 A.D., and modern archaeologists found these in 1888. See the New Testament Documents : Are They Reliable? P.94 by F.F. Bruce (IVP 1943) for more info.

Q: In Jn 6:23, what do we know about the town of Tiberias?

A: It was a new town in Jesus' time, since Herod Antipas built it between 16 and 22 A.D. as his administrative capital. It was a Gentile town, Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.822-823 says Jews avoided it because it was built on a cemetery. See The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.1014 and the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1704 for more info.

Q: In Jn 11:44, how could Lazarus walk out, since he was bound hand and foot?

A: As When Critics Ask p.418 mentions, corpses were wrapped in linen, they were not tightly bound like the Egyptians bodies. Nothing here prevented Lazarus from walking.

Q: In Jn 18:31, why was the Jewish council unable to execute Jesus?

A: The power of execution was taken away from them by the Romans. Following is the historical documentation of this fact.

1. Josephus in his book, Wars of the Jews book 2 chapter 8 says, "And now Archelaus' part of Judea was reduced into a province, and Caponius, one of the Equestrian order of the Romans, was sent as a procurator, having the power of life and death put into his hands by Caesar." Josephus also mentions that the Sanhedrin lost power over capital cases in Antiquities of the Jews 20.9. (Written about 93-94 A.D.)

2. In the Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, Chap.4 following 37, recto. Rabbi Rachman said, "When the members of the Sanhedrin found themselves deprived of the/their right over life and death, a general consternation took possession of them; they covered their heads with ashes, and their bodies with sackcloth, exclaiming: 'Woe unto us, for the scepter has departed from Judah, and the Messiah has not come!'" This happened around 7 A.D. (Taken from Josh McDowell's Evidence That Demands a Verdict vol.1 p.169., and Jesus Before the Sanhedrin by Augustin Lemann, 1886 translated by Julius Magath, NL#0239683, Library of Congress # 15-24973. See also Pugio Fidei, Martini, Raymundus, published by De Vosin in 1651. (p.148)

3. Talmud "A little more than forty years before the destruction of the Temple, the power of pronouncing capital sentences was taken away from the Jews." Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin folio 24. (p.147)

Q: In Jn, what evidence is there that John wrote the Gospel of John?

A: The early church universally accepted the Gospel of John as being written by John the apostle.

Theophilus of Antioch (160-180 A.D.) was the first to mention the gospel was by John according to the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1463.

Hippolytus (225-236 A.D.) mentions that the heretic Basilides, who lived in the time of the apostles, quoted from John 1:9. (Refutation of All Heresies 7:10).

Clement of Alexandria (153-220 A.D.) in Stromata 2:15 mentions the Gospel of John is by John the apostle.

Cyprian, bishop of Carthage (248-258 A.D.) quotes from John as being from John in Treatise 12 The Third Book 24,25.

The Believer's Bible Commentary p.1463 says that until the 19th century no one rejected John as the Gospel of John except for an obscure cult called the Alogi.

For the reliability of the Gospel of John in general, see the next three questions.

Q: When was the Gospel of Jn written?

A: We have a fragment of John, called the John Rylands manuscript dated by radiocarbon dating to about 125 A.D., so it had to be written before then. John was probably written between 70 A.D. and 125 A.D.

Views of Various Writers

The New Geneva Study Bible p.1656 says church tradition suggests it was around 90 A.D.

The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.267 is it was probably between 85-95 A.D. Some critics have attempted a date as late as 150 A.D. based on similarities to Gnostic writings. Others date it as early as 45-66 A.D.

The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.268 says that archaeological finds support John 4:11; 5:2-3, word studies such as synchrontai in John 4:9, and the Dead Sea scrolls give support to an early date for John.

The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.534 says that the Gospel of John was written "sometime toward the close of the first century A.D."

The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.954 says that the fourth gospel is later than the others, but by 150 A.D. it seems already to have been known and referred to by writers. Perhaps 100 A.D. is a likely date, though it might be somewhat later still.

Evidence:

According to the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.937, John was familiar with details of Jerusalem prior to its destruction, such as the Pool of Bethesda (John 5:2), the pavement (John 19:13). Used some terminology also used at Qumran A harmony of the Gospels, called the Egerton Papyrus 2, contains John 5 and is dated not later than 150 A.D. (See the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1464 for more on this.)

Valentinus quoted the Gospel of John in his Gospel of Truth, written c. 140 A.D.

Roman catacombs have paintings of Christ as the Good Shepherd and the raising of Lazarus that are dated c. 150 A.D.

Q: In Jn, how do we know that what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three good reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35. It is freely conceded that ultimately this involves a degree of trusting in God. If God really did want to communicate something, God would want it preserved.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in John.

Constitutions of the Holy Apostles c.80-190 A.D.

Ignatius alluded to verse in John according to the Believer's Bible Commentary p.1463.

The Gnostic heretics Basilides and Valentinus

Tatian's Diatessaron

Justin Martyr 110/114-138-165 A.D.

Didache 120-150 A.D.

The Letter of Mathetes To Diognetus 130 A.D.

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

Theophilus of Antioch 180 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217A.D.

Irenaeus 170-202 A.D.

Tertullian 200-220A.D.

Cyprian 200-258 A.D.

Origen 225-254 A.D.

Hilary wrote about 355-367/368 A.D.

Hippolytus 225-236 A.D.

Athanasius 326-373 A.D

Eusebius c.360 A.D.

Basil 357-379 A.D.

Gregory of Nyssa 335-394 A.D

Gregory Nanzianzus 330-391 A.D.

Ambrose 340-397 A.D.

Didymus 398 A.D.

Nonnus 431 A.D.

Chrysostom (c.407 A.D.) wrote down 88 sermons on the Gospel of John. He said it was written by the son of Zebedee, the son of thunder who holds the keys of heaven.

We still have all of these today.

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of John show there are small manuscript variations, but no theologically significant errors.

p5 John 1:23-31,33-40; 16:14-30; 20:11-17, 19-20, 22-25 early 3rd century. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of it on p.62. It says that the manuscript is of normal quality, except that the copyist tended to leave out unnecessary pronouns and conjunctions.

p22 (c.250 A.D.) Jn 15:25-27; 16:1-2, 31-32

p28 John 6:6-12, 17-22 3rd century

p39 John 8:14-22 first half of 3rd century The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of it on p.138.

p45 Chester Beatty I. Much of all four gospels and Acts. Includes John 4:51,54; 5:21,24; 10:7-25; 10:30-11:10; 11:18-36,42-57. Late 2nd or early 3rd century. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of one page of it on p.146. On p.150-151 it says that the copy was a loose paraphrase, where he tries to bring out the thought of each phrase. A General Introduction to the Bible p.389 says the original scroll was about 220 leaves, of which we have 30 leaves: 2 leaves from Matthew, 2 from John, 6 from Mark, 7 from Luke, and 13 from Acts.

p52 John Rylands papyrus (2 1/2 by 3 1/2 fragment of parts of John 18:31-33) c.110-150 (others say c.117-138) Another fragment, John 18:37-38, is generally thought to be from the same scroll and is also referred to as the John Rylands Papyrus. You can see a photograph of the John Rylands papyrus in the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.937, the New International Dictionary of the Bible p.534, Greek Manuscripts of the Bible p.62-63, and A General Introduction to the Bible p.388.

p66 Bodmer II Papyrii (John 1:1-6:11, 6:35b-14:26,29-30; 16:10-20:20; 20:22-23; 20:25-21:9; 21:12,17 (dates of c.175 or c.125-150 A.D.) We have 104 leaves, and fragments of 40 other leaves. A photograph of John 6:58-64 from the Bodmer II Papyrus is in the New International Dictionary of the Bible p.1003. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has photographs of 966 on p.368.370. It remarks that the manuscript was written by a professional scribe, with two correctors putting in corrections.

p75 Bodmer 14/15 Papyrii (most of Luke and John. John 1:1-11:45,28-57; 12:3-13:1; 13:8-9; 14:8-29; 15:7-8) 175-200 A.D. Originally 144 leaves, we have preserved 102 leaves) Very similar to Vaticanus (A General Introduction to the Bible p.390) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a picture of part of it on p.496. It says a professional scribe wrote this manuscript. A photograph of part of the scroll of the Bodmer 14/15 Papyrii is in the New International Dictionary of the Bible p.706.

p80 John 3:34, followed by interpretation. Middle 3rd century.

p90 Jn 18:36-19:7 (c.175 A.D.) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph showing part of p90 on p.610.

p95 John 5:26-29, 36-38. 3rd century. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of it on p.620.

0162 John 2:11-22. Late 3rd or 4th century. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of it on p.632.

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.) and Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.) have all of John.

Alexandrinus c.450 A.D. has all of John except John 6:50-8:52.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

The Washington Codex (4th/5th century) has preserved all of John except for John 14:25-16:7.

Sinaitic Syriac 4th-7th century

Cambridge 5th/6th century

Armenian 5th century

Georgian 5th century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Ethiopic 6th century

Q: In Acts 4:12, apart from the Bible, how do we know that all religions are not true?

A: Before answering the question, here is a brief acrostic of the beliefs of some religions.

Animist - Nearly every tree and rock has a spirit to fear and appease with offerings.

Buddhism - Life is suffering.

Cargo Cult -(New Guinea) March in formation like the gods (really WWII soldiers) did, so they will return with their gifts of cargo.

Daoism (later) - There are many spirits to be worshipped.

Epicurean philosophy - Life is great. Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die.

Family of Love (Children of God) be a sexual prostitute for Jesus.

Greek - Worship Zeus, who raped Europa and others. There is Hades but no heaven.

Hashashins (small Muslim sect) - They got stoned on hashish before assassinating people.

Islam - The Trinity is false, and Jesus Christ is not the Son of God

Jainism - It is spiritual to starve to death.

Khonds (of India) - It is good to slowly torture people to death.

Lubavitchers - (of America) The promised Messiah may have come, and his name is Rabbi Menachem Schneerson of New York.

Mayan (and Aztec too) Ripping people's hearts out while alive is pleasing to the gods.

New Thought Movement - A receptive mind can cure every illness. Sickness is not reality.

Oneida Community - (of America) All adults are "married" to all others in the community.

Papua New Guinea - As a sign of reverence, eat the brains of your dead relatives.

Quraysh (pre-Mohammed) - worship a moon god idol named Allah.

Roman (later) - You must worship the Roman Emperor or die.

Shakerism (of America) - All sexual relations are forbidden.

Thuggees - (of India) In January one worships God by strangling unsuspecting men.

Unitarian Universalists - You may join with any religious belief whatsoever. (except that there is only one way through Jesus.)

Vikings - The only way to go to heaven (Valhalla) is to die violently.

Witchcraft (early) - There are many things you must do to avoid the evil eye.

Yamamato (Indians) - One of the highest virtues is treachery.

Zoroastrianism - There is only one true God, and worship of others should be forcibly suppressed.

It should be obvious that all of these contradictory statements cannot be true.

Q: In Acts 4:36, was there a genuine Gospel of Barnabas, written by Barnabas as some Muslims claim?

A: No. The Gospel of Barnabas was a forgery of the Middle ages. Here some of the reasons we know it is not an ancient work.

Basic facts show that is not an ancient work. It is only known in Italian, and no ancient writer ever referred to it. It mentions things that were not used until centuries later. Other Gospel forgeries, written in Arabic were also found in Granada. They were discovered after 1588, and the forgers were Moors.

Historical Anachronisms mentioning European things of the Middle Ages are out of place in Jesus' time.

Coins in chapter 54 of the Gospel of Barnabas (golden denarius divided into sixty minuti) were Spanish.?

A banker and his money ch.75 p.173

Abraham's father claimed there were an infinite number of gods. (The Sumerians did not have the concept of infinity) ch.26 p.57

Whereupon, as the food was going down [Adam's throat], he remembered the words of God; wherefore, wishing to stop the food, he put his hand into this throat, where every man has the mark." (The phrase Adam's apple is a Medieval one) ch.40 p.93

Pilate was not governor of Judea, when Jesus was born. ch.3 p.7

Jews taught to fast, do alms, make prayer, and go on pilgrimage ch.89 p.207

The Jubilee is now every 100 years ch.83 p.191-193

Kings' barons ch.131 p.301

You desire horses like knights. ch.69 p.159

The burden of the republic ch.69 p.161

Courtiers ch.133 p.307

After then nightly prayer ch.131 p.299

Pinnacle where the scribes used to preach ch.127 p.291 & ch.129 p.297 & ch.12 p.19

Prodigal son, new [leg] hose ch.147 p.241

God is not composite ch.161 p.377

Man is composite ch.168 p.389

Lazarus and his two sisters were proprietors other the towns of Magdala and Bethany, just like in the Middle Ages! ch.194 p.433

Why would they attire Jesus (really Judas) as a juggler? ch.217 p.475

Pine-cones ch.113 p.259

Fistula ch.120 p.275

Jesus could not read at age 12 ch.9 p.15

Do penance ch.121 p.277

Jesus made prayer in union with the messenger of God, and Jesus heard Mohammed's voice, [before Mohammed was even born.] ch.84 p.195

The point here is not that the Gospel of Barnabas has a few historical oddities. The point is that the numerous errors prove that the book was written during the Middle Ages in Europe.

General Errors are not just small mistakes, but demonstrate that the author knew very little about the geography and history of Palestine.

Joshua was not the one who made the sun stand still, God did ch.39 p.89

Jesus went to the Sea of Galilee, and having embarked in a ship sailed to his city of Nazareth" ch.20 p.41

Canaanites despised Pharisees ch.144 p.335

Pharisees in Jesus' time very strange in their ascetism ch.145 p.337-339

Funny things about Pharisees ch.143 p.343-345

Rome has 28,000 gods ch.152 p.353

Romans taught their gods were omnipotent ch.152 p.353

Angels "rolled" the soldiers away for Jesus ch.153 p.355

Roman Senate decreed that none should call Jesus God or Son of God. ch.98 p.227

The Roman Senate said could never speak of Jesus ch.157 p.367

People who preached penitence were called Nazarenes (after Jesus) ch.194 p.433

Archangels were Michael, Raphael, Uriel ch.209 p.461 & ch.215 p.471 & ch.220 p.485

Roman Senate's decree ch.210 p.461

Why would Judas smile when the disciples mistook him for Jesus. ch.216 p.471

When did Israel say Jesus was God or the Son of God? ch.138 p.321

Barnabas was not a disciple of Jesus ch.83 p.191 & ch.88 p.205 & ch.19 p.39 & ch.72 p.167

When was there a great famine in Israel in Jesus' time? ch.138 p.321

God had bad consequences for Jesus because others called Jesus God ch.112 p.257

The mountains (plural) of Samaria ch.81 p.189

Contradictions with the Quran should make Muslims wary of wanting to appeal to the Gospel of Barnabas.

Jesus is not the Messiah ch.83 p.181 ch.97 p.223 ch.42 p.97

Jesus is a voice in the wilderness ch.42 p.97

The Messiah is Mohammed. ch.97 p.225-227

Ishmael was the ancestor of the Messiah ch.190 p.425 ch.191 p.407 also ch.43 p.103

Messiah was from Ishmael ch.208 p.459

Mohammed is coming ch.44 p.105

God created all things for the Messiah ch.191 p.427

Faithful Muslims who do not have works will be in Hell for 70,000 years. ch.137 p.319

Mohammed will go to Hell and be terrified as he beholds the punishment of others ch.135 p.315

Mary gave birth to Jesus without pain ch.3 p.9

It is not lawful to hate anything save only sin. ch.86 p.199

God is a father ch.133 p.307

God is our Father. (He has no sons, though) ch.17 p.31,33

There shall be no envy in Heaven ch.177 p.401

A prophet's words are only to the people they were sent to ch.43 p.101

Sabbath day ch.47 p.111

10. Without faith in Mohammed, none will be saved. (Most Muslims do not believe you should have saving faith in Mohammed.] ch.192 p.429

"The messenger of God [Mohammed] shall answer: 'O Lord, I remember that when though didst create me, thou saidst that thou hadst willed to make for love of me the world and paradise, and angels and men, that they might glorify thee by me thy servant.""ch.55 p.131. Also ch.56. p.133

God created everything for Mohammed ch.39 p.91 "[Mohammed] shall be my messenger, for whom I have created all things; who shall give light to the world when he shall come; whose soul was set in a celestial splendour sixty thousand years before I made anything."

