Zondervan Illustrated Background New Testament series- how theological?

I own the Old Testament set, and like it a good bit. I'm interested in the New Testament set, on sale until the end of today... but I'm a little wary. I'm not Protestant, and I know Zondervan as a publisher. How much Protestant theology is woven into the commentary here on, e.g. Romans? This isn't about me maintaining some kind of theological purity in my reading (I certainly don't), I only want to make sure that if I actually spend the money for this, I'll actually get historical/cultural/archaeological background in the New Testament volumes, not conservative Evangelical theology.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

HansK

I own the Old Testament set, and like it a good bit. I'm interested in the New Testament set, on sale until the end of today... but I'm a little wary. I'm not Protestant, and I know Zondervan as a publisher. How much Protestant theology is woven into the commentary here on, e.g. Romans? This isn't about me maintaining some kind of theological purity in my reading (I certainly don't), I only want to make sure that if I actually spend the money for this, I'll actually get historical/cultural/archaeological background in the New Testament volumes, not conservative Evangelical theology.

Hello Ben,

Here is some of the commentary on Rm 3.21 [:)]

----

Justification and the Righteousness of God (3:21–26)

In one of the greatest paragraphs of the Bible, Paul rehearses some of the reasons why the coming of Jesus Christ is, indeed, good news. In Christ, God has acted to manifest his saving righteousness, making it possible for any person who believes to be “justified”—pronounced innocent before the judgment seat of God himself (3:21–23). This verdict of justification is possible because Christ has redeemed us from our enslavement to sin (3:24), giving himself as a sacrifice that provides atonement for all people (3:25a). But what gives this paragraph its unparalleled significance is its claim that God did all this while preserving his own righteousness (3:25b–26a). In Christ—God become man and sacrificed for us—God found a way both to “justify” undeserving sinners and to remain “just” as he did so (3:26b).

Apart from law … to which the Law and the Prophets testify (3:21). “Law” in the first phrase refers to the Mosaic law, and thus should probably be made definite: the law. “The Law and the Prophets,” on the other hand, is a way by which Jews referred to the Old Testament as a whole (see, e.g., Matt. 5:17; 7:12).

Through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus (3:24). The word “redemption” (apolytrōsis) means “liberation through payment of a price.” Some interpreters think that this word, and its cognates, “redeem” (Gal. 3:13–14; 4:5; Titus 2:14; 1 Peter 1:18; Rev. 14:3) and “ransom” (Matt. 20:28//Mark 10:45; 1 Tim. 2:6; Heb. 9:15), have, through their use in the Old Testament, lost any sense of a “price paid.” The terms simply mean “deliverance” or “deliver.” But this is probably not the case. Several New Testament texts keep alive the idea of a “price.” The terms were widely used in the ancient world to refer to the process by which prisoners of war or slaves could be bought out of their bondage.²⁶ Paul, then, presents Christ’s death as a price that has been paid to release human beings from their slavery to sin (see comments on Rom. 3:9). Theologians and laypeople alike have asked the question: “To whom, then, was the price paid?” But Paul gives no answer; and perhaps even asking the question pushes Paul’s metaphor further than he intended.

God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement (3:25). Another significant theological term with a debated background lies behind the niv’s “sacrifice of atonement” (hilastērion). This word was used widely in the Greek world to refer to altars, monuments, etc., that would have the power to “propitiate” the wrath of gods. Many interpreters think this is the context from which Paul takes the term, and thus prefer to translate “propitiation.” But the word is also used in the Old Testament in a more specific sense, where it refers to the “mercy seat” (kjv language), the place on the altar where blood was placed and atonement took place. In fact, so often does the term have this meaning in Leviticus 16, in the description of the Day of Atonement ritual, that it virtually takes on the meaning “place of atonement” (see Lev. 3:1, 13, 14, 15). Since the only other occurrence of the word in the New Testament has this same reference (Heb. 9:5), we should probably accept this as the reference Paul intended.

----

Hans

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/824032#Comment_824032

Save your money, you will be better served by Faithlife Study Bible. The only thing the ZIBBC offers are average pictures. The comments are too basic and not helpful for someone who wants yo do serious exegesis. Your top Commentaries have more indepth information that is even more practical than what the Zondervan set offers. Anybody who thinks this set is the cream of the crop is definitely not doing his or her homework when preparing to teach God's Word. My two cents! Theologically speaking it kind of varies. It has faith only teaching in some parts, futurism mixed in it with premillennialism sprinkled here and there. This set fails to be what it claims to be "a bible background commentary" since most authors leave the background aside to push their own theological agenda. Disappointed with the content. They're getting sold to make me a little profit and if that doesn't happen before the 30 day period, then they're getting returned, no matter what great of a deal some think this was. Honest and realistic review

