Bad me, I know. No posts yet this week. I figured that a Thursday night post is dumb, 'cos it's not really the end of the week, so Sunday nights might be the go. I don't have much to say this round, as I haven't done any significant research on the topics of interest, other than identifying that the Reformation and other historical events that impacted which books are in the Bible today are probably going to be my next area of exploration. And of course, more OT research. Other than that, I've been reading my Bible a wee bit more, and am finding it more interesting and engaging with all the study note additions.
Hm, so I'll probably hold off 'til I've made some new discoveries and tell you all about them next time. Over and out!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nicolette, if you have any questions regarding Bible=OT+NT, I will be glad to talk to you. My weblinks are www.avikadosh.com.ua and blog in Russian www.avikadosh.blogspot.com
ReplyDeleteCheers! and Blessings!
Ah, hi Andy. I'm curious whether you're someone I know in the real world or someone who found my blog out in cyberspace.
ReplyDeleteUm, I did a correspondence course called 'Intro to the Bible' back in late 2006 to early 2007, so I think I understand the fundamentals of how the new and old testaments are linked. That's not so much my issue or worry. I'm cool with learning more of the particulars of how they link better through bible studies and just general Bible reading. The thing that does bug me a bit is that from what I've read so far, writer's who argue for the historical reliability of the Bible, or answer the Q 'is it true' seem to neglect the OT. They have heaps of cool stuff to say about the NT - so much so that I'm fairly convinced of their historical reliability; but because the claims of the NT depend upon the promises and prophecies of the OT, I'd like to hear the historian's perspective on the reliability of the OT.
I'll be writing about these kinds of things real soon :)
Thanks for the comment!