A new type of pre-pub - it isn't in print yet!

Wilson Hines said:

Can somebody explain this marketing jargon for me?: "New standard in evangelical research"  - Exactly what does this mean?   That is a broad brush comment, IMHO. Will these scholars take an approach, method, or use of technology that will make this commentary an evolutionary jump over the NIC or WCC?

Wilson,

I believe it's a marketing goal.  Nobody can make something to be that standard, but they can certainly write and labor to the end that what they produce fits the requirements for that standard.  I guess the question is, what is the definition of the standard?  That would be the best way to clarify the goals of the EEC.

Like you, I'd appreciate more commentary about this commentary from the commentators.

To all, thanks for this thread.  Thomas, I have so many mixed emotions about this topic I can't even begin to start.  

Over all:  I don't like commentaries.  I said over all.  The reason is I think way to many people rely on them like crutches.  My goal in working with the scripture is that I will become familiar with the text in English and then in it's original language, as much as possible.  I think the best commentary on the Bible is the Bible itself, and then we move forward.  In other words, what does other passages say about this passage with which I am working.  I use commentaries to figure out whether or not my exegesis is consistent with reality.  I rarely get taught much by a commentary.  I think that is a shame.  I didn't say I never get taught anything.  I am just saying I rarely get taught much.  A tool like the ABD has been more valuable to me than anything in my library as far as none linguistic resources.

The single resources which I get the most frequent and most valuable "hits" from is the Expositor's Greek Testament, and this is in hardback on my shelf. The E.G.T is technically a commentary, I guess, but more of a background on what is going on with the language, IMHO.  I get "WOW" moments in this resource.  I don't understand why it has taken so long for this product to move in the pre-pub system.  

Anyway, I am wary of commentaries.  The scholars involved with this work is the reason why I am comforted.   Admittedly, I'm not looking for a work that pastor's or laymen would desire.  And if this is what this is, I still am not certain I am going to buy the E.E.C. (Hence, the reason we need samples).

On the "expanding my horizons" front:  I hope when I attend Dallas Theological that they will either put the nail in the coffin with commentaries for me, or make me want to use them properly.  

After rambling about all of this, after reading this thread and consulting with my sales guy, I have intrepidly signed up for the pre-pub.  I hope my wife doesn't find out the stipulations of this pre-pub, as I may get thrown a pillow and blanky!  Quite frankly, under the guise of the same known hurdles, if the name Logos wasn't involved and it was Barnes and Nobles, Amazon.com, or whomever, we would be raving idiots whom could rightfully so be accused of financial stupidity - and everybody here, including the Pritchetts know this to be true.

So much for "I'll pray about it."  LOL  I guess I will pull the trigger, due to the raising price, and pray about it along the way, asking God for wisdom for an unemployed, full time student, whose wife could find him worth more dead (life insurance) than alive.  Don't get me wrong, my couch is really comfortable LOL. 

Wilson Hines said:

 I think the best commentary on the Bible is the Bible itself,

Quite a healthy outlook.  I do encourage you to consider learning from the maturity (and mistakes!) of the fellow travelers who walk in the way beside you. The receptiveness of the disciples as they walked the road to Emmaus is striking. After all, they were THE DISCIPLES of this Jesus fellow. Why should they bend there ear to this stranger who walked with them? Yet they listened and later said,""Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?"  Luke 24:32

Sometimes God will not speak to you directly but through the person who walks in the way with you, be that a little boy in the temple, your wife, or even a commentator.

Wilson Hines said:

"I'll pray about it."

Matthew C Jones said:

Wilson Hines said:

 I think the best commentary on the Bible is the Bible itself,

Quite a healthy outlook.  I do encourage you to consider learning from the maturity (and mistakes!) of the fellow travelers who walk in the way beside you. The receptiveness of the disciples as they walked the road to Emmaus is striking. After all, they were THE DISCIPLES of this Jesus fellow. Why should they bend there ear to this stranger who walked with them? Yet they listened and later said,""Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?"  Luke 24:32

Sometimes God will not speak to you directly but through the person who walks in the way with you, be that a little boy in the temple, your wife, or even a commentator.

Wilson Hines said:

"I'll pray about it."

    Keep praying about it even after the order is in. If God wants you to have it He will ultimately be the one who provides the funds to purchase it.  And if Logos keeps up the Pre-Pub flood, my kneecaps will resemble a hippo's.

 

 

I really like your analogy Matthew. I do not see commentaries as crutches but as broadening of the circle God can use to speak to me. It happens some times, I read them in expectation all the time [:)]. Sometimes God speaks to us through lexicon like TWOT [:O] ...very often he speaks to me through my wife (what is obvious since the time of Abraham - Gen 21:12 [:)] ).

