Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Best of all with MacArthur's comments. Explains what is written quite clearly and conveniently. If possible, find the printed version, because the electronic version does not have an explanation for all books, it is not known why.
Read my comments, which mainly concern the Six-Day Course, and in which I fully solve the problem of matching the Bible's evidence with scientific data.My articles are on Samizdat,in particular, “The Bible as a scientific source of World History”
I am not an expert, but I quote the genre indicated in the question, my opinion: an excellent comment that reveals the context of what is happening and contains a good exegetical analysis-a comment on the New York by William Barkley. The question is whether it can be considered as relevant and up-to-date as possible, since it was written in the late 50s of the last century.
If you are interested in very modern biblical studies, then you can read the new commentary by Nicholas Thomas Wright, one of the most relevant (and adequate) biblical scholars of our time. In my opinion, his commentaries on the New Testament are too “popular”, but his other works on Biblical studies are practically out of competition – both in terms of scientific content and in terms of the depth and quality of text analysis.