Відео

Gotta love your neighbor. Thanks for watching and commenting.

@@biblegeekPhD titus 3:10-11, 1 corinthians 5:1-13, matthew 18:15-17, galatians 6:1. I will love my neighbor, but I won’t condone their mass misinterpretation of the Bible

My video is not about the KJV, and all my commented are based on the original language, Greek or Hebrew.

@@biblegeekPhD I think the point that she was making was that this translation choice is not something that's unique to the ESV. So, it's not really a fair critique to say that they're "adding the word in for their agenda" (no, that isn't intended to be a verbatim quote, but it is an accurate representation of what you've suggested here). Personally I'm not familiar enough with the manuscripts in question to know off the top of my head, but I wonder if this is a textual variant in the manuscripts that the ESV translators chose to go with this version, that they believed to be more accurate for whatever reason?

@@KFish-bw1om that is exactly what I was trying to point out. The ESV is a translation that derives from the KJV, as do many other translations. Thank you 😊

The KJV is disqualified.

As I say at the end of the video, use multiple translations, and recognize that none are perfect. I often reference the NRSV, NASB, KJV. I also think the NIV and NLT are useful for reading casually.

This is why I always recommend people to go learn Greek and Hebrew if they have the ability and access. Knowing the language is very helpful. And, had I never taken Greek, I likely would have never become a PhD in NT.

I agree with you, often times people just like finding issues with translations. You will notice that I have not done this for other translations. The reason being, most other translations aren’t breaking basic translation rules in specific and targeted verses that create problems for the translators theology. There is a reason many of these choices didn’t exist until now, and that is because these choices are illegitimate options. Thanks for watching.

When looking for study Bibles, I recommend the SBL Study Bible, New Oxford Annotated Study Bible. The SBL is the newest and full of world class Bible scholars. Though, if this is for someone young and new the the faith, the Zondervan NIV Study Bible is also useful.

Indeed, moderating UA-cam comments is often entertaining.

Well, I looked into this. It's removed as the earlier texts don't have it, and it's an exact copy of verse 48. So the text is still there, and scholars aren't sure why it was added later in time.

The KJV and the ESV versions use different versions of the New Testament. The KJV uses what is called the majority text.

The Gideons decided to use the ESV. They had to put these versus back in for Gideons to use it.

Here is what one scholar (Comfort) says in his textual commentary: “Although it could be argued that these verses were omitted by scribes who considered the repetition to be unnecessary, such a deletion could hardly occur in manuscripts of such vast diversity as those that give witness to the absence of these verses. Contrarily, verses 44 and 46 were added as a sort of prophetic refrain that makes for good oral reading. Indeed, many textual variants entered the textual stream as the result of scribes enhancing the text for oral reading in the church. This is a classic example. Several modern English versions omit these verses and then note their inclusion for the sake of readers familiar with their place in the KJV tradition. By retaining the verses in the text, the HCSB retains the KJV tradition.” And, here is what another group say the the Textual Commentary on the New Testament, “The words ὅπου ὁ σκώληξ … οὐ σβέννυται, which are lacking in important early witnesses (including ℵ B C W itk syrs copsa), were added by copyists from ver. 48.” All these scholars are explaining that what we find in the “majority text” tradition represented in the KJV is actually a later addition. It is not the ESV who has removed verses, but rather the KJV has verses that were added. There are many early manuscripts that lack these additions, and thus scholars are very convinced they were a later addition likely added for public reading that worked their way into the main text. I get that people see verses removed, and they think things are intentionally being redacted. However, history has shown us that it is the other way around, for centuries people read and copied the Bible, they loved it so much, they gradually expanded it, whether intentionally or accidentally, and so the “majority text tradition” repeatedly expands ideas in the text. But, thankfully we have many manuscripts that show us where these expansions happened. Regardless, an expanded text is much different than a text with gaps. So, the majority text is still valuable, as it has the original text within it, it just has a little more sprinkled in, and we need to be aware of those things, so that we don’t base theologies and such on them.