Matthew C Jones said:

Todd Phillips said:

So there's no way I'm going to preorder a set that has yet to be written.  Therefore, I'm going to have to wait until this set is released to see if there are volumes I want,

If you bought NICOT/NICNT for $600 or WBC for $300 in Pre-Pub, you'd be skipping through this forum thread.  

I'm still weighing my purchase decision on EEC. I've settled a few points others are still wrestling with.

• I have no problem with the production side of the project. I know Logos will fulfill their responsibilities. (Remember how fast the Zondervan collection was completed after the announcement?)
• I am familiar with many of the names slated to write individual commentaries and trust their abilities.
• The Pre-Pub price is well within reason for what I am offered.
• If the project is not completed in my lifetime, at least others will benefit from my purchase.

Todd Phillips said:

without reviews and recommendations from others who have used it.

• I even have a different outlook on this speed bump. When I consult BestCommentaries<dot>com I notice not every volume of the premier sets rates at the top. This can be attributed to multiple authors as well as authors writing outside their area of expertise. If the EEC gives us a first look at a stellar volume it will not be a guarantee all subsequent volumes will be stellar. If the first look disappoints you it could lead to you canceling out on better volumes to follow.  Just a thought.

I would rather Pre-Pub the whole EEC at the intro price than wait ten years and buy the volumes at $70 a piece. 

The hardest part of committing is, as my mom would say about my plate of food at Thanksgiving Dinner, "Your eyes are bigger than your stomach." Will I end up canceling Pre-Pubs because they all ship at once?

 

Todd you hit the nail on the head.  The pre-pub people at Logos need to have better timing.  I know they would be smarter by releasing those pre-pubs out once a week for 10 weeks or 15 weeks (for example), even thought they finished all 10 of them on the very same day.  Why?  Because I want all of them.  When they go to rapid firing, I am going to cancel some of it.  The other way, they successfully get all the transactions, instead of one or two or maybe three.  IMHO.  

Wilson Hines said:

Over all:  I don't like commentaries.  I said over all.  The reason is I think way to many people rely on them like crutches.  My goal in working with the scripture is that I will become familiar with the text in English and then in it's original language, as much as possible.  I think the best commentary on the Bible is the Bible itself, and then we move forward.  In other words, what does other passages say about this passage with which I am working.  I use commentaries to figure out whether or not my exegesis is consistent with reality.

Wilson I share some of your philosophy,  in that in the first instance we should be not relying up on secondary sources but going straight to the primary source.   Whether one is a layperson, a preacher or a scholar of the original languages, our primary focus should be upon God's Word.  We can become lazy and rely upon secondary sources without first getting acquainted with the scriptures for ourselves. 

For the layperson they make their minister's preaching as there primary examination of the text. A sermon as good as the preacher may be, is a secondary source.  Even when we have a minister of the Word whom we know preachers the whole scripture, and nothing but the scripture, faithfully and is prepared to say the things we'd rather not hear, I think the layperson is missing out on so much if they don't learn how to read and ask questions of the text themselves. They may well run into questions they can't answer and that is then where secondary sources  come into to play;  combination of preaching, discussion within a bible study group, and a good commentary and bible dictionary. If preacher's and scholars aren't getting into the text for themselves but simply relying on someone else's work.... perish the thought.

Matthew C Jones said:

Quite a healthy outlook.  I do
encourage you to consider learning from the maturity (and mistakes!) of
the fellow travelers who walk in the way beside you. The receptiveness
of the disciples as they walked the road to Emmaus is striking. After
all, they were THE DISCIPLES of this Jesus fellow. Why should they bend
there ear to this stranger who walked with them? Yet they listened and
later said,""Were not our hearts burning within us while he talked with
us on the road and opened the Scriptures to us?"  Luke 24:32

Sometimes God will not speak to you directly but through the person
who walks in the way with you, be that a little boy in the temple, your
wife, or even a commentator.

On the other side of the scales you have balanced out things very well Matthew.  There is still an important place for a variety of secondary sources in our lives.  We  though always should examine them up in light of the scriptures to expose any mistruth they may contain. But if they pass that test - then we should take them into consideration our journey of understanding the scriptures and getting to know our Lord and Saviour, so that we might better bring Glory to our God.

