Alternative outlines to Roy Gingrich series

I purchased the Roy Gingrich outline to Exodus without being given any warning that it's exceedingly conservative and not informed by critical scholarship. E.g. It posits that Moses wrote Exodus in around 1460BC. Wikipedia suggests otherwise.

I don't want to get into the claims themselves, but I'm just wondering what clues I need to look out for to know an author's views such that clear areas of dispute are at least outlined.

Does anybody know of a set of more critical outlines?? I was pondering purchasing the complete Gingrich set, but am now slightly put off.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

MJ. Smith

Faithlife's description of the author:

Roy Gingrich was an American pastor and author best known for his comprehensive commentary series. He was born to Arthur and Arista Gingrich on February 3, 1920 in Ozark, Illinois, the youngest of four children. Roy received God’s call to enter the Christian ministry in 1941. After intensive preparation and pastoral stints in Illinois and Indiana, he became pastor of Faith Bible Church in Memphis, Tennessee, where he remained for over 40 years.

[Note it is his personal life not academic or pastoral achievements that are emphasized. Note the name of the church he served].

In 1963, Gingrich graduated cum laude from Victory University (formally Mid-South Bible College) and soon thereafter joined the teaching staff. Gingrich began writing conservative Bible commentaries in 1964. Roy Gingrich’s Commentaries in Outline Form (100 vols.) includes 60 different commentaries on the books of the Bible, and 40 additional commentaries on major Bible themes.

[Note where he received his education, and that he was then employed there - a big warning sign academically]

In 2001, Dr. Gingrich retired from a long and fruitful ministry, but continued to revise his commentaries and lecture at colleges and churches in the US. In 2003, he was inducted into the Crichton College Hall of Fame.

===========

I actually have several of his pamphlets but would never recommend them for general usage except for those who would write and appreciate the description above. My impression is of a likeable and sincere author whose probably has a reasonable following of people who would love to be in his Bible class on Sunday mornings. But I think that the Logos description gives plenty of clues to that.

Alternatives? Depends on your purpose ... have you considered the Outline Bible?

Matthew C Jones

Wikipedia suggests otherwise.

Personally, I do not accept Wikipedia as the final authority on things theological.

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/719897#Comment_719897

.. have you considered the Outline Bible?

The Outline Bible by Harold L. Willmington

If Rayner does not like Gingrich I doubt Willmington will be appreciated much more. He is a conservative Baptist that probably agrees with Gingrich on the authorship of Exodus.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/719905#Comment_719905

Ann Hudson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/719902#Comment_719902

Personally, I do not accept Wikipedia as the final authority on things theological.

[Y][Y]

Philana Crouch

A good place to start would be a commentary on the book you want to study. I believe they would have an outline. I have to agree with the assesment that Wikipedia is not the final authority when it comes to theological topic.

If you have a commentary from the perspective you are looking for, Anchor Yale Bible for example, should have an outline. Also there is an outline section in the Passage Guide that might be helpful.

HansK

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/719959#Comment_719959

@Rayner In Factbook, you can do a book study (find "Book of Exodus"), see Outline section under Content. Depending on your library, you will find many outlines there.

Your 'theological remarks' on Exodus are not appreciated here on this forum.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/719966#Comment_719966

Your 'theological remarks' on Exodus are not appreciated here on this forum.

Hans, I am one who is quick to call people on becoming theological but I think Raynor tried hard not to cross the line while giving enough information to elicit the information he needed. Perhaps I think that because I also had to try very hard not to cross the line in my answer. I personally read far more theology into your concern re: Raynor than I read into Raynor's comment itself.

Rayner

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/719897#Comment_719897

[Note it is his personal life not academic or pastoral achievements that are emphasized. Note the name of the church he served].

[Note where he received his education, and that he was then employed there - a big warning sign academically]

It's all slightly reading between the lines, however... It would be more useful if it could be clearly spelled out (along some kind of pre-agreed guidelines) the place on the spectrum of where somebody sits. Saying somebody takes a "high" view of Scripture is unhelpful. I have a "high" view of Scripture, but what I mean by that and what others mean by it seems to differ considerably.

I actually have several of his pamphlets but would never recommend them for general usage except for those who would write and appreciate the description above. My impression is of a likeable and sincere author whose probably has a reasonable following of people who would love to be in his Bible class on Sunday mornings. But I think that the Logos description gives plenty of clues to that.

I think I need more practice reading through the lines. I scanned his biography and bought it due to the fact that it was an "outline" more than anything

Alternatives? Depends on your purpose ... have you considered the Outline Bible?

