When characters in the Bible reference other Biblical books, they never reference chapters and verses. That is because the Bible did not have chapters until the 1200s and verses until the 1500s. Various factors played a role in the need for chapters and verses, one of which was the increase in circulation of Bibles that resulted in more laypersons having access to the text. For the most part, Bibles follow the same chapter divisions, but there are still a couple of challenging differences based on the content and manuscripts used for translation.
Old-Style Bible Referencing
The New Testament often references the Old Testament using general terms like “it is written” without specifying the book within the Tanak it refers to. An example is Matthew 4:4, which states:
“But he answered, ‘It is written, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.”’”
The quote comes from Deuteronomy 8:3. The “it is written” term without any specificity as to the book referenced appears regularly in the New Testament (See Matthew 4:7, 4:10, John 6:31-32, Romans 3:10, 9:33 and 1 Corinthians 1:19, among others). Another general reference like “it is written,” is “the Scripture says” (Romans 10:11).
Sometimes, the New Testament is a little more specific, mentioning that the quote comes from a prophet without naming him. Matthew 1:22-23 says:
“All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: ‘Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel’ (which means, God with us).”
The prophet is not specified in this reference, though it was Isaiah 7:14 that the author quoted. (See also Matthew 2:5-6, 21:4-5 for similar unspecified references.) At other times, the author mentions the name, as in Matthew 8:17, 12:17, and 13:14, where Isaiah receives credit.
For the first millennium of the Christian era, these general references sufficed. A deeper analysis of the text and the need to link theologically related words or sections of scripture caused scholars and laymen to require a more specific system to reference specific lines of texts or passages.
The Development of Chapter Divisions
Ancient Greek and Latin texts did not have punctuation, spaces between words, or lines between paragraphs. Scriptio continua, or continuous writing, is the Latin term for writing without spaces or divisions. The text was also in capitalis quadrata, or all caps, as the contemporary reader would call it.
Imagine reading this article in all caps without spaces in between.
ITWOULDBEQUITEANIGHTMARETOMAKE
SENSEOFTEXTWITHOUTPUNCTUATION
ORSPACESWOULDNTIT
But that was the reality the early Church dealt with for several centuries. It made the public reading of the scriptures very difficult. The need to divide words, sentences, paragraphs, and larger sections of the Bible was self-evident, though chapter divisions took some time to appear. In the 4th century CE, some scribes started dividing the text into chapter-like segments. It took until the 12th century for chapter divisions to really gain traction and become standardized.
Most scholars of the Bible in the first millennium resided in monasteries or similar secluded environments. The study of the Bible was not an academic discipline as we know it today. It was not until the 12th century that the academic study of the Bible gained prominence in several European cities such as Paris, Bologna, and Oxford. The Church became increasingly involved in the educational sphere, and theologians and philosophers started applying scholastic principles and logic to interpreting the Bible. Names like Peter Abelard (12th century) and later Thomas Aquinas (13th century), were prominent influences in this process.
The study of the scriptures necessitated a system to find and reference specific sections of the Bible more easily. Existing divisions based on Old Latin translations were not standardized, resulting in greatly differing divisions in the text, which complicated the interaction between academics using different texts.
The “Paris Bibles” saw the light. These were single volumes containing the complete canon of scripture. These Bibles helped standardize the order of books in the Bible. Many scholars today credit Stephen Langton (1150-1228 CE) with the chapter divisions in the Paris Bibles because the divisions of chapters in his commentaries are almost identical to contemporary Bible chapters. In addition, two medieval manuscripts claim that the numbering and divisions were the work of Langton.
Langton was a student and later a lecturer at the University of Paris from 1180 to 1206 CE. In a classroom setting, a standardized chapter division was essential. The plethora of Latin divisions would not suffice. Further, Langton was critical of existing divisions in terms of content and length. He attempted to divide the text into relatively equal lengths and sections that deal with one subject at a time. Such a division of chapters would make the text easier for the reader to understand and interpret. The two criteria were often incompatible. One had to give way to the other regularly.
Though Langton received credit, it is unlikely that he made the determinations alone. Scribes and editors of the Paris Bibles likely gave their input, and Langton was undoubtedly influenced by earlier chapter divisions of some of the Latin Bibles, such as the Latin Bible of Theodulf, bishop of Orléans published in 800 CE. He also had the benefit of considering later chapter divisions and considering the logic and motivation behind those divisions.
The current chapter division of the Bible is remarkably like that of Langton and the Paris Bibles, though there are differences that suggest that later editors evaluated and modified Langton’s divisions.
An Example of Differences in Chapters
Even today, different translations of the Bible have different chapter divisions in some instances. When a line of text is moved from one chapter to another, it constitutes a change in chapter division. Let’s look at an example of differences in chapter division and see why and how the translators decided to make the changes they made.
In the King James Version, Revelation 12:17 and 13:1 read:
12:17 “And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.”
13:1 “And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.”
Yet, in the English Standard Version, the same two verses state:
12:17 “Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. And he stood on the sand of the sea.”
13:1 “And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads, with ten diadems on its horns and blasphemous names on its heads.”
The King James Bible follows the Langton division and is based on the Textus Receptus and secondarily on the Latin Vulgate. In the original language of the manuscript used for the KJV translation, the one standing on the beach is first person singular. It seems to indicate a new vision commencing, disconnected from the former, with John standing on the beach and seeing a beast rising from the sea.
The Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece (currently the 28th edition) and the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament (5th edition) served as the primary sources for the English Standard Version, which renders the one standing on the beach in the third person singular. In this translation, the dragon stood on the beach and saw the beast rising from the sea. Considering that shortly thereafter, the text says: “they worshiped the dragon, for he had given his authority to the beast” it may imply that the dragon summoned the beast from the sea as his agent and oversaw its rise from the sea.
The American Standard Version, based on the Westcott and Hort Greek New Testament of 1881, renders the one standing on the beach in the third person singular, thus referring to the dragon but divides the chapters like the King James does. Revelation 13:1: “And he stood upon the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads, and on his horns ten diadems, and upon his heads names of blasphemy.”
These chapter divisions exemplify the challenges translators face when deciding how to divide the text. Each of the three texts above has merit and a sense of logic behind the division but could cause problems when a person references one but a listener or reader uses another translation which renders the text differently.
The Impact of Chapter Divisions
After dividing the Bible into chapters, some editors introduced section headings. These headings do not necessarily follow the chapter divisions and in some instances divide chapters further into subsections. In a sense, these headings reflect a critique of the chapter divisions. If editors did not provide a chapter heading it means that they considered that chapter, or at least the first part of the chapter, as part of the previous chapter.
Though the chapter divisions are helpful to contemporary readers, it is important to remember that they do not have the same authority and inspiration as the text. They represent the interpretations of later scholars who attempted to systematically arrange the text into logical sections that deal with specific themes.
The benefits of chapter divisions are ease of finding specific passages in the Bible and knowing when one theme ends and another begins. The downside is that a chapter may divide a single thought the author shared because an editor ended the chapter before the author’s thought concluded. It breaks the flow of thought when contemporary readers read the text chapter by chapter. Chapter divisions are not as simple as it may seem, and the source manuscripts used and content may complicate standardization across translations.
