The Oldest Books in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible

As anyone with even a cursory familiarity with the Judeo-Christian Bible knows, that book is composed of a collection of writings which were composed by a number of different authors and editors over a great span of time. Hence, it is no great wonder that many of us would be interested in the first contributions to both the Hebrew and Christian canons. After all, in identifying and exploring these works, we understand that we are looking through a window into the distant past and seeing a view of God and religion that is unadulterated and diluted by the inevitable evolution in thought and revelation which followed - a glimpse at the origins, the foundations of the whole! Moreover, as with so many other things associated with the study of the Bible, our suppositions about which books came first are skewed by the arrangement of the Bible as it appears in our time - the chronology and narrative of the book that we hold in our hands.

For example, most of us would suppose that the book of Genesis is the oldest document in the Hebrew Bible - the collection of writings which Christians refer to as the Old Testament. After all, that book recounts the story of creation, the prehistoric flood, and the ancestral origins of God's people (the Israelites). However, although these assumptions appear to make perfect sense at first glance, a scholarly deep dive into the various documents which make up the Hebrew canon has demonstrated that the book of Genesis was composed hundreds of years after the book of Job was written! That's right, a book about an extremely righteous and wealthy Gentile - with NO mention of Israel, covenants or laws - is the oldest book in the Hebrew canon!

 In beliefnet's article What is the Oldest Book in the Bible? by Stephanie Hertzenberg, we learn that there are a number of good reasons to believe that Job is the oldest book in the Hebrew canon. In brief, scholars point to the language, content, and things that are noticeably absent from the book. Hertzenberg observed that "Job is written in a form of Hebrew that is even older than the ancient Hebrew that makes up most of the Old Testament. In fact, the language used in Job is not even usually referred to as ancient Hebrew. Instead, it is called “Paleo-Hebrew.” The book also contains Syriac and Arabic expressions which point to a period of time between 1900 and 1700 B.C. when the Shemitic tribes had not yet separated into speaking separate Syriac, Hebrew and Arabic dialects." She went on to note that "Job also mentions several creatures and conditions that are unknown today. The phrases may refer to animals that have gone extinct or, more likely, were called by a different name in later books of the Bible." Finally, Hertzenberg points out that "There are no mentions of the covenant, the Law of Moses or the priesthood. There are not even any mentions of the Israelite people or the Promised Land. Instead, Job offers sacrifices himself for his sons without the use of a priesthood, temple or consecrated altar. His wealth is measured by the size of his herds and the amount of 'qesiytah,' unique silver coins, he possesses. Both herds and silver were used as ancient systems of money between 1900 and 1700 B.C."

Another feature of Job which sets it apart from the other writings of the Hebrew canon relates to its subject matter - the age-old dilemma for people of faith: Why do the righteous suffer? In stark contrast to the folks who occupied the pre-flood world, the people who built the tower of Babel, the Sodomites, and the children of Israel, Job isn't subjected to pain and suffering because of his sins or misconduct - he suffers as a consequence of Satan's interest in him, and the subsequent challenge which he (Satan) offered to God regarding him. In other words, the familiar sin followed by punishment formula (which is so prominent in the rest of the Old Testament) is conspicuously absent from this book! This is obviously an important feature in distinguishing this book from its companions, but it is also significant in terms of its impact on our theology more generally speaking. In short, this other perspective on suffering serves as an important counterbalance to the "sin causes suffering" narrative. More to the point, it is the book of Job which prevents us from attributing all human suffering to sin/wrongdoing and forces us all to be more empathetic toward each other!

