Fee on 1 Corinthians (NICNT)

I noticed this morning that bestcommentaries.com gives the 1987 edition of Fee's commentary on 1 Corinthians a score of 89.1 but gives the updated 2014 edition the much lower score of 74.7. Thoughts on the rating system used by that website aside, is the newer edition really that much worse? I currently have both editions of Fee's commentary in Logos but have never read either one. I am about to start a study of 1 Corinthians, but do not see me taking the time to read both editions. Which one would you recommend I read and why?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Joseph Turner

I think the metrics they use to score volumes are based on reviews from various sources, and since the new edition doesn't have as many reviews, maybe that accounts for the score. I am almost completely guessing on that.

Paul Caneparo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029029#Comment_1029029

I think the metrics they use to score volumes are based on reviews from various sources, and since the new edition doesn't have as many reviews, maybe that accounts for the score. I am almost completely guessing on that.

You're right.

Ted Hans

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029032#Comment_1029032

I think the metrics they use to score volumes are based on reviews from various sources, and since the new edition doesn't have as many reviews, maybe that accounts for the score. I am almost completely guessing on that.

You're right.

Agree

Mike Tourangeau

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029029#Comment_1029029

I think the metrics they use to score volumes are based on reviews from various sources, and since the new edition doesn't have as many reviews, maybe that accounts for the score. I am almost completely guessing on that.

I also agree, for me I set up my library according to their recommendations, but through the years just using the commentaries have prompted me to prioritize others.

You may benefit from something like this https://www.logos.com/product/151680/new-testament-commentary-survey-7th-ed

Lew Worthington

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029045#Comment_1029045

Thanks for bringing that up, Matthew. I've noticed some very odd evaluations of commentaries there in the past, but your example acutely illustrates a major weakness of the whole web site. When I'm considering Logos purchases, I'll occasionally use bestcommentaries to filter out what's horrible, but will usually look in journals for a more complete evaluation.

Another weakness of bestcommentaries is that technical commentaries are thrown in the same pot as devotional ones -- in spite of their acknowledgement of the distinctions. Technical commentaries almost always seem to fare worse because of the weight of the type of review contributors.

Lee

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029048#Comment_1029048

The replies here have hit the nail on the head.

David Thomas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029048#Comment_1029048

Another weakness of bestcommentaries is that technical commentaries are thrown in the same pot as devotional ones

Some users may not be aware that a person can isolate those that are tagged as Technical so that it is easier to find the top 5 technical. Unless the tagging is incorrect (as in the case of Fee on 1 Cor) where the 1987 is tagged as "Technical" so it is NOT in the same pot, but the 2014 is NOT tagged as Technical so it IS in the same pot.

Matthew

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029153#Comment_1029153

Just wanted to say thanks to everyone for the feedback. The answer was kind of what I figured, but I had just wanted to check. Revised 2014 edition it is! [Y][H]

Kevin A Lewis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029176#Comment_1029176

Hi All

Thanks for all the comments - it is very useful to have feedback on the content of the BestCommentaries site and particularly it's reviewing and scoring system. As you will appreciate no such system is perfect and there are always compromises to be made. That said I will let the webmaster know of your views and we will be putting our heads together to see what can be done.

Shalom Kevin

Rick Carmickle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029226#Comment_1029226

Kevin, do you work on the site for BestCommentaries?

BestCommentaries is great. It's very useful to see a list of what is out there, and what is coming. I am amazed at how many commentaries are in the works. Even Stanley Porter, who thinks there are too many commentaries, is working on one for Romans.

But you have a near impossible task of ranking them. I think most would agree that the objective ranking system doesn't work, because the number of reviews and libraries doesn't get the best to the top. Older books are given an advantage under this system. (We tried computer rankings for some years in college football, and the results were bad. The algorithms just didn't work.)

I think an editorial decision from several well-informed professionals is better. Just rank them yourself. Others may disagree with your rankings, but it would have better results than the current "objective" system.

Kevin A Lewis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029357#Comment_1029357

"Work for" - interesting idea. I do a lot of the bibliographic work on the site and have an input with John who's site it is and does all the web master/programming work. We compare notes and draw each others attention to relevant information on the site or suitable content.

So on that basis, I do work for it. I do it for the love of biblical theology and to get information of the best quality to those interested.

Regarding your contribution I certainly understand all you say. I would add though that not only do reviewers assess works differently, people reading reviews are looking for different things. It is clearly an impossible task to get this right for everyone. I take the view that it should not dissuade us to trying the best we can to provide through access to reviews and other assessments as much information as we can to allow everyone to make their own reading and purchasing choices.

Blessings Kevin

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029226#Comment_1029226

I will let the webmaster know of your views and we will be putting our heads together to see what can be done.

OT as per the ranking, but: Maybe when you're at it you could look at the "available in Logos" indicators: several NAC volumes do not show this (e.g. Revelation), so currently it seems only a competitor has the whole series whereas Logos has all of them, too.

Kevin A Lewis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029809#Comment_1029809

thanks for pointing that out - I have just been through the entire set and revised where necessary all published and expected titles. There are now only two volumes not accounted for.

Please review these and if I have made any mistakes let me know.

Also do feel free to contact me direct with any other issues. kevin<under&score>a<under$score>lewis<at$sign>hotmail<dot>com

Shalom

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029818#Comment_1029818

Hi Kevin - thanks for your work on this

Please review these and if I have made any mistakes let me know.

Looking at the NAC series page - https://www.bestcommentaries.com/series/new-american-commentary-nac/ - I noted that some commentaries weren't shown as in Logos:

The 2 volumes on Genesis
The 2 volumes on Isaiah
The volume on Hebrews
The volume on Revelation

But clicking those entries and looking at the detail for each resource they do show as in Logos - such as https://www.bestcommentaries.com/book/5475/0805401393-revelation-paige-patterson

Is there something further that needs to be done to update the series page?

Graham

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029819#Comment_1029819

Maybe it was just a server (or browser) refresh thing? For me the series page now shows the Logos icon for all - Thanks Kevin!

Kevin A Lewis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029820#Comment_1029820

HI NB.Mick

That was exactly that - I had forgotten about that issue - everything should be up to date now.

Any further problems let me know.

Or any other series for that matter - that needs attention - I find it too much to constantly trawl through - so I rely on notifications.

Shalom Kevin

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1029824#Comment_1029824

That was exactly that - I had forgotten about that issue - everything should be up to date now.

It's fine noe

Thanks Kevin