Dan Francis: Your take on the NIB Study Bible?

http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Interpreters-Study-Bible/dp/0687278325

I didn't know about this volume. Been watching/reading all your threads on the NIB (which I'll probably not get since I have good coverage from AYB/Hermeneia).

However I was wanting a more liberal-ish viewpoint to accompany my IVP Background Commentaries when not in Logos (since obviously Logos doesn't have it ... 2 others do, plus Oxford's not legal on the Logos app).

Seeing the samples, I'm pretty sold. But not?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dan Francis

Well it is a fine volume a bit more conservative than the commentary at times (theologically but still very progressive ). "Of the current editions of Study Bibles, in my opinion the most helpful for pastors, teachers, and all students of the Scriptures has now been issued by Abingdon Press under the dedicated guidance of Dr. Walter Harrelson." - Bruce M. Metzger, Professor of New Testament, Emeritus, Princeton Theological Seminary. He stated this after the 3rd edition of the NOAB was released (my understanding for his removing his name from the editorialship of NOAB because he thought theologically it was a bit too liberal for him, as well as basically passing the torch along to a new generation of scholars.

Here is a sample of Gen. 1, Psa. 23, Wis 4:1-15, Luke 6, Rom 1

8. Jacob’s Blessings on His Twelve Sons, 49:1- 28 9. Jacob’s Death and Burial, 49:29–50:26
Theodore Hiebert
1:1–2:4a The book of Genesis contains two accounts of creation. This first is spacious, taking in the whole cosmos as viewed from earth, while the second has a more limited, localized setting, taking place entirely within the Garden of Eden (2:4–3:24 b). According to the first account, God creates the world in 6 days and then rests on the 7th, thereby establishing the Sabbath day of rest as a part of the natural order. God’s week of creative work follows a perfectly symmetrical pattern. In the first three days, God marks out three earthly realms:(1) day and night, (2) sky and sea, and (3) land and plants. In the second three days, God populates these three realms with stars and planets, birds and sea creatures, and land animals, including humans. God is characterized as high and powerful, creating mostly by command (“And God said”). Because of its exalted view of God, its focus on the Sabbath at creation’s climax, its repetitious (perhaps liturgical) style, and its distinctive vocabulary (e. g., “Be fruitful and multiply”), this account of creation is attributed to a Priestly writer. The Priestly writer (P) describes the world as a sacred realm with a harmonious order and precise distinctions within it.
1:1- 2 The introduction describes the expanse of unformed matter from which God creates the world (see Excursus:“Creation:Ordering Chaos,” below).
Behind the different translations of the first verse of the Bible lie different conceptions about creation. The traditional translation, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth” (KJV, RSV; see note a in the NRSV), implies that the formless earth and waters (“deep”) of v. 2 were God’s first creative act. Creation is thus understood as making, bringing into existence all things “out of nothing,” or ex nihilo, as this doctrine of creation is commonly known. A more recent alternative translation, “When God began to create the heavens and the earth” (NJPS; see note a in the NRSV), regards v. 2 as a subordinate clause describing the formless earth and waters as the pre- existing material out of which God shaped the world. Creation is thus understood as ordering, as imposing a design on formlessness and chaos. This alternative translation reflects the conventional opening for creation narratives in the ancient Near East (see Enuma Elish; Gen 2:4 b; 5:1) and the biblical view of creation as the establishment of order and restraint of chaos (Ps 104:5- 9). It has received growing support. However, because the terms and grammar of v. 1 are unique and precisely duplicated nowhere else in the OT, scholars continue to debate these alternatives. While the ordinary rules of Hebrew grammar require one alternative or the other, the translators of the NRSV concluded that the Jewish scribes who added vowels to the traditional consonantal text wished to affirm both interpretive possibilities.
1:2 The deep (tehom) is the great subterranean reservoir of water that erupts later in the Priestly account of the flood (7:11). Its linguistic relationship to tiamat, “sea,” out of which the world is created in the Babylonian creation epic Enuma Elish, shows that this biblical creation story shares features with its neighbors’ creation stories. Wind translates the Hebrew ruakh, whose basic meaning is “air”; depending on context, it may also be translated either “wind” or “breath.” Here both meanings may be intended. The translation “spirit” (KJV, RSV) rests on a later Greek division between spirit and matter that is not present in Priestly theology.
