A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W XY Z

Tyndale Open Bible Dictionary

Intro ← Index → ©

CHRONOLOGY OF THE BIBLE* (New Testament)

Branch of biblical studies that attempts to discover the sequence of NT events and the amount of time that elapsed between them. Chronology is essential to historians, whose task it is to determine the causes and effects of past events. Generally, for a historian’s purpose, assigning absolute dates is less important than knowing the sequence of events that may have influenced each other. Very few NT happenings, in fact, can be given exact dates.

A remarkable testimony to the influence of Christianity is the fact that the entire Western world now divides history into BC (before Christ) and AD (anno Domini, “in the year of the Lord”). Before that method of dating became widespread in the Middle Ages, events were dated by their relation to other important events such as the founding of Rome or the beginning of a king’s reign. When a monk named Dionysius Exiguus (sixth century) invented our present method of dating, with the birth of Christ dividing history, he made a mistake in his computations. The odd result is the historical anomaly that Jesus himself was born no later than four years “before Christ.”

Chronology of Jesus’ Life

Birth

According to Matthew 2:1 Jesus was born “in the days of Herod the king.” A first-century AD historian, Josephus, recorded that Herod died in the spring of the year we identify as 4 BC. Hence, Jesus was born sometime before that, but how much before is uncertain. Luke 2:1-2 records that Jesus’ birth occurred when “Caesar Augustus,” the Roman emperor, decreed that a census, or enrollment, should be taken throughout the nation. “This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria” (NLT). Those statements raise two questions: When was such a census taken, and when was Quirinius governor of Syria? Neither question has received a completely satisfying answer.

Census documents discovered in Egypt, together with earlier references, suggest that such enrollments were held every 14 years. That would put a census roughly in 8 or 9 BC. In view of the time needed to carry out the census (which required a person to travel to his birthplace), the birth of Jesus may have been somewhat later than the actual year of the decree (perhaps 7 BC).

Josephus recorded that Quirinius became governor of Syria in AD 6, rather late as a date for Jesus’ birth. But some scholars have argued from ancient inscriptions that Quirinius also served in Syria as a special legate of the emperor Augustus before 6 BC. That could be the period referred to in Luke 2:2. Why did Luke choose to cite Quirinius instead of the regular governor of Syria at that time? Perhaps by so doing he could provide a more exact date for the birth of Jesus, since Quirinius was in authority for a shorter time than the regular governor of Syria.

A reasonable conclusion is that Jesus was born about 7 or 6 BC. That fits with Matthew 2:16, which seems to say that Jesus was born at least two years before Herod’s death in 4 BC. No clear evidence exists concerning the day and month of his birth. Celebration of December 25 as Christmas originated in the fourth century, probably as a Christian alternative to the pagan winter solstice festival (Saturnalia).

The Beginning of Public Ministry

Luke 3:23 says that Jesus, “when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age”; since the age given is only approximate, he may have been two or three years older or younger (cf. the pseudepigraphal Testament of Levi 2:2; 12:5). If exactly 30 is added to the suggested date of birth, one gets AD 24. That date cannot be right, because Jesus’ ministry began after John the Baptist appears; Luke 3:1-3 dates John’s public appearance precisely in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberias Caesar” while Pilate was procurator (governor) over Judea. Pilate governed from AD 26 to 36, and the 15th year of Tiberius was most likely AD 27. Therefore Jesus did not begin his public ministry before AD 27. If only a short time elapsed between the beginning of John’s ministry and the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, then Jesus probably began in AD 27 or 28 when he was approximately 33 years old.

Jesus’ Death

All four Gospel records seem to imply that Jesus ate the Last Supper with his disciples on Thursday evening, was crucified on Friday, and rose from the dead early Sunday morning (Mt 28:1; Mk 16:1; Lk 24:1). The claim that Jesus rose on the third day (1 Cor 15:4) comes from the Jewish custom of counting a part of the day as a whole day. According to Matthew (26:19), Mark (14:12), and Luke (22:15), the Last Supper was the Passover meal, a yearly celebration of Israel’s escape from Egypt (Ex 12–15 OET EXO 12:1–51 · OET EXO 13:1–22 · OET EXO 14:1–31 · OET EXO 15:1–27). But according to John 13:1 and 19:14, the Passover meal had not yet been eaten on Friday; hence the Last Supper in John was not the Passover meal.