Mark A. Smith said:

Interesting but he seems to just be interested in seeing how it shakes out

I confess I was mostly using my comment as a way to draw attention to his very interesting blog, which I thought people with an interest in both faith and technology would enjoy reading. You're right that the content of that particular post, though pertinent to this thread, was not particularly enlightening. Nobody knows more than what Logos has revealed thus far. So, OK, I'll be more direct: go read his other blog posts. That was the point of my post... [:)]

Rosie Perera said:

Mark A. Smith said:

Interesting but he seems to just be interested in seeing how it shakes out

I confess I was mostly using my comment as a way to draw attention to his very interesting blog, which I thought people with an interest in both faith and technology would enjoy reading. You're right that the content of that particular post, though pertinent to this thread, was not particularly enlightening. Nobody knows more than what Logos has revealed thus far. So, OK, I'll be more direct: go read his other blog posts. That was the point of my post...

Thanks for bringing up this blog.  I have come across if before.  It focuses on things that I am passionate about so I've just added it to my google reader account.

Rosie Perera said:

. You might enjoy my blog, too, then. Faith & Technology: http://blog.faithandtechnology.org.

Added

Matthew C Jones said:

I don't think you can purchase each volume of NICNT individually, can you? And at what price would you?

Since you asked, here are a couple I'd buy if I still bought paper commentaries:

http://www.amazon.com/Epistle-Romans-International-Commentary-Testament/dp/0802823173

http://www.amazon.com/Letter-Philippians-International-Commentary-Testament/dp/0802825117

Matthew C Jones said:

Nobody is forcing is to buy it.

Nope. I'm just pointing out that they will just get my money if they offer the individual volumes eventually.

Mark Denning said:

This thread has now gone to seven pages and I have not read them all. Hopefully I'm not duplicating what someone else has already pointed out but there is a blog post by John Dyer over at Don't Eat the Fruit that touches on this new series and what it might portend for the future of research and digital books.

Yep, there's some discussion of it on the previous page (6), if you're interested in reading it.

After consideration … I'm in. [:)]

I'm in - but I haven't told my wife yet.  I figure I have until April to convince her.

Well, I just convinced myself to pre-order, even though now my pre-pub orders total more than I paid for Logos Platinum, I think. [:)

I sent a long email to Logos about this proposal. Several things come to mind, much of which has already been written. But let me enter the fray

Logos is an amateur at publishing, at least commentary publishing . . . yes, they have done a lot of cranking stuff out that has been written and published by others but taking stuff through the initial editorial process not so much. What do they know about this? They will scream loudly that they are hardly amateurs, but take Dan's last comment as a case in point. He hopes that by showing their seriousness, it will get the writers to speed up . . . Like Eerdmans couldn't get the NIC contributers and T& T Clark couldn't get the ICC guys and Word couldn't get the WBC guys to speed up, what because their writers didn't think the publishers were seriously committed to the projects--their respective series? The reality is that life happens. Scholars die, get sick, get sacked, get . . . you fill in the blank. Wayne House is writing on 4 books . . . sure Philemon should be "easy" but Corinthians? In ten years? Like he is planning not to sleep?

It would be nice to see the proposed format of one, just one commentary. What is it the authors are supposed to do with their commentaries? Technical lexical stuff? Exegetical stuff? From the hype, I see nothing on the proposed content or format. There is a big difference between a TNTC and a BEC and a NIGTC and a NIC commentary. I mean Bock wrote two whole large volumes on Luke. What is there left for Porter to say?[:D]

An abridged print form? You gotta be kidding . . . who would use that? No prof would allow a student to use it at any reputable seminary. But the digital will be in accessible because you cannot put it in the library, so if you cannot buy it, you cannot use it. No writer can afford to BUY everything they cite and no serious writer would cite an abridgment. So a print abridgment is of little value.

Some of the commentators are not even assigned. Unless God is on the staff of Logos and has made his mind known, not even Logos can guarantee the aggressive timetable. I talked with on friend who considered participating but decided against it because of the overly aggressive time-table.[8-|][N]

I think Logos needs to rethink the $700 up front part of this. I wrote to Bill Barrick about my concerns and he replied that "the early bird gets the worm." Well . . . I don't eat worms. And I am also reluctant to "buy a pig in a poke" (sack) for you less literate types.

I love Logos . . . but I am not sold on this 

Jeff Straub

Logos is an amateur at publishing, at least commentary publishing . . .

I don't believe there are amateurs in the commentary publishing business.  I believe there can be professionals that take plenty of hard knock lessons whilst they produce commentaries but the "amateurs" are probably less inclined to make it past gathering the writers and developing the content"

It would be nice to see the proposed format of one, just one commentary. What is it the authors are supposed to do with their commentaries? Technical lexical stuff? Exegetical stuff? From the hype, I see nothing on the proposed content or format. There is a big difference between a TNTC and a BEC and a NIGTC and a NIC commentary. I mean Bock wrote two whole large volumes on Luke. What is there left for Porter to say?

