SUGGESTION: Traditions of the Bible: A Guide to the Bible as it was at the Start of the Common Era

Very nice addition to Logos, and maybe cheaper too!  The Amazon Look-Inside is amazing.

I was unimpressed (joking) until I saw he covered Phinehas. Now, would that be Samaritan? Ha.

The author sure would be nice in Logos (jewish perspective). Granted, not monolithic, but death was interesting. Also his debate with the reluctant jewish student.

David Paul said:

There's a "joke" that Kugel is the professor you picked if you wanted to lose your religion. He tends to be of the opinion that scholarship has debunked the Bible as "believable". But, he insists, good Jews should remain good Jews and practice Judaism because "tradition".

I assume there's more to the anonymous 'there's a joke' ... this isn't your usual careful style 

MJ. Smith said:

Traditions of the Bible: A Guide to the Bible as it was at the Start of the Common Era by James L. Kugel

[Y]

MJ. Smith said:

David Paul said:

There's a "joke" that Kugel is the professor you picked if you wanted to lose your religion

My faith is sufficiently strong and well-reasoned that I do not care about the personal stance of any author. I care about the quality of their work.  Do you have any alternative resources with as broad a range of parallel passages/stories?

PS. I have added a request for Howard Schwartz, the only potential competition that came to my mind.

Firstly, yes...MJ is correct; that Moment article, plus I have seen lectures he's given in Israel (he teaches @ BIU) where he basically says (in sum) "I'm a scholar but I still practice Judaism because I think the tradition is important." To be clear, I didn't say what I said about Kugel to be dismissive of him. I said it because it describes (from a variety of perspectives) what his positional influence is perceived to be. I just figured people might want to know. I have advocated for his books in Logos for years and own some dead tree copies.

I have said on a few occasions in the forum that about 99% of what I have in my moderately large Logos library is stuff with which I broadly disagree. I read extensively, but I rarely read anything that promulgates my understanding of the Bible. Unlike politically-minded folks, I don't seek to confirm my presently held beliefs in what I read. If anything, my primary purpose when reading is to find any reason to reject what I have determined to be a proper perspective.

Regarding Howard Schwartz, I have no interest in his oeuvre, but have no problem with his stuff being added to Logos.

I'm not exactly sure (even though I reread the thread) what you are looking for in terms of "a better alternative"...that is, alternative to what? Or put otherwise, what are you seeking, exactly?

I can say that as far as my estimate of my own awareness goes, I'm not much of an expert on non-canonical (i.e. beyond the 66) books. [I realize you accept the Apocryphal books as canon.] I've read quite a few, but haven't gotten to some I really should. Its more a function of not finding/making time as opposed to not having interest. I find that prophetically, the 66 have extraordinary "beauty" (i.e. internal consistency). There are snippets of the extra-66 books that occasionally seem to mesh, but there are usually also bits that are "troublesome" and questionable, so my willingness to accept any of them as whole cloth is restrained. The exceptions to that general view are 1&2 Maccabees. They provide details that tend to mesh pretty well with the prophetic paradigm of the 66.

Since my hermeneutic is prophecy driven, I take a far less "historical" view of the Bible than most folks. I think nearly all talk about "what shaped the thoughts of the Hebrews/Israelites/Jews in determining what ended up in the Bible" is essentially absurd. I am convinced the Bible says what it says because YHWH wanted it to say what it says. That, and that alone, can account for the prophetic synchrony that exists throughout the Book. I'm not suggesting that YHWH can't use history, because He obviously does, but I pretty much reject talk about "progressive awareness" in the sense that as Hebrews "developed", their religion "developed" as well. That scenario could never account for prophecy as it exists. That is essentially a view of Bible by happenstance.