Even so, in light of this understanding, it is perhaps more comprehensible to us that this book has been a source of consternation among some Jewish scholars and Christian legalists. In the Torah.org article on the book, we read: "Job is a book that ranks as one of the most difficult books in the Tanach (Bible), for two reasons: 1) Its incredibly complex and obscure Hebrew – allowing for multiple translations and meanings. 2) The complex and delicate nature of the subject matter." Likewise, the My Jewish Learning article on the book notes that "The book of Job challenges the simple equation of suffering with punishment." Also, one has to imagine that the absence of any reference to the patriarchs, Israel, and God's covenants with them has to be a source of some consternation among God's people, and probably accounts for its assignment to the Ketuvim (Writings) - which are largely concerned with wisdom and worship. Interestingly, in both of the articles just referenced, the respective authors divide the book into a number of distinct sections in their attempts to explain the Jewish perspective on it. Roughly speaking, they note that there is a prologue (Satan's conversation with God about Job), "friendly" advice and Job's responses to that advice, and an epilogue (God's answer to Job, Job's reaction, and God's restoration of Job).

In his book The Bible: A Historical and Literary Introduction, Bart Ehrman expresses his opinion that the prologue and epilogue belong to one author, and the "friendly advice" and Job's responses to that advice belong to another author. Ehrman believes that the works of these two authors were later spliced together, and that this accounts for some of the book's complexity. In his view, the two authors had very different perspectives on "how to deal with the problem of suffering." (pg. 212) Personally, I think that the book reflects a number of very different ways that the faithful deal with the "problem of suffering," and that the overarching message of the book is that ALL of our human perspectives on this issue are flawed - that we simply cannot see the ends of all things or truly appreciate the extent of God's mind or his plans and purposes for humankind. Similarly, I also see the book of Job as an object lesson in the WRONG way for people of faith to comfort each other in times of loss and distress!

In broader terms, for Christians generally, the book of Job demonstrates that there is a Godly righteousness that exists apart from the Law, or any covenants associated with it. The non-Israelite Job was clearly considered righteous by God. There is no indication that Job was circumcised, kept the Sabbath, had access to ANY Scriptures, or required the services or mediation of ANY priesthood! And, before we move on to the oldest book in the New Testament, it should be noted that Job is very unlike the Torah in terms of its presentation of the Devil. Outside of a highly symbolic representation of a Serpent in the Garden of Eden, Satan is simply ignored by the Torah. In another stark contrast which has great significance for Christians, Satan is front and center in the story of Job! This portrayal of Satan as "Adversary," "Accuser," and "Afflicter" is central to the theology of the New Testament.

Just as most casual students of the Bible are drawn to the book of Genesis as the "oldest" book in the Hebrew canon, many Christians would probably point to on one of the Gospels as the earliest New Testament text (the more serious ones would probably mention Mark in this connection). The reasons, of course, are obvious. After all, the gospels tell the story of the founder of the religion, Jesus Christ. Once again, however, the majority of Biblical scholars point us in an entirely different direction.

In the preface to his book The Earliest Christian Text, Gerd Ludemann wrote: "This book deals with I Thessalonians, a document that most scholars consider to be the earliest extant Christian writing, a judgment I believe to be well founded." Likewise, in Bart Ehrman's The Bible, we read: "I Thessalonians is usually dated to around 49 C.E., about sixteen or seventeen years after Paul's conversion and about twenty years after the death of Jesus." (Page 328) And, when we compare these statements with what most scholars believe about the timing of the writing of the gospels (most scholars believe that the Gospels were penned between 60-100 C.E. - with Mark generally being acknowledged as the first of these accounts*), we can be fairly certain that the majority of Paul's letters were composed well before the Gospels were written. What's more, there exists a rare and high degree of agreement among scholars regarding the timeline of Paul's writings, and the book of I Thessalonians is almost universally regarded as his earliest surviving "genuine" epistle.

*See Bart Ehrman's The Bible: A Historical and Literary Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2018. Also, please see:  When Were The Four Gospels Written?)

Why is all of this important? Once again, because it gives us a glimpse into the origins of Christianity - what the religion was like before everything got nailed down! It also gives us some insight into what Paul and Gentile Christians knew and/or believed about the historical Jesus and his teachings. Likewise, obviously, it informs our understanding of what Paul was preaching during the middle portion of his own ministry, and what kind of organization/structure existed within the congregations of this period.

