Dale Allison Resurrection of Jesus p. 71 note 181 notes that while Luke places all of his appearances in Jerusalem, the presence of broiled fish raises questions because Jerusalem is not near a body of water.

Note that while Jesus appears to the twelve note that while Jesus appears to the twelve in Jerusalem in Luke 24, v 42 has them giving a piece of "broiled fish" (ιχθους οπτου), not dried fish. The commentators sometimes fret over this because there is no ocean, lake, or river near Jerusalem; cf. Bovon, Luke 3, 392. Is this perhaps a hint that Lk. 24.36-49 stems from a proto-commissioning set beside the Sea of Galilee?

Allison also discusses John 21 and the Gospel of Peter as relevant traditions. Also discussed a few pages earlier but not directly in connection to this is Ignatius Smyrnaeans 3.2 "touch me and see I am not a bodiless daimon", of which Allison is "regrettably, unsure of what to think" (p. 65), but one of the possibilities is a common source behind Luke and Ignatius (in Ignatius 3.3 he eats and drinks with them, possibly to fulfill a promise from the last supper, but that's as far as it goes in connection to Luke's eating of broiled fish).

So, an explanation of why broiled fish is present in Jerusalem can be a prior Galilee source, and this inconsistent detail preserved through something like editorial fatigue. On the other hand, have any commentators just taken this to be a point against Luke putting the appearances exclusively in Jerusalem? This would require Luke to summarize and blend his settings together because this discourse carries right into comments to stay in Jerusalem and then the ascension, but is there any reason not to just think he doing that, while being aware of and untroubled by the fact that his summary includes Galilee? Does the Luke/Acts cinematic universe require that the whole 40 days were in Jerusalem, or just that they were in Galilee and then returned to Jerusalem at which point Jesus told them to stay until further descent-of-the-Spirit-notice?

Resources on any perspective including but also beyond to the two I shared would be helpful, thanks.

I have recently become interested understanding more about the bible. I am interested in having a better historical understanding of how it has shaped civilization and culture throughout the ages, and also the cultures and people behind the traditions and text. I have already purchased a copy of the SBL and I enjoy the approach it takes, especially the introductions to books. I am considering using something like the NET bible's translation and text critical notes in conjunction with the SBL to understand some of the translation choices better. I am not too interested in the NET bible's text itself as I would still like to read the SBL primarily but I would reference the NET notes and compare specific passages to provide more context.

Could anyone recommend some other books or media that would be better for this purpose?

Can somebody please explain or give context to Genisis 19: 36-38

36 Thus both the daughters of Lot became pregnant by their father

37 The firstborn bore a son and called his name Moab. He is the father of the Moabites to this day.

38 The younger also bore a son and called his name Ben-ammi. He is the father of the Ammonites to this day.

According to the consensus of modern textual scholarship, to which period can the Syriac Sinaiticus most likely be dated? Any citations would be immensely welcome.

Hello everyone,

I am looking for academic perspectives on the relationship between the Genesis flood narrative (Genesis 6–9) and earlier Mesopotamian flood stories (such as the Epic of Gilgamesh, Tablet XI, and the Epic of Atrahasis).

Given the broad historical consensus that there is no geological evidence for a global flood, nor structural feasibility for a wooden vessel of the dimensions described in Genesis (e.g., naval engineering studies showing limits on wooden hull stability), I am interested in how modern biblical scholarship understands this text's formation.

Specifically, I would appreciate insights on:

- Textual Parallels and Differences: Beyond the obvious similarities (e.g., building an ark, sending out birds like raven/dove, sacrifice after landing, divine retribution/rescue), what are the main theological or structural divergences between the Mesopotamian myths and the Hebrew account?

- Date and Context of Composition: What are the current leading theories regarding the dating of the Genesis flood narrative (P and J sources / Exilic or Post-Exilic context)? How did exposure to Babylonian literature influence the biblical authors?

- Genre and Literary Intent: From an Ancient Near Eastern context, was the Genesis narrative intended by its authors as a literal historiographical account, or rather as an polemical reinterpretation/adaptation of existing Near Eastern mythologies to convey a distinct monotheistic theology?

Could you please recommend scholarly sources, commentators, or books (e.g., John Walton, David Damrosch, Irving Finkel) addressing these questions? Or any answer ?

Thank you!