Glad you all discussed this in the comments. Thanks for watching and commenting :)

I have a PhD in New Testament, and I am a Greek professor. I say that to say, I am well aware of how words are supposed to be used in context, both from a literary standpoint and a cultural. Also, I expertise is in interpretation, so I am also very aware of how text produce meaning. What I have explained in this video is discussed by many in scholarship, and feel free to look at the resources in the video description. The ESV, following the NET, has broken long standing translation on norms. Also, what you have been told about women in leadership is historically false. You can see my other videos on women in ministry for more on that. Moreover there were women in leadership even in early church history, see “Mary and Early Christian Women,” it demonstrates that there were actually women leaders the first like 400-700 years. Glad you studied theology, I hope my channel reminds you of your education. As a seminary prof, I love helping students read, and translate, scripture thoughtfully. Thanks for watching and commenting.

@ interesting. Thank you for not taking offense.

This is I say in the video no translation is perfect. Thanks for watching and commenting.

If you’re looking for a good study Bible, the two I recommend are the SBL Study Bible and the Oxford Annotated Study Bible. The SBL study Bible is newer, so I would pick that one. Thanks for watching.

Oh, Cool, I don’t know Syriac, so I didn’t think to look at that. Had I become a text critic, I would have learned it, but I am not interested in the minutia of textual criticism, so Greek Hebrew Aramaic Latin German and French was enough for me. Haha Thanks for sharing!

I don’t know how to read. Thanks for watching.

So motivated

Reading your comment makes me wonder if you watched the whole video… I give advice at the end and tell people to read multiple translations and that there are many amazing Bible translations. Soooo, perhaps you didn’t get that far. Also, the Bible isn’t a tool for “achieving salvation,” so when we limit our discussion of the Bible to what is related to salvation, we have significantly limited what the Bible actually is. Thanks for watching and commenting.

@@biblegeekPhD well, i did watch it all, but didnt fully pay attention cause there are a lot of such videos and I kind of tuned out as you just appeared to be another guy nitpicking small details. And i'd rather spend my time learning about what the Bible does say instead of tearing apart translations or making entire videos about small issues. And yeah, I did see your recommendation at the end to read multiple translations. But maybe that should be at the beginning? And although I get that you are a scholar and know how to find all these descrepencies, but the point of my comment is that MOST people are not. And videos like this that say "problems with ____ " I suspect do more harm than good to the Christian community. Does nitpicking a few translation choices really affect the theology of the rest of the text? i don't know what the rest of your content looks like (actually I just looked at your channel and it seems like you are focused on digging into things that don't matter.) Use your degree to accomplish something helpful, not cause confusion. From my little observations, you appear to be pushing toward eisegesis in your study. But maybe I am wrong. Just don't dive too deep on things that you miss sharing the Gospel

I find it humorous you tuned me out and also claimed I was doing eisegesis. And, to your point about nitpicking. I think there are many videos that are pointless and nitpicks about Bible versions. You will notice I am not making videos like this about random versions and random texts. My video was focused on the ESV because it has been used to legitimize harmful theology that affects people’s lives. Women and men are affected by theologies these verses are used to support. Women are told if they disagree with their husband, they are living “in the fall” when that is literally not what the text suggests. Women are told they can’t be deacons, when there are women deacons in the NT, and I could go on. The ESV has intentionally mistranslated passages their gender roles disagree with. That is not how theology is supposed to be done. Theology should not lead translators to mistranslate passages. Lastly, these videos are meant to educate people on the Bible, not disciple, or minister, or preach. That has its place in church and such, but that is not the function of this channel. The Bible can and should be understood academically, because when it isn’t, people can misuse it.

@@biblegeekPhD I think the debate against women preaching has been happening far before the ESV, and probably even the KJV has been in existence. But when at least 4 of your 11 videos on your channel so far seem to be oriented towards women preachers, when that it probably very low on the things a Christian should be concerned about, it sure looks as if you are attacking the issue with preconceived ideals. But if that is what you think is important, go for it. I think mercy, grace and forgiveness are probably more important topics, but I'm not the one with a seminary (I'm assuming) degree. And for the record, I don't really care about who TEACHES the Word, as the word should stand regardless of the speaker. But I'm still on the fence about who should be LEADING the church. And although this isn't a topic I have fully studied, I personally think the distinction is more about who should be in charge spiritually, not who should be teaching. Since Adam and Eve, its been the man first. But in our current cultural climate, I really think there are much bigger things to debate than this.