DAL

Brandon

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/824099#Comment_824099

Save your money, you will be better served by Faithlife Study Bible. The only thing the ZIBBC offers are average pictures. The comments are too basic and not helpful for someone who wants yo do serious exegesis. Your top Commentaries have more indepth information that is even more practical than what the Zondervan set offers. Anybody who thinks this set is the cream of the crop is definitely not doing his or her homework when preparing to teach God's Word. My two cents! Theologically speaking it kind of varies. It has faith only teaching in some parts, futurism mixed in it with premillennialism sprinkled here and there. This set fails to be what it claims to be "a bible background commentary" since most authors leave the background aside to push their own theological agenda. Disappointed with the content. They're getting sold to make me a little profit and if that doesn't happen before the 30 day period, then they're getting returned, no matter what great of a deal some think this was. Honest and realistic review

DAL

I couldn't agree more and you expressed my thoughts perfectly. I called FL and returned them this morning.

Rick Ausdahl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/824099#Comment_824099

Save your money, you will be better served by Faithlife Study Bible. The only thing the ZIBBC offers are average pictures. The comments are too basic and not helpful for someone who wants yo do serious exegesis. Your top Commentaries have more indepth information that is even more practical than what the Zondervan set offers. Anybody who thinks this set is the cream of the crop is definitely not doing his or her homework when preparing to teach God's Word. My two cents! Theologically speaking it kind of varies. It has faith only teaching in some parts, futurism mixed in it with premillennialism sprinkled here and there. This set fails to be what it claims to be "a bible background commentary" since most authors leave the background aside to push their own theological agenda. Disappointed with the content. They're getting sold to make me a little profit and if that doesn't happen before the 30 day period, then they're getting returned, no matter what great of a deal some think this was. Honest and realistic review

DAL

Dal, does that opinion hold for both the OT and the NT or just the NT?

I had never considered the set at the regular price but felt it was worth a look at the sale price. I wasn't thinking so much of myself, but thought this set might be more in line with the level of interest of any family member to whom I eventually pass the library on to, then would be the case with some of the more academic/technical commentary sets.

With that end in mind, there are some nice charts, maps, and pictures that might draw in someone new to Bible study if they have at least a little interest in this sort of information. But so far I am a bit underwhelmed by the actual commentary and I'm not sure I'll have time to do an adequate evaluation of the text within the 30 day grace period, so I'm very interested in comments and opinions on the set.

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/824243#Comment_824243

Save your money, you will be better served by Faithlife Study Bible. The only thing the ZIBBC offers are average pictures. The comments are too basic and not helpful for someone who wants yo do serious exegesis. Your top Commentaries have more indepth information that is even more practical than what the Zondervan set offers. Anybody who thinks this set is the cream of the crop is definitely not doing his or her homework when preparing to teach God's Word. My two cents! Theologically speaking it kind of varies. It has faith only teaching in some parts, futurism mixed in it with premillennialism sprinkled here and there. This set fails to be what it claims to be "a bible background commentary" since most authors leave the background aside to push their own theological agenda. Disappointed with the content. They're getting sold to make me a little profit and if that doesn't happen before the 30 day period, then they're getting returned, no matter what great of a deal some think this was. Honest and realistic review

DAL

Dal, does that opinion hold for both the OT and the NT or just the NT?
I had never considered the set at the regular price but felt it was worth a look at the sale price. I wasn't thinking so much of myself, but thought this set might be more in line with the level of interest of any family member to whom I eventually pass the library on to, then would be the case with some of the more academic/technical commentary sets.

With that end in mind, there are some nice charts, maps, and pictures that might draw in someone new to Bible study if they have at least a little interest in this sort of information. But so far I am a bit underwhelmed by the actual commentary and I'm not sure I'll have time to do an adequate evaluation of the text within the 30 day grace period, so I'm very interested in comments and opinions on the set.

So far it applies to both Testaments. I will continue to peruse them both. I still have 25 days before either selling them or returning them. I'll let you know.

DAL

Rick Ausdahl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/824257#Comment_824257

Thanks, Dal. Much appreciated! [:)]

Comments/opinions from others welcome as well.

Note:

I just realized my question could result in hi-jacking this thread. Please chime in regarding Ben's original theology question/concern.

Ben, if the conversation starts to drift, I'll start a new thread and ask people to reply to me there. My apologies. [:$]

Rick Ausdahl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/824257#Comment_824257

Save your money, you will be better served by Faithlife Study Bible. The only thing the ZIBBC offers are average pictures. The comments are too basic and not helpful for someone who wants yo do serious exegesis. Your top Commentaries have more indepth information that is even more practical than what the Zondervan set offers. Anybody who thinks this set is the cream of the crop is definitely not doing his or her homework when preparing to teach God's Word. My two cents! Theologically speaking it kind of varies. It has faith only teaching in some parts, futurism mixed in it with premillennialism sprinkled here and there. This set fails to be what it claims to be "a bible background commentary" since most authors leave the background aside to push their own theological agenda. Disappointed with the content. They're getting sold to make me a little profit and if that doesn't happen before the 30 day period, then they're getting returned, no matter what great of a deal some think this was. Honest and realistic review

DAL

Dal, does that opinion hold for both the OT and the NT or just the NT?
I had never considered the set at the regular price but felt it was worth a look at the sale price. I wasn't thinking so much of myself, but thought this set might be more in line with the level of interest of any family member to whom I eventually pass the library on to, then would be the case with some of the more academic/technical commentary sets.

