Hard to know what you want theologically. You're open to BCBC which is Anabaptist/Mennonite/Brethren in bent, but you don't want Jewish or any of those others you listed, and yet you want something on the more critical side so you probably don't want Baptist either, and certainly not Pentecostal. What's left who are major commentary producers that can be bought on a single volume basis? Catholic / Early Church Fathers? While Hermeneia or Anchor Yale or NICOT might suit your theological tastes, they only come in sets. Perhaps you'd be happy with the ITC volume The New Israel: A Commentary on Isaiah 56-66 (based on RSV) or Cornerstone Biblical Commentary: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations (based on NLT), but I'm guessing those are too conservative for you.

You can see pages 332-336 of the BCBC Isaiah in Amazon.com's preview if you search for 53 in the "Look Inside" feature, and that's most of the section on Isaiah 53 (it finishes on p. 337), so you can see for yourself if it'll suit your needs.

Also check out BestCommentaries.com's Isaiah page. If you hover over a title, it'll show you whether it's available in Logos or not. They do have icons showing what academic level each book is written for, and some are tagged for whether they are premil or Jewish, but in general there is no indicator of the theological leaning.

[:#]

Rosie Perera said:

David Paul said:

There's another way to communicate that, which is to not post anything at all.

Yeah, but not posting anything at all wasn't what I was trying to communicate... [;)]  I know a tar baby when I see one. [^o)]

So, yeah, I've decided to go against my first instinct and offer a suggestion. How about this? It was written by a Logos employee! JB is the editor of Bible Study magazine. I bought it. Haven't read it yet...but I haven't read most of the 6400 things in my Library yet.

Unix living in celibacy said:

Thanks! I noticed a strange thing there: there has come ICC volumes (by Goldingay and Payne) but Logos doesn't offer them! It might be the best though, costs $99 including postage to over here where I am

Maybe you can find it in a library and borrow it via Inter-Library Loan (do you have that service through libraries in your country?) and scan or photocopy the relevant pages.

http://www.worldcat.org/title/critical-and-exegetical-commentary-on-isaiah-40-55/oclc/62525220

Unix living in celibacy said:

Maybe I should buy the ICC volume. It has 62 pages on the Messiah prophesy and that's a lot more than any of the other commentaries that were an option, except the one David Paul suggested which is among the more expensive ones anyway. $131 is still about the same price Logos probably offers, they used to charge $110-$120 for all fairly new volumes.

Wait...my suggestion is expensive, but you're considering paying $110-130 for something? Is that in Swedish money? [^o)]

Is this not what you are seeing? My abacus and chisanbop say $30 beats $130 any day of the week. [8-|]

The Book of Isaiah by Edward J. Young has been very helpful to me.  Also College Press but it uses the NIV ;-)

David Paul said:

Unix living in celibacy said:

Also, I'm a bit suspicious when it comes to the title: "The resurrected servant in Isaiah" - that gives the notion from start that author has settled his mind what to think about the question and I wonder how critical it may be?

 

You keep-a-using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means...     [Logos, you're dropping the ball!! Where's the mustachioed swashbuckler emoticon when I need one?!?]

You wonder, huh? Well...taking a different, less closed-minded perspective...perhaps Barry weighed the evidence that he compiled while researching and writing his book, and then came up with the title when attempting to describe what he in his studies perceived the Scriptures to be picturing? What would you prefer the title be--I'm Not Sure How to Describe This So-Called Servant Who Is Mentioned in Chapter 53 of Isaiah, but I'd Like to Know More So Why Don't You Join Me and We'll Find Out Together?? Would that be critical enough--or just critically lame?

Just a point of observation: the way in which you so openly and easily predetermine what you want to hear (which in some quarters is known as prejudice, i.e.pre-judging), seems to be fundamentally at odds with the meaning of the term ("critical") you keep calling upon when describing your preferred choice of commentary. Honestly...consider what you are saying: I don't want to consider what this guy is saying because...(wait for it...)...I'm not sure that he fully considers all possibilities. That isn't just ironic...it's hypo-"critical".