I would recommend this Bible, the SBL Study Bible. www.amazon.com/Study-Bible-Society-Biblical-Literature/dp/0062969420/ref=asc_df_0062969420/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=693550347081&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=1799144134918663961&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9014319&hvtargid=pla-2015286708377&psc=1&mcid=ca0895bf3e4c3e89bee2ea6da262e0fd

I would definitely recommend getting as many different translations as you can and start sooner than later. But I’ll also give my opinion and suggestions as a seminary student Every man’s study Bible NLT - great Bible they also have a women’s version but I can’t speak to that as I’ve never used it. This one focuses on how to live the life God calls men to and highlights the positives and negatives of different biblical men. Life application NLT- focus again on practical theology and how to actually put the biblical meanings into practice. The ESV study Bible - this one is funny to recommend on a video about problems with the ESV translation, which this just doubles down. But it’s still a good translation for 90% of the Bible and just acknowledge the Calvinist and complementation bias CSB study Bible - from my experience this one does a much better job at being neutral and saying here’s the Text and letting you draw your own conclusions. CSB also has a few other good study bibles, it’s my preference translation as it does a great job balancing the word for word and though for thought translations, and I own 8 different CSB study bibles (he reads truth, apologetics, life connections, life counsel, the disciples Bible, the Charles Spurgeon, and the Tony Evan’s,) I recommend all of them except for the two with the names on them A great option would be a Thomason Chain in any translation. No bias just linked scriptures. Your not going to go wrong with something like the NKJV Spirit filled life bible, Notice my bibles have all been devotional in nature, if you’ve never read. The Bible you should probably start with something more devotional than academic in nature. I would honestly look at reviews of translations and just go from there. You won’t ever find a perfect one so get a good one and build out. Maybe even download you version or go on Bible hub and read john or Lukeacts to get a feel those translations ( I always recommend you to read Luke and acts together as those are actually part one and part two off the same book)

Most likely they placed that note in there not because the Greek allows for that, but because there were centuries of English translation who used Junias. Prior to the 1800’s, no one suggested that Junia was Junias, some Greek scholars on the 1800’s confused the woman name Junia, with a centuries later man name, Junias. The logic was that Junia was a contracted form of Junias. But, there is no record of Junias in the first century, and the contracted form of Junias is from centuries later. This was a mistake scholars made because of historical distance. This is why even the KJV has Junia. You can learn more about this in Eldon J Epp’s book on Junia.

The NRSV translation was not a subject of this video. It is only an English reference for those who do not know Greek or Hebrew.

KJV and im sure the others have a lot of errors as well.

Thanks for watching

I have not read Tom Holland’s work, but I know many people like his stuff. From what I have heard, he simplifies Stoicism in a digestible way for people. I have, however, read many Stoic philosophers, especially those who wrote in Greek. I would always recommend reading them, as all their work is free on the internet because it is 2000 years old, haha. Now to your question, it is hard to say in the grand scale how much “influence” there was of Stoicism on Christianity. The source I cited that is about Stoicism and the NT is very thorough, but even in that source it is less about influence and more about shared similarities. We just don’t know if Paul or others were directly drawing on Stoicism, or more just living in the same world and thinking similar things. We do know, however, that during the second sophistic (the philosophical era that is contemporary to the NT) philosophies were all blending, Platonists thinking overlapped some with Epicureans and Stoics and Aristotelians, and so on. That being said, Judaism had various sects, and when a Jewish historian named Josephus described Judaism to his Greek and Roman readers, he compared the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes to philosophical schools. In this comparison he explained that the Pharisees were like the Stoics. And, it should be noted that Paul was a Pharisee. All that being said, while Paul was not a Stoic, he certainly shared similarities, so much so that other Jews recognized the similarities generally. These kinds of similarities were common among thinkers of the time. Lastly, philosophers often founded learning communities and wrote letters to those communities or their students, just like Paul did. So, the beginnings of Christianity, especially the way Paul spread it had lots of overlap with ancient philosophy. Lastly, the ethics of Stoicism are often categorized as virtue ethics, and these kinds of ethics are also present in the NT. You can read about virtue ethics in the NT in this book: www.amazon.com/Practice-Body-Christ-Theology-MacIntyre/dp/0227174607 So at minimum, the ethical systems they both present are similar. But with key differences, as I point out in the video, Paul’s understanding of Jesus is crucial, and Stoics don’t have the same kind of thinking. Great question, btw, thanks for watching.