Finally, according to the Bukhari Hadith volume 4 no.712 Mohammed said that one of the three worst lies is "to attribute to me what I have not said."

Conclusion for Muslims: Imagine you were a Muslim who was told that someone found a lost Sura of the Quran. Among other things, this "Sura" mentioned that Mohammed sailed on a boat to Mecca, and this Sura contradicted the teaching of the Bible and contradicted the Quran on ten points. The oldest manuscript of the alleged Sura was written in Italian, which is not only not a Mideastern language, but Italian did not exist in the time of Mohammed. Finally, this supposed Sura had some historical customs, which did not occur until 1,000 years later in Europe.

I think it is safe to say a Muslims would probably have a few questions, to say the least. Before you embrace this Medieval forgery as an authentic work that shows the "real" teachings of Jesus, remember that this work contradicts the Quran, too.

For more info, see The Gospel of Barnabas translated by Lonsdale and Laura Ragg. Bakhtyar Printers, Lahore, Pakistan, 1981.

Q: In Acts 5:34 and 22:3, what do we know about Gamaliel apart from the Bible?

A: Gamaliel, son of Simon, was a famous Jewish rabbi who was the grandson of another famous rabbi named Hillel. Gamaliel died in 52 A.D. The Pharisaic tradition of Hillel believed that a man could divorce his wife for any reason.

Q: In Acts 8:9-24, what happened to Simon Magus?

A: Scripture does not tell us anything about Simon's eventual repentance or lack of repentance. However, the church fathers Irenaeus and Hippolytus tell us. (Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John the apostle. Hippolytus was a disciple of Irenaeus.)

Irenaeus in Against Heresies (wrote about 170-202 A.D.) devotes all of chapter 23 to Simon Magus. He said that Emperor Claudius honored Simon Magus with a statue because of his magic. Irenaeus says that Simon taught that he appeared to the Jews as the Son, to the Samaritans as the Father, and to other nations as the Holy Spirit. Simon freed from slavery a woman from Tyre named Helena, whom Simon said was the first conception of his mind. Simon said this was the same Helen over whom the Trojan War had been fought. Irenaeus says the Simon Magus' successor was the heretic Menander.

Tertullian in Against All Heresies (200-210 A.D) also devotes the first chapter to discussing Simon Magus. Tertullian says that Simon called himself "The Supreme Virtue", and that his successor was Menander. Tertullian also says in A Treatise on the Soul ch.34, that Simon devoted his energies to destroying the truth after Peter rebuked him. He adds that Helen was a woman of Tyre who was a slave in a brothel.

Hippolytus in The Refutation of All Heresies book 6 chapters 2-7, (225-236 A.D.) goes into Simon's pseudo-Platonic nonsense.

Q: In Acts 8:27, why would an Ethiopian go to the Jewish Temple?

A: The ancient land called Ethiopia was actually north of modern Ethiopia in modern Sudan. Persia and the Bible p.245-246, The Expositor's Bible Commentary p.649, and the skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible mentions that after 590 B.C., Jewish mercenaries manned a fort at Elephantine in south Egypt to keep the Nubians from attacking Egypt. Some who came from Ethiopia could have been their descendants.

In addition, the Queen of Sheba visited Jerusalem during Solomon's time (around 960 B.C.). While Sheba was across the Red Sea from Ethiopia, apparently some people from the land of modern-day Ethiopia converted to Judaism at that time, and were still there in the Twentieth Century.

In summary, this Ethiopian was probably going to the Jewish Temple because he was a Jew.

As a side note, a Roman drawing of the type of carriage that might have been used by Ethiopian Eunuch is in The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.327.

Q: In Acts 8:27, who was Candace?

A: Candace (or Kandake) was a term for the queens of Nubia, much like Pharaoh is a term for the kings of Egypt, and Caesar was a term for the emperors of Rome.

The Expositor's Bible Commentary volume 9 p.363 says that the Ethiopian queens always ruled as regents for their sons, as the son was considered a "child of the sun and therefore too holy to become involved in the secular functions of the state"

Q: In Acts 9:11, is there any archaeological evidence for Straight Street in Damascus?

A: Yes. Not only is there archaeological evidence that the street was once flanked by colonnades (Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.418,1627), but the street is in use today. The street goes from the northeast to the southwest and, at least in Paul's time, was two miles (3.2 km) long.

Q: In Acts 11:28, Acts 14:17, and 2 Cor 8-9, what evidence is there of a famine throughout all the world at this time?

A: Three points.

1. The Greek word for world/land here is oikoumene. It does not necessary mean the entire planet or world, like the Greek word cosmos. Rather the famine was over Judea.

2. Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews 15.9.1-2 (written about 93-94 A.D.) mentions a famine in Judea in 44/46-48 A.D.. This famine was caused by drought, and there was disease after the famine occurred.

3. As further evidence, Paul collected an offering from the churches in Greece (where presumably there was no famine) to send back to Palestine in 1 Corinthians 16:2-3 and 2 Corinthians 8:1-4, 13-15, 18-21.

Q: In Acts 12:1-2, is this the same Herod who reigned when Jesus was crucified?

A: No. That was neither Herod the Great nor Herod Antipas, but another Herod, called Herod Agrippa, who reigned from 41-44 A.D.

Q: In Acts 12:23, what is extra-Biblical evidence of Herod suddenly dying of worms?

A: Josephus records the following in Antiquities of the Jews 19.8.2. (written about 93-94 A.D.)

"When Agrippa had reigned three full years over all Judea, he came to the city of
Caesarea, which was formerly called Strato's Tower. There he exhibited shows in honour of Caesar, inaugurating this as a festival for the emperor's welfare. And there came together to it a multitude of the provincial officials and of those who had been promoted to a distinguished position. On the second day of the show he put on a robe all made of silver, of altogether wonderful weaving, and arrived in the theatre at the beak of day. Then the silver shone as the sun's first rays fell upon it and glittered wonderfully, its resplendence inspiring a sort of fear and trembling in those who gazed upon it. Immediately his flatterers called out from various quarters, in words which in truth were not for his good, addressing him as a god, and invoking him with the cry, 'Be propitious! If hitherto we have revered thee as a human being, yet henceforth we confess thee to be superior to mortal nature.'

The king did not rebuke them, nor did he repudiate their impious flattery. But looking up soon afterwards he saw the owl sitting on a rope above his head, and immediately recognized it as a messenger of evil as it had formerly been a messenger of good, and a pang of grief pierced his heart. There came also a severe pain in his belly, beginning with a violent attack... So he was carried quickly into the palace and the news sped abroad among all that he would certainly die before long.... And when he had suffered continuously for five days from the pain in his belly, he departed this life in the fifty-fourth year of his age and the seventh of his reign."

(Take from the New Testament Documents : Are They Reliable 5th edition p.105. F.F. Bruce points out that though Josephus and Acts are similar, the differences are great enough so show that Luke could not have just copied from Josephus.

Q: In Acts 13:6-13, what extra-Biblical evidence exists for Sergius Paulus?

A: Two sources.

1. An inscription at Soli (now Karavastasi) on the northern coast of Cyprus mentions the proconsul Paulos. (Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinentes, 3: 930. An inscription in Pisidian Antioch of L. Sergius Paullus, a propraetor of Galatia in 72-74 A.D. was probably his son. (See W.M. Ramsay The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament, 1914 chapter 12). See also The New Bible Dictionary (IVP) for more info.

2. The early Christian father Tertullian (200-240 A.D.) in On Idolatry chapter 9 mentions that the magician who served Sergius Paulus lost the use of his eyes.

Q: In Acts 13:7, what was the difference between a procurator and a proconsul?

A: According to The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.388 procurators were appointed by the Roman Emperor. The Roman Senate appointed the Proconsuls.

This used to be a major Bible difficulty. Since Cyprus was an imperial province, Luke would be wrong to use the word "proconsul"; it would seem he should have used the word "procurator". However, as Bible Difficulties Answered p.29-30 points out, it was discovered that the Emperor and Senate had made a "swap", and at this time Cyprus was under the Senate, and Luke indeed used the correct word. Also, as the answer to the previous question stated, an inscription has been found of the "proconsul" Paulus.

Q: In Acts 13:20, what do "about 450 years before Joshua to Samuel" mean to Old Testament dating?

A: This is similar to 1 Kings 6:1 says that Solomon built the temple in the four hundred eightieth year after the Israelites had come out of Egypt. Since archaeologists are reasonably certain Solomon's temple was completed in October/November 960 B.C. (Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1673). This would make the Exodus about 1440 B.C. Since Samuel died about 30 years before Solomon's Temple, this would be about 990 B.C..

The date of 1440 (or 1447/6 B.C.) for the Exodus is important, because in the early Twentieth Century many held a date of the Exodus of over a hundred years later. However, the later date does not line up with archaeological evidence.

Q: In Acts 14:14, why would the Lystrans think Paul and Barnabas were Zeus and Hermes?

A: There is a myth recorded in the eighth book of Ovid's Metamorphoses (lines 626 ff.) that Zeus and Hermes visited an elderly couple named Philemon and Baucis. They shared their home, while nobody else would. Zeus and Hermes destroyed the other houses, but changed theirs into a temple with marble columns and a golden roof.

F.F. Bruce in The New Testament Documents : Are They Reliable? 5th edition p.96 says that an inscription at Sedasa near Lystra (c.250 A.D.) records the dedication to Zeus of a statue of Hermes by men with Lycaonian names.

See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.391-392 and the Geneva Study Bible p.1737 for more info.

Q: In Acts 16:26-28, is there any extra-Biblical evidence for this earthquake?

A: No. However:

1. There were frequent earthquakes in this mountainous region of northern Greece and Macedonia. Here are some major earthquakes in this region. (In ancient times, reporting was very spotty.)

403 A.D. Constantinople (Chrysostom exiled)

856 A.D. Corinth, Greece 45,000 dead

1858 Corinth, Greece

1928 Corinth, Greece

3/18/1953 NW Turkey 1,200 dead 7.2 R. Scale

7/26/1963 Skopje, Yugoslavia 1,100 dead 6.0 on the Richter Scale

As for minor quakes, the Encyclopedia Britannica reports for Greece and Turkey that:

Between 1902 and 1946 there were 58 quakes

Between 1947 and 1966 there were 82 quakes

Between 1967 and 1976 there were 45 quakes

Between 1977 and 1981 there were 9 quakes

2. This was no ordinary earthquake. The building stood, but the chains miraculously broke off.

Q: In Acts 17:6, what extra-Biblical evidence is there for this strange Greek word for "city-ruler" (politarch)?

A: There used to be none whatsoever. However, archaeologists first discovered the word in 1835 in an arch outside of Thessalonika. The term has since been found in sixteen other places. See The NIV Study Bible for more info.

Q: In Acts 17:16-34, why did Paul apparently quote truth from pagan sources? Specifically, the Cretan poet Epimenides (600 B.C.) in Cretica "in him we live and move and have our being" and the Cilician poet Aratus (~315-240 B.C.) in Phaenomena, and the Stoic Cleanthes of Assos (331-233 B.C.) in Hymn to Zeus "We are his offspring"

A: His quotes were both intentional and understood as such by his listeners. Paul was establishing a point of common ground many for which many of his listeners could relate. Clement of Alexandria (Stromata 1:14 p.313 (193-217 A.D.) has an interesting thought on this. He says Paul quoted true statements of Greek poets to edify some and shame others. Perhaps Paul wanted to point out how curious it was that atheistic Epicureans and Pantheistic Stoics would worship and write hymns to Greek idols. See When Critics Ask under Titus 1:12 p.507-508 for more on quoting from pagan sources.

Q: In Acts 17:18, how did Paul try to reach the Epicureans, who came from Epicurus of Samos (341-270 B.C.)?

A: Epicurus believed the two main things man could be conscious of were pain and pleasure. He said the chief end of man was to maximize pleasure and happiness. He believed that the gods, if they existed at all, were irrelevant to mankind, and matter and chance were primary causes. Epicureans believed only material atoms lasted forever, and there was no afterlife. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, one of the chief goals of Epicurus was to remove from man the fear of the gods. People should be free from the fear of death and judgment. The Epicureans did not have much ethical teaching. There were two types of Epicureans: original and "mutated". The original Epicureans believed in moderation. For example, both starvation and over-eating caused pain. The later, mutated Epicureans were party-goers who said "eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die." There were not many famous Epicureans, but the Roman poet Lucretius was one. For more info see The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.318-319.

Against this, Paul mentioned the following.

1) God determines when and where people live

2) Men should seek God

3) We need to repent before God

4) God is near to us

5) God will judge the world with justice

6) Proof of the true religion: Resurrection of Jesus

Q: In Acts 17:18-31, why mention idols to Epicureans?

A: Epicurus did not deny the existence of the Greek gods, since he wrote (Letter to Menoec. 123) "their existence is known to us by immediate apprehension." Other Epicureans wrote, "Fashioned of finer stuff that we, they dwell afar in the intermundial spaces (Plutarch Mor. 731 D, 734 C, Intermundia Cicero N.D. i.8)

The Epicureans' main opponents were the Stoics. While Stoics were pantheists, and Epicureans were similar to atheistic rationalists, both of them had the inconsistency of denying gods, yet explicitly affirming the Greek and later Roman idols.

Q: In Acts 17:18, how did Paul try to reach the Stoics, who came from Zeno of Citium on Cyprus (c.320-c250 B.C.)?

A: The Stoics believed in a pantheistic force or divine soul, and believed a great purpose directed history. They did not see that pleasure was necessarily the best way to avoid pain. Sometimes one did not know how to correctly choose the best pleasure. They were fatalistic, and Josephus remarks they had many similarities to the Pharisees. Rather than believing in a divine law, they believed they should follow a "law of nature." They emphasize three things: logic, physics, and ethics, and they strove to shape people's character to be strong through triumph and tragedy. Its four highest virtues were wisdom, courage, self-restraint, and justice. Stoicism was a significant influence. Seneca, Epictetus, and the emperor Marcus Aurelius were Stoics.

Against Stoicism, Paul in Athens mentioned the following.

1) God being personal

2) Men should seek God, not just wisdom and ethics

3) We need to repent before God

4) God will judge the world

5) Proof of the true religion: the resurrection of Jesus

Q: In Acts 17:18-31, why did Paul mention idols to the atheistic Stoics?

A: The famous philosopher Socrates was the only Greek philosopher known to be executed for not believing in the Greek gods. Since then, no other Greek philosopher stood up and said the Greek gods were false. One of Socrates' disciples, Antisthenes, found the Cynic school, and the Stoics came from the Cynics.

One must observe the inconsistency between Stoic philosophy and the actual beliefs of the Stoics.

Stoic Philosophy: Stoicism taught that all people are derived from the one universal spirit, (not Greek idols) and that all men are brothers and equal.

Stoics: However, the Stoics were not atheists, as one of the Stoics' prominent leaders, Cleanthes of Assos wrote the Hymn to Zeus (Zeus was Greek idol) that Paul quoted from. Stoics who believed in idols later became a life and death matter for Christians. The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius was a Stoic who persecuted Christians, for among other things, not believing in any gods except the One True God.

Paul's purpose: In Acts 17:18-31, Paul was probably shrewdly but implicitly pointing out the intellectual hypocrisy of hymns to Zeus and approval of Greek idols vs. belief in only one (but pantheistic) God. The root issues is that if God is the cause of our being, then we cannot be the cause of God's being.

Q: In Acts 17:18-31, was Paul using a straw-man argument, saying the gods were not these man-made idols? Some polytheists believed the idols were only lifeless representations of the gods.

