Expositor's Bible Commentary.

To those of you purchasing Pradis material let me give you heads up on what I discovered. I have Pradis 6.0 which has the NIV Bible Commentary. I purchased all 12 volumes of the Expositors Bible Commentary from Zondervan only to find out these 2 commentaries are almost identical. Check out the following and this is the way these commentaries run. Zondervan would reply when I told them.

See

Judges 15 Notes
8. Samson's feat of strength at Gaza (

16:1-3)
1-3
The final episodes in Samson's story confirm his great physical strength and his great weakness for women. A number of years passed before Samson ventured into Philistine territory again. This time he went to Gaza (v.
1), some forty miles west of Hebron and twelve miles south of Ashkelon. Even at this southernmost Philistine city, his reputation was well known; and the residents showed great caution in their attempt to capture him.
Samson's sensual nature led him to involvement with a prostitute, one of many at centers such as Gaza. Still not married, Samson was particularly susceptible to temptations of the flesh (cf.

Gen 38:12-15). Thinking they had him trapped, the men of Gaza hid outside and made plans to surprise Samson in the morning (v.2). Their lack of activity implies that many of them fell asleep, confident that the locked city gates had hemmed in their prisoner.

Wolf, Herbert. "7. Samson's victory at Lehi (15:9-20)" In

The Expositor's Bible Commentary
: Volume 3. 473-474. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, © 1992.
*********************************************************************

8. Samson's feat of strength at Gaza (

16:1-3)
1-3
The final episodes in Samson's story confirm both his great physical strength and his great weakness for women. A number of years passed before he ventured into Philistine territory again. This time he went to Gaza, some forty miles west of Hebron and twelve miles south of Ashkelon. Even at this southernmost Philistine city, his reputation was well known; and the residents showed great caution in their attempt to capture him.
Samson's sensual nature led him to involvement with a prostitute, one of many at centers such as Gaza. Still not married, Samson was especially susceptible to temptations of the flesh (cf.

Ge 38:12-15). Thinking they had him trapped, the men of Gaza hid outside and made plans to surprise Samson in the morning. They probably fell asleep, confident that the locked city gates had hemmed in their prisoner.
Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary (2 volumes),
Pradis CD-ROM:Jdg 16:1, Book Version: 5.1.50

　

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Greg Steward

My understanding is that the NIV Bible Commentary is a abridged version of the Expositors Bible Commentary.

Charles Reeder

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/112749#Comment_112749

It could be as I said I have not checked it out completly but every time I checked both of them they were the same. Just trying to save someone a little green!

Chuck

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/112780#Comment_112780

Most if not all of the footnotes are missing from the shorter version - and some of the more technical arguments are missing, too. On a relatively simple passage like the one you cited they'll be broad similar, but in several places there is considerably more content in Expositors.

Jim VanSchoonhoven

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/112844#Comment_112844

I have both of these sets and I agree with Mark, they are not the same. In fact I do not consider them any where near the same, the footnotes in the 12 volume set is a big difference, they discuss many things concerning language usage.

If put the 2 volume set in the same range as The Bible Knowledge Commentary and the 12 volume set in the same range as the Tyndale OT and NT Commentary set.

In Christ,

Jim

Charles Reeder

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/112844#Comment_112844

When I asked Zondervan about the two commentaries being the same, they did not or would not explain anything about them as far as I can remember. However, after reading your explantion concerning the foot notes I went and checked and you are right. The NIV doesn't have the footnotes. I might add that the footnotes are very good. Thank you for helping me out!

Chuck

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/113001#Comment_113001

are there three versions, then? The abridged EBC and then the NIV Bible commentary?

Charles Reeder

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/113009#Comment_113009

In my Pradis 6.0 Program I have the Full 12 Volume & the abridged Expositor's Bible commentary + the NIV Bible Commentary (2 Volumes) which some think is an abridgement of the Expositors Bible Commentary as it doesn't have the Notes. Gets kind of confusing I know. Soooo, maybe YES there would be 3 of them! It might be that the NIV Bible Commentary and the Expositor's Bible abridged could be the same! Some one else out there might know?

Chuck

Derek Browning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/113028#Comment_113028

Does anyone know what theological convictions are typical of the authors?

IE: Conservative, Baptistic, Reformed, Liberal, etc.?

