ECC: Eerdmans Critical Commentary on Sale

Normally, I'd post the Logos.com link, but after scrolling thru 60 'ecc's I gave up. That pony's in there somewhere ... and typing out the full name, sorry, pony. You're another victim of Logos.com!

I aleady had 'random' volumes from this set ... collected one at a time over the years. I never really took a look. I should have.

I'd propose ECC is Hermeneia on steroids. I'm not a big supporter of 'wild' commentaries, but I do like commentaries that discuss the obvious, even if not traditionally doctrinal. I like to see the rationale.

As an example, in the Johns commentary, right off the bat, there's a 'Johnine community' (in opposition to the Petrine community!). And 3 editions of John. And so on. Basically, the commentators just start off, at a fast pace.

So. If you sometimes get frustrated at Hermeneia (AYB's a bit more staid), try out ECC. The full set is discounted (not the individuals). And a few more hours of 'summersavings' code is available today.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Christian Alexander

I'd propose ECC is Hermeneia on steroids.

Agreed 100%. ECC is very good for a scholarly treatment. I own the ECC on John's Gospel in print and it is wild but very good. Whether subsequent scholarship follows von Wahlde’s processing and argument is immaterial. What is important is that he has laid out a sumptuous study his academic colleagues. The pace is very fast and eclectic. The person reading will feel like they are sitting across from the author and receiving personal instruction but it is very hard to grasp some of his perspectives as an Bible believing Christian.

MJ. Smith

as an Bible believing Christian.

For some reason I've been thinking about the use of this term in the forums. Isn't it just another way of saying the author and I differ in our hermeneutics?

Christian Alexander

In my case no. In some other cases possibly yes but I’m not the one to judge any of the forum members. I am a follower of Jesus Christ and want to be able to exemplify His teachings and His wisdom.

MJ. Smith

Okay, if you identify as a Bible-believing Christian as I believe nearly all of us do, who are the not-Bible-believing Christians? or is the Bible-believing part simply redundant?

DMB

I own the ECC on John's Gospel in print and it is wild but very good.

I had ECC-Johnines for a while, but didn't spend any time with them. Now, reading the intro volume, I can see the basis (I assume) for many of your queries.

I think there's 2 problems you're up against:

- Logos itself is its own 'theology'. I characterize it as '1950s church' ... what Readers Digest spoke to. Add early 1900s OL thinking and automate. So, the app is really not designed for getting much beyond hard searches. Tagging is Christian-bookstore 1950s.

- The forum coffee-table sort of forces questions to remain in-bounds (documentable discussions, etc). Going out of bounds, even explaining, gets messy. Leaves bad tastes.

I really wonder at the AI summarizings (not questioning their inclusion). But I'd assume the process has to satisfy the above issues, since that's how neural net pattern identification works (naive grouping).

Christian Alexander

Glad I was able to explain it further MJ. I always like to help explain if needed. DMB I agree with the problems you see in my court. These are very aphoristic, rational and important. I am sorry that I never can get my explanations right. I do not use AI a lot. Do you think AI can help me any at all? If so where? Thanks again

DMB

I am sorry that I never can get my explanations right. I do not use AI a lot. Do you think AI can help me any at all? If so where? Thanks again

Just my opinion, your explanations don't merit apology. It's just, your research is largely foreign to the audience ... and I've no solution (smiling).

I think MJ is the AI expert as regards the balance between AI searches to locate likely sources, vs analytics of those sources. Most of my work is using 'AI' against the sources.

MJ. Smith

Do you think AI can help me any at all? If so where?

This is difficult to answer because AI can be very useful to a beginner who will only enter a few key words. For them, the process is very simple:

enter a few general word that you think may be keywords
read the results, learning more of the vocabulary used in discussions of the topic
refine your keywords and repeat the cycle

AI can be very useful to "experts" defined not by what they already know about the topic but rather by their ability to ask well-formed questions i.e. questions that describe precisely and completely the criteria that need to be met by the answer returned.

Where AI becomes dangerous is where you expect it to read your mind and accept its answer as if it has read you mind accurately. To give an apparently simple example: "who is Abraham's wife?" The following issues should immediately come to your mind:

what name do you want e.g. Sarah or Sarai?
which wife e.g Sarah or Keturah?
what is a wife e.g. does Hagar fit your definition of wife? or is Keturah actually another name for Hagar?
are there other names or persons in Islamic literature? Pseudepigrapha? . . .
what about rabbinic traditions such as Iscah?

Depending upon what you already know, these questions may come up when you ask the question or as you read the results. But if they don't come up, you can easily misinterpret the results.

The same problem is increased tenfold when you ask questions like "Which apostles did Jesus rebuke?" because defining what characteristics in the text are required for it to be a "rebuke" is not easy to define. AI will make a judgment call which may or may not be what you would make ... and it never tells you explicitly what it did. So, you have to be very slow to call something a "complete list of" as well as to quickly verify that cases you expect are included and those you don't expect are excluded.

The same issue arises when you ask questions that are not answerable e.g. "Why didn't Jonah want to go to Nineveh? The Bible provides hints but no definitive answer. Beware of assuming AI knows more than the text.

In short, the old adage garbage in garbage out applies. If your thought is sloppy AI will amplify the sloppiness. If your thought is clear and precise, AI can be a great time saver.