A: Pagans inconsistently believed in both in invisible gods and the visible statues. Specifically, the gods could "indwell" the visible statues, which were sacred and had the power to give prophecies and heal. For example, at Ephesus they did not say the goddess Artemis was important; rather, they cried "Great is Artemis of the Ephesians." Let's look at what early Christians, modern Hindus, and modern Catholics said, not about polytheism in general, but about the worship of the actual stone statues themselves.

Early Church: Besides Paul, many early Christian writers pointed out this inconsistency, using many arguments of the same type, that "the actual wood, metal, and stone, cannot do anything". A few examples are:

Tatian's Address to Greeks ch.4 110-172 A.D.

Theophilus to Autolycus 1:10 115-181 A.D.

Athenagoras' Plea for Christians 177 A.D. takes the pagans to task for believing actual statues heal the dead and utter oracles.

Clement of Alexandria Exhortation 193-217 A.D. chapter.10 criticizes taking stones and wood as sacred things.

Octavius of Minucius Felix 210 A.D. ch.19 and chapter 27. In chapter 27, he mentions that demons lurk under the statues and images,

Cyprian (248-258) Treatise 6:6 paraphrases Octavius.

Hindu Idolatry: Today, Vedantic Hindus emphasize the Upanishads, and one, pantheistic being, Brahman. Unlike other Hindus, they do not emphasize Indra the king of the gods, or that Shiva is Supreme, or that Vishnu is Supreme, or other gods. Yet, inconsistently, they can still have idols of these or other idols in their homes, which they give ghee (butter), or other offerings. How do these small idols consume the butter and other foods, especially if all is Brahman?

Catholic Idolatry: Today, Catholics believe not just that Mary sheds tears and heals, but that actual statues of her shed tears and heal.

Q: In Acts 17:23, is there any extra-Biblical evidence of an altar to an unknown god?

A: There is no archaeological evidence, but abundant literary evidence. Pausanius (2nd century A.D.) in Description of Greece 1:1:4 says "altars of gods unknown" and Philostratus (3rd century A.D.) in Life of Apollonius of Tyana 6:3:5 mentions "It is more prudent to speak well of all gods, especially at Athens, where altars are erected even to unknown gods." Diogenes Laertius in Lives of the Philosophers 1:110, mentions during a plague in Athens that Epimenides let loose black and white sheep. The Athenians were to sacrifice the sheep wherever they laid down to the altar closest to where they stopped. When the sheep stopped far from any existing altar to a god, the Athenians erected an altar to an unknown god. See Kirsop Lake's article "The Unknown God" in F.J. Foakes-Jackson and K. Lake The Beginnings of Christianity vol.5 p.240-246 (1933) for more info.

Q: In Acts 17:34, did this Dionysius write the works said to be by Dionysius of Areopagite?

A: No. The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.1065 correctly mentions that these were written hundreds of years later in the fifth century A.D. The Encyclopedia Britannica, 1956 version (volume 7 p.396-397) says that these four works plus ten letters had a profound influence on theologians in the Middle Ages, including Thomas Aquinas, Erigena, Peter Lombard, Albert Magnus, and others. They were more interested in the system of Christian theology combined with Greek philosophy found within them, than the identity of the actual author.

Unfortunately, it put philosophy in place of relationship and obedience to God. The Encyclopedia Britannica (1956) p.396 says, "Their ingredients - Christian, Greek, Oriental and Jewish - are united into an organic system, not crudely mingled. Perhaps theological philosophic fantasy has never constructed anything more remarkable." This system stressed the flow of life from God through a three-by-three celestial hierarchy of:

I. Seraphim, Cherubim, and Thrones

II. Dominations, Virtues, and Powers

III. Principalities, Archangels, and Angels.

The study of the supposed relationship of these beings, triads of rituals, and other things took the place of the simple study of God's word. It is almost as if the writer had very carefully read Colossians 2:18-19, and then did all he could to disobey it.

Q: In Acts 18:2, do we have any extra-Biblical confirmation that the Emperor Claudius (41-54 A.D.) ordered all Jews to leave Rome?

A: Yes, the Roman historian Suetonius in Claudius 25, writes of the expulsion and says the reason was "their continual tumults instigated by Chrestus". Chrestus was probably a misspelling of Christ, and the tumults likely were opposition of many Jews accepting Christ. This happened about 50 A.D.

Q: In Acts 18:12, do we have any extra-Biblical information about Gallio the proconsul?

A: Yes, Junius Annaeus Gallio was the older brother of the famous Stoic philosopher Lucius Annaeus Seneca, who was the tutor of Nero. An inscription at Delphi says Gallio was proconsul from c.51-52 A.D. Others interpret the date to be 52-53 A.D. Apparently he had recently become proconsul when Paul was there. The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.1135 says 1 Thessalonians was written about 50 A.D., which would make Paul in Corinth then. See The NIV Study Bible under Acts 18:12 and 1 Thessalonians (p.1819) for more info.

Q: In Acts 19:35, why were they so sensitive about "Artemis of the Ephesians"?

A: The temple of Artemis was built here after a meteorite landed. The offerings left at the Temple, and the sale of idols of Artemis brought revenue to the city. As the skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.1072 points out, conquerors generally spared Ephesus because of respect for the Temple of Artemis. However, in 400 B.C. the Temple was accidentally burned down, and in 356 B.C., a fame-seeker named Herostratus purposely burned down the temple so that his name would be immortal. They executed Herostratus, and in the future would likely execute anyone accused of desecrating the Temple of Artemis, that brought them safety and income. The New Geneva Study Bible p.1746 mentions that the temple served as a banking depository, too.

For some people, worshipping an idol is equated with national patriotism. In Roman times, loyal Roman citizens were supposed to sacrifice to the Emperor. The magazine Hinduism Today April, 1998 p.36 mentions that Hinduism is "patriotic" to India. Of course, until the British came, one of the few elements common to all Hinduism was "Suttee", the practice of the widow being burned to death on the husband's funeral pyre. If traditional Hinduism is true patriotism, thank goodness few Indians are patriotic by the twisted definition of being true to their Hindu traditions.

Q: In Acts 19:35, what do we know about this position of "townclerk"?

A: The New Bible Dictionary (Eerdmans, 1962) p.1287 and the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1730 both mention that the town clerk (or grammateus) was usually the secretary, and leader, of the city council. The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary adds that the Roman provincial government was in Ephesus, and the townclerk was the liaison between the city and the Roman government. His short yet effective speech demonstrated his skill at using his knowledge of the people to persuade them to keep calm, and the respect the people had for him.

Q: In Acts 19:35, why do they mention the image that fell down from Jupiter?

A: Apparently one factor in the special emphasis of Artemis at Ephesus was a meteorite that fell from the sky near there. Similarly, a meteorite reverenced at the Kaaba in Mecca.

Q: In Acts 20:15,17 what do we know about the city of Miletus?

A: The Persians sacked Miletus in 499 B.C.. It recovered to become a major city of Asia Minor. Miletus was on the coast about 30 miles from Ephesus. Today, the sea coast is ten miles away, because large quantities of silt were deposited along the entire coast.

The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1118 says it had a population of 100,000 during the first century A.D. However, the New International Dictionary of the Bible p.650 says it was a city of no great standing.

The reason for this difference of opinion is probably because Miletus was originally larger than Ephesus. However, around the second century A.D. it was insignificant because the harbor was silting up. It is unclear how big it was in Paul's time.

Q: In Acts 21:28,31 is there any archaeological evidence for the Jewish rule that non-Jews were to be killed if they entered the Temple?

A: Yes. In 1871 an inscription was found at Jerusalem that reads "No foreigner may enter within the barricade which surrounds the temple and enclosure. Anyone who is caught doing so will have himself to thank for his ensuing death." See The New Testament Documents : Are They Reliable? p.93-94 by F.F. Bruce (IVP, 1943) for more info.

Q: In Acts 24:27, is there an archaeological evidence for Festus?

A: Porcius Festus was appointed to be the governor of Judea in the Fall of 60 A.D., according to the Believer's Bible Commentary (Nelson, 1989) p.1657. However, the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.605-606, says there is some uncertainty about the date, which could vary from 55 A.D. to 60 A.D. Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews 20.8.9-11 written about 93-94 A.D.) also says Festus was appointed governor of Judea.

The New Geneva Study Bible (p.1754) records that Festus was the surname of a noble family in Rome.

The New International Study Bible p.1693 says that there is no record of Festus prior to his coming to Palestine. However, records of his rule shows that he was wiser and more honest than Felix. Even so, Felix had to go to Rome to answer for his handling of riots between Jews and Syrians.

Q: In Acts 27:27, how were they sailing in the Adriatic Sea, since they should have been south of Italy?

A: According to the NIV, what they called the Adriatic Sea also included water south of Italy and south of what today is called the Adriatic Sea.

Q: In Acts 28:3, how could a viper fasten itself on Paul's hand, since there are no vipers in Malta today?

A: There are only two species of snakes in Malta today, and both of them were imported. There is not much forest to gather wood from on Malta today, either. However, before men cleared out the forest, there is no reason to suppose that there were not the same kinds of snakes that were in the surrounding lands. The Vipera aspis lives in southern Europe, Vipera latastei inhabits in Spain and Portugal, and Vipera amondytes is somewhat farther away in southeastern Europe.

While this could have been a demon disguised as a snake, there is no reason to suppose it was not a normal, natural animal. Whether the snake was indigenous or came in on a ship, the Maltese were not strangers to poisonous snakes.

Q: In Acts 28:7, is there any archaeological evidence for the title "first/chief man" of the Island?

A: Yes. The New Geneva Study Bible (p.1759) says an inscription shows that Emperor Augustus installed a "chief man over all the municipality of Malta."

Q: In Acts 28:7, is there any extra-Biblical evidence for this Publius, the "chief man of the island"?

A: Yes. The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1428 mentions that tradition says Publius became the first bishop of Malta. Jerome in On Illustrious Men 19 says that he was killed for his Christian faith.

Q: Who wrote the Book of Acts?

A: It is fairly unanimous that it was written by Luke, the same person who wrote the Gospel of Luke.

The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.914-915 says, "We can search for more hints in the fact that the same author who wrote Luke almost certainly wrote the Acts of the Apostles as well, the book in which the events of the decades following the crucifixion are given, particularly matters concerning the travels of the Apostle Paul.

There are indications that the writer of Acts was actually a companion of Paul who accompanied him on his travels." Asimov also adds that the tradition of Luke writing both goes back at least to Irenaeus (170-202 A.D.).

Luke is also mentioned in Colossians 4:14, 2 Timothy 4:11, and Philemon 24.

Q: when was the book of Acts written?

A: There are a variety of answers.

1. The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.351 and the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.23 say that nobody knows for sure. However, since Luke would likely have mentioned Paul's death, the persecutions of Nero, and the fall of Jerusalem if they had occurred, Luke might have written the book of Acts between 61 and 64 A.D.

2. The Believer's Bible Commentary p.1576 agrees with the previous view. However, in support of a later date, it mentions an intriguing argument. It was possible that Luke was planning a third volume (though it was not in God's will), so Luke could have written later and planned the later events for the third volume.

3. The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.997 says that some have put forward dates between 64 to 100 A.D., but it was likely around 80 A.D. Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.1089 claims a date of 64 A.D. is pretty well discounted, but he never said why that was his opinion.

Q: Was Acts was this book written in the second century (long after Luke's death) as the liberal Tubingen school claimed?

A: They claimed this because of the many parallel facts given in both Acts and the works of Josephus. (Josephus wrote Antiquities of the Jews c.93-94 A.D.)

However, the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.23 says that one would expect this if Luke had access to many of the same sources Josephus used. In addition, Irenaeus (wrote about 170-202 A.D.) says that Luke wrote Acts.

Q: In Acts, how do we know that scripture today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three good reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in Acts.

Clement of Rome 97 A.D.

Polycarp 110-135 A.D.

Justin Martyr wrote about 138-165 A.D.

Didache 120-150 A.D.

Letter of Mathetes to Diognetus 130 A.D.

Ignatius 110-117 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217AD

Tertullian (200-240 A.D.) mentions by name the Acts of the Apostles in On the Resurrection of the Flesh ch.39)

Cyprian, bishop of Carthage (248-258 A.D.) quotes from "Acts of the Apostles" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 3,43.

John Chrysostom (c.396 A.D.) wrote down 55 sermons on Acts.

Mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

We still have all of these today.

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Acts show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p8 Berlin 4th century

p29 Acts 26:7-8,20 200-255 A.D. A photograph of this manuscript is in The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.114.

p38 Acts 18:27-19:6; 19:12-16 late 2nd or early 3rd century. A photograph of this manuscript is in The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.134.

p45 Chester Beatty (200 A.D.) All 4 gospels and Acts. Acts 4:27-36; 5:10-21, 30-39; 6:7-7:2; 7:10-21; 7:32-41; 11:2-13; 11:24-12:6; 12:13-22; 13:6-16,25-36; 13:46-14:3; 14:15-23; 15:2-9,9-27; 15:38-16:4; 16:15-21,32-40; 17:9-17) 200 A.D.

p48 Acts 23:11-17,25-29 (c.220 or latter part of the 3rd century A.D.) A photograph of part of this manuscript is in The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.342. A photograph of Galatians 6:10-18 and the start of Philippians is in Paul : Apostle of the Heart Set Free p.384. According to A General Introduction to the Bible p.389 the original scroll was about 220 leaves, of which we have 30 leaves preserves. 13 of these leaves are from Acts.

p48 Acts 23:11-17, 25-29

p50 (Papyrus Yale 1543) Acts 8:36-32; Acts 10:26-31 The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.352 says Aland dated this to the 4th or 5th century, "but Yale editors argue quite persuasively for a dating to the reign of Diocletian (A.D. 2840395)."

p53 Matthew 26:29-30 and Acts 9:33-10:1 260 A.D. A photograph of part of this manuscript (showing Matthew 26:29-35) is in The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.360.

p74 Bodmer 17 (7th century)

p91 Acts 2:30-37; 2:46-3:2 middle 3rd century. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.612 says this is just one leaf (two fragments) "written in a documentary hand".

Uncial 0189 Acts 5:3-21. Late 2nd or early 3rd century. A photograph of this manuscript (showing some decay holes in the text) is in The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.642.

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.), Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.), and Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D.) contain all of Acts.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Fayyumic Coptic 3th/4th century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Armenian 5th century

Cambridge 5th/6th century

Ethiopic 6th century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Georgian 5th century

Q: In Rom 5:12, are there any Jewish writings resembling this passage?

A: Yes. Jewish writings resembling Romans 5:12 are 4 Ezra 7:118 (=2 Esdras 7:118), Sirach 25:25, and 2 Baruch 23:4; 48:42; 54:19.

According to Hard Sayings of the Bible p.548, here is what 2 Esdras 7:118 says,

"[Adam] transgressed ... Thou didst appoint death for him and for his descendants....

For the first Adam, burdened with an evil heart, transgressed and was overcome, as were also all who were descended from him. Thus the disease became permanent." (2 Esdras 3:7, 21-22)

"O Adam, what have you done? For though it was you who sinned, the fall was not yours alone, but ours also who are your descendants." (2 Esdras 7:118).

Note that this speaks of the consequences to us: we are fallen, diseased, and have death. It does not say we are guilty for Adam's sin.

Q: In Rom 16:23, what archaeological evidence is there for Erastus?

A: In Romans 16:23, Paul greets Erastus, the city treasurer of the city Paul was writing from (Corinth). This may be the same Erastus in 2 Timothy 4:20 and Acts 19:22.

In 1929, in excavating Corinth, the following inscription was found: "Erastus, curator of public buildings, laid this pavement at his own expense." See The New Testament Documents : Are They Reliable? (IV Press 1943) by F.F. Bruce p.95 for more info.

Q: In Rom, when was the book of Romans written?

A: Probably during the winter of 56/57 A.D. See The New Testament Documents : Are They Reliable? (IV Press 1943) by F.F. Bruce p.95 for more info.

Q: How do we know that Rom was really written by Paul?