Nope, but I was after suggestions so I shall take a look. Thanks!

Rayner

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/719902#Comment_719902

Wikipedia suggests otherwise.

Personally, I do not accept Wikipedia as the final authority on things theological.

Me neither, but when there is scholarly disagreement over something, I much prefer that it is outlined, even if one ends up taking a strong position one way or the other.

Gingrich speculates that Moses "probably" kept a journal, whereas it would have been helpful to comment, "there is some disagreement over the authorship of the Pentateuch. Along with other traditional scholars, I understand that it was written by Moses, perhaps from a journal he kept, but see Joe Bloggs for an alternative view."

Rayner

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/719966#Comment_719966

@Rayner In Factbook, you can do a book study (find "Book of Exodus"), see Outline section under Content. Depending on your library, you will find many outlines there.

Ahh, thank you. That's quite helpful. I'm still new to Logos so I hadn't thought of that.

Your 'theological remarks' on Exodus are not appreciated here on this forum.

It was a little tricky to make my point without including an example of the issue I faced, and especially whilst making the point that I think that some of the resources fail to spell out their theological assumptions adequately.

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/720038#Comment_720038

I .... bought it due to the fact that it was an "outline" more than anything

How does the question of date and author impact the outline of the existing text? The introductory matters would be much less than a page and could be overlooked.

I must admit that I only have a limited exposure to Gingrich - even at DailyDeal prices they seemed to be of little additional value to oulines in commentaries etc. my Logos already contains.

Rayner

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/720045#Comment_720045

I .... bought it due to the fact that it was an "outline" more than anything

How does the question of date and author impact the outline of the existing text? The introductory matters would be much less than a page and could be overlooked.

Good question. It just makes me trust the whole outlining process a little less. Perhaps, however, given that outlining is a more structural matter, it won't make a difference

William M. Harper

Logos provides adequate descriptions in my opinion. I rely on them heavily in determining if I want to buy a certain resource or not. On occasion I do purchase resources by authors that I know that I am probably not in theological agreement with in order to examine an opposing point of view and simply to have it on record. However, I don't buy the " higher criticism " stuff for several reasons.and I am thankful that Logos' descriptions generally help me to recognize those resources before I spend my money on something I don't want.

EastTN

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/720041#Comment_720041

... when there is scholarly disagreement over something, I much prefer that it is outlined, even if one ends up taking a strong position one way or the other.

Gingrich speculates that Moses "probably" kept a journal, whereas it would have been helpful to comment, "there is some disagreement over the authorship of the Pentateuch. Along with other traditional scholars, I understand that it was written by Moses, perhaps from a journal he kept, but see Joe Bloggs for an alternative view."

I think it's important to remember that different resources may have very different purposes and target very different audiences. For a textbook or technical commentary, I would strongly agree with you. But if the author intends to provide a more basic reading or devotional aid for a non-academic audience, a different approach may be appropriate. For myself, I assume that anything described as an "outline" will only include the author's bottom-line conclusions.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/720089#Comment_720089

For myself, I assume that anything described as an "outline" will only include the author's bottom-line conclusions.

You are absolutely correct with regards to Gingrich and some others which I consider "teaching notes". What is interesting is that when I see anything described as "outline" my first expectation is that it is a textual outline with as little interpretation as possible - one reason the Outline Bible was a disappointment although I do at times find it useful.

EastTN

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/720216#Comment_720216

You are absolutely correct with regards to Gingrich and some others which I consider "teaching notes". What is interesting is that when I see anything described as "outline" my first expectation is that it is a textual outline with as little interpretation as possible - one reason the Outline Bible was a disappointment although I do at times find it useful.

That's a great distinction. It would be helpful if the website identified "teaching notes" as such.

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/719973#Comment_719973

MJ I thought Rayner was a chick. I think you had "he" at one point in your post...I could be wrong, though, with a lot of names being unisex (e.g. Billy, Ashley, Tracy, etc.)

I think her/his comment was fine and Hans just over reacted a little like all of us do sometimes. I like Roy's outlines even if I don't agree with his gap theory and other issues. I wish the table of contents was better in the Logos edition, though.

DAL

Rayner

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/720216#Comment_720216

What is interesting is that when I see anything described as "outline" my first expectation is that it is a textual outline with as little interpretation as possible - one reason the Outline Bible was a disappointment although I do at times find it useful.

That is also an interesting point... Should authorship/dating enter into any "outline" text? Ideally, perhaps not.