With that end in mind, there are some nice charts, maps, and pictures that might draw in someone new to Bible study if they have at least a little interest in this sort of information. But so far I am a bit underwhelmed by the actual commentary and I'm not sure I'll have time to do an adequate evaluation of the text within the 30 day grace period, so I'm very interested in comments and opinions on the set.

So far it applies to both Testaments. I will continue to peruse them both. I still have 25 days before either selling them or returning them. I'll let you know.

DAL

Although as DAL pointed out in the https://community.logos.com/forums/t/126255.aspx?PageIndex=1 thread regarding this set, that D.A. Carson does not seem to hold the NT portion of the set in high regard, I've decided to keep the entire OT/NT set. Borrowing from that thread, Carson is quoted as saying "It is sometimes worth skimming in conjunction with commentaries on the text at hand, but the best of the major commentaries usually include all the relevant background materials anyway. To use this four-volume set by itself is unwise: it might encourage the unwary reader to think that the background is the foreground, with the result that what the text actually says quietly dissolves from view."

I'm not of the Reformed persuasion, but I have a great deal of respect for Grudem, Moo, and Carson, so Carson's assessment definitely caught my attention. But after taking as much time as I could to sample portions of both the OT and NT sections of the set, I still feel it has a useful niche. It's not that I disagree with Carson's assessment, but by the same token, I think it unwise to use any commentary set by itself if that can be avoided. And while I can see how "... it might encourage the unwary reader to think that the background is the foreground...", I think the only unwary readers would be those brand new to the use of commentaries for Bible study--readers who might also be so overwhelmed by the sheer volume of content in the more technical and academic sets (and perhaps even distraught over the many disputes and contentions raised in those sets), that their faith could be hindered more by some of these advanced sets than by this background set.

So... since one of my goals is to build a library that has something to offer regardless of where a person is in his/her journey in the faith, I've opted to keep this set. And while this set might be primarily for those in the early phase of their journey, I think it sometimes offers new tidbits and fresh perspectives than can be beneficial even for those who are much farther down the road. And for those who haven't even started their journey of faith, I think it can be a great way to introduce them to Biblical history. [:)]

JoshInRI

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/825105#Comment_825105

What a shame the huge sale I waited on for over a year ended so quickly.

Mattillo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/825131#Comment_825131

What commentaries would you recommend that include this type of background information?

Rick Ausdahl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/825138#Comment_825138

What commentaries would you recommend that include this type of background information?

I only have two background commentary sets: The two-volume IVP non-illustrated and the nine-volume Zondervan illustrated. I think they both have a place. If cost is an issue, the IVP set is naturally much cheaper, at about 20% the cost of the Zondervan set.

Rick Ausdahl

I own the Old Testament set, and like it a good bit. I'm interested in the New Testament set, on sale until the end of today... but I'm a little wary. I'm not Protestant, and I know Zondervan as a publisher. How much Protestant theology is woven into the commentary here on, e.g. Romans? This isn't about me maintaining some kind of theological purity in my reading (I certainly don't), I only want to make sure that if I actually spend the money for this, I'll actually get historical/cultural/archaeological background in the New Testament volumes, not conservative Evangelical theology.

Ben, did you make the purchase to give the NT set a look? If so, have you had time to evaluate it in regard to your theological concerns?

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/825131#Comment_825131

What a shame the huge sale I waited on for over a year ended so quickly.

There's still one set for sale for $200 no transfer fee. You want it so bad, I think $40 extra than the recent sale price is not that bad considering that not even Logos will offer you that price after the sale ended. Remember, there's no dynamic pricing or discounts on Zondervan products unless Zondervan authorizes Logos to give one. Right now, Zondervan is out of jurisdiction since I own the set and can do whatever I want with it 😉 I may even keep it since it's starting to grow on me...or I can return it...or sell it for $200 to you or someone else if they get the money this coming week...either way, I got nothing to lose.

Visit the facebook page if you want if not, no worries, you can wait for the sale to come back, if it ever comes back.

DAL

Ps. Not trying to sell you anything, just trying to help you get the set you always wanted.

Ben

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/825151#Comment_825151

There was another factor beyond the theology, about which I was on the fence. I did not purchase, and don't feel I missed much.