WBC format

I've got the feeling that it is politically correct and popular to complain about the format of the Word Biblical Commentary https://www.logos.com/product/53935/word-biblical-commentary in teh Logos forum.

But when using it I begin to feel more and more comfortable with the format, actually almost happy. Anyway, I would assume the publisher intentionally designed the format to be good and useful.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

HJ. van der Wal

[Y] I've never understood why people complain about the WBC format.

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/782281#Comment_782281

I have found it logical and very easy to use. The contents make it very easy to jump to the section you wish to focus on. If only other commentary series like hermeneia made getting to their different sections easier.

-Dan

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/782281#Comment_782281

I've never understood why people complain about the WBC format.

Me either.

Kenneth Neighoff

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/782318#Comment_782318

I like the format of WBC. It is easy to follow and use.

Lonnie Spencer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/782331#Comment_782331

I have never had a problem finding what I need to find in WBC

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/782345#Comment_782345

I found it odd at first, but now I'm used to it and have no problem with it

DAL

Allen Browne

But when using it I begin to feel more and more comfortable with the format

Likewise. I quite like the layout now.

Rick Ausdahl

As a lay person with no original language experience and just moving into the arena of more critical/scholarly commentary resources, I had some serious doubts about investing in WBC for three reasons.

My primary concern was simply the many negatives I'd heard about the format--and not only on this forum. My second concern had to do with how often the original language would be interspersed in the narrative without explanation, assuming the reader could read and understand the original language. My third concern was that with this series being more critical/scholarly in it's approach than I was accustomed to, I might find it dry and unsatisfying at best, and at worst, perhaps causing doubts about the reliability of the scripture..

None of my concerns have played out to be problems. The format is different and for my type of use it does not lend itself to simply "reading through" the commentary. However it does make it very easy to find and focus on the specific type of material that best lends itself to the nature and depth of study a person is wanting to achieve. Regarding interspersion of original language in the narrative without explanation, I have not found this nearly as common as I had feared, and once again, because of the format, it's easy to avoid this almost entirely by focusing on certain sections/categories in the commentary and avoiding others. In the same way, the format always provides for a section of the commentary that while remaining critical and scholarly, focuses on the big picture and flow of the text in a way that is anything but dry and unsatisfying.

For me, the bottom line is that the format of the WBC has something for everyone and makes it easy for people to achieve the type of study in which they are interested.

PS: Though I am not holding my breath [+o(], I am very much still hoping to be able to add NICOT/NICNT to my library via a sale similar to what we had recently with NIVAC and WBC. [8-|]