1:3- 5 On the first day of creation, light is made and separated from darkness. The first day begins, as does each day, with a divine command:And God said...” 1:4 God declares nature good at each stage of creation (7 times; see esp. v. 31). This is the clearest and strongest affirmation in the Bible of the sacred character and value of the natural world. Separate (divide, set apart) occurs five times in this account; it is one device among many by which the Priestly writer describes creation’s precise orders and distinctions. 1:5 The phrase evening... morning, which concludes each day, probably reflects the idea that night (between evening and morning) ends the day and that a new day begins at dawn, when in fact each new creative act takes place.
1:6- 8 On the second day of creation, sky and sea are formed. The dome (“firmament,” KJV, RSV), according to ancient Israel’s cosmology, is an impermeable barrier that holds back a great reservoir of water in the sky, separating it from the great reservoir under the earth. When the “windows of the sky” are opened in the Priestly flood story (7:11), the water in this reservoir falls as rain.
1:9- 13 On the third day, dry land and plants appear through two creative acts:the separation of dry land from the water in the subterranean reservoir (vv. 9- 10) and the germination of plants, earth’s first form of life (vv. 11- 13). 1:11- 12 The earth participates in the creative process, producing vegetation, which is divided into the two kinds of plants cultivated by Israelite farmers. The first, plants yielding seed, is more precisely “grains [‘eseb; see 1:29; 2:5] yielding seed,” a reference to wheat and barley, which are the basis of Israelite agriculture, and whose seed is plainly visible on the stalk. The second, fruit trees, are the tree crops, primarily olives, with which farmers supplement their cultivation of grain and whose seeds are hidden inside the fruit (fruit with the seed in it). These two kinds of plants are in fact given to human beings for food later in this account (1:29). The traditional translation “according to its kind” (RSV; KJV, “after his kind”) is closer to the Hebrew and better reflects the Priestly concern for clear categories in creation than the NRSV’s of every kind, used throughout this account.
1:14- 19 On the fourth day, God populates the realms of day and night, created on the first day, with the heavenly bodies that inhabit and regulate these realms. 1:14- 15 These heavenly bodies have two purposes:to provide light for earth (v. 15) and to determine time by marking out its significant periods, including its seasons, a term used most commonly for Israel’s sacred seasons, its religious festivals, which are of special interest to the Priestly author (v. 14).
The use of greater light and lesser light is commonly interpreted as the Priestly avoidance of “Sun” and “Moon,” since these were names of ancient Near Eastern deities, and the Priestly writer wished to emphasize Israel’s belief in a single God. But elsewhere in creation liturgies, “great lights,” “sun,” and “moon” are used together without concern (Ps 136:7- 9). Furthermore, the greater and lesser lights are personified when they are assigned rule over day and night, the same task assigned to comparable deities in ancient belief. The relationship between Israel’s one God and the heavenly beings who surround God is complex in biblical thought (see notes on 1:26).
1:20- 23 On the fifth day, God populates the realms of sky and sea, created on the second day, with the animals that inhabit these realms. These two realms, together with earth, populated on the 6th day, separate the animal world into three categories—sky, water, and land animals—categories used by Israel’s priests to distinguish clean from unclean animals (Lev 11:1- 19). 1:20- 21 Swarms of living creatures is the general designation for all animal life inhabiting seas and rivers (Lev 11:10, 46). Sea monsters (tanninim) probably refer to the most impressive sea creatures (KJV, “whales”). 1:22 God’s blessing grants animals the ability to reproduce. In antiquity the mysterious nature of conception was directly associated with divine activity (Gen 4:1; 16:2).
1:24- 31 On the sixth day, God populates the realm of earth and its vegetation, created on the third day, with land animals, including human beings. 1:24- 25 The earth again participates in creation, producing animals on the sixth day as it did plants on the third day. This link between animals and the earth is also made in the second creation story (2:19). The word translated cattle actually refers to all large animals (Gen 6:20; Lev 11:1- 8), distinguished regularly by P from creeping things —that is, the smaller creatures. The word translated wild animals means literally “living thing” (see v. 28) and may be a general term for all animate life.
1:26- 31 Although they share the sixth day with other animals, humans are God’s final and climactic creative act in this account. Humans alone are made in God’s image and are given dominion over other animals (see Excursuses:“ In God’s Image,” below, and “ Dominion or Dependence?” 8).
The statement in Gen 1:26- 27 that human beings were created in God’s image has had a powerful influence on later views of human life, and many interpretations of its meaning have been proposed. These interpretations emphasize either the nature or the function of human life:the image of God as a certain quality or character granted to humans or the image of God as a role or task assigned to them. Early Christian thought emphasized the former, connecting the image of God with human nature and, in particular, with the unique spiritual character of human life. Augustine, for example, believed that the image of God referred to the rational soul, placed by God in the human body, which was created out of the ground (as described in the second creation account, 2:7). Such a division between soul and body, or spirit and matter, is a later development in Greek thought, however, and is not shared by Priestly or other OT writers.