No completely satisfying solution to the apparent discrepancy has been put forward. Some scholars suggest plausibly that the use of two different calendars was responsible. According to that theory, Jesus was following a calendar that placed the Passover meal on Thursday night. Temple officials, on the other hand, followed an alternate calendar that placed the killing of sacrificial victims on the next day. John may have used the second system to emphasize the fact that Christ was offered as the Passover sacrifice (cf. Jn 19:36; 1 Cor 5:7).

To find out how long Jesus’ public ministry lasted and thus the year in which he died, one can turn to time references in John’s Gospel. John referred to at least three Passovers (2:13; 6:4; 13:1) and possibly four (5:1). Since the Passover was a yearly feast, the ministry of Jesus would have lasted at least two and possibly three years. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke the Friday of Jesus’ death occurred on the 15th of the Jewish month Nisan (which overlaps March and April). According to John, Jesus died on 14 Nisan. The question is: In which years from 26 to 36 (when Pilate was procurator in Judea) did 14 or 15 Nisan fall on a Friday? The answer is AD 27, 29, 30, and 33. Of those, the year 27 is too early and 33 is probably too late. Thus Jesus was probably crucified in 29 or 30, his public ministry lasted two or three years, and he was 35 or 36 years old when he died.

Events from AD 30 to 50

Acts is the only NT book that records how much time elapsed between Jesus’ death and his ascension: “To them he presented himself alive after his passion by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days, and speaking of the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, rsv). The next key event after the ascension of Jesus into heaven was Pentecost (Acts 2:1). Pentecost, the Greek word for “fiftieth,” referred to a celebration of the Feast of Weeks/Harvest (cf. Ex 34:22; Dt 16:9-12) 50 days after the Passover. Since Jesus was crucified during the Passover season, the Pentecost of Acts 2:1, during which the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, took place in AD 29 or 30, some 50 days after the Crucifixion and about 10 days after the Ascension.

After that, events of the early chapters of Acts are hard to date because no precise statements are made about the amount of time between various events. Therefore, the usual method for dating events of the apostolic age is first to find at least one event that can be dated with relative certainty from sources outside the NT; one then dates events before and after that event by figuring out how much time elapsed between them. Sometimes Acts records how much time passed between two events; usually it does not, so dating can only be approximate.

One pivotal starting point is the great famine prophesied by Agabus, which befell Palestine during the reign of the Roman emperor Claudius (Acts 11:28-29). Josephus, who was alive at the time, gives enough information to locate the famine sometime between the years 46 and 48. We also know from the Mishnah, a collection of Jewish laws, that the autumn of 47 to the autumn of 48 was a sabbatical year, when the Jews let the land rest and harvested nothing (cf. Lv 25:2-7). That could have aggravated and prolonged a famine, but one cannot be sure how early the famine started; some scholars propose 46 and some 47.

At first, it seems peculiar that Luke, the author of Acts, should have recorded that famine (Acts 11:28) before recording the death of Herod Agrippa (12:20-23). From facts reported by Josephus, the death of Herod (a grandson of Herod the Great) can be dated in AD 44, probably in the spring. That means that Herod must have died several years before the famine Luke recorded earlier. Some scholars think that Luke simply got his chronological facts wrong. Others see Acts 12:1-24 as a kind of flashback to bring the history of the church in Jerusalem up to date. Such a practice was common among ancient historians, who often followed one source up to a suitable stopping point before moving on to another source. To charge Luke with inaccurate dating, it is argued, is to misunderstand the techniques of historical writing he was using.

Since Herod Agrippa died in AD 44 (Acts 12:23), the apostle James, whom Herod put to death with the sword (v 2), must have died soon before 44, perhaps during the Passover season of 43 (v 3). The apostle Peter’s imprisonment and his miraculous escape (vv 3-17) also belong to that period.

When the Christians of Antioch decided to send relief to the Christians in Jerusalem in the midst of the great famine (Acts 11:29), Barnabas and Paul were appointed to transport the money to Jerusalem. That was Paul’s second visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. The first visit is recorded in Acts 9:26-30. The third comes in Acts 15 when Paul and Barnabas were sent to discuss with the apostles and elders whether gentile converts to Christianity had to be circumcised. How one dates the first and third visits to Jerusalem, as well as Paul’s conversion, depends on how those Jerusalem visits are related to those reported in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.