A: A number of ways:

1. Romans says so, and the early church never questioned this.

2. Tertullian said Paul wrote to the Romans in Tertullian Against Marcion Book 14 chapter 5 (207 A.D.). It was a book "that comes down from the apostles, which has been kept as a sacred deposit in the churches of the apostles." Tertullian also mentioned Paul writing to the Romans in Against Praxeas chapter 28.

There are likely other proofs too, as this search was not very exhaustive.

Q: In Rom, how do we know that Scripture today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three good reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in Romans.

Didache 120-150 A.D.

Letter of Mathetes to Diognetus 130 A.D.

Theophilus 180 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

Irenaeus born 120/140 A.D., wrote 170-202 A.D.

Tertullian 200-240 A.D.

Origen 225-254 A.D.

Hilary wrote about 355-367/368 A.D.

Athanasius 326-373 A.D.

Cyprian was a bishop of Carthage from 248 to his martyrdom in 258 A.D.. He quotes from "the epistle of Paul to the Romans" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 17 among other places.

Chrysostom (c.396 A.D.) wrote down 32 sermons on Romans.

Mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

We still have all of these today.

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Romans show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p27 Rom 8:12-22,24-27; 8:33-9:3; 9:5-9 (3rd century) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a picture of part of p27 on p.109.

p40 Rom 1:24-17; 1:31-2:3; 3:21-4:8; 6:2-5,15-16; 9:17,27 (3rd century)

p46 Chester Beatty II 200 A.D. Rom 5:17-6:3; 6:5-14; 8:15-25,27-35; 8:37-9:32; 10:1-11:11; 11:24-33; 11:35-15:9; 15:11-16:27, and other parts of Paul's letters and Hebrews. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p46 on p.192. It also says on p.197-198 that the quality and the stichiometric marks show that a professional scribe wrote this.

Uncial 0220 (c.300 A.D.) Rom 4:23-5:3; 5:8-13 (c.300 A.D.) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.646 says this manuscript agrees with Vaticanus everywhere except on Romans 5:1. It also says that while Rom 5:8-13 is there too, it is too damaged for reconstruction.

Vaticanus 325-350 A.D.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Fayyumic Coptic 3th/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Alexandrinus c.450 A.D.

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Armenian 5th century

Claromontanus 6th century

Ethiopic 6th century

Q: In 1 Cor 1:1, what was the city of Corinth like?

A: In Paul's time it was a huge city, being the center of commerce of the entire eastern Mediterranean area between Sicily and Antioch. Corinth had a population of about 650,000 people, two-thirds of which were slaves. It had a wicked reputation; the Greeks had a slang term for going over to a completely immoral life; it was literally "to Corinthiasize". The church there tolerated some serious moral and doctrinal problems. If someone says we want to be just like the early Christians, the truth of the matter is that we do not want to be exactly like the Corinthians.

In 97 A.D. Clement of Rome wrote a letter to the Corinthian church, basically rebuking them for not doing some of the things Paul told them to do fifty years ago.

As a small detail, Haley's Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible p.310 mentions that Mr. Conybeare in Life and Epistles of St. Paul vol.2 p.27,31 (American edition) is one who mentioned about the term "to Corinthiasize".

Q: In 1 Cor 5:1, why was Paul disfellowshipping the man but not the woman? Was this a double standard?

A: While scripture is silent on the woman, Paul might have said nothing about her because she never claimed to be a Christian.

The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.514 has an interesting sidenote. A man having intimate relations with his mother or father's wife was not only against Old Testament Law (Leviticus 18:8 and Deuteronomy 22:22), it was also against Roman Law (Cicero Cluentes 6:15 and the Institutes of Gaius 1:63).

Q: Does 1 Cor 6:9 teach against all homosexuality or only "homosexual offenders"?

A: There is no uncertainty in either the definition or the Greek word he used. What some people question is the verse's scope.

Definition: For the Greeks, especially the Spartans, homosexuality was a common practice. Some even raised children for the sole purpose of turning out male and female prostitutes. The Greeks distinguished between the 1) men who practiced with boys, and 2) the boys who were used by the men. The Greek word arsenokoitai means the men.

Scope: Some claim that since Paul used this specific Greek word, he somehow nullified what Leviticus 18:22; 20:13, and Romans 1:26-27 said about homosexuality in general. However, the truth is that Paul is using a specific word to remind his readers of the condemnation of the whole practice.

In the early church, there was no hint that the prohibition did not apply to all homosexuality. See Clement of Alexandria The Instructor 3:12 and See also the discussion on Romans 1:26-27 and Leviticus 18:22; 20:13. See Today's Handbook for Solving Bible Difficulties p.380-382 and When Critics Ask p.455-456 for more info.

Q: In 1 Cor 9:5, did Peter (Cephas) have a wife?

A: Besides 1 Corinthians 9:5 saying so, in Matthew 8:14 and Luke 4:38-39, Jesus healed Peter's mother-in-law of fever. Clement of Alexandria (Stromata) and Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History (3:30) also teach that Peter was married and had children.

According to Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History 3:30, "They say, accordingly, that when the blessed Peter saw his own wife led out to die, he rejoiced because of her summons and her return home, and called to her very encouragingly and comfortingly, addressing her by name, and saying, 'Oh thou, remember the Lord.' Such was the marriage of the blessed, and their perfect disposition toward those dearest to them" (Stromata 7:2)

Jesus healed Peter's mother-in-law early in his ministry (Matthew 8:14-17; Mark 1:29-34; Luke 4:38-39). Thus Peter likely was married prior to meeting Jesus.

Q: In 1 Cor 15:1-4, what is the first non-Biblical reference to a Christian teaching that Christ's blood saved us?

A: This is First Clement chapters 21 and 49, which was written in 97 A.D. This was written even before the book of Revelation.

The second extra-Biblical reference was the Epistle of Barnabas (100 A.D.) in chapter 5 among other places.

The third reference is from Ignatius (died either 107 or 116 A.D.) in his letter to the Smyrneans chapter 6 says that unless one believes in the blood of Christ, he will be condemned.

After this, the order is a little murky. Polycarp (110-155 A.D.) referred to the atonement in his short letter to the Philippians chapter 1. He said, "... Lord Jesus Christ, who for our sins suffered even unto death, [but] whom God raised from the dead, having loosed the bands of the grave."

The Letter of Mathetes to Diognetus (130 A.D.) mentions God sending His own Son as a ransom for us in a sweet exchange.

Q: In 1 Cor 15:29, should Christians baptize for dead people?

A: No. Paul was saying that if even these pagans believed in resurrection as proven by their baptism for the dead, why can't you believe in resurrection. A very similar argument is in Theophilus To Autolychus 1:13. (Theophilus was the Bishop of Antioch from 168-181/188 A.D.)

"Then, as to your denying that the dead are raised ... you believe that Hercules, who burned himself, lives; and that Aesculapius, who was struck with lightning, was raised;..." (Ante-Nicene Fathers volume 2 p.92)

If baptizing for the dead is one of the most important things we can do, like Mormonism teaches, then why are we not once commanded to do this in scripture? Paul said others (they) in 1 Corinthians 15:29. A cult in Paul's time in Greece, called Serinthians, baptized for the dead, but nobody ever said Christians were to do that.

According to The Bible Knowledge Commentary p.544-545, within the Eleusian Mysteries was the doctrine of washings required for bliss in the afterlife (Pindar Fragment 212, Sophocles Fragment 753.) Baptism on the account of others was known, from Orphica Fragment 245. See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.616-618 for more info.

Of course we are not to imitate many of the practices the Corinthians did, such as carnality, immorality, sectarianism, abuse of the Lord's Supper, and denying the physical resurrection of Jesus. If practicing this today as Mormons do leads us to think God required us to do to intensive genealogical study, 1 Timothy 1:3,4 and Titus 3:9 command God's people not to devote themselves to endless genealogies.

Q: In 1 Cor 15:29-30, should we practice baptism for the dead, as Mormons teach?

A: First some true facts that are not directly related to the answer, and then the answer.

1. The Greek word huper means "on account of", not necessarily "for the sake of".

2. Many people became Christians on account of the witness of Christians who were already martyred.

3. Baptism for all Christians means that in one sense we are all dead men, that is, dead to ourselves and alive in Christ (Colossians 2:11-13)

The answer: The pronouns Paul uses (they, they, and we) make it conspicuous that Paul never said he nor his immediate readers practiced baptism for the dead. Paul did not command, recommend, perform, practice, or say the Corinthians practiced baptism for the dead. In 1 Corinthians 10:18-22, Paul mentions that others sacrificed to idols, but we should not do that either. There is no example of Christians doing baptizing for the dead in the entire Bible, or in the early church. However, some religious pagans in Corinth, called Serinthians practiced baptism for the dead.

Since there is no command or example of this, and the only known practice was by pagan Serinthians, Mormons are on rather shaky ground to make this a most important part of their religion".

When talking to Greeks, Paul used writings of pagan Greek poets to echo things that were true, such as in Acts 17:23-29. Jude used true statements in apocryphal books to drive home a point with his listeners. Jesus likewise used, what is called an "ad hominem" argument to prove He was from God in debating with the Pharisees in John 5:31-34.

Paul's point in 1 Corinthians 15:29-30, that even though many Greeks disbelieved and sneered at a physical resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:12; Acts 17:43), yet at the same time Greek Serinthians were baptizing for the dead. Why do they think they need to do this bodily ritual of baptism, if the bodies are forever gone? See Mormons Answered Verse by Verse p.85-87, Now That's a Good Question p.590-591, When Cultists Ask p.235-236, and The Complete Book of Bible Answers p.212-213 for more info.

Q: In 1 Cor 15:29-30, what is baptism for the dead?

A: Apart from this verse, we know of only two cases, both pagan practices. Mandaeans in Mesopotamia practiced this, and Serinthians (who happened to be in Corinth) practiced this. We have no evidence of a single Christian practicing baptism for dead people. See Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.401-402 and 1001 Bible Questions Answered p.121-122 for complementary answers.

Q: In 1 Cor 15:33, who was Paul quoting?

A: There are two complementary answers.

1. All truth is God's truth. Paul's quote is from a famous playwright named Menander (Thais 218). See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.544-545 and When Cultists Ask p.236-237 and for more info. See also the discussion on Acts 17:16-34.

2. Paul quoted from Isaiah 22:13, except that Paul took out the "you say" that Isaiah had in the middle. Like Paul, Isaiah was not suggesting we follow this hollow saying, but Isaiah was expressing the view of godless people.

By the way, Menander lived approximately 342-291 B.C. Isaiah prophesied from before 739 B.C. to after 682 B.C. Paul likely would have been familiar with Menander as well as Isaiah.

Q: In 1 Cor, how do we know this was really written by Paul?

A: We have no evidence suggesting Paul did not write it, and four types of evidence that indicates Paul wrote it.

1. 1 Corinthians says so, and the early church never questioned this.

2. Irenaeus (170-202 A.D.) was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of John the Apostle. He showed that both he and Gnostic heretics agreed Corinthians was written by Paul in Against Heresies 8.

3. Polycarp (110-155 A.D.) in his Letter (ch.11) quotes 1 Corinthians 6:2 and says this was by Paul.

4. Tertullian said Paul wrote to the Galatians in Tertullian Against Marcion Book 14 chapter 5 (207 A.D.). It was a book "that comes down from the apostles, which has been kept as a sacred deposit in the churches of the apostles." Tertullian, writing 200-240 A.D. in de Corona ch.13 mentions that "you have the apostle [Paul] enjoining people to marry in the Lord."

Assuming Paul died under Nero, Paul's death would be about 67 A.D.

Q: In 1 Cor, how do we know that Scripture today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three good reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11, Isaiah 59:21, 1 Peter 1:24-25, and Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in 1 Corinthians.

Didache 120-150 A.D.

Letter of Mathetes to Diognetus 130 A.D.

Irenaeus 170-202 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

Tertullian 200-240 A.D.

Origen 225-254 A.D.

Athanasius 326-373 A.D.

Cyprian was a bishop of Carthage from 248 to his martyrdom in 258 A.D.. He quotes from "the first epistle to the Corinthians" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 63,65.

Chrysostom (c.396 A.D.) must have really appreciated 1 Corinthians, because he wrote down 44 sermons on 1 Corinthians, which we still have today. He says 1 Corinthians was by Paul and Sosthenes.

Mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of 1 Corinthians show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p15 1 Cor 7:18-8:4 (late 3rd century). The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a picture of p15 on p.84.

p46 Chester Beatty II 200 A.D. 1 Cor 1:1-9:2; 9:4-14:14; 14:16-15:15; 15:17-16:22 and other parts of Paul's letters and Hebrews. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p46 on p.192. It also says on p.197-198 that the quality and the stichiometric marks show a professional scribe wrote this.

Vaticanus 325-350 A.D.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Alexandrinus c.450 A.D.

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Q: In 2 Cor 11:32, is there any extra-Biblical evidence for Aratus, governor of Syria?

A: No. We do not know who the governors of Syria were at that time this happened in Acts 9:24,25. While Paul quotes from an Aratus in Acts 17:28, this was a different Aratus, who died in 240 B.C.

Q: In 2 Cor, how do we know that Scripture today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: We have at least three good reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in 2 Corinthians.

Letter of Mathetes to Diognetus 130 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

Irenaeus 170-202 A.D.

Tertullian 200-240 A.D. said it was by Paul the apostle in On the Resurrection of the Flesh ch.40.

Origen 225-254 A.D.

Athanasius 326-373 A.D.

Cyprian was a bishop of Carthage from 248 to his martyrdom in 258 A.D.. He quotes from "the second epistle to the Corinthians" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 2.

Chrysostom (c.396 A.D.) wrote down 30 sermons on 2 Corinthians. He says 2 Corinthians was by Paul.

Mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

We still have all of these today.

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of 2 Corinthians show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p46 Chester Beatty II 200 A.D. 2 Cor 1:1-11:10; 11:12-21; 11:23-13:13 and other parts of Paul's letters and Hebrews. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p46 on p.192. It also says on p.197-198 that the quality and the stichiometric marks show that a professional scribe wrote this.

Vaticanus 325-350 A.D.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Q: In Gal 1:2, where exactly is Galatia?

A: The New Geneva Study Bible p.1845, the NIV Study Bible p.1781, and Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.1114-1115 point out there were two regions called Galatia, the original home of the Galatian people to the north, a second one bordering it on the south, and the Roman province was both combined. Asimov does not rule out either one, but favors south Galatia.

The New Geneva Study Bible (p.1845) favors it being written to the Galatian people in the north.

The NIV Study Bible p.1781 simply mentions both theories. Either way, Christian doctrine and the evidence of authenticity of the book are not affected.

Q: In Gal 2:11-14, if Peter was once a bad example, does this mean that a Catholic Pope who was a bad example is not disqualified as Peter's successor?

A: I supposed someone else could argue that if a Pope burned Christians at the stake, he was not willing to sit down and eat with them, but I think the two situations are fundamentally unlike. There is a world of difference between not sitting down with genuine Christians, and ordering them to be burned at the stake for the crime of reading the Bible. The unintentional sin of Peter's confusion does not excuse a lifetime of flaunted wickedness, murder, immorality, drunkenness, and luxurious living of the offerings of others.

Pope Julius (1504-1513) had his armies destroy and loot entire Italian cities to add to his empire of the Papal States. According to Austin's Topical History of Christianity p.148, after 904 A.D. was the so-called "pornocracy" in which prostitutes had relations of power and sexual intimacy with various popes, including Popes Sergius III, Anastasius III, Lando, and John XII. People bought the office of Pope as Gregory VI and Alexander VI did. Men became Pope by the previous Pope being murdered (Boniface VII, Leo V, and Stephen VII all killed). There were periods of two and even once three popes at a time (Ursinus and Damasus (366-384), (Gregory VI, Benedict IX, and Sylvester III). Popes were sometimes deposed unwillingly, which makes the concept of papal succession very intriguing. Pope Stephen VII 896-897) had the body of Pope Formosus dug up and condemned for heresy at a mock trial.

Some Catholics might agree there is a possibility that at least one of the preceding popes was not in the center of God's will. Actually, "Papal succession", if it ever existed, was made meaningless in the Middle Ages by the lack of papal succession.

