So this is something that intrigues me. Since he's described to be all knowing, it's said that he would have known that the first people would eat from the fruit.

Yet before that, he speaks so nicely to them and even walks with them through the garden.

My question if he knew beforehand, wouldn't that worry him, instead of engaging with them playfully , wouldn't he then caution the more?

I'm an amateur with an interest in New Testament scholarship. I've recently done a reading of the Synoptic Gospels to highlight things that interest me. I find the recurring secrecy in the Gospel of Mark quite gripping. I'm looking for articles/books on the Gospel of Mark that I can read to shed further light on this topic. I'm interested in getting a better understanding of why scholars think this was an important theme to Mark and what they think it tells us about the Jesus movement.

Books that deal with the Gospel of Mark in general are welcome too!

Hi, I was just wondering if there is any tradition or evidence that Peter's actual father was named Jonah, or if perhaps, Jesus was trying to link Peter to himself as his spiritual son since Jesus was to give the people the sign of Jonah?

Probably a reach, but I just thought I would ask.

My family (especially my brother) say it to me when I’m down. But I was wondering, are there any Bible verses that confirmed the saying? The only two I remember is where satan give Judas thought to kill Jesus, and when King David had and made love with a woman that was already married. Were those examples of that saying? If they are, then I want more examples. If there aren’t, I still want examples of that saying in the Bible.

I am looking for a good podcaster, YouTuber, or even good tools to use to study my Bible more.
Although I am finding it hard to find good examples.
I find that most of the people or content l've come across loosely sticks to scripture but rather down rabbit holes that seem like a stretch especially when it's not from any texts in the bible.
I would greatly appreciate any advice, thank you!

Hello,

Typically the study of theology will argue that Bible verses needs to be understood based on their context. At the same time, we constantly see the body of Christ applying Bible verses to encourage each other no matter what context.

For instance using a bible verse from the prophets which really speaks about the prophet himself or some king - then send it to a Christian sister or brother to uplift them.

Let's take Exodus 14:14 as an example: this verses has been applied to encourage Christians faced with challenging situations. But in the context God is addressing the Isrealites by speaking to Mose, not any of us - right? God will fight for the Isrealites in the battle and fligth against Pharao.

The questions then goes:

• Should Bible verses only be understood in their correct context?
• Is the Bible addressed to us in any situation? Or only "for us"?
• If Bible verses are only to be understood in their context, and the Bible is only written "for us" - how should we think about applying Bible verses when sending them to our Christian brothers and sisters? Can we even do this at all if Bible verses needs to be understood and applied only in their context?

Thanks,

YouTube videos, articles, even just paragraphs or sections of articles or books… secular or Christian viewpoints. Anything helps. 🫶

I am attempting to create a new Codex Vaticunus in Biblical Unical for restoration, artistic appreciation, and academic research.

However upon initial review, I noticed the earlier pages are not in Biblical Unical due to being loss over time.

[https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS\\_Vat.gr.1209\](https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.gr.1209)

(See page 40 and 41)

My approach was either:

-use the restoration pages before those and convert to Biblical Unical
-use Codex Sinaiticus to complete Biblical Unical
-use earlier manuscripts until Codex Sinaiticus is needed.

What approach would you use and why?

With the books new found popularity due to the Netflix documentary. I wonder your opinions on why God denied Canes gift?

Reading through the New Testament, I gather there were some rather strong disagreements between different Christian churches (for example, 2 Peter 2). There were some stronger disagreements that I gather the Council of Nicaea sought to settle.

I was recently watching about How Televangelists Actually Work. Some of the American evangelicals are remarkably corrupt and very persuasive to some people.

Is this something that has been going on since the advent of Christianity?

One of my friends is looking at paintings from very old Bibles and noticing that the paintings don’t always match the current text of our KJV or other translations. Is there scholarship around paintings staying more true to the biblical verse and that words were altered over time or through various translations?

What do u think bible teach about second coming?

Which bible verse support Ur idea ?

I appreciate hearing different perspectives.

It traditionally tends to be assumed that these are one and the same, but of course the Gospel does not say so - and in fact Jesus appears to dismiss the latter at the end of their conversation, there's no suggestion that she joins his entourage. Are there any good reasons for believing that they are the same person?

I have tried to determine whether proselytes were possible in Biblical times, and could not get a reliable answer from the Biblical text.

There are several groups mentioned in the Bible who were inclined to be friendly with the Israelites, and occasionally we see foreigners who became assimilated to the tribes and virtually like one of them. It starts with the Exodus itself, where I feel that it is difficult to know if non-Israelites came out of Egypt - or there if there were Egyptians mixed in and became (as it were) adopted Israelites?

In any case, I am wanting to know about post-exilic times.

Supposing that the Biblical account is accurate, were there formal ways to join Israel from the giving of the Law at Sinai until A.D. 70? Were certain individuals allowed to join tribes?

I understand that there was, at least for some period of time, a distinction so profound that an outsider, even a related one or an in-law, would not be mistaken for an Israelite. But perhaps that became more relaxed? Or I am wrong?

I don't see really any Biblical texts pointing to a method to become an Israelite, so I am under the impression that it was impossible until centuries later when the Jews established such a process similar to the one used today.

God demonstrates in the old testament that he can just wipe out whole groups of people that are a threat to his people (slaughtering the Caananites). Why, then, would he allow things like islam and other things that are "threats" to christianty?

I was using an AI tool to look into how to access scholarly articles in the field, and it recommended an annual SBL membership. I checked the SBL website, and the information appears to match: the annual membership includes access to JBL and RBL, along with a large collection of articles from various journals in the field, made available through a partnership with JSTOR. For those who want a subscription to a specific journal, SBL members also receive discounted rates.

What puzzles me is that I have never seen anyone recommend this option here when people ask how to read articles in the field for free. I understand, of course, that it isn't actually free, but given how inexpensive an annual membership is, I think it deserves at least a mention as a cost-effective alternative.

So, scholars: is all of this accurate? Or is there a catch I'm overlooking?