@@biblegeekPhD thanks for the response. I love the video. You got yourself a subscription keep it up!

Yeah, Junia “being a man” is a new phenomenon.

Hi, thanks for watching. Indeed, the comments on UA-cam are often not the best. I would recommend the SBL Study Bible or the Oxford Annotated Study Bible. Both of these are more concerned with representing what scholars of the Bible think about the Bible, and they try to not have Christian denomination or doctrinal commitments. The SBL Study Bible is relatively cheap, and came out last year, so that’s what I would likely choose. (SBL, stands for Society of Biblical Literature, which is a scholarly society that has Bible scholars from all over the world and from various religious backgrounds).

​@@biblegeekPhD I think this is exactly what I wanted, a more academical approach so I'll be able analyse it myself! Thank you a lot!

My PhD research focused on the politics of the gospel, so, yeah, I agree, it does need PhD’s to figure out. The gospel of God is not partisan, but it is political, and those politics are very different from the politics of the right at the current moment. Thanks for watching.

Lol, not anymore

@@biblegeekPhDI watched this twice to make sure lol

@@biblegeekPhDgreat work by the way!

Thanks!

Thank you for watching and commenting. Glad you got something out of it. The NIV is not perfect either, but its strength is that it is very readable. As I say in the video, no translation is perfect, and if you’re studying a passage, read multiple. If you’re not studying, and just reading for enjoyment, then read whatever is easiest for you. The NLT is similarly readable.

Thanks for watching.

Thanks for watching, I have two long form videos on this topic, if you’re interested.

I am glad you know what hermeneutics is, that’s great! However, the clearest verse informing the less clear is not actually sound hermeneutics. How does one determine clear? What “clear” texts do you use to interpret other texts? And I could go on. Hermeneutics is actually a specialty of mine, I have even published in hermeneutic theory. All that said, when one studies an unclear word or phrase, you do not begin with clear texts, you begin with how the author uses it elsewhere. Then you work your way outward to similar writers from that time and in similar literature. Your representation of 1 Tim is too simplistic. The reason translators struggle and all come to different conclusions is because it is not “very clear language.” The verse prior is taking directly to women, this causes some odd tension because then the writer switches to talking about plural deacons (in the masculine). Often the masculine plural is not gender specific: “brothers” refers to all siblings in a collective, “men” refers to all people in a collective. Thus it is possible this is not specific to male deacons. And your word for word is also not accurate, it is actually “deacons, let them be of one woman men.” And this phrase actually means “married only once” Below in [] is a lexical entry from BDAG, and it specifically notes that it can apply to a man or woman. Thus, the phrase it taking about a person being a faithful spouse, not only to men having one wife. [μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἀνήρ a husband married only once (numerous sepulchral ins celebrate the virtue of a surviving spouse by noting that he or she was married only once, thereby suggesting the virtue of extraordinary fidelity, e.g. CIL VI, 3604; 723; 12405; 14404; cp. Horace, Odes 3, 14, 4; Propertius 4, 11, 36; Valerius Maximus 4, 3, 3; and s. esp. CIL VI, 1527, 31670, 37053=ILS 8393 [text and Eng. tr.: EWistrand, The So-Called Laudatio Thuriae, ’76]; s. GWilliams, JRS 48, ’58 16-29. For the use of μία in ref. to a woman: Ael. Aristid. 46 p. 346 D.: ὑπὲρ μιᾶς γυναικός=for only one woman; μία γυνή quite freq.: Diod. S. 17, 72, 6; cp. 1, 80, 3, where the phrase γαμοῦσι μίαν simply means that the priests married only once, not that they lead a strictly moral life, a concept for which Greeks never use the expression μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἀνήρ or anything like it; Hippostratus [III BC]: 568 fgm. 1 Jac.; Appian, Bell. Civ. 4, 95 §402; Ath. 33, 2 ἐφ̓ ἑνὶ γάμῳ: Ath. terms a second marriage εὐπρεπής μοιχεία veiled adultery) 1 Ti 3:2, 12.] There is a reason the overwhelming majority of NT scholars are egalitarian, it is because when you look closely at the evidence, complementarian theology becomes unsustainable. See my videos on women in ministry for more detail.