One hand, it should be pointed out that if one can find a Catholic who is a rotten, ungodly person, that does nothing to prove Catholicism wrong. On the other hand, if millions of Catholics loyally obey the wicked desires of someone who is like, this, even when they know he is ungodly, there is something very wrong.

Q: In Gal 3:28, how did Greek culture view women and marriage?

A: Here are some quotes from Greek writers taken from The Great Quotations compiled by George Seldes.

"Marriage, to tell the truth, is an evil, but a necessary evil." -Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) quoted by Diognetus Laertius (p.67)

"Woman may be said to be an inferior man"

Menander (342?-291? B.C.) (p.486)

Q: In Gal 4:4 and Tt 1:3, why did God send Jesus at that time, and not earlier or later?

A: This scripture simply says that Jesus was sent at the right time, without saying why, -but it is still fun to speculate. There are at least three factors we can see.

Language: From about 200 B.C. to 250 A.D., much of the area of the Roman Empire spoke Greek. After that, they spoke Greek in the east and Latin in the West. One language greatly helped the spread of Christianity.

Peace: This was a time window of peace. This was after the Seleucids, Ptolemies, and Persians, were not fighting by 141 B.C.. Pompey conquered Phoenicia in 64 B.C. This window of relative peace was before 161 A.D. when the Parthians invaded Syria and 220 A.D. when the Goths invaded Asia Minor. By 350 A.D. the northern Europeans, Huns, and Persians were fighting Rome. Since there was relative peace, the Romans were able to eliminate much of piracy that often plagued the Mediterranean by 69 B.C. In general, peace was a great help in Christians moving about to spread the Gospel.

Roads: The Romans built over 42,000 miles of extensive roads that connected their vast empire together. This aided people such as Paul travel relatively safely and easily to a great number of places.

The results were amazing. Within 300 years, Christianity had peacefully blossomed out to Ethiopia, India, Georgia, England, Spain, and North Africa. The only two major world beliefs that had a faster initial spread were Islam and Communism, and both of them spread fundamentally by military conquest.

Q: In Gal 4:25, was Mt. Sinai in Arabia, or was it in the Sinai Peninsula as the Torah indicates?

A: Both, understanding that "Arabia" here is not the modern Muslim country of Saudi Arabia. It is the Roman Province of Arabia. The Roman Province of Arabia was the Sinai Peninsula, and the northwestern portion of modern-day Jordan, and a small part of Syria. See either The Roman World p.107 or Encyclopedia Britannica under Roman History for a map proving this. As a side note, the Romans never conquered near Mecca.

Q: In Gal 6:17, could the marks on Paul have been "stigmata"?

A: -Probably not. Stigmata are open wounds that have appeared on some Catholic mystics on their hands and side for no known physical reason. Padre Pio, who lived at the time of the Reformation, was one person. He later died a natural death, which Padre Pio said was a sacrifice for the sake of the unity of the church. From what I can tell of history of that time, the Popes were either totally unaware or else totally unconcerned with Padre Pio's sacrifice being a reason to hound and kill Protestants any less.

Some say the stigmata is a psychological phenomena, and others say it is a miraculous sign from God. One important point is concerning the hands. The Greek word "hand" includes the wrist, and we know today that in crucifixion the nails were in the top part of the victim's wrist, where the bone would hold the nail. If the nails had been in the palms of the hands, they would have ripped out. Stigmata appears on the palms of the hands.

Q: In Gal, how do we know Paul wrote the book of Galatians?

A: There are at least two reasons.

1. Paul says so in Galatians 6:11. We trust this is correct because no one in the early church ever questioned this. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Tertullian (200-240 A.D.) in Against Praxeas ch.28 also says the Paul wrote to the Galatians.

See also the next question for more info.

Q: What evidence do we have that the book of Galatians should be in the Bible?

A: There are at least four reasons.

1. Paul wrote it, and He was an apostle. Peter attested that Paul's words were scripture in 2 Peter 3:15-16.

2. Paul himself said he was apostle in 1 Timothy 1:1; 2:7, Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 1:1; 9:1, 2 Corinthians 1:1, 11:5; Galatians 1:1, Ephesians 1:1; Colossians 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:1; 2 Timothy 1:1; Titus 1:1.

3. Evidence of the early church. See the next question for some of the writers who referred to verses in Galatians.

4. Tertullian said Paul wrote to the Galatians in Tertullian Against Marcion Book 14 chapter 5 (207 A.D.). It was a book "that comes down from the apostles, which has been kept as a sacred deposit in the churches of the apostles."

Q: In Gal, how do we know that Scripture today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three good reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Early church evidence. Here are some of the writers who referred to verses in Galatians.

Ignatius 110-117 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

Irenaeus 170-202 A.D.

Tertullian 200-240 A.D.

Origen 225-254 A.D.

Eusebius 325 A.D.

Cyprian (wrote 248-258 A.D.) "Paul to the Galatians" and from "Galatians" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 3,9,64 among other places.

Chrysostom 397 A.D. wrote a commentary on Galatians, which we still have today.

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Galatians show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p46 Chester Beatty II 200 A.D. Gal 1:1-8; 1:10-2:9; 2:12-21; 3:2-29; 4:2-18; 4:20-5:17; 5:20-6:8; 6:10-18 and other parts of Paul's letters and Hebrews. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p46 on p.192. It also says on p.197-198 that the quality and the stichiometric marks show that a professional scribe wrote this. A quite readable photograph of the page of the Chester Beatty papyrii of Galatians 6:10-18 and the start of Philippians is in Paul : Apostle of the Heart Set Free.

Vaticanus 325-350 A.D.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

p51Oxyrynchus c.400AD

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Q: In Eph 1:1, was the letter to the Ephesians really to the Ephesians? (Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.1119 asked this)

A: It was certainly to churches in the area, but some early manuscripts do not have the words "in Ephesus". These manuscripts are

p46 Chester Beatty II 200 A.D.

Vaticanus 325-350 A.D. Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

Early writers who do not have "in Ephesus" are Tertullian (200-240 A.D.) and Origen (225-254 A.D.).

As for having the words "in Ephesus", both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus have these words added in the manuscript by another hand, Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D.), the Bezae Cantabrigiensis (5th/6th century) and the Byzantine Lectionary. The church father Chrysostom (c.397 A.D.) has it in his commentary. Chrysostom's commentaries have direct quotes of the scripture.

Today's Handbook for Solving Bible Difficulties p.294 mentions that if Paul had written it just to the Ephesians, one would have expected personal greetings to people with whom he had lived three years, but there are none. Also, Origen and Jerome said that "in Ephesus" was not in the best manuscripts they had, though Jerome, in listing the writings of the church, said Paul wrote one letter to the Ephesians (Jerome and Gennadius (c.485-492 A.D.) chapter 5)

In conclusion, either "in Ephesus" was taken out of some manuscripts, such Chester Beatty II prior to 200 A.D., or it was added to some manuscripts prior to c.397 A.D..

Q: In Eph, what evidence do we have that this book should be in the Bible?

A: There are at least four good reasons.

1. Paul wrote it, and He was an apostle. Peter attested that Paul's words were scripture in 2 Peter 3:15-16.

2. Paul himself said he was apostle in 1 Timothy 1:1; 2:7, Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 1:1; 9:1, 2 Corinthians 1:1, 11:5; Galatians 1:1, Ephesians 1:1; Colossians 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:1; 2 Timothy 1:1; Titus 1:1.

3. Early church evidence

Letter of Ignatius to the Ephesians 110-117 A.D.

Letter of Mathetes to Diognetus 130 A.D.

Justin Martyr wrote about 138-165 A.D.

Irenaeus 170-202A.D.

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

Tertullian wrote about 200-240 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 AD

Hippolytus 222-236 A.D.

Origen 225-254 A.D.

Gregory Thaumaturgus 270 A.D.

Adamantius 300 A.D.

Tertullian 200-240 A.D. said it was by Paul the apostle in On the Resurrection of the Flesh ch.40.

Cyprian was a bishop of Carthage from 248 to his martyrdom in 258 A.D.. He quotes from "the epistle of Paul to the Ephesians" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 7,70,72,117.

Chrysostom 396 A.D. wrote down 23 sermons on Ephesians which we still have today. He said it was by Paul.

4. Tertullian said Paul wrote to the Ephesians in Tertullian Against Marcion Book 14 chapter 5 (207 A.D.). It was a book "that comes down from the apostles, which has been kept as a sacred deposit in the churches of the apostles."

Q: In Eph, how do we know that Scripture today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: We have at least three good reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. See the previous question for some of the writers who referred to verses in Ephesians.

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Ephesians show there are small manuscript uncertainties, but zero theologically significant errors.

p46 Chester Beatty II 200 A.D. Eph 1:1-2:7; 2:10-5:6; 5:8-6:6; 6:8-18,20-24 and other parts of Paul's letters and Hebrews. A photograph of the first page of Ephesians is in A General Introduction to the Bible p.389. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p46 on p.192. It also says on p.197-198 that the quality and the stichiometric marks show that a professional scribe wrote this.

p49 (middle 3rd century) Eph 4:16-29; 4:31-5:31 The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p49 on p.346. It also says that p49 and p65 were written by the same scribe.

p92 Eph 1:11-13,19-21; 2 Thess 1:4-5,11-12 (c. 300 A.D.) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p92 on p.614.

Vaticanus 325-350 A.D.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Alexandrinus c.450 A.D.

p13 London/Florence3rd/4th century

Q: In Php 1, what do we know about the city of Philippi?

A: It was originally called "Crenides" meaning fountains. Philip of Macedon, Alexander's father conquered it in 356 B.C. and renamed it after himself. There were gold mines near there. In 42 B.C., Marc Antony and Octavian defeated Brutus and Cassius at Philippi. Marc Antony order some Roman soldiers to live there. In 30 B.C. Octavian (Emperor Augustus) ordered some people in Italy to more to Philippi, while retaining their rights as Roman citizens and being able to call their new land a part of Italian soil.

See The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.647-648 for more info.

Q: In Php 2:6-11, was this an early Christian hymn instead of originally being written by Paul?

A: While there is no external evidence of this being an early Christian hymn, the poetic cadence suggests this. Regardless of whether Paul originated this or copied this from a hymn, it was still written in the Book of Philippians under Paul's authority.

Q: In Php 3:4, who is "Syzygus", or "yokefellow"?

A: There are two views:

1. The Greek word Syzygus could be a personal name. However, we have no record of any Greek using this as a personal name.

2. Paul could have deliberately kept unnamed someone he particularly wanted to help with the dispute between Euodias and Syntyche. Sometimes people who diplomatically bring people back together work better when the attention is not drawn to them.

From a non-Christian perspective, Asimov in Asimov's Guide to the Bible (p.1126-1127) pondered this, and concluded that this was not known.

Q: In Php, how do we know Paul really wrote this book?

A: Philippians 1:1 says so, and the early church never questioned this. Polycarp (110-155 A.D.) in Letter to the Philippians chapter 3, says Philippians was by Paul. See the discussion on Philippians 3 for more on why Paul wrote all of Philippians.

Q: In Php, what evidence do we have that this book should be in the Bible?

A: There are at least four reasons.

1. Paul wrote it, and he was an apostle. Peter attested that Paul's words were scripture in 2 Peter 3:15-16.

2. Paul himself said he was apostle in 1 Timothy 1:1; 2:7, Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 1:1; 9:1, 2 Corinthians 1:1, 11:5; Galatians 1:1, Ephesians 1:1; Colossians 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:1; 2 Timothy 1:1; Titus 1:1.

3. Early church evidence

Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians mentions Paul writing to the Philippians 110-155 A.D.

Letter of Mathetes to Diognetus 130 A.D.

Shepherd of Hermas 115-140 A.D.

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

Irenaeus 170-202A.D.

Tertullian 200-240 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

Cyprian was a bishop of Carthage from 248 to his martyrdom in 258 A.D.. He quotes from "the second epistle to the Corinthians" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 26.

Chrysostom 396 A.D. wrote down 15 sermons on Philippians, which we still have preserved today. He said it was by Paul the apostle (Homily I and other places).

Hippolytus 222-236 A.D.

others

4. Tertullian said Paul wrote to the Galatians in Tertullian Against Marcion Book 14 chapter 5 (207 A.D.). It was a book "that comes down from the apostles, which has been kept as a sacred deposit in the churches of the apostles."

Q: How do we know that Php today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three good reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. See the previous question for a few of the writers who referred to verses in Philippians.

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Philippians show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p16 Php 3:10-17; 4:2-8 (late 3rd century) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a picture of p16 on p.86.

p46 Chester Beatty II 200 A.D. Php 1:1,5-15,17-28; 1:30-3:12; 2:14-27; 2:29-3:8; 3:10-21; 4:2-12; 4:14-23 and other parts of Paul's letters and Hebrews. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p46 on p.192. It also says on p.197-198 that the quality and the stichiometric marks show that a professional scribe wrote this.

Vaticanus 325-350 A.D.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Q: In Col, why should this book be in the Bible?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. Paul wrote it, and He was an apostle. Peter attested that Paul's words were scripture in 2 Peter 3:15-16.

2. Paul himself said he was apostle in 1 Timothy 1:1; 2:7, Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 1:1; 9:1, 2 Corinthians 1:1, 11:5; Galatians 1:1, Ephesians 1:1; Colossians 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:1; 2 Timothy 1:1; Titus 1:1.

3. Evidence of the early church. See the next question for a few of the writers who referred to verses in Colossians.

Q: In Col, how do we know that what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three good reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Early Church evidence: Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in Colossians.

Ignatius 110-117 A.D.

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

Irenaeus 170-202 A.D.

Tertullian 200-240 A.D.

Hippolytus 222-236AD

Novatian 250-280 A.D.

Cyprian was a bishop of Carthage from 248 to his martyrdom in 258 A.D.. He quotes from "to the Colossians" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 11.

Chrysostom 396 A.D. wrote down 12 sermons on Colossians, which we still have today. He said it was by Paul

others

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Colossians show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p46 Chester Beatty II 200 A.D. Col 1:1-2,5-13,16-24; 1:27-2:19; 2:23-3:11; 3:13-24; 4:3-12,16-18 and other parts of Paul's letters and Hebrews. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p46 on p.192. It also says on p.197-198 that the quality and the stichiometric marks show that a professional scribe wrote this.

Vaticanus 325-350 A.D.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Q: In 1 Thess 1, what do we know about the city of Thessalonika?

A: It was originally called "Therma" because of hot springs close by the city. The gulf is called the Thermaic Gulf. One of Alexander the Great's generals, Cassander married Alexander's half-sister, who was named Thessalonica. Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.1060 says he built a new city near Therma in her honor. Thessalonika had a large Jewish population. The NIV Study Bible p.1819 says it was the largest city in Macedonia, with a total population was about 200,000. (For comparison, Corinth had a population of 650,000.)

Q: When was 1 Thess written?

A: We know rather precisely when it was written: c. 51-52 A.D. 1 Thessalonians 3:1-7 shows it was written after Paul left Athens and was at Corinth. Acts 18:12,17 says that Gallio was the proconsul of Achaia. The NIV Study Bible p.1819 says that an inscription at Delphi shows that Gallio was only proconsul from c.51-52A.D. Others interpret the date to be 52-53 A.D. The skeptical Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.1135 says 1 Thessalonians was written about 50 A.D.

It a skeptic claims Pauls' letters were written much later by someone else, and the words of 1 Thessalonians about it being written by Paul were a lie, then the burden of proof is on them to provide any evidence at all that the words were a lie. There are few fields of study where one can claim a document is bogus with no evidence whatsoever.

Q: In 1 Thess, how do we know if what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in 1 Thessalonians.

Ignatius 110-117 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

Tertullian 220-220 A.D.

Origen 225-254 A.D.

Ephraem 373 A.D.

Cyprian (wrote 248-258 A.D.) quotes from what he states is "the first Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians" and then quotes 1 Thessalonians 4:6. He says "the apostle says" and then quotes 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3. These are in Treatise 12 The Third Book 88,89.