A very different approach to the image of God as a definition of human nature has been taken by modern theologians writing on behalf of oppressed groups (women, racial and ethnic minorities, those in the lower economic strata). According to this interpretation, the divine image refers to the sanctity and innate worth of all human beings and presumes that all persons are to be treated with equal dignity. Unlike the early Christian view, this characterization of human nature focuses on the whole person rather than on the soul alone. The logic behind this interpretation is obvious to modern readers, though it is unlikely that the Priestly writer shared such modern conceptions of equality.
Biblical scholarship in the late 20th century emphasized the functional interpretation of the image of God, viewing that image as identifying a particular role for humans, either as counterparts or partners of God, or as representatives of God in the created realm. The concept of representation, the most widespread view in biblical scholarship today, is drawn from analyzing the use of the expression “image of god” in the ancient world. In antiquity, this expression was used, in Egyptian and Mesopotamian texts, to designate the ruling monarch as the gods’ special representative with a divine mandate to rule. By adopting this expression, the Priestly writer has therefore attributed royal status and responsibility to human beings. When taken in this context, the image of God describes humanity’s preeminent position in the world and humanity’s responsibility to rule in creation as God’s representative. Human beings are thus mediators, as were kings and priests alike, of God’s presence in the world.
Because of the growing concern for the environment and the human effect upon it, the word dominion (radah) in Gen 1:26, 28 has received extraordinary attention. It has been understood by some scholars as granting humans unlimited power and license to exploit nature for their own use. “Dominion” means “rule,” as is illustrated by its use elsewhere for the authority of masters over servants (Lev 25:43) and kings over their subjects (Ps 72:8); so it does grant humanity a potent authority over the animal world. But the word does not in itself define the exercise of this power, since it can be used for either benevolent or harsh rule. In the context of Gen 1, where human beings are viewed as God’s representatives in creation (see Excursus:“In God’s Image,” 7- 8), dominion must be understood as the same kind of rule God would exercise in the natural world, a world God created good in all of its parts.
An entirely different picture of the place of humans in nature is present in the second creation account, in which the first human is made out of the soil and is given the command to cultivate (‘ aba d) it. This Hebrew term means literally “serve.” It is used to express the servitude of servants to masters (Gen 12:6), of one group of people to another (Exod 5:9), and of people to God (Exod 4:23). The human being is seen to be in the service of the earth, upon which its life and livelihood depend. Human beings in this account are thus placed in a position of dependence on nature rather than dominion over it. Such different images of the human role in nature show that biblical traditions provide a rich array of perspectives on the place of human beings in the world and their responsibility to it.
1:26 The plural us has been variously interpreted as the plural of “majesty” (the royal “we”) and, in Christian theology, as the Trinity. Here, as elsewhere in Genesis (e. g., 11:7), God is addressing the divine council, the assembly of heavenly beings believed to assist God in governing the world and communicating with the human race (Gen 1:16; 16:7; 1 Kgs 22:19- 23; Job 1:6- 7; Jer 23:18, 22). The translation humankind (’adam) is an improvement over “man” (RSV, KJV). The Hebrew word ’adam possesses the same dual sense, “man, mankind (humanity)” as the English word “man” in traditional discourse. Here, where it refers to humanity, including male and female (v. 27), the general sense is obviously intended. 1:29 According to Priestly tradition, humans were vegetarians before the flood; they are given food from the two traditional Mediterranean crops—grains and fruits—created on the third day (vv. 11- 12).
2:1- 4a The Priestly creation account comes to a climax with the establishment of the seventh day of the week as a sacred day of rest, modeled on God’s own behavior at creation (cf. Exod 20:8- 11). 2:2 The Hebrew for rested is shabat, the root from which the word “Sabbath” derives.
2:4 These are the generations [or descendants] of... This is a formula with which the Priestly writer frames the major sections of Genesis (e. g., 5:1; 6:9; 10:1), dividing early history into precise periods. Here it concludes the Priestly creation account and introduces the Yahwist’s narratives of the Garden of Eden and of Cain and his descendants, which follow (2:4–4:26 b).