@@biblegeekPhD To me, your scholarship, while remarkable, is not convincing enough to overthrow 2000 years of church practice, in ordaining only men. Mary, the sister of Lazarus, is probably the most astute follower that Jesus had. Her insights were remarkable, and Jesus never had to say to her, "Get behind me, Satan." And yet she was not appointed to office. When a denomination allows women to be ordained, especially to the office of elder, it is usually the beginning of a slip into full-blown liberalism.

What you have been told about the history of the church not ordaining women is not accurate. I hear this all the time in comp circles, and I used to be in one. Here is a link to a church history book called Mary and Early Christian Women. The kindle is free because the researcher received grants from the Catholic Church. www.amazon.com/Mary-Early-Christian-Women-Leadership-ebook/dp/B07NZT14J3 It explains that from 300-700 there is loads of evidence that women were ordained. There are numerous fresco paintings in churches all over Europe of women wearing clerical attire, offering the sacramental meal, which only priests could do, and other evidence as well. For, centuries some of these paintings were, literally, covered up and hidden because the Catholic Church didn’t want people to know women used to be ordained. And then there is also this book, which is a bit more approachable: The Making of Biblical Womanhood. www.amazon.com/Making-Biblical-Womanhood-Subjugation-Became/dp/1587434709/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=28Q8I03QGLN2C&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.1DE5caQqGmkiGeAJaNnR4yejgLt8lsFCB01q7h8F-bLJ3R3dG8vvJPAnQAzkjRapbFWoW9PVM4Zu3H_D2RbNAeJVSZzN4pQRS4V6Fli3Gv7uZG5cF2SmcJVsRyJp2bEhHxtzRVXuElfuiax5fZzLdX3JTwFuTPUIXRE6MxJy7pAgl828UW0AsPu1rGjg2mszH98RAhuGq24YiM5J17QmvQ.3BTISnz6RpW90b8kw0gPT-FHTTCfl3P9d-FW2Kd_E0s&dib_tag=se&keywords=The+Making+of+Biblical+Womanhood&qid=1728695728&sprefix=the+making+of+biblical+womanhood%2Caps%2C156&sr=8-1 Also written by a historian, and it chronicles women in the medieval church and Protestant reformation, as well as has a chapter in the NT which is very well researched, being that Barr is not an NT scholar (everything she argues there is normative NT scholarship, and well stated). Lastly, while this books is focused on much more than women in ministry, it too discusses women in ministry in the US in African American churches. African American Readings of Paul, www.amazon.com/African-American-Readings-Paul-Transformation/dp/0802876765/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=269ICXWV6ILRP&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.soJb1hDQYYjSR2a9iF-iNrXKwXeBpp5Db39dTlCMRLXdPXMTVKwIXWVY0_7Jl-DATVnUJ3ZMgwuKZCQMAV7WL5byng_4vQMKob1c6tH0rMB7ey4vkk7TxLBbldoKxGDCbzbsIs90U8xf77lCpybcrTgucBKe7WRe5laoU7hY--2L8uJfq6iwaJqLE0Hpv3RNyhkVRdj7BlhAYkhilIsppA.q3go00pejOq12NkSLfasZh81CwolbvuWYJqdBQFMdS0&dib_tag=se&keywords=african+american+readings+of+paul&qid=1728695918&sprefix=paul+and+african+am%2Caps%2C96&sr=8-1 All that said, the argument that the church didn’t ordain women for 2000 years is just factually incorrect. Many women have been ordained, and these churches were around long before “liberalism.” I hope you decide to go read one of these books. If I had to recommend one, I would recommend the one by Barr. Thanks for watching, Grace and Peace.

Yeah, this position should not be controversial, but in a world where God is often described as a man, and the Spirit is translated to match that, it often is, and the feminine metaphors for God’s Spirit get lost. Thanks for watching and commenting.

@@biblegeekPhD Thanks for the reply. Good video too, appreciate your content!

“Male headship” is a new phenomenon in Christian theology, and it is a tragic misreading of Scripture. There has BEEN women leading in churches since the dawn of the church. If you are curious to learn more, I am happy to recommend books.