Its possible over 16,000 fans on facebook and many others want to see a less solely technical lexical and a more applicative commentary.  Of course many commentaries have attempted this very formula, I believe the EEC would be one to recommend straight to the church members instead of stopping at the well trained pastor or leader.

Some of the commentators are not even assigned. Unless God is on the staff of Logos and has made his mind known, not even Logos can guarantee the aggressive timetable.

The series was already underway before Logos became involved.  I would assume some of the material is in the editorial process or beyond.

and maybe I missed it but I was curious as to your proposal Jeff, was there something you thought maybe Logos could change on as they move forward?

Matthew C Jones said:

Jeff Straub said:

Logos is an amateur at publishing, at least commentary publishing .

There is a difference in digital publishing and traditional publishing. The old guard must change with the times or die. We saw Nelson undergo a big shakeup in company leadership earlier this year. Traditional publishers have been abandoning the big projects as too expensive and risky. It is not just an EEC thing.
Logos is THE leader in publishing digital commentaries. No one else comes close. Logos has been successful because they watch, listen and adapt to meet the needs of the moment. You have to concede NIC, ICC, WBC and all the other fine commentaries are MORE useful in the Logos format than they are in hard copy form. My favorite lexicographer, Oreste Vaccari, had a motto: "To do better what others do well." This is what I see Logos doing every day of every year. They take something good and make it better. I would put my money on Logos to actually be able to pull off this ambitious EEC project better than any of the traditional publishers could. Bob Pritchett has shown he can chase a dream into reality and Dale and Dan Pritchett know how to sell others on the dream. If it is going to get done, it will be done by Logos.

In Dan P's post about the EEC, he admitted that they didn't have all the answers, but were committed to making the project work. Logos has a proven track record and I am confident that they will do what is necessary to make this project work for everyone involved. They are real pioneers. When mistakes are made, they admit it and find another solution.

Scott Lumsden said:

Is anyone else just a little concerned that the Genesis commentator is a creationist. I must be more out of touch than I thought with the evangelical take on genesis. or maybe there are different stands of evangelical thought. the electronic series is bold, i'll give them that. i'm just concerned about the scholarship. if they invite a literalist to write on Genesis, what does that say about the rest of the series. 

Scott, as you might imagine, people with a wide variety of positions on Genesis use Logos BIble Software and read the forums, so by asking a question like that you're inviting theological debate, which isn't helpful on the forums and is actually strongly discouraged by Logos who hosts these forums. Many people likely agree with you, but nobody is supposed to be voicing such opinions here. It's unfortunate we can't have that kind of discussion to help people decide whether they want to buy this resource or not. But I'm sure there will be some of folks for whom that characteristic of the volume's author is a selling point. It is still a very live issue among some evangelicals.

Scott Lumsden said:

Is anyone else just a little concerned that the Genesis commentator is a creationist. I must be more out of touch than I thought with the evangelical take on genesis. or maybe there are different stands of evangelical thought. the electronic series is bold, i'll give them that. i'm just concerned about the scholarship. if they invite a literalist to write on Genesis, what does that say about the rest of the series. 

Hi Scott,

We won't settle the Creation question, virgin birth, bodily resurrection or even the existence of eternal, literal punishment in a forum debate. So we can abandon that goal. Your question has another underlying question we can address, and already have several times. That being, "Should I entertain theological viewpoints in my Logos resources that I do not agree with?" That is a fair question that merits asking.

I have been treated by very brilliant medical doctors who hold to religions that I find bordering on the ridiculous. (I refuse to enumerate the long lists of things I find unbelievable about their dearly held beliefs.) Their naivete in spiritual matters did not prevent them from very ably addressing my biological needs. Had I marginalized them because of my differences I would have lost out on their help.

While I do not hold the same disdain for the viewpoints of the EEC authors I would consider hearing their points even if I did disagree with them. There is hardly a consensus of theological matters across the board with the present scholarly commentaries in print. My response to the divergent views expressed could be to mock them, or attack them, or avoid them like a disease. Or I could read them and become aware of why they hold to their viewpoints. Caveat: An open mind can sometimes be changed. So if our goal is to remain in the place we presently find ourselves, it takes nothing more than blindfolds and earplugs.  It all comes back to our answer to the question in blue stated above. Can we learn from people we disagree with? Do they have anything worthwhile to teach us? Have we considered & addressed their points to our satisfaction? Can nothing new be learned? The true spirit of scholarship is asking the questions with an open mind.

Welcome to the forums.

MJ. Smith said:

Matthew C Jones said:

That being, "Should I entertain theological viewpoints in my Logos resources that I do not agree with?" That is a fair question that merits asking.

How does one test one's beliefs without exposure to other opinions?

Two great questions.