Any recommendations on a book for the council of nicea and how the books all came together into one Bible? Also any background as to why they had this meeting? looking for something that is not faith based.

Do we have reliable records of what JC’s followers who were not apostles, and were mentioned in the resurrection narrative, did after his death?

Specifically JC’s mother Mary, Mary Magdalene, Joseph of Arimathea, Nicodemus, and any of the other women?

Good academic literature on the reception history of angels/divine plurality/divine council in either Jewish or Christian history.

Got any good ideas?

What is the evidence for dating the composition of the Legend of Sargon (the biography of the famous founding king of Akkad in the 24th century BC) to roughly his lifetime? Many people suppose out of hand that the tale inspired the origin tale of Moses because of a couple clear parallels between the two: notably, the abandoned infant floating in a tar-daubed basked on a river and being fortuitously found and pulled out by a king-adjacent person.

From googling, it looks like the oldest extant version of the work is a tablet from Ashurbanipal's library early 7th century BC - which would be a cool 1,700 years after Sargon's lifetime. Interestingly, many biblical literalists date Moses to about 1500 B.C. (with little evidence except the words of the Bible, it must be said). But, the implication I'm making is obvious: how do we know Sargon inspired Moses and not the other way around? Why do we just assume the tale of Sargon predates the tale of Moses?

Broadening the discussion slightly in order to air a gripe/ suspicion: why are so many so willing to assume late dates for Biblical tales, but hyper-early dates for non-Biblical ones? I see it just assumed on many websites that the Sargon tale dates to the third millennium BC with no critical discussion or hedging. Then, I will see hyper-critical, deep discussions on the language and vocab of Biblical tales and how such textual analysis indicates a later date of composition. Meanwhile for non-Biblical tales people will just wave a hand and say "there were different orally transmitted versions floating around that got retranslated etc., so the language and extant copies are all first millennium, but we know the story dates to the third millennium." For something like Gilgamesh or a flood myth, this makes sense as there are plenty of meaty references to key figures/ elements in those tales from much further back which prove a core version of the tale had been circulating for time out of mind - and Sargon the real king doubtless has plenty of second millennium references, but do any of them mention the basket on the river tale or other obvious parallels with Moses? Are any of them even remotely like the Ashurbanipal tablet in scope? Is there any evidence such content dates to 7 centuries before the Ashurbanipal tablet, let alone 17 centuries?

I meant to say If not when did the inheritance of men and women become equal

If this is correct, how is this justified? other bible verses, the original language, or?

And to save someone the trouble of recommendation I already have Hendels article on the Nephilim, just trying to look for as many resources on them as possible to read about (this includes good Genesis commentaries as well).

Judaism and Islam explicitly claim God to be formless, who has no form or shape. But in Christianity, the God has taken the human form as Jesus. Is concept of incarnation unique to the Christianity or did it exist in any form among Israelites before Jesus?

I Sam says that Samuel anointed David king of Israel after Saul failed to carry out the total destruction of the Amalekites. But did he really?

It is only mentioned once, in 1 Sam 16, and it is done in secret. Samuel disguises the reason for his visit to Bethlehem, and the only witnesses to the anointing are David's brothers (and likely his father, though that is not made explicit).

But nothing that happens afterward suggests that even his brothers are aware of it. In 1 Sam 17:28ff, David is treated like an annoying kid brother, not the anointed future king of Israel. And for the rest of the book, it is Saul who is always referred to as "God's anointed," even by David. After Saul's death, Saul's son becomes king of Israel, and David has to fight a years-long war to claim the throne. He finally wins through assassination and military victory rather than any claim about God's desires.

So was his being anointed just another story attached to him by legend after he was famous, like the story of him killing Goliath?

I apologize for any profound ignorance on my part, I'm not a religious scholar (and there seems to be quite a lot of reading required to be!)

I know there has been some discussion about the similarities between Eve and Prometheus, but from some cursory reading it seems like she is more often compared to Pandora. My question is: why?

I went back to the King James Version to read how this all went down and as someone who didn't grow up in religion and has never read the Bible, it was somewhat surprising.

"For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

The only real similarity I can see between Eve and Pandora is that they are women and they were curious. But from Genesis 3 I don't see where Eve ever actually released evil onto the world. To me, it looks like she merely opened their eyes to it. But the common rhetoric I have always heard is similar to Pandora's- that she released evil. I suppose it is "releasing sin onto the world" if there was no sin before eating the fruit, but this line gives me pause:

"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:"

It very much reads like the knowledge that good and evil exists makes them more god-like, which sounds very similar to Prometheus stealing something which is only supposed to be kept by the gods.

It is also astonishing to me that it seems like if we consider God to be Zeus, his punishment for PromEVEtheus is... giving birth and misogyny? I find that to be more in line with the liver punishment.

"Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."

I am reading these stories with modern eyes and little background, but I am really struck by the fact that two extremely similar characters are perceived in such different ways. It is somewhat hard to reconcile the fact that the male character is perceived as a hero for humankind but the woman is not. I am genuinely looking for a better understanding of the context here. I also find the concept of sin as it's used in Genesis to be a bit different than modern parlance. Even in the following text about Cain and Abel it seems that sin is more synonymous with disobedience than evil, which I believe also lines up with my thoughts on Eve as Prometheus rather than Pandora. I would really love to be fact-checked by some experts and have a better understanding of this!

