Chronology of Scripture


I know that the old testament is not written in chronological order. Is the New Testament written in chronological order? My husband says no, but I believe the New Testament is written in chronological order. Thank you.


Look at the following web-site that may help you. It comes from Agape Bible Study.


If you mean by chronological order that the books of the NT appear in the order they were written then, no, that is not the case. For example, scholars believe that the first NT work set down in writing is Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians.

More likely, the books were arranged in an order of primacy. Thus, the Gospels have pride of place, followed by Paul’s letters, then the writings of the other apostles.

The Book of Revelation may have been placed last because a) it may have been written last, b) it’s inclusion in the canon was debated within the Church for a long time, and c) because the last two chapters deal with the end times and our blessed hope of heaven.

NotWorthy has provided a very helpful resource (thanks NotWorthy:tiphat: ). If you and your husband are interested in looking deeper into this, I highly recommend this fantastic resource from Jeff Cavins:

The Great Adventure
Catholic Bible Timeline System


Thanks for your help with this. I will look into it further. I checked the website and yes that is helpful. What I really meant was that sometimes even within a book it may not have been written in the order in which the events occurred. I don’t think we have the time for a seminar on the topic but do not rule it out. Thanks for your help.


Ooooh! That’s different. :o

The answer to that would be: sometimes. In general (and we’re primarily talking about the gospels, here), even though the four evangelists are telling the same story, sometimes they arrange the sequence of the stories a little differently, even ommiting or adding some, depending on the particular theological emphasis of the Gospel they are writing. They didn’t make anything up, of course, but they were pointedly selective in what material at their disposal they used. This is not a problem as long as we keep in mind that --while they were relating true, historical events --they were not writing history in the manner we are accustomed to in the 21st century, where it is a strictly linear presentation of events. The Gospels are both *history *and theology.

The Acts of the Apostles is more linear than the Gospels, although it greatly compresses the time of events. It might seem to us that the events related in Acts happened rather quickly, but they actually took place over a long expanse of time; decades, in fact.

The remainder of the NT is mostly letters and timelines are not an issue. The Book of Revelation, as a specialized type of prophecy called apocalyptic, is in a class by itself, and describes events that can in no way be chronologicalized, as many are symbolic, and the one’s that aren’t often happen simultaneously, or even back-track.

Hope that’s more helpful. :slight_smile:

If you’ll scroll down a bit on the website, you’ll see you can listen to the series on tape or CD at your leisure (as I did), without attending the seminar.


Thank you very much! You have answered my question and given me places to go to further my study. I will use those sites. They look very promising. Thanks!


Thank you to all who participated; this thread is now closed.

Mane Nobiscum Domine,
Ferdinand Mary

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit