The Bible
What the Christian Bible is, its Old and New Testament contents, and how its canon differs across Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox traditions — with sources.
The Bible is the collection of texts Christians hold as scripture, traditionally regarded as written by human authors under divine inspiration.1 It is divided into two main parts: the Old Testament, largely shared with the Hebrew Bible of Judaism, and the New Testament, unique to Christianity. Each book is divided into chapters, and each chapter into verses, so that a passage can be cited precisely — for example, Genesis 1:1 or John 3:16.
The Old Testament was composed mostly in Hebrew, with a few passages in Aramaic; the New Testament was composed in Koine (common) Greek, the everyday language of the eastern Mediterranean in the 1st century CE.2 Because of this, virtually every Bible in use today — in every language, including English — is itself a translation, unlike the Qur’an, which Muslims are required to recite in its original Arabic.
Old Testament
The Old Testament, sometimes called the Hebrew Bible or the Tanakh in Judaism, is organized differently depending on tradition; the grouping below follows the common Christian arrangement by genre.
The Pentateuch (Torah): Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy
The Historical Books: Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings, 1 & 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther
The Poetical and Wisdom Books: Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon
The Prophetic Books: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi
That list totals 39 books — the Protestant Old Testament. As the next section explains, Catholic and Orthodox Bibles include additional books here.
New Testament
The New Testament is fixed at 27 books across every major Christian tradition — Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox alike — and consists of the four Gospels, a history of the early church, a set of letters (epistles), and a closing apocalyptic text.
The Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John
Acts of the Apostles: Acts
Letters/Epistles: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, James, 1 & 2 Peter, 1, 2 & 3 John, Jude
Revelation
Most of the New Testament’s letters are attributed to Paul; see Understanding Christianity for his role in shaping it, and Is the Injeel (Gospel) Corrupted? for how its authorship and transmission are understood historically.
Why the canon differs by tradition
Because the New Testament is stable at 27 books everywhere, all of the variation between Christian Bibles is in the Old Testament — specifically, whether a tradition follows the shorter Hebrew Masoretic Text (39 books) or the longer Greek Septuagint, an ancient Jewish translation that circulated with several additional books the Reformers later set aside.3
Click a tradition below to see which additional books it includes on top of the shared 39-book Old Testament and 27-book New Testament core:
39 Old Testament books + 0 additional books + 27 New Testament books = 66 total
Tobit Judith Wisdom of Solomon Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) Baruch 1 Maccabees 2 Maccabees 1 Esdras 3 Maccabees Psalm 151 2 Esdras 1 Enoch Jubilees
The Old Testament's 39 books and the New Testament's 27 books are the same across every tradition shown here — only the additional books above vary. Counts are illustrative: some printed editions of the Slavonic and Ethiopian Bibles include a few further texts beyond the two named for each here.
The table below lays out the same comparison with fuller detail on each tradition:
| Tradition | Old Testament | Total books | What's added beyond the Hebrew 39 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Protestant | 39 books (Hebrew Masoretic Text) | 66 | — |
| Roman Catholic | 46 books | 73 | Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Baruch, and 1 & 2 Maccabees (the seven Deuterocanonical books), plus additions to Esther and to Daniel (the Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon) |
| Eastern Orthodox (Greek) | 49–51 books | 76–78 | Everything in the Catholic list, plus 1 Esdras, 3 Maccabees, and Psalm 151 (4 Maccabees is often printed as a non-canonical appendix) |
| Slavonic / Russian Orthodox | 52 books | ~79 | Everything in the Greek Orthodox list, plus 2 Esdras (the numbering of "Esdras" books famously differs by tradition — see note below) |
| Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo | Broadest canon in regular use | ~81 | Everything above, plus additional texts such as 1 Enoch and Jubilees, which are considered fully canonical only in this tradition |
The books called “Esdras” are the single most confusing point in these comparisons, because the same title is used for different texts — and numbered differently — across traditions. Canonical Ezra and Nehemiah are themselves sometimes labeled “1 Esdras” and “2 Esdras” in Latin Vulgate numbering; a Greek retelling of Ezra-Nehemiah with extra material is called “1 Esdras” in Greek Bibles but “3 Esdras” in the Vulgate and “2 Esdras” in Slavonic Bibles; and a separate Jewish-Christian apocalypse is called “2 Esdras” in most English Apocrypha editions but “4 Esdras” in the Vulgate and “3 Esdras” in Slavonic.4 None of this affects the New Testament, and none of it is a live dispute between Christians and Muslims — it is included here only because the Christian scriptures compared throughout this section are not one fixed list, even among Christians themselves. For how these denominational lines map onto belief and practice more broadly, see Christian Denominations.
Authorship and dating, book by book
The tables below give each book’s traditional attribution — who the book’s title or church tradition says wrote it — alongside where modern critical scholarship typically places it, which is often a different, usually anonymous or composite author, and usually a later date. Every suggested author and date here is a widely-cited scholarly proposal, not a certainty; specialists continue to argue over many of them, sometimes by centuries. Read the notes for why.
Old Testament
| Book | Traditional author | Modern scholars suggest | Estimated date | Note (the textual evidence behind the suggestion) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Genesis | Moses | The Yahwist (J), Elohist (E), and Priestly (P) source-writers or schools, later combined | ~6th century BCE for the combined text | The text contains doublets — two creation accounts (Genesis 1 and 2) and an interwoven flood story — that alternate between calling God "Elohim" and "YHWH" and sometimes conflict on details, which the Documentary Hypothesis explains as separate sources stitched together rather than one author's work |
| Exodus | Moses | The same J, E, and P sources as Genesis | ~6th–5th century BCE final form | Like Genesis, shows doubled or conflicting accounts (e.g. two versions of how Moses's name was revealed to him) attributed to different source strands; Moses is referred to throughout in the third person ("Moses did..."), not "I," which is unusual for a personal memoir |
| Leviticus | Moses | The Priestly (P) source or school | Likely exilic/post-exilic | Its formal, repetitive ritual-law style is stylistically distinct from the narrative portions of Genesis and Exodus, marking it as a separate priestly composition |
| Numbers | Moses | J, E, and P sources combined | ~6th–5th century BCE final form | Scholars identify Numbers as a Priestly (P) reworking of an earlier non-Priestly text, the same kind of multi-source editing the Documentary Hypothesis proposes for Genesis and Exodus |
| Deuteronomy | Moses | "The Deuteronomist" — a scribal school linked to King Josiah's court | Core ~622 BCE; expanded later | Deuteronomy 34 narrates Moses's own death and burial in the third person — "no one knows his burial place to this day," and "since then no prophet has arisen in Israel like Moses" — a retrospective statement Moses could not have written about himself |
| Joshua | Joshua | The Deuteronomistic historian(s) | ~7th–6th century BCE | Like Deuteronomy 34, it records Joshua's own death (24:29-33) and repeatedly uses the phrase "to this day" about customs or landmarks, implying the writer lived long after the events described |
| Judges | Samuel (per Jewish tradition) | The Deuteronomistic historian(s), reworking older hero-tales | ~7th–6th century BCE | The repeated refrain "in those days Israel had no king" (17:6, 21:25) presupposes that the monarchy already existed by the time of writing — placing composition after the period the book describes |
| Ruth | Samuel (per Jewish tradition) | An anonymous writer, possibly of the post-exilic period | Uncertain — monarchic to post-exilic (5th century BCE) | The closing genealogy (4:18-22) traces the family line down to King David, meaning the book as it stands could not have been completed before David's reign began — generations after the story's setting |
| 1 Samuel | Samuel, Gad, Nathan | The Deuteronomistic historian(s), using older court source material | Compiled ~6th century BCE | Samuel's own death is recorded partway through (25:1), yet the narrative continues for many more chapters afterward — proof that at least the second half cannot be Samuel's own writing |
| 2 Samuel | Gad, Nathan | The Deuteronomistic historian(s), as with 1 Samuel | Same compilation as 1 Samuel | Covers David's entire reign, none of which the already-dead Samuel could have witnessed |
| 1 Kings | Jeremiah (per Jewish tradition) | The Deuteronomistic historian(s), drawing on royal annals | Final form ~6th century BCE | The text itself repeatedly cites now-lost source documents by name — "the Book of the Acts of Solomon," "the Book of the Annals of the Kings of Israel/Judah" — showing the writer was a later compiler working from records, not an eyewitness |
| 2 Kings | Jeremiah (per Jewish tradition) | The Deuteronomistic historian(s), as with 1 Kings | ~6th century BCE, extends to 586 BCE | Ends with the Babylonian exile and a Judean king's release from a Babylonian prison decades after Jerusalem's fall — events centuries after Jeremiah's traditional era and impossible for an earlier author to record |
| 1 Chronicles | Ezra (per Jewish tradition) | "The Chronicler" — an anonymous post-exilic priestly writer | Post-exilic, ~4th century BCE | Its genealogies extend several generations past the Babylonian exile (3:17-24), which by itself places the book's composition well after Ezra's own generation |
| 2 Chronicles | Ezra (per Jewish tradition) | The Chronicler, as with 1 Chronicles | Post-exilic, ~4th century BCE | Ends with Persian king Cyrus's decree freeing the Jews from exile (36:22-23) — an explicitly post-exilic event that frames the whole preceding narrative as a retrospective look back at the monarchy |
| Ezra | Ezra | A later editor incorporating an authentic first-person Ezra memoir | ~5th–4th century BCE | The book shifts between first-person ("I, Ezra...") and third-person narration about Ezra within the same text, suggesting an editor wove a genuine Ezra memoir into a larger compiled account |
| Nehemiah | Nehemiah | A later editor incorporating an authentic first-person Nehemiah memoir | ~5th–4th century BCE | Large sections are written consistently in Nehemiah's own first-person voice, which is why scholars treat this "memoir" as more reliably autobiographical than most other historical books |
| Esther | Anonymous | An anonymous Jewish writer of the Persian era | ~4th–3rd century BCE | Uniquely among biblical books, it never mentions God, prayer, or any Jewish religious practice by name, reading more like a Persian court tale than a work of prophecy or law — a genre clue pointing away from any named prophetic author |
| Job | Anonymous | An anonymous poet, possibly reworking an older folk tale into the prose frame | Disputed — patriarchal era to post-exilic | The prose frame (chapters 1-2 and 42) uses simple, archaic Hebrew, while the poetic dialogues in between use far more sophisticated language and vocabulary — a stylistic seam suggesting a poet expanded an older, simpler story |
| Psalms | David (for 73 of 150 psalms) | Many separate poets across centuries; final compilers unnamed | ~10th–4th century BCE, compiled after the exile | Individual psalms are credited in their own superscriptions to Asaph, the sons of Korah, and Moses as well as David, and the collection's composition is generally dated across at least five centuries — from as early as the 10th century BCE to the post-exilic period (no earlier than the 5th century BCE) — making single Davidic authorship untenable for the collection as a whole |
| Proverbs | Solomon | Multiple anonymous wisdom-teacher circles, alongside possibly genuine Solomonic material | Compiled ~6th–4th century BCE | The text itself credits other named sources — "the sayings of Agur," "the sayings of King Lemuel," and material "the men of Hezekiah copied out" (25:1) — proving multiple contributors and compilers rather than one author |
| Ecclesiastes | Solomon ("the Preacher") | An anonymous wisdom teacher ("Qoheleth") writing in Solomon's persona | Most scholars: ~3rd century BCE | Contains Persian loanwords and grammatical features from a much later stage of Hebrew than would have existed in Solomon's 10th-century BCE court, which is why most linguists reject direct Solomonic authorship |
| Song of Solomon | Solomon | An anonymous poet, or a compiled anthology of court love-poetry | Disputed — pre-exilic core to post-exilic | Contains a small number of apparent Persian and Greek loanwords, which some scholars read as evidence of later composition or later editorial touch-ups to an older core, despite the Solomonic superscription |
| Isaiah | The prophet Isaiah (8th century BCE) | The historical Isaiah (chs. 1–39) plus at least one later anonymous prophet or school — often called "Deutero-Isaiah" (chs. 40–55) and "Trito-Isaiah" (chs. 56–66) | 8th century BCE core; 6th and post-exilic additions | Chapters 40-55 speak of the Babylonian exile as a present, ongoing reality and name the Persian king Cyrus directly as God's chosen liberator (44:28, 45:1) — a ruler who lived roughly 150 years after the historical Isaiah, which is why most scholars see a different, later voice here |
| Jeremiah | The prophet Jeremiah, via his scribe Baruch | Substantially Jeremiah's own oracles, compiled and expanded by Baruch and later editors | ~7th–6th century BCE, with later editorial expansion | The book explicitly describes its own creation — Jeremiah dictating his oracles to Baruch, who wrote them on a scroll (36:4) — and the Greek Septuagint's version is about one-eighth shorter than the Hebrew text, a variant confirmed by a matching shorter Hebrew manuscript found at Qumran |
| Lamentations | Jeremiah | An anonymous eyewitness or near-eyewitness poet, not necessarily Jeremiah | Shortly after 586 BCE | The book never names its author; the Jeremiah link comes from a separate later tradition (2 Chronicles 35:25) about Jeremiah composing laments on a different occasion entirely, and its tightly acrostic poetic structure differs from Jeremiah's known prophetic style |
| Ezekiel | The prophet Ezekiel | Substantially the prophet Ezekiel himself, per most scholars | ~6th century BCE | Almost every vision opens with a precise regnal-year date formula (e.g. "in the thirtieth year..." 1:1), giving the book an internal chronological consistency that most other prophetic books lack, and that most scholars take as a strong sign of single, contemporary authorship |
| Daniel | The prophet Daniel (6th century BCE) | An anonymous 2nd-century BCE Jewish writer, using the name of a legendary earlier sage | Most critical scholars: ~167–164 BCE | Its "predictions" of Hellenistic political history are extremely precise up through the persecution under Antiochus IV Epiphanes (chs. 8, 11) and then become vague or inaccurate immediately afterward — a pattern most critical scholars read as history written after the fact up to that point, not genuine long-range prophecy; the text's Aramaic also includes Persian and Greek loanwords hard to explain in an authentic 6th-century Babylonian setting. A minority of scholars defend the traditional 6th-century date14 |
| Hosea | The prophet Hosea | Substantially the prophet Hosea, with later editorial framing | ~8th century BCE | Its opening superscription lists a long span of kings, which some read as an editorial framing device added after Hosea's own lifetime, though the oracles themselves are rarely doubted |
| Joel | The prophet Joel | An anonymous prophetic writer; identity and period uncertain | 9th to 4th century BCE | Unlike most prophetic books, it names no king, foreign invader, or other datable historical event at all — the absence of any internal anchor is exactly why estimates span so many centuries |
| Amos | The prophet Amos | Substantially the prophet Amos, with later editorial additions | ~8th century BCE | Precisely dated by its own superscription to the reigns of named kings, "two years before the earthquake" (1:1) — a level of specific detail that most scholars accept as reliable |
| Obadiah | The prophet Obadiah | An anonymous prophetic writer | Likely ~6th century BCE | The Old Testament's shortest book, with no superscription naming a king or era — its date rests entirely on inference from its description of Edom betraying Judah, usually linked to Jerusalem's fall in 586 BCE |
| Jonah | The prophet Jonah (8th century BCE) | An anonymous post-exilic writer composing a didactic narrative, not the historical Jonah | Many scholars: ~5th–4th century BCE | Unlike other prophetic books, Jonah is written entirely in the third person as a story about a prophet rather than a first-person collection of his own oracles — a genre difference, plus some late-Hebrew vocabulary, that leads most critical scholars to read it as a later parable using an earlier prophet's name |
| Micah | The prophet Micah | Substantially the prophet Micah, with later editorial additions | ~8th century BCE | Alternates abruptly between oracles of judgment and oracles of hope, a shift some scholars attribute to later editorial additions responding to circumstances after Micah's own lifetime |
| Nahum | The prophet Nahum | Substantially the prophet Nahum | ~7th century BCE, before 612 BCE | Entirely concerned with celebrating Nineveh's coming destruction, which anchors it firmly to shortly before Nineveh actually fell in 612 BCE |
