I am a bit puzzled by this blog post. First, as I read the description of the updates and compare the samples provided, I think "that's nice, but is it really worth $99"? But more puzzling to me is the question in the blog "are you still using 30 years old commentaries?". The editions of Martin and Butler I have are both from 1998 and the new editions are from 2014. In my books that 16 years, not 30.
But really, the main question is how much of a rewrite this really is. I have read in recent times new editions of several books. J.L. Martyn's History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel is adorned with a nice preface from Moody Smith, a good article indeed but perhaps not enough to justify a new purchase. Then there are a few insertions here and there with more recent bibliographic information and brief comments on some of them, but for the main part, one who reads the first edition probably has more 95% of the content of the latest. Burridge's second edition to What are the Gospels includes a new chapter on how his original edition was received and a bit of interaction with critics. That interaction is pretty limited however, as Burridge is sticking to his guns (as he does in all the subsequent articles he has written since that I am aware of -- I have read a fair number). There is no new insight per se. Again, one who had already been reading the first edition would not missing much as compared to the second.
Now of course it does not have to be that way in the new commentaries. Perhaps some of you have read the new editions and have comments about this? If I were doing research on 2 Corinthians or Judges, I'd probably want the new bibliographies and to quote from the most recent edition, but otherwise???