Chrysostom 396 A.D. wrote down 11 sermons on 1 Thessalonians, which we still have today. He said it was by Paul, and Timothy with him.

others

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of 1 Thessalonians show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p30 1 Thess 4:12-13,16-17; 5:3,8-10,12-18,25-28; 2 Thess 1:1-2; 2:1,9-11 (early 3rd century)

p46 Chester Beatty II 200 A.D. 1 Thess 1:1; 1:9-2:3; 5:5-9,23-28 and other parts of Paul's letters and Hebrews. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p46 on p.192. It also says on p.197-198 that the quality and the stichiometric marks show that a professional scribe wrote this.

p46 1 Thess 1:1; 1:9-29; 2:1-3; 5:5-9; 5:23-28

p65 1 Thess 1:3-2:1; 2:6-13. Middle 3rd century The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p49 on p.348. It also says that p49 and p65 were written by the same scribe.

Vaticanus 325-350 A.D.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Q: In 1 Thess and 2 Thess, what evidence do we have that these books should be in the Bible?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. Paul wrote it, and he was an apostle. Peter attested that Paul's words were scripture in 2 Peter 3:15-16.

2. Paul himself said he was apostle in 1 Timothy 1:1; 2:7, Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 1:1; 9:1, 2 Corinthians 1:1, 11:5; Galatians 1:1, Ephesians 1:1; Colossians 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:1; 2 Timothy 1:1; Titus 1:1.

3. Evidence of the early church. See the next question for a few of the writers who referred to verses in 2 Thessalonians.

Q: In 2 Thess, how do we know that what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three good reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in 1 and 2 Thessalonians.

Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians chapter 11 110-155 A.D.

Irenaeus 170-202 A.D. says written by the Apostle

Shepherd of Hermas 115-140A.D.

Justin Martyr wrote 138-165 A.D.

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

Tertullian fl. [flourished] 200-240 A.D.

Hippolytus 222-236 A.D.

Chrysostom 396 A.D. wrote down five sermons on 2 Thessalonians, which we still have today. He said it was written by Paul in Homily 3.

others

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of 2 Thessalonians show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p30 1 Thess 4:12-13,16-17; 5:3,8-10,12-18,25-28; 2 Thess 1:1-2; 2:1,9-11 (early 3rd century)

p92 Eph 1:11-13,19-21; 2 Thess 1:4-5,11-12 (c. 300 A.D.) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p92 on p.614.

Vaticanus 325-350 A.D.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Q: In 1 Tim, how do we know Paul wrote 1 Timothy?

A: 1 Timothy 1:1 says it was written by Paul, and the early church never questioned this. It was probably written after the events mentioned in Acts.

Tertullian (200-240 A.D.) in de Corona ch.8 alludes to 1 Timothy 5:23, saying that "Paul, too, knows that a little wine does the stomach good." In the same chapter of de Corona, Tertullian also reminds his audience of what they read of Paul's cloak, mentioned in 1 Timothy 4:13.

Cyprian was a bishop of Carthage from 248 to his martyrdom in 258 A.D.. He quotes from "the first epistle of Paul to Timothy" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 74,75,76,77.

John Chrysostom (c.396 A.D.) wrote down 18 sermons he preached on 1 Timothy. He frequently mentions that this was written by Paul.

We still have copies of all of these today.

Q: In 1 Tim, how do we know if what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in 1 Timothy.

Polycarp 110-155 A.D. Letter to the Philippians

Letter of Mathetes to Diognetus 130 A.D.

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

Chrysostom 396 A.D. wrote down 18 sermons on 1 Timothy which we still have today. He said it was written by Paul the apostle in Homily 1.

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of 1 Timothy show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

1 Timothy was not preserved in Vaticanus

Alexandrinus c.450 A.D.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Q: In 2 Tim 3:8, who are Jannes and Jambres, and how did their names get in the New Testament?

A: These are the names of some of the Egyptian magicians who opposed Moses in Exodus 7:11-12,22; 8:7,18-19. Their names are not mentioned in the Old Testament, but their names were preserved in Jewish tradition. Examples are "Yohane and Mambres" (Menahoth 85a) and "Yohaneh and his brother" in the Zadokite Work at Qumran (7:19). Even some pagan works mention them. See The New Bible Dictionary first edition p.599 for more information.

Q: In 2 Tim, how do we know if what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55: 10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; and Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in 2 Timothy.

Polycarp Letter to the Philippians 110-155 A.D.

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

Irenaeus 170-202 A.D.

Cyprian 248-258 A.D.

Archelaus 278 A.D.

Ephraem 373 A.D.

Chrysostom 396 A.D. wrote down ten sermons on 2 Timothy which we still have preserved today. He said it was by Paul the apostle in Homily 1 on 2 Timothy.

others

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of 2 Timothy show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

2 Timothy was not preserved in Vaticanus

Alexandrinus c.450 A.D.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Ephraimi Rescriptus 5th century

Claromontanus 6th century

Ethiopic 6th century

Q: In Tt 1:12, why is Paul insulting the Cretans?

A: Paul actually was quoting a famous Cretan poet Epimenides. The same Epimenides that Paul quoted in Acts 17:28. Neither Paul nor Epimenides meant that every Cretan, Epimenides included, never told a single truth. Rather, Cretans were prone to lying. See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.675-676 When Critics Ask p.507 for more info.

Paul is not being either humorous or insulting here. The objective truth is that people of some cultures are more prone to some sins. Sometimes there is a genetic basis, such as North American Indians and alcoholism, and other times a culture has prevailing sins with no genetic basis at all, but due to external factors. For example, at one time a great number of people in China were opium addicts, due to the British winning the opium wars to protect their supposed "right" to export opium to China. What do you think are the dominant sins of your culture?

Clement of Alexandria (Stromata. 1:14 p.313 193-217 A.D.) affirms Paul's words about Cretans.

Q: In Tt, how do we know Paul really wrote this book?

A: Titus 1:1 says so, and the early church never questioned that Paul wrote the book of Titus. Clement of Alexandria (193-217 A.D.) mentions that Paul wrote Titus in Stromata 1:14 p.313. Paul wrote the letter to Titus after 64 A.D.

Q: In Tt, how do we know if what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in Titus.

Clement of Rome 97 A.D.

Letter of Mathetes to Diognetus 130 A.D.

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

Cyprian was a bishop of Carthage from 248 to his martyrdom in 258 A.D.. He quotes from Titus, simply calling it "To Titus" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 78.

Chrysostom (396 A.D.) wrote down six sermons on Titus which have been preserved. He says Paul wrote Titus to one of his companions in Homily 1.

We still have all of these today.

The only one who did not accept this letter was Marcion the Gnostic heretic, who rejected many book of the Bible.

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Titus show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p32 Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8 (latter half of 2nd century) The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p32 on p.124.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

Titus was not preserved in Vaticanus

Alexandrinus c.450 A.D.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Ephraimi Rescriptus 5th century

Claromontanus 6th century

Ethiopic 6th century

Q: In Phm 10, is there any extra-Biblical evidence for Onesimus?

A: There may be, actually. Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History 3:36, mentions letter o Ignatius to the Ephesians (ch.1). Ignatius mentions Onesimus as the pastor there. It does not explicitly say it was the same Onesimus, though.

Q: In Phm, what evidence do we have that this book should be in the Bible?

A: Frankly, since Philemon is such a short book, we do not have as many references to Philemon as the other books. Here are three reasons we know this should be in the Bible.

1. Paul wrote it, and he was an apostle. Peter attested that Paul's words were scripture in 2 Peter 3:15-16.

2. Paul himself said he was apostle in 1 Timothy 1:1; 2:7, Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 1:1; 9:1, 2 Corinthians 1:1, 11:5; Galatians 1:1, Ephesians 1:1; Colossians 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:1; 2 Timothy 1:1; Titus 1:1.

3. Early church evidence

It is mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

Ambrosiaster 4th century

Chrysostom 396 A.D. wrote down three sermons on Philemon. He says that Paul wrote this letter to Philemon, an admirable man, in Homily 1.

Jerome 420 A.D.

Augustine c.400 A.D.

We still have all of these today.

Q: How do we know that Phm today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three good reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. See the previous question for a few of the writers who referred to verses in Philippians.

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Philemon show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p87 contains Phm 13-15,24-25 with gaps (c.125 A.D.) Handwriting is nearly identical to p46. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of p87 on p.608.

Sinaiticus 340-350 A.D.

Philemon was not preserved in Vaticanus

Alexandrinus c.450 A.D.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Bezae Cantabrigiensis 5th/6th century

Q: In Heb, how do we know if what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in Hebrews.

Didache 120-150 A.D.

Clement of Rome 97 A.D.

Irenaeus 170-202 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

Origen 225-254A.D.

Eusebius 324 A.D.

Ephraem 373 A.D.

Athanasius 326-373 A.D.

Faustinus 380 A.D.

John Chrysostom (c.396 A.D.) wrote down 33 sermons on Hebrews.

We still have these today.

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Hebrews show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p12 (285-300 A.D.) Heb 1:1

p13 contains Hebrews 2:14-5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29-11:13; 11:28-12:17 (c.200-250 A.D.) A photograph of part of this is in The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.74.

p17 (late 3rd century) Heb 9:12-19

p46 Chester Beatty II 200 A.D. Heb 1:1-9:16; 9:18-10:10; 1022-30; 10:32-13:25 and other parts of Paul's letters and Hebrews. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts has a photograph of part of p46 on p.192. It also says on p.197-198 that the quality and the stichiometric marks show that a professional scribe wrote this.

Cyril of Jerusalem 386 A.D. Chrysostom 407 A.D.

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.) contains all of Hebrews except Hebrews 9:14-13:25 according to Gospel Parallels.

Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.) and Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D.) contain all of Hebrews.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th

Fayyumic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Armenian 5th century

Bezae Cantabrigiensis 5th or 6th century

Ethiopic 6th century

Washington 5th century

Wolfenbuttel 6th century

Q: In Jms, how do we know if what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least two reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in James.

Shepherd of Hermas 115-140 A.D.

Irenaeus 170-202 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

Tertullian 200-240 A.D.

Origen 225-254 A.D.

others

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of James show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors. Here are some of the manuscripts prior to the 8th century.

p20 3rd century. (James 2:19-3:2; 3:4-9) A photograph of this manuscript is in The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.96. This book also mentions that the handwriting on the manuscript is very similar to the P. Egerton 4 manuscript of 2 Chronicles and p27, a manuscript of Romans.

p23 Urbana (early 3rd) (James 1:10-12, 15-18) A photograph of this is in The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.102.

p54 5th-6th century. (James 2:16-18, 21-26; 3:2-4)

p74 Bodmer 17 Papyrii 7th (virtually all of James)

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.), Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.), and Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D) have all of James.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th (James 1:1-4:2)

0166 5th century. (James 1:11)

0173 5th century. (James 1:25-27)

Armenian 5th century

Ethiopic 6th century

Syriac Peshitta

Syriac Philoxenian

Syriac Heraclean

Syriac Palestinian (James 1:1-12)

According to the New International Greek Testament Commentary on James p.59-60, there are no "western family" texts of James, only Alexandrian and Byzantine.

Other notes are that the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.) did not include James, Hebrews, of 1 and 2 Peter.

Q: When was 1 Pet written?

A: Most people agree shortly after 63-64 A.D, as The Bible Knowledge Commentary - New Testament and the New Bible Dictionary show. Similarly, the NIV Study Bible and the Geneva Study Bible say between 60-68 A.D.

For a non-Christian viewpoint, Asimov in Asimov's Guide to the Bible p.1164 believes it was written after 90 A.D., which would be after Peter's death, since he claims that the persecution of Domitian (81-96 A.D.) was "the first time the Christians of Asia Minor first felt organized repression from the central government."

The New Bible Dictionary (p.974-976) gives reasons why a later date is incorrect.

For the Name: In New Testament church times, but not later, the Name of Jesus was greatly emphasized. Christians suffered "for the name" (Acts 5:41; 9:16). The very name of Jesus was important in Mark 9:37,41 13:13; Luke 21:12; Acts 2:21,38; 3:6,16; 4:12,17,30; 5:28). Peter likewise said we "are reproached for the name of Christ" (1 Peter 4:14 NKJV).

No slander: In the time of Pliny, Christians were slandered with gross crimes of immorality and cannibalism, but 1 Peter does not say anything about Christians being slandered. Most tellingly, 1 Peter 4:15 mentions that, at most, Christians were criticized for being "meddlers", hardly the same level of offense. 1 Peter 3:16 talks of the ungodly speaking slander against Christian's good behavior.

Not necessarily legislative persecution: Since the language of 1 Peter does not refer to "legislative action", 1 Peter is talking of persecution in general, not specific laws under Domitian.

See also the discussion on when 2 Peter was written.

Q: In 1 Pet, how do we know if what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are some of the writers who referred to verses in 1 Peter.

Clement of Rome 97 A.D.

Shepherd of Hermas 115-140 A.D.

Gospel of Truth 140-150 A.D.

Polycarp 110-155 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

Irenaeus wrote about 170-202 A.D.

Tertullian wrote about 200-220 A.D.

Origen 225-254 A.D.

Athanasius 326-373 A.D.

Hilary wrote about 355-367/368 A.D.

Ephraem 373 A.D.

Ambrose c.378 A.D.

Cyprian, bishop of Carthage (248-258 A.D.) quotes from "the epistle of Peter to Pontus" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 36,37,39. Cyprian is the only writer who adds "to Pontus" when describing this letter. (Pontus was in north-central Asia Minor.)

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of 1 Peter show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p72 Bodmer 7 & 8 Papyrii (1 Peter 1:1-5:14) c.300 A.D. A photograph of part of this manuscript (showing 2 Peter 1:16-2:2) is in The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.468. It says the handwriting is written "in a documentary hand."

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.), Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.), and Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D) have all of 1 Peter.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Armenian 5th century

Q: When was 2 Pet written?

A: Since 2 Peter 1:13-15 says that God showed Peter that his death was near, the simplest explanation is that it was written shortly before his death in 67-68 A.D. The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament gives the following support:

Methodius of Olympus 3rd century quotes 2 Peter 3:8 as from Peter in On the Resurrection.

Firmilian refers to Peter's warning against false teachers.

For a non-Christian view, Asimov's Guide to the Bible (p.1165) says "it is possible that 2 Peter, like 1 Peter and James, may date to the Domitianic persecution" (90 A.D.) Various commentators say this because,

a. It mentions Paul's epistles as though they were already collected, or at least written.

b. It has a focus indicating Christians were under persecution.

c. 2 Peter is similar to Jude, so perhaps the two were written close in time to each other.

However, since Paul's letters were written before Peter's death, very heavy persecution started three to four years before Peter's death, and Jude could easily have been written before Peter's death, there is no problem here saying 2 Peter was written before 67-68 A.D. See also the discussion on when 1 Peter was written.

Q: In 2 Pet, how do we know the book of 2 Peter was written by Peter, especially since the style and Greek of 1 Peter and 2 Peter are different?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. 2 Peter 1:1 says so, and the early church never questioned this.

2. The style (but not Greek grammar) of the two is different because they topics are different. As Gleason Archer (Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.425-426) points out, comparing word lists no more proves they are of different authors than word lists would "prove" John Milton's poems were by a different person than Paradise Lost, and everyone acknowledges that Milton wrote all of them.

3. The Greek grammar of 2 Peter is rougher, because, as 1 Peter 5:12 says, Silas helped Peter write down 1 Peter.

Q: In 2 Pet, how do we know if what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are the writers who referred to 2 Peter or verses in it.

Possibly Clement of Rome 97 A.D.

Methodius of Olympus (3rd cent)

Firmilian (3rd cent) probably alludes to 2 Peter

Origen 225-254 A.D.

Eusebius 325 A.D.

Athanasius 326-373 A.D.

Hilary wrote about 355-367/368 A.D.

Ephraem 373 A.D.

Council of Laodicea 372 A.D.

3rd Council of Carthage 397 A.D.

Ambrose c.378 A.D. Jerome 404 A.D.

Augustine c.400 A.D.

