Incorrect hyperlink in "Crucifixion of the Warrior God"

Graham Criddle

Page 63 of "the Crucifixion of the Warrior God" footnote 105 has a link to Bruce's NICNT commentary on Colossians.

It links to page 207 whereas the quote is from page 74 as shown below

Anyone know if this error is in the hard copy or it is a Logos linking mistake?

"Look Inside" on Amazon shows the same incorrect cross-reference so I suspect the problem is in the original resource.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Paul Strickert

Different issue, but I noticed that the introduction to vol 2 immediately follows the introduction to vol 1. Seems like odd placement, since the intro to vol 2 assumes the reader has already read vol 1. Shouldn't the intro to vol 2 follow the entire text of vol 1?

Kyle G. Anderson

Page 63 of "the Crucifixion of the Warrior God" footnote 105 has a link to Bruce's NICNT commentary on Colossians.

It links to page 207 whereas the quote is from page 74 as shown below

Anyone know if this error is in the hard copy or it is a Logos linking mistake?

"Look Inside" on Amazon shows the same incorrect cross-reference so I suspect the problem is in the original resource.

Thanks. Since the typo is in the original we can let the publisher know.

Different issue, but I noticed that the introduction to vol 2 immediately follows the introduction to vol 1. Seems like odd placement, since the intro to vol 2 assumes the reader has already read vol 1. Shouldn't the intro to vol 2 follow the entire text of vol 1?

This is a fairly typical way for us to handle prefatory material in what exists--due to size constraints--as two volumes in print. It's not ideal but plopping an "Introduction" between Parts III and IV feels odd as well.

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/897215#Comment_897215

Thanks Kyle

Appreciated, Graham

James McAdams

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/897215#Comment_897215

Different issue, but I noticed that the introduction to vol 2 immediately follows the introduction to vol 1. Seems like odd placement, since the intro to vol 2 assumes the reader has already read vol 1. Shouldn't the intro to vol 2 follow the entire text of vol 1?

This is a fairly typical way for us to handle prefatory material in what exists--due to size constraints--as two volumes in print. It's not ideal but plopping an "Introduction" between Parts III and IV feels odd as well.

This decision with made for one of my happiest discoveries in recent weeks - the introductions to The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew seem almost farcical when read in quick sequence as they project with tremendous optimism how it's all plain-sailing now this volume is out of the way, immediately followed by the next volume explaining how it got away from them, but next time, it'll be much easier... This is repeated on loop in each volume. It makes sense given the ambition of the project, but it is hilarious.