@thor@mstdn.social @Mitsu
Hmm. It seems like what you're talking about is a combination of a Concordance and a Commentary.
A Concordance is is sort of like an index of the Bible, which also includes alternate translations of various works from the original text. This would help you find passages about marriage.
A Commentary has interpretations of biblical texts. Of course, the content will change based on which scholar wrote the commentary, but these generally tend to help with interpreting certain passages. What I use for my daily devotions at the moment is John MacArthur's Study Bible. I read my Bible on a #Kindle, that version is cheaper:
But another thing that can be helpful sometimes, if you really wanna get into it, is to gather together multiple commentaries and sources together. Nobody's perfect when it comes to biblical interpretation, and sometimes one scholar will catch something the other will miss.
> Early Christians didn't call themselves such. They saw themselves as Jews, and wanted the Israelites to come around to their viewpoint, but they mostly didn't. Their timeline wasn't continued by a sequel.
This is indeed true. The Jews that do not adhere to the New Testament felt that Jesus being deity was blasphemy and did not embrace the concept in the Trinity.
> if it is indeed a chronology, this is obviously a mistake.
It's not a strict chronology, but it's certainly a historical book, and the New Testament does indeed proceed the Old.