Thanks,

Derek

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/333433#Comment_333433

Primarily dispensational, though there are exceptions (Carson on Matthew)

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/333433#Comment_333433

Does anyone know what theological convictions are typical of the authors?

IE: Conservative, Baptistic, Reformed, Liberal, etc.?

Thanks,

Derek

Derek, I thought I had replied, but apparently it did not post. I think most of the authors (all?) are evangelical with a pre-millenial eschatology. I didn't catch the "dispensational" approach as kKnight has, rather I see it more as historical pre-mill. I may be dead wrong. I think there is a bit of a predestinarian bent (as opposed to more "free-will"). Some very good and helpful authors, and some throw-away authors. For the price, a very good set, I think.

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336126#Comment_336126

Does anyone know what theological convictions are typical of the authors?

IE: Conservative, Baptistic, Reformed, Liberal, etc.?

Thanks,

Derek

Derek, I thought I had replied, but apparently it did not post. I think most of the authors (all?) are evangelical with a pre-millenial eschatology. I didn't catch the "dispensational" approach as kKnight has, rather I see it more as historical pre-mill. I may be dead wrong. I think there is a bit of a predestinarian bent (as opposed to more "free-will"). Some very good and helpful authors, and some throw-away authors. For the price, a very good set, I think.

Sorry, my post was probably a little more "broad brush" than it should have been...but there are definitely a number of dispensational authors in the mix.

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336136#Comment_336136

but there are definitely a number of dispensational authors in the mix.

i plead ignorance! [:)] who are the dispensational authors you are aware of? I have not used all the volumes by any stretch. I am curious to be less ignorant. Thanks, Kknight.

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336156#Comment_336156

but there are definitely a number of dispensational authors in the mix.

i plead ignorance! who are the dispensational authors you are aware of? I have not used all the volumes by any stretch. I am curious to be less ignorant. Thanks, Kknight.

These are the ones that I am sure of (or almost sure of in a couple cases):

John Sailhamer

Walter Kaiser (not fully dispensational, but speaks of himself as being influenced by the Scofield Reference Bible and dispensational teaching. He adopts something of a halfway view between dispensationalism and covenant theology...I guess similar to progressive dispensationalism)

McComiskey

Robert L. Saucy

R.L. Thomas

Ralph Alexander

Charles L. Feinberg

Leon J. Wood

Ronald Allen

Herbert Wolf

Allen Ross

G.W. Grogan

VanGemeren (he is no longer a dispensationalist, but I believe he still was at the time this was written...I could be wrong though)

Kenneth Barker

Merrill Tenney

Edwin Blum

There are also some that I think are, but I couldn't determine for sure by quick searching:

Kalland

Richard Patterson

I may have missed a couple because I couldn't find much information on several in a quick search, but I think I got most of them. Hope that helps! [;)]

Josh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336442#Comment_336442

Frank E. Gaebelein teaches premillennial dispensationalism too.

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336455#Comment_336455

Frank E. Gaebelein teaches premillennial dispensationalism too.

Good catch, thanks Joshua [:)]

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336442#Comment_336442

I may have missed a couple because I couldn't find much information on several in a quick search, but I think I got most of them. Hope that helps!

Sounds like the posse has rounded all of them up. Hangin's start at dawn. [:S] One almost got away, almost.

I can't wait for the Collected Writings of John Nelson Darby!

Derek Browning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336462#Comment_336462

HAHA - Thanks Everyone!

brings up another question...

Do you all know if there's a website that really explains the theological leanings within commentary sets?

IE: a list of dispensational commentary sets, a list of covenental, etc.?

Having that background would be really helpful, so I could target the resources I want to look at for alternative perspective: IE: when studying Romans 8 - How would a Calvinist interpret it vs. an Arminian?

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336442#Comment_336442

but there are definitely a number of dispensational authors in the mix.

i plead ignorance! who are the dispensational authors you are aware of? I have not used all the volumes by any stretch. I am curious to be less ignorant. Thanks, Kknight.