The basic problem, which still divides NT scholars, is this: In Galatians 1:15–2:10 OET GAL 1:15–24 · OET GAL 2:1–10 Paul recounted that his conversion was followed by two visits to Jerusalem, one three years after his conversion (1:18) and one 14 years after that (2:1-10). All scholars agree that the first visit three years after his conversion is the same as the first visit recorded in Acts 9:26-30. Answers differ, however, to the question of whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the second (famine) visit to Jerusalem in Acts 11:30 (in which case the third visit of Acts 15 is the one omitted from Galatians) or whether Galatians 2:1-10 refers to the visit in Acts 15 (in which case the famine visit was the one omitted from Galatians).

Those who favor the first reconstruction offer six arguments: (1) The reason Paul gave such a rigorous account of his comings and goings in Galatians 1:15-24 was to show that he did not get his gospel from men, nor was he taught it (1:12). In other words, his visits to the Jerusalem apostles were not for the purpose of receiving his gospel. If that is so, for Paul to omit the second Jerusalem visit would jeopardize his integrity and his authority with the Galatians. The first reconstruction avoids that difficulty; omission of a third Jerusalem visit from Galatians 2:1-10 could mean that it had not yet happened when Galatians was written. (2) Galatians 2:1-10 pictures a private meeting between Paul and Barnabas on one hand and the “pillar” apostles on the other. But the meeting in Acts 15 was public and before the whole church. Hence Galatians 2:1-10 more likely refers to a private meeting during the visit of Acts 11:30, which Galatians does not record. (3) Paul’s eagerness to give to the poor mentioned in Galatians 2:10 connects naturally with the second Jerusalem visit, when he was in fact delivering relief to the poor (Acts 11:30). (4) If Galatians 2 recorded the same trip as Acts 15, one would expect some mention of the decision reached by the Jerusalem Council, especially since that decision related directly to the problem of circumcision that Paul was handling in his Letter to the Galatians. (5) Further, it seems unlikely that the Jerusalem Council preceded the event of Galatians 2:11-21, when Peter was rebuked by Paul for withdrawing from fellowship with gentile believers; that incident could hardly have happened so soon after the issue of gentile status in the church had been settled in Jerusalem. (6) According to Galatians 1:6, the letter was written “quickly” after Paul had established the Galatian churches. That makes sense if Galatians was written soon after the first missionary journey, hence just before the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15; that would make Galatians Paul’s first letter.

Scholars who favor the second reconstruction offer four arguments: (1) The main purpose of Paul’s visit in Galatians 2:1-10 appears to be the same as that in Acts 15:1-20; both dealt with the issue of whether circumcision should be required of gentile converts (Gal 2:3-5; Acts 15:1, 5 OET ACT 15:1 · OET ACT 15:5). That similarity is obvious, but there is no such explicit similarity between Galatians 2 and Acts 11:30. (2) On the basis of form and content Galatians is similar to Romans and to 1 and 2 Corinthians; it would thus seem to come from the same period—considerably later than the Jerusalem Council. If so, it is likely that Paul would have included a reference to the Jerusalem Council (namely Gal 2:1-10) in his recollections, since its outcome supported his own stance on circumcision set forth in the letter. (3) Acts 11:30 pictures Barnabas as the leader of the Barnabas/Paul team, since his name is given first place (as in Acts 12:25; 13:1-2, 7 OET ACT 13:1–2 · OET ACT 13:7; cf. 11:25-26). But in the description Paul gives of the visit in Galatians 2, he sees himself as the leader of the team. Since Acts does picture Paul as the leader from the time of the first missionary journey (Acts 13:9, 13, 43, 46, 50 OET ACT 13:9 · OET ACT 13:13 · OET ACT 13:43 · OET ACT 13:46 · OET ACT 13:50), including the third Jerusalem visit (15:2), it is more likely that Galatians 2 records the trip of Acts 15. (4) Finally, in Galatians 2:7-8 Paul was recognized as an apostle to the Gentiles with a standing equal to that of Peter. But if Galatians 2 recorded the events of Acts 11:30 and the first missionary journey had not yet occurred, the “pillar” apostles could hardly have recognized Paul’s authority as apostle to the Gentiles. It is more likely that Galatians 2 followed the first missionary journey, just as Acts 15 followed the first missionary journey in Acts, and that both refer to the same event.