| Habakkuk | The prophet Habakkuk | Substantially the prophet Habakkuk | ~7th century BCE | Structured as a dialogue about the rise of the Babylonians ("Chaldeans") as a coming power, anchoring it to the late 7th century BCE just as Babylon was emerging as a threat |
| Zephaniah | The prophet Zephaniah | Substantially the prophet Zephaniah | ~7th century BCE | Internally dated by its own superscription to the reign of King Josiah (1:1), consistent with a 7th-century setting |
| Haggai | The prophet Haggai | Substantially the prophet Haggai, recorded by a close associate or scribe | 520 BCE | Every oracle carries an exact month-and-regnal-year date tied to the Persian king Darius I, an unusually precise internal dating scheme that leaves little room for dispute |
| Zechariah | The prophet Zechariah | The prophet Zechariah (chs. 1–8) plus an anonymous later writer, sometimes called "Deutero-Zechariah" (chs. 9–14) | Chs. 1–8: ~520–518 BCE. Chs. 9–14: ~5th–4th century BCE | Chapters 1-8 share Haggai's precise dating formulas and concern for rebuilding the Temple, while chapters 9-14 shift abruptly to different vocabulary, apocalyptic imagery, and historical references — a stylistic break sharp enough that most scholars treat the two halves as originally separate works |
| Malachi | "Malachi" | An anonymous prophetic writer — "Malachi" may be a title, not a name | ~5th century BCE | The Hebrew word "malachi" means simply "my messenger," and that exact phrase reappears inside the book itself (3:1) describing a future messenger — leading some scholars to suspect a later editor lifted the title from that verse rather than recording the author's actual name |
New Testament
| Book | Traditional author | Modern scholars suggest | Estimated date | Note (the textual evidence behind the suggestion) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matthew | The apostle Matthew | An anonymous Jewish-Christian writer or teacher, drawing on Mark, a hypothesized sayings-source ("Q"), and material unique to Matthew | ~80–90 CE, after and dependent on Mark | Over 600 of Mark's roughly 660 verses reappear in Matthew, closely following Mark's wording and order — an odd pattern if Matthew were an eyewitness apostle relying on a non-eyewitness's account rather than his own memory; the title "According to Matthew" itself is absent from the text and was added by later church tradition |
| Mark | John Mark, companion of Peter | An anonymous Christian writer, not necessarily connected to Peter at all | ~65–70 CE — the earliest Gospel | The text never names its author; the link to Peter comes from a claim by the 2nd-century writer Papias, not from the Gospel itself, and the Greek shows some unfamiliarity with Palestinian geography that some scholars think is unexpected in a native companion of Peter |
| Luke | Luke, physician and companion of Paul | An educated Gentile Christian writer; some scholars retain a link to Paul's circle, others see a later, unconnected author | ~80–90 CE | The author's own opening states he is compiling an "orderly account" from the testimony of "many" earlier writers and eyewitnesses (Luke 1:1-4) — explicitly describing himself as a second-hand compiler, not a direct eyewitness, and never naming himself |
| John | The apostle John | A "Johannine community" or school, drawing on a "Beloved Disciple" tradition, likely finalized by a later redactor | ~90–100 CE — the latest Gospel | Its source is called only "the disciple whom Jesus loved," never named as John, and its closing verse (21:24) refers to that disciple in the third person as someone whose testimony "we know is true" — a plural voice suggesting a different final editor speaking on the source's behalf |
| Acts | Same author as Luke's Gospel | The same anonymous author proposed for the Gospel of Luke | ~80–90 CE, shortly after Luke | Several passages shift without explanation from third-person narration to first-person-plural "we" (e.g. 16:10), which some read as evidence of a travel companion's eyewitness notes and others read as a literary device borrowed from ancient sea-voyage narratives |
| Romans | Paul | Paul — no serious alternative proposed | ~57 CE | Among the least disputed letters in the New Testament; its style, vocabulary, and theology are consistent with Paul's other undisputed letters |