Dude...you are a walking contradiction. Do you not see that? What's funny to me is that of all the mindset-isms out there with which I disagree, the one that I have the least tolerance for is the so-called "critical school". Why? Because it is the most hypo-"critical" of them all. But understand this...I do not ignore what they say. I have plenty of Logos resources that hold to that un-enlighted school of thought, and though it grinds my nerves and patience to do so, I read what they have to say. Why? Two reasons: first, if I am going to "judge righteous judgment"...get this...I HAVE TO ACTUALLY JUDGE. I can't prejudge and then refuse to hear the matter. Prov. 18:13 How can you "BE critical" when you refuse to allow yourself to have the experience that requires you to judge? Secondly, how can you know you are right when you engage in behavior that doesn't "test" you? The vast majority of non-Scripture reading I do is stuff I disagree with AND stuff that disagrees with me. If I'm not willing to give the opposing view a fair hearing, then I am a wicked judge.

If you want ICC, get ICC. But don't avoid something because you are "suspicious" it might not be something you are unwilling to be yourself.

I was about to respond to the OP but you have already conveyed my exact sentiments about what it takes to really be "critical" and how the term is often abused.

MJ. Smith said:

I've been reading some materials recently on how to follow the line of reasoning of someone else. It includes many of the normal features - how to spot fallacies, how to identify unspoken assumptions, etc. but it offered two pieces of advice that I found noteworthy:

• when reconstructing someone else's argument, always strive to make their argument look as good as possible
• before worrying about reconstructing an argument, identify the question that they are trying to answer.

Then there is always the old standard:

• read what they say not what you expect them to say.

Admittedly Logos has some resources that still are trash no matter how generous your reading, Admittedly most authors are unaware of their biases - they list their presuppositions as their biases and remain blind to the latter. But most any commentary that Morris Proctor places in the Academic/Technical category will have enough useful insights to make it worth your time.

[Y][Y]

I am reminded of a book I heard read during meals when visiting a monastery about the difficulties in the Anglican Communion.  The author observed that with modern tech we are now able to "misunderstand each other faster than ever before". 

When I was in school, I had a class on Luke where the Prof. had us rotate through a half dozen different commentaries and then come to class to discuss various passages, each of us having read different commentaries.  I found that the commentaries which prepared me best for class discussions were the ones that brought up all kinds of issues - namely the most "Academic/Technical" ones.  It didn't matter if I agreed with them or not.  Heck, it didn't even matter if the author even came to a clear conclusion...  By bringing up the points that have been at issue in the text, I had the raw material I needed to start to piece together what is going on there.

I commend the OP for his desire to dig deep into the Word.  He is showing much more maturity in this than I did at his age.

SDG

Ken McGuire

Unix living in celibacy said:

I'm OK with necessary grammatical discussions, if written in an intelligible manner. I don't know any Hebr. But I don't want an expensive commentary or one that only comes in a set. Theologically I would not want a Presbyterian, Reformed, conservative Evangelical, Eastern Orthodox or Lutheran commentary. And preferably not one that uncritically uses the NIV84, God's Word, NEB or AV text. If there is no commentary that suits my needs, just tell me so!

Okay, Mr.Unix how about Harper's Bible Commentary by Society of Biblical Literature, 1988? Find it in Logos format here (link). 

"Harper's Bible Commentary was written by 82 members of the Society of Biblical Literature. This readable commentary introduces each book of the Bible and interprets it section by section. Lively general articles place the Bible in its historical, literary, and interpretive contexts. Entries are also cross referenced to the companion Harper's Bible Dictionary."

Or,   The Prophecy of Isaiah by J. Alec Motyer IVP 1996 (link).

MJ. Smith said:

Then there is always the old standard:

• read what they say not what you expect them to say.

Isn't that a good maxim to follow when reading Scripture as well?

Soli Deo Gloria,

Randy