Please, some comments about AYBRL? The titles in this bundle look very interesting. If you have them, what do you think? Thanks in advance. Blessings.
There are so many volumes in the series, so I allow me comment on just a few.
The 4 volume "A Marginal Jew" by John Meier is considered the benchmark historical-critical study on the historical Jesus. The premise of Meier's work is something like 'what could a Jew, a Christian, and an atheist agree on that the historical Jesus said and did, if they looked somewhat objectively at the gospel material as competent historians.' The stories in the gospels are weighed in the balance of probability (how likely is it that each story happened), and the meaning of the stories interpreted. Nobody has the exact faith of Meier's combo Jew-Christian-Atheist (Meier himself is a Catholic priest and believes in a lot of stories that he cannot 'prove as a historian'), but that is not the point. This is an exercise in "what can we agree upon as historians irrespective of faith and background", and as such it is a very interesting project. You will be taken a long on a journey into of a lot of contemporary scholarship on Jesus. Few scholars today are better informed than Meier. So it is simply a must-read series for anyone wanting to participate in the historians' quest for the Jesus of Nazareth. The series is written thematically, not going through the gospels chapter by chapter as a commentary, which I think is good for a project like this.
The 2 volume "The Death of the Messiah" by Raymond Brown is an indispensable commentary on the passion-stories in the gospels. Brown was a historical-critical Catholic scholar, and I am a conservative Evangelical, and I find a lot of interesting insights on the last chapters of the Gospels that are useful for anyone no matter our background.
I will let others comment on other books in the AYBRL series. A lot of well-known (and not so well known) gems in that collection.
Thank you Reimar for your excellent answer. Very good explanation. Blessings!
An Introduction to the New Testament by Raymond E. Brown. Though not recent, it is one of the finest introduction you can find
Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, vol. 1: 10,000–586 B.C.E. by Amihai Mazar. A reference (the best?) if you want to study archaeology through its period. My only regret is that it does not go beyond 586 BCE and does not talk about the Persian period.
Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, vol. 2: The Assyrian, Babylonian, and Persian Periods (732–332 B.C.E.) by Ephraim Stern. the companion book of the vol.1 (similar to Peoples of the OT World[?], see here: https://www.logos.com/product/23987/baker-academic-old-testament-backgrounds)
These are "critical" books. One does not have to expect to find "conservative" evangelical or protestant point of view.
So a protestant point of view can be very possible.
I think Edwin intended "conservative" to be read with both "evangelical" and "protestant".
This book is not yet in Logos, but the next Anchor volume on archaeology is by Eric M. Meyers and Mark A. Chancey, "Alexander to Constantine: Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, vol. 3," Yale University Press, 2012.
It's coverage starts with the Persian period and continues through the emergence of Christianity and early Judaism's rise of the Synagogue.
So a protestant point of view can be very possible. I think Edwin intended "conservative" to be read with both "evangelical" and "protestant".
Sounded pejorative to me. [*-)]
I am "conservative" and like both of these volumes.
Quite possible, but one should never equate truth or quality with any school of thought. Conservatives can be wrong and liberals can be right.
-Dan
one should never equate truth or quality with any school of thought
So a protestant point of view can be very possible. I think Edwin intended "conservative" to be read with both "evangelical" and "protestant". Quite possible, but one should never equate truth or quality with any school of thought. Conservatives can be wrong and liberals can be right. -Dan
This can be true. The lines are not always clear. How about introducing a new title called conservibles or liberatives?
How about introducing a new title called conservibles or liberatives?
[:D]
Can liberals ever be wrong and conservatives right?
Quite possible, but one should never equate truth or quality with any school of thought. Conservatives can be wrong and liberals can be right. Can liberals ever be wrong and conservatives right?
[:#] I know nothing….
Sounded pejorative to me.
You both had a completely different view as to what Edwin was trying to say! For my part, it seemed to me that Edwin enjoyed the books, but thought others might appreciate knowing that they weren't necessarily coming from a conservative perspective. I don't think at all he was making a judgement on either conservatives or liberals.
Thank you Edwin for your answer. It was very good.
Available Now
Build your biblical library with a new trusted commentary or resource every month. Yours to keep forever.