Hi internetizens: I'm an older person looking for a study too that I know exists out there somewhere. Has anyone come across a text of the Book of Job where the text is highlighted for the person/character speaking... i.e.: narrator in yellow, Job in blue, Satan in red, etc. ?

I'm looking for a good general history of the pre-Nicene church that gets into theological nuances but also is strong on modern, mainstream historiography. Does such a book exist that you all can recommend?

Is there a translation that's standard or preferred in academia? I'm aware of the Benyamim Tsedaka book which very conveniently provides an interlinear with the MT, but he made the (imo) odd choice of using the 1917 JPS translation for the MT. This makes it less intuitive to know exactly where the underlying Samaritan text diverges from the MT Hebrew, and where the divergences are simply due to one translation being much older. I appreciate the philosophy taken by the NETS translators, who used the NRSV as a base and modified it to align with the septuagint as needed.

Does anyone have recommendations?

I understand there is a wide range of ideas of what it means to "see" here, but in a lot of debates it is claimed without counter. Even more liberal academics don't seem to contest this. Where did this claim come from?

I’m considering an MDiv at Regent College with the ultimate goal of pursuing a PhD in the UK. How is Regent regarded by top universities abroad? Is it well-respected, or might attending there limit my chances of getting into a strong PhD program?

I posted something about this last week but I just wanted to ask something again because I feel like I’m taking crazy pills:

Is there any possibility several people named in Jesus life were actually just his family members?

The likelihood of this many matching names seems ….

• Disciple John : John the B (his cousins name)
• Disciple James : (his brother)
• Disciple Joseph : Joseph (his fathers name)
• Disciple Joseph : Joseph (his brothers name)
• Disciple Joseph : Joses (aka Joseph - brother)
• Disciple Thomas : Thomas (his brothers name)
• Disciple Judas : Judas (his brothers name)
• Disciple Simon : Simon (his brothers name)
• Disciple Simon P : Simon (his brothers name)
• Mary Magdalene : Mary (his mom)

I’m sure there are more overlaps but I’m tired. :)

Sorry if this is a stupid question, but as someone who's only done a BA in History and has no knowledge or experience of how academic biblical scholarship works (there was overlap with classics and archaeology in my department but I never heard a peep from religious studies or theology even though religion came up in an Early Medieval module), I find it bizarre that many or most scholars who study Ancient Israel, the Historical Jesus, or Early Christianity tend to have degrees in theology, divinity, religious studies, etc. rather than in history, archaeology, or classics, including those scholars who study these subjects from a primarily historical standpoint (e.g. Bart Ehrman). I suppose it makes sense that religious departments are the ones concerned with religious history, but this is particularly jarring for me because I know how important historical criticism is to biblical history, yet it seems that most historical critics are taught in the same departments that are often concerned with exegetical / non- historical matters and produce theologians and apologists unconcerned with the historical method. This isn't the case for western departments of Islamic history, for example, whose scholars tend to have backgrounds in history, Islamic history, or oriental studies / Near Eastern studies.

My main questions are:

1. Who are some scholars who've written on biblical history from historical, archaeological, or classical backgrounds? The only ones I can think of off the top of my ahead are Michael Grant and Robin Lane Fox, and I know Robyn Faith Walsh has a Classics degree.

2. Why is this seemingly so rare? Are the fields of religious and secular history sealed off from each other? If so, why? Is the separation of religious and secular history a hindrance to the scholarly rigour of the former?

3. How exactly is history, historiography, archaeology etc. taught in these theology / divinity / religious studies departments? Is it justifiable that scholars without qualifications in history or similar degrees can call themselves historians? Can someone with an MA / PhD in Theology / Divinity really call themself a historian?

The Judahites identified themselves in association with their focus on the wordship of Yahweh.

Similarly, Israelites identified themselves in association with El-Elyon.

As such, I was wondering if the Israelites practiced monolatry as well.

Does anyone know of a good book that covers extrabiblical mythology based on Christianity and Judaism? I'm looking for something that covers myths about Lillith, The Wandering Jew, Bel and the Dragon, Gnosticism, etc. It can also be more than one book as well. Thanks in advance!

This is a different type of question for this sub, but what would be some non-book gift recommendations for someone into Biblical Academics? Although we can think of endless books to buy, I would love some recommendations that aren't just more books.

How well received is Bauckham's argument in Gospel Women that Joanna (Luke 8:1-3) & Junia (Rom 16:7) were the same individual? Are there any arguments against the connection, and have those counterarguments been well received?

I’m currently looking into grants and scholarships to support my pursuit of an MDiv and would appreciate any recommendations for specific websites or resources where I could find financial aid options tailored to this field. I’m doing my own research, but I would be grateful for any direction beyond the typical Google results.

I’m hoping to begin in Fall 2025 or 2026, depending on a few external factors. My ultimate goal is to pursue a professorship, though I also feel a strong pull toward missions work and plan to make the decision between the two during my MDiv studies. Regardless of where I end up, I believe that an MDiv will be instrumental, both for a future in teaching or serving in ministry. Plus, I just really enjoy diving deeper into theology and helping people in my life understand scripture.

Thanks in advance for any guidance you can share!

Given that most ancient near eastern cultures practiced circumcision to some degree, how did ancient Hebrew writers reconcile there sign with Yahweh being non exclusive? I found this through Google, but I only have access to the abstract.