Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible vs. AYBD

I realise this is an 11th hour question, but I have pre-ordered three Zondervan products, the NIDNTT, the NIDOTTE and the Encyclopedia of the Bible.

I am fairly happy with the former two, but am in a quandry regarding the latter purchase. I have checked out the product page and the equivalent pages on Amazon and am struggling to determine how useful it will be. This has led me to consider whether perhaps the AYBD might be a better purchase (I do intend on getting the AYBD at some stage).

I currently own the IVP Bible Dictionary collection in my paper library and, I guess, would consider this to be a semi-technical resource (just to help you understand how I am defining semi-technical). I guess I am looking for something of the equivalent level (or higher), but in Logos. I would prefer not to spend my money on anything less scholarly at this stage (I already have a wealth of material at that level).

I know the IVP set is available in Logos, but I would prefer not to buy it again at this stage.

I would be exceedingly grateful if someone is able to help me assess how the Encyclopedia stacks up against the IVP Dictionary set...

If, in your view, the Zondervan Encyclopedia is wanting, I would be grateful for your view of AYBD...

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Justin Burt

Hello Andy!

I do not own the Encyclopedia of the Bible by Zondervan, but do have both IVP New Bible Dictionary (3rd Edition) and AYBD for Accordance. I can say that with these two resources, that there is little, if any need for another Bible Dictionary. I normally open up IVP NBD first and then if I am in need of more information I go to the AYBD. AYBD is by far the most complete Bible dictionary I have ever used. It is very well put together and there is a ton of information, so if you can, I would suggest just getting the AYBD for Logos and use it when you find IVP BD to be insufficient. I am even planning on purchasing AYBD for Logos as well. It is worth the money!

Justin

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114122#Comment_114122

ZEB combines the thoroughness of the AYBD with the evangelical stance of the NBD. It is both less academic and less critical than AYBD. I have the print version of ZEB and its proved sufficiently valueable for me to purchase the Logos version, despite already owning AYBD and NBD. I anticipate using all three.

Andy

Thanks Justin and thanks Mark. I think I will stick with the ZEB given there is a slight pre-pub discount and will save up for the AYBD over the coming weeks.

Thanks again for the advice.

Andy

Jim VanSchoonhoven

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114166#Comment_114166

I am a conservative dispensational list, I own AYBD, ZEB, ISBE two editions, NBD and the BEB.

From the things I had heard about AYBD I almost did't buy it because I thought it would not be conservative enough for me, but it is without a doubt the most useful of all these sets, followed by the newest ISBE and than ZEB.

ZEB is the only one I do not have in Logos, and I would get a 40% off discount on it, but it is not worth it to me. If money is an issue I would go for ISBE if it is not I would go for the AYBD.

In Christ,

Jim

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114186#Comment_114186

For the sake of comparison, you can read part of the Zondervan entry for Aaron as a sample. By way of comparison, below is part (less than half) of the entry for Aaron in AYBD.

AARON (PERSON) [Heb ˒ahărōn (אַהֲרֹן)]. AARONITES. The son of Amram and the brother of Moses and Miriam who was the eponymous ancestor of the priestly Aaronites and the paradigm for later priests. He dies at Mount Hur (Deut 32:50) and is succeeded by his son Eleazar (Num 20:22–29). Aaronites are the priests who claim descent from Levi through Aaron. They are often referred to as the “sons of Aaron” (Heb bĕnê ˒ahărōn) (cf. Lev 3:8; 21:1; Num 10:8; Josh 21:4; 1 Chr 24:1; Neh 12:47) or as “belonging to Aaron” (Heb lĕ˒ahărōn) (cf. 1 Chr 12:28—Eng12:27; 27:17). The meaning of the name “Aaron” is uncertain, although it is perhaps derived from Egyptian.
———
A. Introduction
B. Images of Aaron in the Biblical Literature
C. Aaron/Aaronite Relations with Others
D. The Priestly Functions of Aaron and the Aaronites
E. Summary
———
A. Introduction

The first task in understanding Aaron and the Aaronites is to examine the varied images of them in the biblical accounts. Sometimes there is a strong positive image of Aaron as the officially ordained priest of God. At other times, the picture is rather negative, portraying Aaron at odds with Moses and “mainline” religious practices. In examining these portrayals, it becomes clear that positive images appear in the later biblical materials and negative images are prominent in the earlier materials. It is also true that there is a significant body of biblical literature (the prophets—especially Ezekiel—and the Deuteronomistic History) in which priests are present but there is little or no reference to Aaron or his followers. Thus, in order to understand the images of Aaron and the Aaronites, one needs to be aware of the particular literature in which these references to Aaron are found, and the specific time frame in which that literature emerged.

A second set of concerns when discussing Aaron and the Aaronites focuses on their relationship to other people or priestly groups. In terms of individuals, the question is primarily Aaron’s relationship with Moses. In terms of the Aaronites, the question is how they relate to the Levites and Zadokites, two other major priestly factions.

Finally, Aaron and his descendants are the preeminent models of what it means to be a priest. They are the ones who perform the most holy of rituals, who handle the holiest of sacred objects and who enter the holiest of places. In addition, they are the ones who oversee all priestly functions and groups, and monitor the activities of the priests at both the temple and the tabernacle.