| 1 Corinthians | Paul | Paul — no serious alternative proposed | ~53–54 CE | Undisputed on the same stylistic and historical grounds as Romans |
| 2 Corinthians | Paul | Paul — no serious alternative proposed | ~55–56 CE | Undisputed, though abrupt shifts in tone across the letter lead some scholars to think it splices together fragments of more than one original letter to the same church |
| Galatians | Paul | Paul — no serious alternative proposed | ~48–55 CE | Undisputed; the exact date depends on which of Paul's visits to Jerusalem, described elsewhere in Acts, the letter refers to |
| Ephesians | Paul | A later member of a "Pauline school," writing in Paul's name after his death | If deutero-Pauline (majority view): ~80–100 CE | Roughly a third of its distinctive vocabulary never appears in Paul's undisputed letters, its sentences run markedly longer and more elaborate than Paul's typical style, and it reads in places like a general theological essay rather than a letter addressing a specific church's problems |
| Philippians | Paul | Paul — no serious alternative proposed | ~54–62 CE, written from prison | Undisputed, though an abrupt tonal shift at 3:2 leads some scholars to think it combines more than one original letter into one |
| Colossians | Paul | Disputed between Paul himself and a later member of a Pauline school | ~54–62 CE if authentic, ~70–80 CE if not | No scholarly consensus; roughly a quarter of its vocabulary is otherwise unattested in Paul, and its more developed, cosmic view of Christ leads some scholars to see a later hand building on Paul's ideas |
| 1 Thessalonians | Paul | Paul — no serious alternative proposed | ~50–51 CE | Widely considered Paul's earliest surviving letter, and among the earliest writings in the entire New Testament, on both historical and stylistic grounds |
| 2 Thessalonians | Paul | Disputed between Paul himself and a later imitator | Close to 1 Thessalonians if authentic, later if not | Its description of the end times reads, to some scholars, as a corrective response to 1 Thessalonians written by someone other than Paul, rather than Paul's own follow-up to his earlier letter |
| 1 Timothy | Paul | An anonymous early 2nd-century church leader, writing in Paul's name to consolidate church order | Most critical scholars: early-to-mid 2nd century CE | Describes a settled church structure of bishops and deacons with formal qualifications (3:1-13) that most scholars associate with a later, more institutionalized stage of church organization than Paul's own charismatic, less formal communities; over a third of its vocabulary is otherwise unattested in Paul's undisputed letters |
| 2 Timothy | Paul | Same proposal as 1 Timothy | Same debate as 1 Timothy | Grouped with 1 Timothy and Titus as the "Pastoral Epistles" on the same vocabulary and church-structure grounds |
| Titus | Paul | Same proposal as 1 Timothy | Same debate as 1 Timothy | Grouped with 1 & 2 Timothy as the "Pastoral Epistles" on the same vocabulary and church-structure grounds |
| Philemon | Paul | Paul — no serious alternative proposed | ~54–62 CE | Undisputed; the shortest of Paul's letters, and its personal, situational content matches Paul's undisputed style closely |
| Hebrews | Anonymous; linked to Paul in some early tradition | Unknown; historically proposed candidates include Apollos (suggested by Martin Luther), Barnabas, and Priscilla (proposed by Adolf von Harnack) — none broadly accepted15 | ~60–95 CE | Its Greek style, theological emphases, and vocabulary all differ substantially enough from Paul's undisputed letters that most scholars consider Pauline authorship increasingly indefensible; even the early church father Origen concluded "only God knows" who wrote it |
| James | James, "brother of the Lord" | An anonymous Hellenistic Jewish-Christian teacher, possibly writing in James's name | ~40s–60s CE if authentic; many scholars prefer ~70–100 CE | Written in polished, literary Greek that some scholars consider advanced for a Galilean laborer, and it engages general ethical themes without addressing any of the specific Jewish-Christian controversies (circumcision, food laws) closely associated with the historical James's known leadership in Jerusalem |
