http://www.logos.com/product/18601/the-new-international-commentary-on-the-old-and-new-testament-upgrade
Three of these four volumes—John, James, & Hebrews—are revisions—by different authors—of volumes already in NICNT. In fact this will be the third version of Hebrews available in Logos.
However, that does not prevent me from pre-ordering. Just thought everyone should know what is included in the upgrade [8-|]
Thanks for highlighting this, Jack.
I was wondering if anyone was in possession of the paper copies of these revisions and was able to comment on the merits of the upgrade?
Thanks Jack, that's very helpful information. I'm in on this pre-pub too. Given how much I invested in this set, I'm willing to invest a little more to keep it as current as possible.
But by upgrade, it isn't like the recent WBC upgrades by the same author. The NICOT/NICNT editions are completely new commentaries by new authors.
The NICOT/NICNT editions are completely new commentaries by new authors.
Good point, Paul. They are also Several years newer than the editions they replace, so they may possibly interact with more recent "scholarship" [:D]
I checked out http://bestcommentaries.com to see if it had any helpful information on the new volumes. The J. Ramsey Michaels volume on John had disappointing reviews. Gareth Lee Cockerill's volume on Hebrews doesn't have any reviews yet. And Scot McKnight's volume on James isn't even up on the site yet.
I'm looking forward to Rikk Watts's volume on Mark (still forthcoming), since he's a professor at Regent College whom I have studied under and know personally as a friend.
Since these updated commentaries are by different authors would we keep the older volumes?
Rob, in short, yes.
I would expect to keep the older volume even where the update is by the same author - after all we paid good money for the edition we already have and have to fork out more good money for the updated edition!
Since these updated commentaries are by different authors would we keep the older volumes? I would expect to keep the older volume even where the update is by the same author - after all we paid good money for the edition we already have and have to fork out more good money for the updated edition!
Yes, they never take away something we already own when we buy a newer version of it, regardless of whether it's just an updated version or a whole new rewrite. If it's an update that is freely distributed to fix typos or something, then it has the same resource ID as the old one and automatically replaces it. But updated volumes that we buy get assigned a new resource ID, so they don't replace what we already have.
I remember the Eerdmans salesman showing me the projected dates for releases of the NICNT commentaries about 40 yrs ago.
It has been a much delayed and never ending project.
That was one of the reasons that it took me a long time to make the pre-paid pre-pub commitment to the EEC purchase. I was around publishing long enough to know that publishing projects of this size always get delayed. At least the Logos editions are of already published volumes of the NICOT/NICNT.
Excellent! This is my favorite set by far, and I will be glad to get the new updates. I especially look forward to the Hebrews volume by Dr. Cockerill. I greatly respect him, though he will have to go aways to top F. F. Bruce. Glad I will have both volumes.
[:D][Y]
This only reflects the weakness of bestcommentaries.com to give a complete and accurate picture of the current status of the best commentaries on the market. In the real world, J. Ramsey Michaels on John gets very very high reviews. I have even heard some scholars say it is currently the BEST John commentary on the market. That is high praise, considering that there are so many great options (e.g. Carson, Kostenburger, Keener, etc., etc. etc.).
In the real world, J. Ramsey Michaels on John gets very very high reviews.
In that case, I would be interested in some links to the real world. IOW, who besides Bestcommentaries provides such reviews?
In the real world, J. Ramsey Michaels on John gets very very high reviews. In that case, I would be interested in some links to the real world. IOW, who besides Bestcommentaries provides such reviews?
Same here - Bestcommentaries has 1 review and displays the (in this case not really favorable) Amazon.com reviews as a service. Up 'till now it always appeared to me that reviews from "the real world" (whereever that may be) were reflected on Amazon.
displays the (in this case not really favorable) Amazon.com reviews
This post only involves the upcoming NICNT revision on John.
Interesting reviews @ Amazon. Two very critical, two complimentary, and one mixed. One reviewer blasted the commentary and then commented on his own review to include even more negative comments. He also added a negative comment to the other unfavorable review.
In summary, what I read so far is quite mixed on this volume. Perhaps each one should read the reviews for themselves. My pre-pub order still stands after all this.
Just to be clear, I don't own Michaels on John. The next time I work through the Gospel of John, I plan on picking it up. However, I have seen enough positive reviews that lead me to believe that bestcommentaries.com fails to keep an up to date snapshot of the best commentaries on the market. And while Amazon reviews are helpful when you are buying a toaster, they can be hit or miss in the category of theological/biblical studies. If you want solid and trustworthy reviews, go to the scholars and graduate students. If you are looking for these types of reviews, do a Google search and find a trusted scholar or a student from a trusted institution that has reviewed this title. I am not going to do that work for you, because I don't know who you trust. But I will send you this link from the publisher. http://www.eerdmans.com/Products/2302/the-gospel-of-john.aspx. Here you will find endorsements from D.A. Carson, Gordon Fee, Craig Keener, Andrew Lincoln, and Rodney Whitacre.
