not sure, maybe in the order of the way they happened
2007-01-25 12:53:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by sissyj 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
No they are not. Most versions of the Bible have the books in the order that was determined by the Council of Nicea in the Fourth Century. It contains the Jewish Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy) those books of the Talmud the council felt relevant to Christianity, and all the Christian gospels and texts they determined were accurate. When it came to their order however that was determined by other considerations than chronology. For example the Torah was kept together as a body of work as were the Gospels. In the Old Testement the other books were divided up into groups of major histories (Judges, Kings, Chronicles) minor histories (Ruth, Ezra, Jonah) prophecy (Isiah, Ezekiel) and wisdom (Psalms, Proverbs). Granted these are not in clearly defined sections, but if you look, they all come in clusters. In regards to the New Testament Epistles, the determinining factor was keeping the works of the authors together rather keeping them dated. Being The Revelation was the only book of prophecy and Acts was the only history outside the Gospels, they are the exceptions to this rule.
As to an actual sequence, I think the best I can tell you is that Job is assumed to be the oldest book in the Bible and the Gospel of John the newest.
2007-01-25 23:10:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by Johnny Canuck 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Book of Revelations was written earlier than some New Testament Books.
2007-01-25 22:38:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by nonoy 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nope. I believe some of Paul's letters were written before the gospels. I think the Old Testement is in chronological order and the New Testement is put in with the most important things first.
2007-01-25 20:41:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by brooken1 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, For the most part they are in order of occurrence in history, but, no they were written in a different order.
2007-01-27 23:12:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by rabbitmedic 3
·
0⤊
0⤋