| 1 Peter | The apostle Peter | Possibly a secretary (amanuensis) writing on Peter's behalf, or a later writer in a "Petrine circle" in Rome | Many scholars: ~70–90 CE | Its polished literary Greek and sophisticated, extensive use of the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint) are considered by many too advanced for a Galilean fisherman whose native language was Aramaic |
| 2 Peter | The apostle Peter | An anonymous early-to-mid 2nd-century writer, likely from the same "Petrine circle" tradition | Widely regarded as the New Testament's latest-written book, ~100–150 CE | Explicitly refers to "all his [Paul's] letters" as an already-gathered, authoritative body of writings (3:15-16) — implying a period well after Paul's death, once his letters had been collected — and it borrows extensively, in places nearly word for word, from the Epistle of Jude |
| 1 John | The apostle John | An anonymous member of the Johannine community or school | ~90–100 CE | Never claims to be written by an apostle, or even by anyone named John — it is completely anonymous from its opening line, unlike most other New Testament letters |
| 2 John | John, "the Elder" | An anonymous leader within the Johannine community, self-titled "the Elder" | ~90–100 CE | The author identifies himself only by the title "the Elder," never as an apostle or by the name John |
| 3 John | John, "the Elder" | The same proposal as 2 John | ~90–100 CE | Uses the identical self-designation, "the Elder," as 2 John |
| Jude | Jude, "brother of James" (a half-brother of Jesus) | Unknown; possibly an anonymous writer invoking Jude's name | ~60s CE if authentic; many scholars prefer ~90–100 CE | Nearly all of its content overlaps closely with 2 Peter 2, and it quotes the non-canonical Book of Enoch directly as authoritative prophecy (1:14-15) — a detail later church authorities found troubling enough to question the letter's place in the canon |
| Revelation | The apostle John | An early Christian prophet named John, distinct from the apostle and from the Gospel's author — often called "John of Patmos" | Most scholars: ~95–96 CE, under Emperor Domitian | The author names himself only as "John," never claiming to be an apostle or otherwise identifying himself further; his precise identity remains an open scholarly question, with no consensus on whether he is the same "John" associated with the Gospel |
Why authorship attribution is often disputed
A few recurring patterns explain most of the gaps between traditional attribution and modern scholarship above:
- The Gospels never name their authors. All four are formally anonymous texts; their traditional titles (“According to Matthew,” and so on) were attached by church tradition starting in the 2nd century, not claimed by the books themselves.5
- Writing in a revered figure’s name was an accepted practice in antiquity, not necessarily viewed as forgery the way it would be today. Many scholars think several New Testament letters were written this way — by students or admirers continuing a teacher’s legacy after his death — which is why the “Pastoral Epistles” (1 & 2 Timothy, Titus) and 2 Peter are so widely doubted.6
- Linguistic and stylistic analysis — vocabulary, sentence complexity, and command of Greek — is used to argue that a given letter’s Greek is too polished, or too different from an author’s other known writing, to be from the same hand. This is the main argument against Peter having personally written 1 and 2 Peter, and against several disputed Pauline letters.7
- Theological development within a text can suggest it postdates the events or figures it claims — for example, church structures (bishops, elders) described in the Pastoral Epistles that scholars associate with a later stage of church organization than Paul’s own lifetime.
- For the Torah specifically, the Documentary Hypothesis holds that Genesis through Deuteronomy were assembled from several older source documents (conventionally labeled J, E, P, and D) rather than written by Moses as a single author — a theory driven by duplicate and sometimes contradictory accounts of the same events within the text itself.8
None of this is a live dispute between Christians and Muslims specifically — it is standard historical-critical scholarship practiced by Christian, Jewish, and secular scholars alike, and it is included here because the “book by book” table above only makes sense in light of it.