Cyprian, bishop of Carthage (248-258 A.D.) quotes from "the epistle of Peter" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 11.

Many quoted the day of the Lord as 1,000 years.

Letter of Barnabas (100 A.D), Justin Martyr (wrote about 138-165 A.D.) and Irenaeus (wrote about 170-202 A.D.). However, these could refer to Psalm 90:4 as well as 2 Peter 3:8. 2 Peter is the least attested book of the New Testament.

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of 2 Peter show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p72 Bodmer 17 Papyrii (2 Peter 1:1-3:18) c.300 A.D. A photograph of part of this manuscript (showing 2 Peter 1:16-2:2) is in The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.468. It says the handwriting is in a "documentary hand".

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.), Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.), and Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D) have all of 2 Peter.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Armenian 5th century

Gothic 493-555 A.D.

Q: In 1 Jn 1, who were the Gnostics?

A: Gnosticism was a heresy which wanted to mix fanciful Greek thought and Christianity. Gnostics are not specifically mentioned in First John. All Gnostics believed in fanciful godlike beings, of whom Christ was just one. They believed the God of the Old and New Testaments were different, and the God of the Old Testament was evil. Gnostics accepted the Gospels but rejected most or all of Paul's writings. They had additional scriptures, which varied. There were two types of Gnostics: libertine and ascetic. All Gnostics said the physical body did not matter, only esoteric spiritual knowledge. Libertine Gnostics concluded that sinning all you wanted in the body was fine. Ascetic Gnostics concluded that you should be celibate, never marry, and treat your body harshly.

It would seem very reasonable that 1 John is addressing Gnostics except for one thing: Gnosticism was not fully developed until 50 to 100 years later. However, proto-Gnosticism was prevalent then, and Eusebius records that John encountered proto-Gnosticism in the heretic Cerinthus. Thus many believe 1 John was written in a large part to combat proto-Gnosticism. See the previous question for more discussion. For more references on the heresy of Gnosticism, see the discussion on 2 John 7.

Q: In 1 Jn, is it true that John writes all his inspired works with one heretic, Cerinthus the Gnostic, in mind, as one Catholic claimed?

A: No. Cerinthus was not a Gnostic, though there were some similarities of belief. Here is some info on Cerinthus, then on Gnostics,

Cerinthus was an early heretic. The church historian Eusebius relates that Polycarp, a disciple of John the apostle, said this about John. "And there are those that heard from him that John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe in Ephesus and seeing Cerinthus within, ran out of the bath-house without bathing, crying, 'Let us flee, lest even the bath fall, because the enemy of the truth, is within."

The church father Iranaeus (120-202 A.D.) wrote against Cerinthus. Here is what Iranaeus said in Against Heresies chapter 26.

"Cerinthus, again, a man who was educated in the wisdom of the Egyptians, taught that the world was not made by the primary god, but by a certain Power far separated from him and at a distance from that Principality who is

supreme over the universe, and ignorant of him who is above all. He represented Jesus as having not been born of a virgin, but as being the son of Joseph and Mary according to the ordinary course of human generation, while he nevertheless was more righteous, prudent, and wise than other men. Moreover, after his baptism, Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler, and that then he proclaimed the unknown Father, and performed miracles. But at last Christ departed from Jesus, and that then Jesus suffered and rose again, while Christ remained impassible, inasmuch as he was a spiritual being. [The next sections talk of other groups, the Ebionites, and then Cerdo, and then Marcion.]

Cerinthus had in common with some Gnostics a belief that the Creator of the world was a different being than the Supreme God, that Christ and Jesus were different, and Christ came upon Jesus. However, another heretic Irenaeus discusses is Marcion, and the Gnostics generally came from Marcion, not Cerinthus.

Cerinthus, Marcion, and the Gnostics in general probably came to some of their conclusions because their Greek culture taught them that God could not have emotions or be affected [emotionally] by His creation in any way. Plato taught that there were two worlds, the lower world, we call reality, and the higher world of ideals. Thus is it not surprisingly that some of these heretical views showed up more than once, since they came from the common source of Greek philosophy.

The Gnostics were actually not a group, but more than 30 different groups. Many Gnostics believed that they should live a frugal, ascetic life and never marry, while many others believed you could live any way you felt like, since the body did not matter anyway. Gnosticism did not come into full bloom (like a weed) until well after John's death, but proto-Gnostic beliefs were around in John's time.

As an aside, I have never read anywhere that Cerinthus or the Gnostics had any particular view on the Lord's Supper, the physical institution of the church, that salvation was by faith alone, the sacraments, or the hierarchical nature of the church.

Saying they believed sins are truly blotted out is false, because they did not believe there was sin, in the same sense as the Bible speaks of sin.

It is false to say that all that John wrote was against Cerinthus for three reasons.

1. While John certainly had heretics in mind in 1 John, he was against all who denied that Jesus Christ came in the flesh, denied that believers should live a holy life. John in no way limited himself to just Cerinthus, but rather said that "...many false prophets have gone out into the world..." (1 John 4:1)

2. The Catholic person's claim that all John's works were against one heretic, or even multiple heretics, reduces all the richness of John's writing to only one small point. If you had to reduce everything John wrote to one point, then believing the Jesus, the only begotten Son of God is the point, not believing against Cerinthus. Furthermore, while it is true that 1 John was written primarily to guard against "many false prophets", 3 John had other emphases, including the divisive church leader Diotrephes.

3. It sounds as though this Catholic person is out-of-step not only with the Bible, but with the Catholic Pope and modern Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has issued as statement basically saying that Luther's teaching on justification "is OK". This does not mean they have converted, or even that they agree with Luther's teaching, but rather that it is tolerated. It seems as if he is trying to make modern Conservative Christians into Gnostics, or at least into followers of Cerinthus.

You can be assured that Conservative Christians do not believe

The Creator and the Supreme God are different,

That Jesus and Christ are different,

That we should live our life in less than a holy way,

Or that we should falsely accuse a group of being an ancient heresy by twisting some of the facts and leaving out most of the other facts.

On a final note, while I think the Pope is greatly in error, and I see many serious errors in Catholic Doctrine, and I have met a few Catholics whom I think were true believers. They did not necessarily "toe the line" on all the Catholic doctrines, (few Catholics do, actually) but where they saw a difference between what the Bible taught and what the Catholic Church taught, they followed the Bible.

Do you know there are no Protestants in heaven? There are no Catholics or Orthodox in heaven either. There are only people, saved by Jesus, who might have been Protestants, Catholics, or Orthodox, but their following Jesus was the most important thing to them.

Q: How do we know that 1 Jn was really written by John?

A: There are two main reasons.

1. The Early church recognized it as from the Apostle John. In particular Cyprian's Epistle 69 (248-258 A.D.) quotes 1 John 2:18-19 and says this is by the apostle John. He also quotes the "epistle of John" in Treatise 12 The Third Book 2.

2. Tertullian (200-240 A.D.) while referring to 1 John 2:33; 4:2-3; and 5:1 says that John said all of these. (Against Praxeas 28). In de Corona ch.10 says that "John says, 'My little children, keep yourselves from idols,' (1 John 5:21)

3. Later Augustine (c.400 A.D.) in his first homily on 1 John, says it was written by the John who wrote the Gospel.

4. It has a similar style as 2 and 3 John and the Gospel of John.

In the highly unlikely event that we were wrong, and the early church was totally mistaken on the authorship of 1 John, if God still intended for 1 John to be scripture, what difference would it make if it were by John or not?

Q: In 1 Jn, how do we know if what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in 1 John.

Didache 120-150 A.D.

A: There are at least three good reasons. 130 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

Tertullian 200-240A.D.

Origen 225-254 A.D.

Hippolytus 222-236 A.D.

Hilary wrote about 355-367/368 A.D.

Athanasius 326-373 A.D.

Ephraem 373 A.D.

Mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of 1 John show there are manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p9 third century. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.70 has a picture of this manuscript, and it says the handwriting was not by a trained scribe, it was written carelessly, and some of the spellings are unintelligible.

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.), Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.), and Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D) have all of 1 John.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Ethiopic 6th century

It should be mentioned 1 John 5:7-8 is one of the three or four most notable manuscript variations in the Bible. However, even this is not theologically significant, as these verses do not teach anything about the Trinity that is not found elsewhere.

Q: In 2 Jn, how do we know if what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in 2 John.

Irenaeus wrote about 170-202 A.D.

Hilary wrote about 355-367/368 A.D.

Mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of 2 John show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

Uncial 0232 c.300 A.D. according to The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts (Aland considers it 5th or 6th century) 2 John 1-9

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.), Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.), and Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D) have all of 2 John.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Armenian 5th century

Ethiopic 6th century

Q: In 3 Jn, how do we know if what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in 3 John.

Irenaeus wrote about 170-202 A.D.

Hilary wrote about 355-367/368 A.D.

Mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of 3 John show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.), Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.), and Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D) have all of 3 John.

Bezae Cantabriginesis (c.450-550 A.D.) has preserved 3 John 11-15.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Armenian 5th century

Ethiopic 6th century

Q: In Jde 14, why did Jude quote from the pseudo-apocryphal Book of 1 Enoch as true?

A: Because this verse is true, though there are errors in other parts of 1 Enoch. Four points.

1. It is not certain that Jude quoted from the book of 1 Enoch. While the words are almost the same, they could have been from a common source. The common source could have been a book with this true prophecy in it, or the common source could have been God Himself.

2. 1 Enoch was subjected to variation. While the Book was pre-Christian, it is possible this quote was inserted later, after Jude was written.

3. It is not improbable that Jude did quote from the book of 1 Enoch, and that is OK. 1 Enoch had at least five different authors, and this verse is from the first and earliest part. The Book of 1 Enoch is a mixture of truth and error, and God may have had Jude deliberately quote a truth from there, so that this true prophecy would not only be preserved in extra-Biblical sources.

4. Since 1 Enoch does contain at least one divine truth, that does not mean it should have been a part of Scripture. It is not sufficient for a book to contain God's word; it must be entirely what God wants in Scripture. The writings of Wesley, Luther, and Calvin contain a great deal of God's truth too, but that does not mean any of them are without error, and they themselves would have objected to their writings being considered Scripture.

Hank Hanegraff said the following on the Bible Answer Man radio show on 10/29/97. The book of 1 Enoch was well-respected. Well-respected means it has many truths, but it does not mean divinely-inspired. I can say Jesus is coming again. That is true, but that does not mean I am divinely inspired.

See Inerrancy p.68, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.430, and When Critics Ask p.549-550 for more info.

Q: In Jde, how do we know that scripture today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55:10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; Matthew 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who referred to verses in Jude.

Didache 120-150 A.D.

Cyprian 200-258 A.D.

Clement of Alexandria 193-217 A.D.

Origen 225-254A.D.

Hilary wrote about 355-367/368 A.D.

Ephraem 373 A.D.

Mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Jude show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p72 (p74) Bodmer 7/8 Papyrii 3rd/4th Jude 1-25 as well as 1 and 2 Peter. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.468 has a picture of this manuscript (showing 2 Peter 1:16-22), and it says the handwriting "is written in a documentary hand"

p78 c.300 A.D. Jude 4-5,7-8 The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.602 indicates this is not a very reliable text. "in four verses it contains two unique and three rare readings, all of them in disagreement with the earliest witness [p72]." (quoted from Grenfell and Hunt Oxy. Pap., 34:4) Earlier is not always better.

Vaticanus (325-350 A.D.), Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.), and Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D) have all of Jude.

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Armenian 5th century

Q: In Rev 2:1-7, what do we know about the city of Ephesus?

A: Until Constantinople was built later, Ephesus was the dominant city between Corinth and Antioch. To give an idea of its importance, The New Bible Dictionary (1978) says the road to this port city was 70 feet wide, and its population was a third of a million. The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.534 also estimates its population was 300,000.

Ephesus was inhabited before the 12th century B.C., and passed peacefully to Roman rule in 133 B.C. The theater Paul entered could seat 25,000 to 50,000 people. Pictures of it are in the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.535 and The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.316. It also adds that Miletus was the leading trading port, but when its harbor silted up (before Paul's time) Ephesus displaced it. When the harbor at Ephesus silted up later, Smyrna replace Ephesus as the leading port. The dominant influence in Ephesus was the Temple of Artemis, the goddess of the hunt. There were many Jewish merchants in the city.

Also, Timothy stayed in Ephesus on 1 Timothy 1:3.

Q: In Rev 2-3, were these messages a) the current situation, b) prophecies which were fulfilled shortly after or c) prophecies of the history of the church through the ages?

A: All agree this describes seven local churches at the time of Revelation and shortly thereafter. Beyond this, there are two main views.

Church Period Theory: This view says this illustrates seven periods of the church. A telling shortcoming of this theory is that advocates do not agree on the periods, except that Ephesus was the early church, and the present age is within the Laodicean Period. I once taught a Sunday School, where I split church history into seven periods on cards. I did not put any dates. Each group of three of four people had to try to match the description on the cards to the church in Revelation. The groups did not all agree on the matching, and no group's matching followed the order of history.

J. Dwight Pentecost was one teacher of this theory in his class on Pauline Epistles and Revelation. According to the class notes

33-100 A.D. was Ephesus

100-316 A.D was Smyrna the persecuted church

316-615 A.D. is Pergamum the state church

615-1517 A.D. Thyatira - Roman Catholicism (what about Orthodox Christians???)

1517-1750 Sardis - The Reformed church

1750-1850 A.D. Philadelphia - the Believing Church

1850- Laodicea, Liberalism

See the next question for more info on this theory.

Church Type Theory: Today for example, it is hard to believe the church in China, the church in Indonesia, and the church in North America have exactly the same problems, strengths, and shortcomings. The seven churches in Revelation illustrate seven types of churches, each type of which was more or less present throughout all of church history.

Q: In Rev 2:6, who were the Nicolatians?

A: They taught that living an immoral life was perfectly fine for a Christian. According to Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History (3:29 p.161) the Nicolatians mentioned in Revelation came from Nicolas. Irenaeus's Against Heresies (ch.26) also describes them as libertines, or trying to be both spiritual and immoral. One characteristic of libertines is that they often reject all moral absolutes, and think that almost nothing is black and white. See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.759-761 for more info.

Q: In Rev 2:8-11, what do we know about the city of Smyrna?

A: Smyrna was a very ancient port of Lelegian people. The Anchor Bible Dictionary volume 6 p.73-75 says that based on Herodotus, Ionian Greeks seized the city from Aeolian Greeks, who were all outside the city celebrating a festival to Dionysius, before 688 B.C.. The powerful Mermnad king Gyges (c.687-652 B.C.) opposed Lydia, and Smyrna was destroyed in 627 B.C. by the Lydians under Alyattes III (609-560 B.C.). Smyrna was only a small group of villages until it was "resurrected" by the Macedonian general Lysimachus around 288 B.C.. Smyrna was allied with Rome against the Seleucids, and built a temple to the goddess Roma in 195 B.C.. The Parthians occupied Smyrna from 41-39 B.C. Worship of the Roman Emperor was strong there, because in 26 A.D., they asked Emperor Tiberius for permission to build a temple to the Roman Emperor as God. Smyrna also had a large Jewish population. The highest point, 525 foot high Mount Pagos/Pagus/Pagros, had a ring of buildings that from a distance would look like a crown. Curving around the mountain, east and west was a road called the "Street of Gold". There probably was a temple at either end of the road. The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1601-1602 and the Wycliffe Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology p.542-543 also add that the population at that time was about 200,000. The Encyclopaedia Britannica (1949) says that in 1940 the modern city of Izmir, on the same site, had a population of 184,000.

Physically, Smyrna is at the point where the Hermus river flows into gulf. It has a well-protected harbor, and The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.950 says it was the endpoint of a trade route through the Hermus Valley.

In Christian times, Ignatius (110-115 A.D.) a disciple of John, wrote a letter to the Smyrnaeans. Polycarp was a bishop of Smyrna who was martyred in 155 A.D. Pionius was martyred there in 250 A.D.

Q: In Rev 2:13, how did Satan have "a throne" at Pergamum?