------

23:1- 6 Certainty of God’s protection and providence and exceptional intimacy with God combine in an individual’s prayer of trust. Text divisions are:vv. 1- 3, declaration of faith in and obedience to the ways of God’s shepherding; v. 4, assertion, at the psalm’s midpoint, that God’s presence and guidance bring comfort; vv. 5- 6, portrayal of God as a gracious host who sustains life. From green pastures (v. 2) to the house of the Lord (v. 6), every verse expresses trust and thanksgiving for what God does for this person. God’s salvific leadership, goodness, and mercy are constant (v. 6). The divine name YHWH forms an inclusio around this psalm and the psalmist (cf. vv. 1 and 6). At its center, 26 words in Hebrew from the first and last word of the text (excluding the superscription), appears the phrase for you are with me (v. 4), which sums up the heart of the matter. Although often used in funeral services, this psalm is more about God- centered living than it is about death. Its unmistakable depiction of intimacy with God is effected by its basic image:God and a single sheep, not a flock; God the host and a single guest. 23:1 Shepherd The claim that God is my shepherd is unparalleled in Scripture. This familiar metaphoric title for God actually appears in only two other psalms (28:9; 80:1). God’s care for people as sheep is more frequent (cf. 44:11, 22; 74:1; 78:52; 95:7; 100:3; 119:176). “Shepherd” is only once a political substitute for an earthly king in the psalms (78:71). References to real sheep appear only in 8:7; 144:13. 23:4 Darkest valley (Heb. slmwt) is an image for a very deep shadow or total darkness. In Job 10:21- 22, the expression conveys death. 23:6 Mercy (Heb. khs d) introduces the language of the exodus and wilderness covenant, thereby extending the prayer of an individual to wider contexts. Follow is the more active “pursue” (rdp) in Hebrew. House of the Lord may refer to the Temple or may suggest metaphorical closeness to God.

-------

4:1- 9 These verses continue the contrast between the godly and the ungodly. The issue addressed is, “What lasts?” It is more important to be virtuous than to have children, since it is virtue that will truly last. Virtue is known by God as well as imitated and longed for by people. Its memory is immortality (4:1). Children born of the ungodly will be of “no use” (v. 3), even if for a while they appear to prosper (v. 4). The circumstances of the present life, for both the godly and the ungodly, are to be viewed in the context of the life to come. Both will be examined by God (3:13; 4:6). The basis of that examination will not be whether they had children but whether they were godly. 4:7- 9 Although the writer is not explicit, he may provide here a clue as to why he has chosen to focus at length on the issue of children and the early death of the righteous. In the face of persecution, the question would easily arise as to whether God is truly with the people if indeed they are dying before their time. Ps- Solomon responds by arguing that the length of one’s years or the amount of gray hair on one’s head is not a sign of God’s favor. Quantity of years is far less important than quality of years. The life that follows Wisdom is one that is truly “long,” for it is the wise who will be at rest with God in the life to come.
4:10- 15 The writer is alluding to the brief reference to Enoch in Gen 5:21- 24; he would certainly have been a well- known figure to the readers of this book. Ps- Solomon appeals to him as a biblical example of one whose quality of life was actually the reason why it was so brief. A short life can be a sign of God’s blessing, since God is delivering the people from the wickedness around them, thus preserving them from possibly sinning. Verse 15 makes explicit the fact that Enoch’s story has applicatory significance. God’s grace and mercy are always with God’s people. Early death, rather than an indication of God’s absence, is the demonstration of God’s care.