Textual variants: why no two ancient manuscripts agree exactly
No original manuscript (“autograph”) survives for any book of the Bible. Everything that exists today is a copy — usually a copy of a copy of a copy — hand-transcribed by scribes for over a thousand years before the invention of printing. Across many thousands of surviving manuscripts, no two are identical: some differences are accidental (a skipped line, a misspelled word, a scribe “correcting” what looked like an error), and a smaller number appear to be intentional theological or harmonizing edits. Reconstructing the most probable original wording from this evidence is the discipline of textual criticism.9 Three of the best-known examples:
- Mark 16:9-20 (the “longer ending”). The two earliest and most reliable surviving manuscripts of Mark end abruptly at 16:8; most textual critics consider verses 9-20 a later addition, written in a noticeably different style, that was added to give the Gospel a more conventional resurrection-appearance ending. Most modern Bible translations still print it, but flag it as absent from the earliest manuscripts.10
- John 7:53-8:11 (the “woman caught in adultery”). This well-known story is missing from virtually all the earliest Greek manuscripts of John, and in the manuscripts that do include it, it appears in different locations — after John 7:36, after John 21:25, or even inserted into Luke in a few copies. Most scholars think it may preserve an authentic early tradition about Jesus that was not originally part of any Gospel, and was inserted into John later.11
- 1 John 5:7-8 (the “Comma Johanneum”). Some later manuscripts and early printed Bibles (including the King James Version) add an explicit Trinitarian formula here — “the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit: and these three are one.” It is absent from virtually every Greek manuscript before the 14th century and does not appear in Jerome’s original Latin Vulgate; nearly all modern critical scholars, including Trinitarian ones, regard it as a later theological gloss that was not part of the original letter.12
The Old Testament has its own version of this problem: the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (1947-56) gave scholars Hebrew manuscripts roughly a thousand years older than any previously known, and while they confirmed the surprising overall stability of the text scribes had transmitted since antiquity, they also showed real variation existed — most strikingly, the Greek Septuagint’s version of Jeremiah, long known to be shorter than the Hebrew text, turned out to match a Hebrew manuscript found at Qumran, confirming that more than one edition of Jeremiah once genuinely circulated.13
References
- "Biblical literature" — Encyclopedia Britannica, for the Bible's composition, structure, and traditional claim of divine inspiration.
- "Biblical literature: Old Testament canon, texts, and versions" — Encyclopedia Britannica and "Biblical languages" — Wikipedia, for the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek languages of composition.
- "Biblical canon" — Encyclopedia Britannica and "Biblical literature: The Christian canon" — Encyclopedia Britannica, for the Hebrew-canon-versus-Septuagint history behind the Reformation-era split and the resulting book counts by tradition.
- "Esdras" — Wikipedia, for the cross-tradition numbering of the various books called Esdras, drawn from the Vulgate, Septuagint, and Slavonic Bibles.
- "Gospel According to Matthew", "Gospel According to Mark", "Gospel According to Luke", and "Gospel According to John" — Encyclopedia Britannica, for each Gospel's traditional attribution, anonymity, and estimated date.
- "Authorship of the Pauline epistles" — Wikipedia, for the scholarly split between the undisputed, disputed, and Pastoral letters attributed to Paul.
- "Authorship of the Pauline epistles" — Wikipedia, for the stylistic and linguistic arguments used to question authorship of several New Testament letters.
- "Documentary hypothesis" — Wikipedia and "Who Wrote the Pentateuch? The JEDP Hypothesis" — Bart D. Ehrman, for the Torah's proposed composite authorship.
- "Biblical literature" — Encyclopedia Britannica, on the transmission of biblical texts through hand-copied manuscripts and the discipline of textual criticism.
- "Mark 16" — Wikipedia, for the manuscript evidence around the Gospel of Mark's longer ending.
- "Jesus and the woman taken in adultery" — Wikipedia, for the manuscript evidence around the Pericope Adulterae.
- "Johannine Comma" — Wikipedia, for the textual history of the Comma Johanneum in 1 John 5:7-8.
- "Dead Sea Scrolls" — Encyclopedia Britannica, for their significance to Old Testament textual history, including the variant text of Jeremiah.
- "Biblical literature: Daniel" — Encyclopedia Britannica, for the dating debate over the Book of Daniel.
- "Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews" — Wikipedia, for the historically proposed candidates (Apollos, Barnabas, Priscilla) and why none has been broadly accepted.