These are the ones that I am sure of (or almost sure of in a couple cases):

John Sailhamer

Walter Kaiser (not fully dispensational, but speaks of himself as being influenced by the Scofield Reference Bible and dispensational teaching. He adopts something of a halfway view between dispensationalism and covenant theology...I guess similar to progressive dispensationalism)

McComiskey

Robert L. Saucy

R.L. Thomas

Ralph Alexander

Charles L. Feinberg

Leon J. Wood

Ronald Allen

Herbert Wolf

Allen Ross

G.W. Grogan

VanGemeren (he is no longer a dispensationalist, but I believe he still was at the time this was written...I could be wrong though)

Kenneth Barker

Merrill Tenney

Edwin Blum

There are also some that I think are, but I couldn't determine for sure by quick searching:

Kalland

Richard Patterson

I may have missed a couple because I couldn't find much information on several in a quick search, but I think I got most of them. Hope that helps!

whoa. what a list. i pled ignorance, now i claim it . .. and begin to transform it.

Some of those surprised me.

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336557#Comment_336557

the presence of DTS in many bios would have clued me in . . .

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336563#Comment_336563

the presence of DTS in many bios would have clued me in . . .

[:D] [Y] [;)]

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336563#Comment_336563

the presence of DTS in many bios would have clued me in . . .

Generally speaking, yes. Especially if they held professorships. But not all graduates of a denominational school will embrace the theological bent of such school. This is frequently true at the seminary level. When my bother graduated from DTS in the early 1980's some of his professors did not even believe all scripture was inspired. One would not expect that from a "conservative" school.

Ron's list is accurate as far as I can tell. There are a few others that are missing.

Jerry M

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336574#Comment_336574

I find it interesting, although I am not sure quite why, that the book of Revelation (the focus of dispensational thought) is commented on by Alan Johnson, while being premillennial, could hardly be considered in the mainstream of classic dispensationalism. (I personally believe he does an outstanding job.)

J. Morris

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336574#Comment_336574

the presence of DTS in many bios would have clued me in . . .

When my bother graduated from DTS in the early 1980's some of his professors did not even believe all scripture was inspired. One would not expect that from a "conservative" school.

Ron's list is accurate as far as I can tell. There are a few others that are missing.

For some clarification...

http://www.dts.edu/about/doctrinalstatement/

Article I—The Scriptures

We believe that "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God,” by
which we understand the whole Bible is inspired in the sense that holy
men of God “were moved by the Holy Spirit” to write the very words of
Scripture. We believe that this divine inspiration extends equally and
fully to all parts of the writings—historical, poetical, doctrinal, and
prophetical—as appeared in the original manuscripts. We believe that the
whole Bible in the originals is therefore without error. We believe
that all the Scriptures center about the Lord Jesus Christ in His person
and work in His first and second coming, and hence that no portion,
even of the Old Testament, is properly read, or understood, until it
leads to Him. We also believe that all the Scriptures were designed for
our practical instruction (Mark 12:26, 36; 13:11; Luke 24:27, 44; John 5:39; Acts 1:16; 17:2–3; 18:28; 26:22–23; 28:23; Rom. 15:4; 1 Cor. 2:13; 10:11; 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:21).

END QUOTE

For sure there will be some professors within seminaries who do not totally hold to every sentence of a school's doctrinal statement. Of course I do find issue, to a point, with that because I'm pretty sure they would be asked if they agree with it before they sign on...

The Expositor's Bible Commentary sound like a great buy, I know I appreciate good theology [;)] thanks for bringing it up.

Mike Childs

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336462#Comment_336462

Sounds like the posse has rounded all of them up. Hangin's start at dawn. One almost got away, almost.

Now that me a chuckle. No, I am not a dispensationalist. However, I do admire some dispensationalists, and do not mind a number of them in a commentary set.

I also admire DTS - though I disagree with them on eschatology.

Danny Baskin

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336612#Comment_336612

I also admire DTS - though I disagree with them on eschatology.

[Y]

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336574#Comment_336574

Ron's list is accurate as far as I can tell. There are a few others that are missing.

Shhh! Don't give away my name Matthew, it's a secret! [:p] (Just kidding) [;)]

I was pretty sure I missed one or two, but ran out of time and energy last night to continue searching for the lesser known contributors.

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/336485#Comment_336485

Do you all know if there's a website that really explains the theological leanings within commentary sets?

Unfortunately not that I've been able to find. It usually requires some digging about the set and about the contributors to get a feel for the theological bent of a set or its individual volumes (since often there are a variety of viewpoints represented in a set). Bestcommentaries.com does often note the broad eschatalogical stance of individual volumes where applicable (amillennial, premillennial, postmillennial, preterist), but nothing much beyond that.