I just remembered that it was Scot McKnight who said that Michaels on John was his 1st choice. See http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2010/10/10/the-gospel-of-john-a-new-commentary/
Here are four reviews in scholarly journals if you have access to any of these:
Miller, Susan. "The gospel of John." Journal For The Study Of The New Testament 33, no. 5 (August 1, 2011): 70-71.
Foster, Paul. "The gospel of John." Expository Times 122, no. 6 (March 1, 2011): 309-310.
Holleran, J Warren. "The gospel of John." Theological Studies 72, no. 2 (June 1, 2011): 449-450.
Fay, Ron. "The gospel of John." Criswell Theological Review 8, no. 2 (March 1, 2011): 114-116.
The two of these I was able to access online gave good reviews with some reservations. Holleran concluded his review by stating, "Although scholars may find no significant advances here over previous work in the field, M. has produced a valuable contribution to evangelical commentary on the Gospel of John, worthy of its predecessor in this series, and one that teachers, pastors, and students will find eminently serviceable for many years to come."
Fay concluded his review with: "At the same time, this volume ranks at the forefront of Johannine scholarship, standing alongside the work of Carson and Brown and, in this reviewer's opinion, above that of Beasley-Murray, Moloney, and others. I recommend this for scholars and lay people alike, as it would complement the library of any serious student of John's Gospel."
The most recent Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society contains reviews for the Hosea, John, and James volumes that are part of this upgrade.
The review of John was not very positive. The reviewer stated that the interaction with the greek text was the strength of the commentary. The major weakness, in the reviewers mind, was the (deliberate) failure to interact with any recent Johanine scholarship, which the reviewer cited as a problem since, ostensibly, the reason for an upgrade over Wood's excellent volume would be to take advantage of recent scholarly discussion. Michaels made the decision NOT to focus on recent scholarship, according to the reviewer, and instead spend more time exegeting the greek. So maybe this is just a case of the reviewer's expectations not being me, but I thought I would point this out as a negative review.
On the other hand, the reviews for Hosea and James were both positive.
Michaels made the decision NOT to focus on recent scholarship, according to the reviewer, and instead spend more time exegeting the greek.
And that is to be considered a weakness? I am far more interested in the exegesis of the Greek text than is reading about what "recent scholarship" thought.
Michaels made the decision NOT to focus on recent scholarship, according to the reviewer, and instead spend more time exegeting the greek. And that is to be considered a weakness? I am far more interested in the exegesis of the Greek text than is reading about what "recent scholarship" thought.
But it's weird, nevertheless.
Eerdmans publish both NICNT and the NIGTC series - the latter focused on exegesis of the Greek text and lacking a volume on the Gospel of John altogether, wheras Morris, even though it's a bit dated now, is considered a very good commentary, so there was no immediate need to replace it. And if so, people surely would expect from NICNT to address current scholarship, after all that's what Eerdmans give themselves as the series' purpose and reason for revisions:
http://www.eerdmans.com/Products/CategoryCenter.aspx?CategoryId=SE!NICNT"> “. . . undertaken to provide earnest students of the New Testament with an exposition that is thorough and abreast of modern scholarship and at the same time loyal to the Scriptures as the infallible Word of God.” This statement reflects the underlying purpose of The New International Commentary on the New Testament. (...) While based on a thorough study of the Greek text, the commentary introductions and expositions contain a minimum of Greek references. The NICNT authors evaluate significant textual problems and take into account the most important exegetical literature. (...). In order to keep the commentary “new” and conversant with contemporary scholarship, the NICNT volumes have been — and will be — revised or replaced as necessary.
“. . . undertaken to provide earnest students of the New Testament with an exposition that is thorough and abreast of modern scholarship and at the same time loyal to the Scriptures as the infallible Word of God.”
This statement reflects the underlying purpose of The New International Commentary on the New Testament. (...) While based on a thorough study of the Greek text, the commentary introductions and expositions contain a minimum of Greek references. The NICNT authors evaluate significant textual problems and take into account the most important exegetical literature. (...). In order to keep the commentary “new” and conversant with contemporary scholarship, the NICNT volumes have been — and will be — revised or replaced as necessary.
And Scot McKnight's volume on James isn't even up on the site yet.
My goof. McKnight's James commentary is listed on bestcommentaries.com. I think I saw the "(not ranked)" at first and thought that meant they had nothing on it, but if you click on its title it does take you to some Amazon reviews, though as has already been discussed above that is not necessarily the best source of reviews of commentaries.
Available Now
Build your biblical library with a new trusted commentary or resource every month. Yours to keep forever.
