Guy Prentiss Waters has an excellent review and response to the subject. P&R Publishing (2004). Justification and the New Perspectives on Paul - A Review and Response.
And this post relates to Logos Bible Software how?
(Actaully , after reading Waters, I must say that he contributes nothing to the debate. All he does is restate the Reformed position, for those already committed to that position. He does not engage with the new perspective in any way that would convince those considering that perspective to come his way.)
And that post contributes to Logos Bible Software how?
This is the Suggestions forum, and it is (among other things) a place for people to suggest new resources for Logos. Milkman's post was a perfectly normal use of this forum and, by its very nature, relevant to Logos.
This forum is not a place to critique other people's suggested works for Logos to carry. If you aren't interested in it, you wouldn't need to buy it if Logos chooses to produce it. It's best to let people's recommendations stand without comment unless you're giving it a thumbs up. If it ever does come to Logos, there's a newly developing wiki page (http://wiki.logos.com/Resource_Review) where users can give reviews of resources (both positive and negative) which would not end up potentially sounding like personal attacks on an individual who recommended the resource (which I'm sure you didn't intend). So hang onto your critique for that venue, should the opportunity arise. Your comments will be most welcome. Thanks!
I'd agree for the need to watch for uncivility and the risk of escalating argument battles. The two starting posts are not of the kind. Each states its view of the usefulness of the resource without biting.
In my humble opinion, it ought to be fine to digress about the usefulness/recommendation/suggestion of a resource if that resource is found redundant or contributing little that is critically valuable to the topic at hand. But perhaps better than just stating that one work is not all that useful would be to recommend what one would consider a better alternative for Logos to prioritize. I would suggest James Dunn's commentaries on Romans (WBC) and Galatians (Black Commentaries) as interesting glimpses into how New Perspective applies to New Testament theology and exegesis.
Not so much New Perspective, yet also a venerable and respectable illustration of credible alternative to the common Lutheran/Reformed assumptions about Pauline theology (and by extension NT and then biblical theology) are John Wesley's works and the Wesleyan Commentaries.
Perhaps others would have useful recommendations to make as well.
Apologies. I didn't read the group it was posed to, and I was wrong.
Rosie,
I clicked on the link you supplied. It seems to be broken? I was instructed to make a choice between two options for a follow up link. This : http://wiki.logos.com/search.aspx?q=Resource+Review) is where I went and it seems to be what you were mentioning. I didn't know about this page. It is good to know about it - wherever it may be
It is linked on the Home page of the wiki, under
Logos Resource Reviews
Rosie, I clicked on the link you supplied. It seems to be broken? I was instructed to make a choice between two options for a follow up link. This : http://wiki.logos.com/search.aspx?q=Resource+Review) is where I went and it seems to be what you were mentioning. I didn't know about this page. It is good to know about it - wherever it may be
Sorry, that's the forum software bug -- including the closing parenthesis with the URL when it's not supposed to be part of it. You could edit the parenthesis out from the browser's address baronce you click there, or copy/paste without the ) or just click here: http://wiki.logos.com/Resource_Review
Thanks Rosie! You sound like my younger sister whenever I "go for it."