------

6:1- 11 The relationship between Jesus and the Pharisees has been escalating into one of open hostility, with the Pharisaic and scribal practice of monitoring Jesus’ behavior giving way finally to their contemplation of a formal indictment against him (6:5, 11). At stake here is not “legalism” but proper interpretation of the scriptural legislation regarding the Sabbath. In the world Luke represents, Sabbath observance was fundamental to Jewish identity, and so it served as a suitable test of faithfulness to the Lord. Because the scriptural references to Sabbath- keeping are relatively vague (Exod 20:8- 11; 31:14- 15; 35:2; Deut 15:12- 15), the questions of interpretation and appropriation were all the more important. From Jesus’ vantage point, scribal interpretation had missed the importance of the redemptive purpose of God to be found in the Sabbath.
6:12- 49 Hostility toward Jesus is held in abeyance now, as the focus turns more pointedly to the formation of Jesus’ disciples. Hints of conflict remain, however, in references to Judas (v. 16) and to opposition (vv. 22- 23). 6:12- 16 To earlier hints that the aim of Jesus’ ministry is the restoration of Israel is added the further detail that twelve are chosen as apostles. These twelve symbolize new leadership for God’s restored people. That Jesus chooses these persons in response to a night of prayer to God places this decision and these persons under the canopy of divine will. 6:17- 49 Sometimes called the Sermon on the Plain (cf. 6:17), this extended sermon serves to identify and develop a vision of the new world—and with it, new behaviors—that Jesus proclaims and introduces. This is a new world grounded in the scriptural affirmation of God as the Merciful One and in the perspective that God’s children reflect this graciousness in their own lives (v. 36; cf. Exod 34:6- 7). This large segment of the Gospel has as its beginning and ending boundaries references to the importance of a “hearing” that issues in obedience (vv. 17- 19, 46- 49). 6:17- 19 Luke envisions three audiences—the apostles and considerable numbers of disciples, the people (in general) gathered from Galilee and adjacent areas, and a smaller group of persons troubled with unclean spirits —all of whom are the recipients of Jesus’ ministry, whether in miraculous deed or word. 6:20- 26 Jesus begins his sermon with a carefully balanced series of blessings and woes. At stake here is a way of thinking at odds with what many imagine to be the case in the world, but this is precisely the point. Here, Jesus cultivates a new way of making sense of the world in which salvation is characterized as a reversal of fortunes. 6:27- 38 Jesus undergirds and develops the perspective sketched in vv. 20- 26 by outlining the new commitments and behaviors that flow from this fresh way of understanding “how the world works.” These new attitudes and behaviors flow from Jesus’ image of God as the merciful Father (v. 36), whose own practices are not stingy or calculated but lavish and full of grace. 6:39- 49 Jesus brings his discourse to a close with a series of parabolic sayings urging his audience not only to listen but to really hear and obey his message. We may recognize a heightened concern with “doing” (vv. 43, 46- 47, 49) —that is, with the need for changed dispositions and commitments to manifest themselves in changed behaviour.

-------

VII. Paul Concludes with Plans to Visit Rome and a Long List of Final Greetings, 15:14–16:27
James R. Edwards
1:1- 17 A rich theological salutation (vv. 1- 7), a review of Paul’s long- standing desire to visit Rome (vv. 8- 15), and an exemplary description of justification by faith (vv. 16- 17) introduce the epistle to the believers at Rome. 1:1- 7 Salutations of Greco- Roman letters customarily included three elements:sender’s name, recipient’s name, and brief greeting (e. g., Acts 15:23; 1 Thess 1:1; Jas 1:1). Expanding these elements into his longest salutation, Paul commences Romans with a mini- treatise on God’s providence, manifested in the sending of Jesus Christ and in Paul’s apostolic commission. 1:1 Paul’s self- description testifies to his consciousness of totally belonging to God (servant), of his being sent (apostle), and of his special commission (set apart) for the gospel of God. 1:2- 4 The gospel is not an innovation, but has been promised through the holy scriptures:the OT. The content of the gospel is a person, God’s Son Jesus Christ. Verses 3- 4 may have been a pre- Pauline formula (so 2 Tim 2:8) familiar to the Romans. God’s Son appears in two manifestations:in earthly humility as David’s descendant and resurrected with power according to the spirit of holiness. 1:5 Paul’s apostolic commission is to produce obedience of faith, with which he begins (1:5) and ends (16:26) Romans. Saving faith is thus a life lived in submission to God. 1:7 In both Hebrew and Greek, saints means to be set apart for the gospel of God (v. 1). Grace and peace summarize the major themes of the NT and the OT, respectively. 1:8- 15 These verses and 15:14- 33 are the only autobiographical sections of Romans. The narrative in vv. 8- 15 is less elevated than the preceding salutation. 1:11 Although unspecified, the spiritual gift and harvest (v. 13) may refer to reconciliation between Jewish and Gentile Christians as a result of Paul’s preaching (see Introduction). 1:13 Paul has desired, but not yet succeeded, to visit Rome (vv. 10- 11; 15:22). The hindrance was apparently due to God rather than to Satan (as in 1 Thess 2:18). See notes on 15:22. 1:16- 17 In contrast to Rome’s political and military power, the gospel is the power of God for salvation. Salvation is not used by Paul to refer to rescue from temporal dangers, but for spiritual deliverance from sin, death, and Satan. To the Jew first and also to the Greek reflects the historic mandate of salvation from Israel to the nations (Isa 49:6) rather than the order of importance of Jews over Gentiles. The quotation of Hab 2:4 (v. 17) is perhaps better rendered, “The one who is justified by faith will live”—that is, God grants life to the one first made right by faith. Four occurrences of faith in vv. 16- 17 underscore its indispensability for salvation.
A phrase that all interpreters regard as a key to understanding Romans, “the righteousness of God” occurs in eight critical passages in the epistle (1:17; 3:5, 21, 22, 25, 26; 10:3 [twice]). The Greek term dikaiosyn e- can be translated as either “righteousness” or “justification.” In the OT, righteousness and justice repeatedly characterize God’s nature and activity, particularly in relationship to the covenant with Israel. Paul’s Damascus road experience convinced him that God imparts righteousness to sinful humanity not by works of merit or Torah but by grace alone. God’s righteousness is a mystery revealed only through the atonement of the cross (3:24- 25) and apprehensible only by faith (“through faith for faith”).
1:18–3:20 The body of the epistle begins with a bold exposé of the need of humanity for the righteousness of God (v. 17). Although Gentiles and Jews are guilty of different sins, there is no final distinction between their guilt (3:10- 12, 23; 11:32). Both “Jews and Greeks are under the power of sin” (3:9) and, apart from grace, unable to please God. 1:18- 32 Paul begins by exposing Gentiles’ sins of idolatry and immorality. 1:18 In v. 17, Paul spoke of the revelation of God’s righteousness; in v. 18 he turns to the revelation of God’s wrath against all ungodliness and wickedness. The divine nature is expressed in both grace toward sinners and wrath toward sin. From heaven affirms that the following judgment is God’s perspective, and not necessarily humanity’s. 1:19- 20 Since creation bears witness to God’s eternal power and divine nature, a rudimentary knowledge of God is available to all people, to which they are accountable, and without excuse when they violate it. 1:21- 25 Humanity’s problem is not an inability to know God but an unwillingness to know God. Humanity’s sin consists of a rebellion that transmutes God’s glory, which makes humanity wise, into idolatry, which makes humanity foolish. The exchange of the glory of the immortal God for images of humans, animals, or reptiles results in worship of creation over Creator and a devolution of human nature and abilities. 1:26- 27 Paul repeats four times that humanity exchanged the authentic for the counterfeit (vv. 23, 25, 26, 27); as a consequence, he repeats three times that God gave them up to their degrading ways (vv. 24, 26, 28). Unrepented sin results in human degradation. One illustration of rebellion and idolatry is homosexual activity, which is discussed in terms of exchanging the natural (heterosexual relations) for the unnatural (homosexual relations), terms Paul will employ again in the illustration of the olive tree (11:24). Homosexual activity is not cited because it is worse than other sins (it is not included in the list of sins in vv. 29- 31), but because it illustrates the nature of sin as the exchanging of a God- given good for a counterfeit good, and hence idolatry (vv. 21- 25).
Paul cannot be interpreted to condone hatred of homosexual persons, however, for such hatred would be malicious, haughty, and heartless, all of which are condemned in vv. 29- 31.
1:28- 32 Paul shifts from the consequences of idolatry for self to its consequences for society. 1:28 A wordplay in the original Greek might be rendered, “Since they did not see fit [edokimasan] to acknowledge God, God gave them over to an unfit [adokimon] mind.” The effects of sin corrupt not only behavior but also thinking itself. 1:29- 31 A list of 21 terms (in Greek) catalogs things that should not be done (v. 28). They may not appear sinful to the debased mind (v. 28), but they are evil consequences of exchanging the truth about God for a lie (v. 25), and thus their own punishment. 1:32 Condoning sinful behavior is no less blameworthy than sinful behavior itself because it lends tacit credibility to something deserving condemnation.