I agree, resurrection is crucial to Christian theology.

You have assumed that the right’s positions on abortion, gender, and sexuality are in consonance with the Bible, but there are other interpretations of the various texts they use to legitimize their positions. Also, my video is about none of those things. Feel free to watch the full video to see my discussion in context. There I actually state that the left also reads the Bible poorly.

I think it is better to tell the truth about who you are, whatever that means.

@@biblegeekPhD I wish more christians had that attitude like you. I think you're gonna be the most popular Christian channel among non-Christians 😂😂😂

All good thoughts, but there is so much to unpack in this comment, it would take for too much typing. I would suggest looking at my two videos one women in ministry. There I cite numerous books and articles worth reading that detail why I hold the positions I hold.

Thanks for watching and commenting.

You know, with the amount that Donald Trump lies, I am not sure I am comfortable with anything he says. In other words, I am not sure he is someone we should listen to as speaking on God’s behalf. Thanks for watching and commenting.

@@biblegeekPhD I never said that “Trump spoke on God’s behalf”, neither would I trust anyone who claimed to today, because Jesus warned of false prophets. I merely said that Trump made a statement about his near death experience that matched my own conclusion about it. It takes not an insignificant amount of humility to admit that you are not in control of your own destiny.

Paul wasn't writing that as a political message for all time, he thought Christ would return in his lifetime and he turned out to be wrong.

@@thedude9941 Christ returning to establish his kingdom isn’t the same thing as calling Christians to subvert governments. Paul never specified a time horizon

Just to be clear, a good news proclamation about Justice, Peace, and Salvation would not “subvert government” in a bad way. Rather, it resists the kinds of politics of oppression, violence, and harm that empires often promulgate. So, it’s subverting and reversing the harms done by imperial power. My PhD research was on Romans, so, I have spent a lot of time on Romans 13. Your interpretation is one many hold, but I think it actually doesn’t make sense in the book of Romans and Paul’s other writings. When my research is published in the next year or two, expect to see a video detailing how Rom 13 is also subverting imperial power.

There are many in scholarship who argue similar to me. My PhD research is actually in this field, so I have many scholars who come to mind. One useful resource is this though: www.amazon.com/Jesus-Lord-Caesar-Not-Evaluating/dp/0830839917

@@biblegeekPhD Thanks for the resources!

@@thomasecker9405 you're welcome

@biblegeek7 Just curious... given that Michael Jones of InspiringPhilosophy has done a video in the past about how both sides of the modern political aisle have weaponized Christianity, and how we need to stop and listen to Him for a change, would you ever agree to talk with him about your research?

My video has nothing to do with economics. I am not an economist, so I will likely not talk about that, haha. Hope you enjoyed. :)

Those passages are not talking about homosexuality generally, but actually sex acts that are more akin to assault, pederasty, and temple prostitution. I plan on making a video about some of those verses in the future. Thanks for watching.

@@biblegeekPhD I’ve heard this take. Your laying it out in a video could be good. From what I can see it is about a receiving and a giving partner in a homosexual act. Of course historical context with other literature from the period and places these passages were relevant can help us better understand.

I am glad God listens. Thanks for watching.

lol, I found God 18 years ago, was baptized, went to Bible college, then Seminary, then did a PhD; I pray all the time, I am at church more than one day a week, I care for the poor and downtrodden-God and I are good.

@@biblegeekPhD That is good to read. Have a blessed day.

I agree, y’all need to read the word. At the end of the video I encourage people to read multiple translations, but perhaps my wokeness put you to sleep before then. Haha The ESV is what happens when you try to fit the Bible with complementarian ideology. They are literally changing longstanding translation choices in specific texts egalitarians point to in order to support women in ministry. People are welcome to come to whatever conclusions they want on the Bible, but they shouldn’t be mistranslating it in order to support those conclusions. Thanks for watching.

@biblegeek7 the ancient culture wasn't complimentarian or egalitarian, so what's the next move? genuine question not an attempt at gotcha..

The next move is to learn how to read an ancient text in your modern context and determine its implications and significance for today (Hermeneutics). Translation that accurately represents the text is only one part of the process. The complexity of the Bible is why I have spent over a decade studying it.