A: This does not mean this is where Satan lives, but rather it was a center of Satanic activity centering on the worship of the Roman Emperor (on this throne). Pergamum had a temple to the divine Augustus and goddess Roma. It also had a temple to the snake-god Asclepius, from which modern medicine gets its symbol. It had a Temple to "Savior Zeus". See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.757-759 for more info.

Q: In Rev 2:17, what is the significance of the white stone?

A: In those times, when there was a public event, such as a competition or a theater performance, the white stone served as a ticket to attend.

Q: In Rev 2:18-29, what do we know about the city of Thyatira?

A: Physically, Thyatira was 52 miles northwest of Smyrna, along a major road connecting the Caicus and Hermus river values. The modern site is Akhisar.

Thyatira passed peacefully to Roman rule in 133 B.C. In Acts 16;14-15,39, a dealer in purple cloth named Lydia, whom Paul met in Philippi, was from Thyatira. Dyes, garments, brass, and pottery were made on this frontier fort. The Anchor Bible Dictionary volume 6 p.546 says that it was especially important center of the wool trade. The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1703-1704 says there is evidence of more trade guilds than in any other Asian town. The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.1013-1014 says that the importance of membership in the trade guilds might have been a temptation for Christians there to compromise.

Q: In Rev 3:1-6, what do we know about the city of Sardis?

A: Physically, Sardis was in the Hermus Valley, 2 1/2 miles south of the Hermus River and at the foot of the 1,000-foot high Mount Tmolus. It was about 50 miles east of Smyrna.

Long before the Roman Empire, Sardis used to be the capital of the mighty Lydian Empire. The Encyclopaedia Britannica says the Cimmerians captured Sardis in the seventh century, and the Persians and Athenians captured it in the 6th century. The Lydians of Sardis captured Ephesus in 560 B.C. Sardis was a fine site for a capital, because of the high cliffs of Mount Tmolus that made it extremely difficult to capture.

Almost everyone in John's time would know the story of how Sardis was captured by the Persians. Some sources say this was in 549 B.C., others 546 B.C., and others say 539 B.C. A Lydian soldier accidentally dropped his helmet, and, with the Persians watching, carefully went down a narrow way through the cliff to retrieve it. At night, the Persians used that route to capture the city. Sardis was captured by Antiochus the Great the same way in 214 B.C., again at night. As Revelation 3:2,3 says, we should be watchful.

Sardis was destroyed by an earthquake in 17 A.D., but it was rebuilt. The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.1525 says there was a large, but unfinished temple of Artemis. It was 160 by 300 feet, with 78 columns 58 feet high.

A reference in Obadiah 20 might refer to Sardis, which would date Jewish settlers in Sardis back to then. From the third century on, there was the largest Jewish synagogue ever discovered. The Anchor Bible Dictionary volume 5 p.982-984 says this was an ornate building, 85 by 20 meters that could have held up to 1,000 people. It adds that this tends to debunk the theory that Jews were "ghettoized" in Roman cities. Other synagogues were much smaller, but there were synagogues in Acmonia, Apameia, Aphrodisias, Hierapolis, Laodicea, Miletus, and Priene.

In Christian times, Melito (flourished 161 A.D.) was a famous bishop of Sardis. The Persian Chosroes II devastated Sardis in 616 A.D. Christianity survived in Sardis, though with bishops there until Gregory ca.1315-1343 A.D.)

See also The New International Dictionary of the Bible p.897-898 for more info.

Q: In Rev 3:5, Rev 13:8, Rev 17:8, Rev 20:12,15, and Rev 21:27 is the book of life "originally ...merely a metaphoric expression signifying the list of living people... and to die would be to be blotted out of that book", and only in post-Exilic times, it became those who would live in Heaven, as Asimov's Guide to the Bible states (p.1200-1201)?

A: No. This is a one of a great number of (almost) unsubstantiated claims that Asimov is fond of making. Other verses in the Bible on the Book of Life, such as Daniel 12:1, and Luke 10:20 (by inference), all are consistent with the Book of Life being those living in Heaven. Asimov would agree, since these verses are all Post-Exilic. He makes his entire case on the only pre-Exilic verses that mention the Book of Life, Exodus 32:32-33, Psalm 69:28. However, Psalm 139 mentions that all David's Days were written in God's book (not necessarily the book of life, though), before one of them came to be. Thus, at least for this book, it is not simply a record of those currently living.

Asimov's claim is almost unsubstantiated, although he does try to substantiate it in a way by mentioning this is based on his opinion that afterlife was only taught in Post-Exilic times. However basing an entire argument on an assumption is not the same as basing an argument on facts. Here is why his assumption that afterlife was only taught in Post-Exilic times was wrong.

Asimov's argument is curious, as nearly all of the ancient Mideast cultures had some concept of afterlife. Perhaps he forgot that the Egyptian pyramids were built by slaves for the purpose of Pharaoh's afterlife. Likewise, the Hittites, built a rock sanctuary of Yazilikaya to the deceased king. The Scythians also had elaborate tombs. Out of Sumerians (Abraham's people), Babylonians, Assyrians, Egyptians, Hittites, Greeks, Scythians, and others, Asimov would make the Hebrews unique in not believing in an afterlife.

Here is an incomplete list of the many Biblical proofs of belief in afterlife, using only Pre-Exilic verses.

Exodus 3:15 Jesus used this verse to refute the Sadducees, who denied an after life. Jesus' point, as valid now as it was then, it that it Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had to still exist in Moses' time, since God said He "is" the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The Sadducees apparently had no answer for this.

1 Sam 2:6 (NIV) "The Lord brings death and make alive; he brings down to the grave and raises up." (NIV)

Psalm 49:14 (NIV) "But God will redeem my soul from the grave; he will surely take me to himself."

Psalm 22:29, (NIV) "...all who go down to the dust will kneel down to Him..."

Psalm 23:6, after telling about the shadow of death in Psalm 23:4, David says, "He will dwell in the house of the Lord forever."

Psalm 49:8-9 (NIV) "The ransom for a life is costly, no payment is ever enough - that he should live on forever and not see decay."

Psalm 52:8-9 (NIV), "I trust in God's unfailing love for ever and ever. I will praise you forever... I will praise you in the presence of your saints."

Isaiah 25:7-8 (NIV) On this mountain he [God] will destroy the shroud that enfolds all peoples, the sheet that covers all nations; he will swallow up death forever...."

Isaiah 53:8-10, after saying the one who suffers for us will be killed and put in the grave of a rich man in verses 8-9, yet he shall see his offspring in verse 10.

Hard Sayings of the Bible p.104 says essentially the same thing, but phrases it much better.

Nevertheless, it is amazing to see how many learned men and women will deny even these two texts [Isaiah 26:19 and Daniel 12:2] and argue that the Old Testament teaches virtually nothing about resurrection or life after death.

The truth of the matter is that ancient peoples were more attuned to the subject of life after death than moderns suspect. The peoples of the ancient Near East wrote at length about what life was like after one left this earth. One need only consult such representative pieces as the Gilgamesh Epic, The Descent of Ishtar into the Netherworld, the Book of the Dead and the Pyramid texts. Indeed, the whole economy of Egypt was geared to the cult of the dead, for all who wished to be a part of the next life had to be buried around the pyramid of the Pharaoh. ... By the time Abraham arrive in Egypt, such concepts had been emblazoned on their walls in hieroglyphics, murals and models made of clay, to make sure no one missed the point. Life after death was not a modern doctrine developed by an educated society that began to think more abstractly about itself and its times. Instead it was an ancient hunger that existed in the hearts of humanity long before the patriarchs.... Why should we attribute this idea to the second and third centuries B.C. if already in the third and second millennium B.C. there is strong evidence to support it?

The earliest biblical mention of the possibility of a mortal's inhabiting the immortal realms of deity can be found in Genesis 5:24 [God taking Enoch away with Him]."

Q: In Rev 3:7-13, what do we know about the city of Philadelphia?

A: King Eumenes II of Pergamum founded it in the 2nd century B.C., named it (city of brotherly love) in honor of his loyal brother Attalus. It was destroyed by an earthquake in 17 A.D., and it was rebuilt with money from the Roman Empire. The city was temporarily renamed as Neokaisareia in honor of Caesar.

Q: In Rev 3:14-22, what do we know about the city of Laodicea?

A: Antiochus II rebuilt Laodicea in 250 B.C.. He named it after his wife, Laodike. It was destroyed by an earthquake in 60 A.D, prior to the book of Revelation being written. The Laodiceans were wealthy enough that they rebuilt the city without external government assistance. Laodicea had fertile land, produced glossy black woolen clothes, and eye-salve. Unfortunately, it had a poor water supply. Unlike nearby Hierapolis, which had hot water, and Colossae, which had cold water, the water at Laodicea was lukewarm, from being piped in from hot springs. Many of these are alluded to in the message to the church at Laodicea in Revelation 3:14-22.

Q: In Rev 6, have the four horsemen come yet?

A: -Probably not. The things they represent (conquest, war, famine, and death/plague) have been around since before John was born. However, the prophecy of the Four Horsemen in Revelation 6:1-8 was probably not been fulfilled yet, because these things have not come in such great magnitude in the correct order, unless you count 1415- for conquest, 1914- for war, 1917- for famine, and 1918- for plague.

If you wish to analyze the data yourself, www.Horsemen.html gives my estimates since John's time.

Q: In Rev 6:9-11, how many Christian persecutions have there been?

A: The following is a partial list of persecution of Christians, and the thousands killed

Date

Persecution

Thousands killed

50-323 A.D.

10 Early Christian Persecutions

50

525 A.D.

Christians flee Ethiopian Jewish persecution

 

527-568

Justinian persecutes Monophysites in Egypt

 

700-

Muslims persecute Christians

 

978-1000

Jewish Queen Judith of Axum persecutes Christians

 

1000-

Persecution of Waldenses

 

10th -12th cent.

Burning and killing heretics in Europe

 

1100-1300

Mongols kill most Nestorian Christians

 

1211

At Strasbourg, Waldenses burned

0.08

1252

Innocent IV's bull for torture to detect heresy

 

1261-1331

Dominicans bring in the Inquisition

 

1232

Dominican Inquisition under Albert

 

1233

Inquisition instituted by Gregory IX

 

1309

Venice under heresy for opposing Clement V

 

1415-16

In Czechoslovakia Hussites revolt

 

1419-34

Crusade against Hussites in Hungary

 

1431

Hussites scare off large Holy Roman Empire Army

 

1480

Spanish Inquisition by Ferdinand and Isabella

 

1487-88

Crusade against the Waldenses

 

1527

Mantz and other Anabaptists killed in Zürich

 

1545

Waldenses persecuted in Italy

 

1555-60

Waldenses persecuted in Italy

 

1562

At Toulouse, French kill Huguenots

4

1576-93

In France, Catholics and Huguenots fight

 

1618-48

Thirty years war kills 1/3 of Germans

7000

1600's

Spanish Inquisition

50

1629-69

"Trample the crucifix" persecution in Japan

 

1637

Japanese + Dutch artillery crush Christians

 

1655

Many Waldenses killed in Italy and France

 

1808

Napoleon ends the Spanish Inquisition

 

1820-41

Christians persecuted in Vietnam

 

1870-90

Guatemala persecutes priests; only 100 left

 

1915-

Persecution of Christians under Communism

 

1956

Protestants persecuted in Colombia

 

1976

Catholics murdered in Guatemala

1,000's

1990-

Severe persecution in Sudan by Muslims

 

1998-

Muslims violently persecuting Christians in Indonesia

 

1998-

Muslim persecution of Christian churches in Uzbekistan

probably 0

As for persecution of heretics, the Roman Empire executed the heretic Priscillian in 385 A.D. Execution of heretics was protested by the church fathers Ambrose, Leo, and John Chrysostom. Torture of heretics was endorsed by Augustine.

Q: In Rev 6:12, what major earthquakes have occurred?

A: The earthquakes and darkness in Revelation have not occurred yet. Here are some of the earthquakes that have happened.

1201 Earthquake in modern day Syria 1000K dead

1/23-24/1556 Earthquake in Shanxi, China 830K dead, class XI

1883 Earthquake near Java, Indonesia 100K dead

1883 Krakatoa blew up. 12 square miles (31 square kilometers) of land went into the atmosphere. The noise was heard 3000 miles (4,800 km) away. In England and America they called it the year without summer.

Q: In Rev 17:1-18, could the heads of the scarlet beast be Roman Emperors?

A: Probably not, because the revival of Babylon is a future event that has not been fulfilled yet. If you wish to try to compare Roman Emperors, here is a list of them. It is believed that Revelation was written about 95-96 A.D., soon before the death of Domitian.

Roman Emperor

Date

Augustus

27 BC.-14 AD

Tiberius

14-37 A.D

Gaius (Caligula)

37-41

Claudius I

41-54

Nero

54-68

Galba

68-69

Otho

69

Vitellius

69

Vespasian

69-79

Titus

79-81

Domitian

81-96

Nerva

96-98

Trajan

98-117

Hadrian

117-138

Antoninus Pius

138-161

Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus

161-169

Avidius Cassius (eastern part)

175

Marcus Aurelius and Commodus

177-180

Q: In Rev 18:13, how can people trade in the souls of men?

A: People can trade in the souls of men in at least three ways.

Lives: The Greek word for soul can also mean life. Slavers can kidnap people and sell slaves, and many ancient empires basically ran off of slavery.

Spiritual: Many people on all continents have used religion as a means to financial gain, as 1 Timothy 6:5 warns. Their "trade" is in the souls of men.

Indulgences: The Catholic Church, especially during the Middle Ages, taught that Catholics who committed venial sins, would suffer in a fiery Purgatory before going to Heaven. However, this stay could be reduced, for themselves and others, by paying money to the church, called indulgences.

Q: In Rev, how do we know if what we have today is a reliable preservation of what originally was written?

A: There are at least three reasons.

1. God promised to preserve His word in Isaiah 55: 10-11; 59:21; 1 Peter 1:24-25; and Mt 24:35.

2. Evidence of the early church. Here are a few of the writers who directly referred to verses in Revelation.

Irenaeus 170-202 A.D. Cyprian 200-258 A.D.

Hippolytus 222-236 A.D. Origen 225-254 A.D.

Mentioned in the Muratorian Canon (c.170 A.D.)

The following either cited or alluded to verses in Revelation.

The Shepherd of Hermas c.115-140 A.D.

The Didache c.120-150 A.D.

Justin Martyr 150-155 A.D.

Tertullian 200-240 A.D.

3. Earliest manuscripts we have of Revelation show there are small manuscript variations, but zero theologically significant errors.

p18 (250-300 A.D.) Rev 1:4-7

p19 middle to late 3rd century. Rev 1:4-7. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.94 has a picture of this manuscript, and it says the handwriting was not by a trained scribe.

p24 c.300 A.D. Rev. 5:5-8; 6:5-8 The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.106 has a picture of this manuscript, and it says the handwriting shows it was written by a common person. Nevertheless, it is very close to Sinaiticus, and only differs from Alexandrinus three times.

p47 Chester Beatty III. 200 A.D. Rev. 9:10-11:3; 11:5-16:15; 16:17-17:2. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.326 has a picture of this manuscript, and on p.25 it says the scribal hand shows the scribe was practiced as writing documents. This manuscript is closest to Sinaiticus.

p98 2nd century Rev 1:13-2:1 The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts p.618 has a picture of this manuscript, and it says the text is badly damaged.

0169 (= Papyrii Oxyrynchus 1080) (4th century) contains Revelation 3:19-4:1. For more info and a photograph see Manuscripts of the Greek Bible p.72-73.

London 3rd/4th

Sinaiticus (340-350 A.D.) and Alexandrinus (c.450 A.D) have all of Revelation.

Revelation is missing in Vaticanus.

Newton Center, Mass 4th century

Bohairic Coptic 3rd/4th century

Sahidic Coptic 3rd/4rth century

Ephraemi Rescriptus 5th century

Armenian 5th century

See also the page on New Testament manuscripts for more info.


For more info please contact Christian Debater™ P.O. Box 144441 Austin, TX 78714 www.BibleQuery.org