-Dan

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595343#Comment_595343

Thank you Dan! Quick answer and a good one too. I didn't know Metzger had been involved.

It looks like it'd be a nice mobile stand-in for my Oxford Commentary (or my wish-I-owned New Jerome).

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595353#Comment_595353

I didn't know Metzger had been involved.

That was his review of the NISB he had not even been involved with the 3rd edition of the NOAB but had asked his name not be left on as a symbolic general editor of the 3rd edition NOAB. Metzger is involved in the NISB no more than being the head of committee behind the NRSV. I had just thought it was a bold move for him to call the NISB the best when the NOAB 3rd was released (which for my money is shade ahead of the NISB even if briefer over all).

-Dan

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595354#Comment_595354

Thanks for the addition; yes he was definitely careful. I was always surprised he worked with the fallen angel from Moody.

Reading your samples, I notice this study Bible might become a favorite of David Paul.

'1:6- 8 On the second day of creation, sky and sea are formed. The dome (“firmament,” KJV, RSV), according to ancient Israel’s cosmology, is an impermeable barrier that holds back a great reservoir of water in the sky, separating it from the great reservoir under the earth. When the “windows of the sky” are opened in the Priestly flood story (7:11), the water in this reservoir falls as rain.'

I'd assume that it could have been made of nylon or maybe bronze-colored rubber.

Well, OK. I'll get it.

Paul C

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595355#Comment_595355

Well, OK. I'll get it

I suspect you had already planned to get it. ... Just needed someone to blame it on. [:P]

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595359#Comment_595359

No and yes. First, I made a careful analysis of the technique the first Adam used in justifying sin. Check.

Then I reviewed whether I wanted to expand my OT holdings after Z-company bought it. I thought, well, gee, I seem to have a lot of Z-company books. It'd be hypocritical to blame OT. And I'm no hypocrite.

But then I noticed Dan's sample was verse-blocks (which I don't like). Hmmm. I justified that by thinking Oxford was also verse-blocks.

So, yes. The decision needed some help. Plus the price won't even pay for the appetizer at our favorite sushi restaurant.

Paul C

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595360#Comment_595360

Plus the price won't even pay for the appetizer at our favorite sushi restaurant.

EWWWWW ! I like my sushi southern fried.

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595360#Comment_595360

Then I reviewed whether I wanted to expand my OT holdings

And here I thought it might have been your accordance holdings, since they just sent out their email announcing the NIB and the NISB....

-Dan

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595368#Comment_595368

Yes, Dan, you guessed correctly. But this also illustrates the value of nice software.

(1) I've yet to figure out how to highlight easily on the Accordance app. And (2), I've yet to succesfully download my recent Accordance purchases to my PC (their server or my firewall times them out on their ftp ... a recent phenomina).

Now if this downloading issue had happened in Logos, I would have whined 'bloody-murder' (since Logos listens!). And then bought some more Logos books. But in the case of Accordance, it's just easier to switch over to OT, where I have my UBS Handbooks too, and skip the book buying thing at Accordance. Plus did I mention NETS?? Also on OT.

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/595372#Comment_595372

While the mobile app is not easy as you pointed out... but that is suppose to be changing. Not to encourage or discourage other apps. A major flaw in Accordance is Highlights and notes do not automatically update like in OT and Logos. It can be done but it is a manual thing with the help of drop box. That said on the computer cmmd-8 is highlight, i would guess cntrl-8 in windows world. My copy of NISB is on OT which has the most advanced mobile app out there. But Logos and Acc. mobile apps very good.

-Dan