Although many modern scholars have focused on how Paul's conception of Jesus and his teachings were significantly different from Jesus and the earliest Jewish Christians*, I have always been more interested in the similarities between them. After all, there is little to no evidence that there ever was an open breach between the Judean and Gentile branches of the Early Church (James, Peter and Paul never publicly excommunicated each other), and this earliest of Christian writings certainly demonstrates a high degree of harmony with regard to the beliefs of the earliest Christians.

* See James Tabor's Paul and Jesus: How the Apostle Transformed Christianity, Simon and Schuster, 2012

Indeed, when we take a closer look at the book, we see that the basic outlines of the Christian story were already well-established within twenty years of Christ's death! For instance, in the very first chapter of this epistle, Paul informed his audience that Christ" had suffered on their behalf, had rescued them from the coming judgment, had been resurrected from death by God, was currently in heaven, and would eventually return to this earth. In the same chapter, Paul also mentioned the Holy Spirit, gospel (or "good news"), evangelism, the fact that God had chosen the Thessalonians to be his, and that they should regard him as their "Father." I don't know about you, but that sounds like a fairly comprehensive list for the first chapter of a short epistle to me!

Likewise, in the second chapter of this epistle, Paul wrote about great opposition to the Christian message and persecution. He also mentioned the apostles of Christ, and that God had called them to share in his Kingdom and glory! Paul went on to note that his audience already regarded his message as the word of God. He then reiterated that both Jewish and Gentile Christians had experienced persecution, and that Satan himself had prevented him from visiting with them.

In the third chapter of his letter, Paul wrote "may the Lord make your love for one another and for all people grow and overflow" (which corresponds nicely to Christ's "new commandment" in the Gospel of John). He also reveals in this chapter that the Lord will one day return "with all his holy people." Continuing into the fourth chapter, Paul went on to state that Christians should be living their lives in a manner that is pleasing to God. He wrote that it was God's will for them to be holy, and that they should consequently stay away from all sexual sins. He went on to reveal that God had given them his Holy Spirit and reiterated the importance of them loving each other, "for God himself has taught you to love one another." Then, once again, Paul reiterated that "we believe that Jesus died and was raised to life again."

Next, Paul's theme returned to Christ's second coming to this earth. In what would eventually become one of the most famous passages of the New Testament, Paul wrote: "the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a commanding shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet call of God. First, the believers who have died will rise from their graves. Then, together with them, we who are still alive and remain on the earth will be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Then we will be with the Lord forever." This same theme continues into the next chapter where Paul echoes Christ's prediction that "the day of the Lord’s return will come unexpectedly, like a thief in the night."

And, if all of that wasn't enough to convince you that the basic message of the Christian Church wasn't already set within twenty years of Christ's death and resurrection, Paul's concluding remarks in this epistle serve to nicely summarize the core of the Christian message. He wrote that Christians should avoid the darkness and live in the light. He went on to say "For God chose to save us through our Lord Jesus Christ, not to pour out his anger on us. Christ died for us so that, whether we are dead or alive when he returns, we can live with him forever." Then he went on to encourage them to respect their leaders (so, the church did have some kind of structure/organization), to always be joyful, never stop praying, avoid quenching the Holy Spirit, and to remain blameless "until our Lord Jesus Christ comes again." Finally, Paul concluded his letter by expressing his desire that "the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ" would remain with them.

I don't know about you, but that reads like a super Reader's Digest condensed version of the New Testament to me! Of course, we must remember that the focus of all of the epistles is fairly narrow and parochial - they were, after all, originally meant to address circumstances/problems within specific Christian communities of the First Century. Even so, the narrow window that this epistle provides into an early ekklesia is extremely revealing and reassuring to the thinking faithful of today.

Indeed, the oldest writings of both the Old and New Testaments force us to think of Scripture in new and vibrant ways. These documents force us to "think outside of the box" - to imagine the traditionally arranged narrative of the canon in new and different ways. In fact, when we understand and fully appreciate that they came first, our ability to differentiate between what is important and what is superfluous has to be enhanced. Of course, this post is NOT intended to denigrate or downplay the importance of the book of Genesis, the Torah, or the Gospels. On the contrary, I believe this understanding can enhance our understanding and appreciation of those other writings if we rightly divide the word of truth! What do you think?