B. Images of Aaron in the Biblical Literature

It is clear that there is some ambivalence in the biblical texts toward Aaron. On the one hand, he becomes involved with the construction of the GOLDEN CALF (Exodus 32) and joins Miriam in opposing Moses (Numbers 12). On the other hand, Aaron and his sons are singled out to serve God as priests (Exodus 28–29; Leviticus 8–9). Somewhere amid these two perspectives stands a remarkable silence on the Aaronites (e.g. 1–2 Kings, Ezekiel), in which they are neither good nor bad. There are other priests or priestly groups present, but Aaron and the Aaronites are not part of that presence.

This confusing portrayal has been the subject of speculation for some period. As early as Wellhausen (WPHI) and Kennett (1905), it was suggested that the positive portrayal of Aaron emerged only in the post-exilic period and that the negative or neutral portrayals dated from the pre-exilic period. Since those early discussions, Meek (1929), Welch (1939), North (1954) and Cody (1969, 1977) have offered slight variations on the same basic position—that the positive image of Aaron is a product of the post-exilic period.

Their arguments are based on an examination of the materials in which Aaron appears. There are 346 references to Aaron in the Hebrew Bible (several in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha and 5 in the NT). A vast majority (296) appear in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers. The remainder are spread out in Deuteronomy (4), Joshua (6), Judges (1), 1 Samuel (2), Micah (1), Psalms (9), Ezra (1), Nehemiah (3), 1 Chronicles (16), and Chronicles (7). The lack of appearances in Ezekiel, who is very concerned with priests, and the scarcity in Deuteronomy (4), where Moses plays a predominant role, are very curious. However, prior to drawing any conclusions, specific passages need to be investigated, and this investigation must be cognizant of the historical situation from which the passages emerge.

A safe place to begin such an examination is the work of the Chronicler, whose postexilic date is essentially undisputed. In 1–2 Chronicles one sees a prominent positive role for Aaron. He is the brother of Moses (1 Chr 5:29—Eng6:3); he and his sons make sacrifices, offerings, and atonement in the most holy place in the temple (1 Chr 6:34—Eng6:49); and Aaron and his sons are “set apart” to perform the most sacred of duties—to burn incense, to V 1, p 2 minister, and to bless (1 Chr 23:13; 24:19). Furthermore, in 2 Chr 26:16–21, it is explicitly indicated that only the sons of Aaron, and not King Uzziah, could burn incense to Yahweh.

There are many other positive portrayals of Aaron, but most are found in P (Priestly) material, a collection of material more problematical in terms of dating than the Chronicler’s materials. The general consensus, albeit certainly not uniform, is that the present form of the P material reflects the understandings and perspectives of the early Second Temple period (i.e., postexilic period). Following that consensus yields a perspective on Aaron which is consistent with what emerged in the postexilic work of the Chronicler.

When one looks at the P material, one sees a very positive understanding of Aaron. A few examples from Exodus will support this point. Following the description of the ark and tabernacle (Exod 25:1–27:20), Aaron and his sons (the Aaronites) are to “tend” the tent of meeting (Exod 27:21), to serve Yahweh as priests (Exod 28:1), to wear priestly garments (Exod 28:3–43), including the Urim and Thummim (Exod 28:30), to be consecrated to Yahweh (Exod 29:1) and to be ordained (Exod 29:9, 35). To celebrate this ordination, a bull and two rams are to be sacrificed in Aaron’s honor (Exod 29:10–37). Finally, Aaron and his sons shall be anointed and consecrated as priests of Yahweh with “holy oil” (Exod 30:30–31). This positive image of Aaron continues through most of Exodus (with the exception of Exodus 32, which will be discussed later), throughout all of Leviticus and most of Numbers.

In Leviticus, much time is spent describing specific offerings and the procedures for those offerings. Consistently, Aaron, or “Aaron’s sons, the priests” are specified as the only people authorized to perform these rituals. In Lev 6:1–9:24—Eng6:8–9:24, Aaron and his sons are instructed as to the law of the various offerings and their crucial role in these offerings. The ritual for anointing Aaron and his sons is spelled out in Lev 6:12–16—Eng6:19–23. The actual ceremony for the ordination of Aaron and his sons is prescribed in Leviticus 8–9. The regulations for the actions of the Aaronites—“the priests, the sons of Aaron”—are spelled out in Leviticus 21. The concern is to maintain the holy status of the priests so that they do not become defiled by such actions as marrying a divorced woman (v 7), letting one’s hair hang loose (v 10), or coming in contact with a dead body (v 11). In addition, no person with a blemish may “offer bread” to Yahweh (v 18).

In Numbers 1–4, Moses and Aaron conduct a census of the people in preparation for war. Three factors should be considered when examining the role of Aaron in this census. First, the Levites, another priestly group, are numbered separately from the rest of the people (Num 1:47; 3:16–37), and are to be given to Aaron to stand (Heb ˒md) before and serve (Heb šrt) him (3:6). The second point is that the line of succession to Aaron is established. In Num 3:2–3 Aaron’s sons are listed and identified as anointed priests “ordained to minister in the priest’s office” (literally “whose hands are filled for the priesthood” [Heb ml˒ yd lkhn], “to fill the hand,” is the common Hebrew expression used to indicate ordination). Since Nadab and Abihu, two of Aaron’s sons, have died (Leviticus 10), Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron’s other sons, are the successors to Aaron. Finally, only Aaron and his sons are to be priests. All others who seek to come near the tent of meeting should be killed (Num 3:10).

This perspective on Aaron’s exclusive role as priest is continued in Numbers 16. The account records the rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram against Moses and Aaron (Num 16:1–3) and contains the statement that only the descendants of Aaron can be priests (Num 17:5—Eng 16:40). This is curious since Korah, the son of Ishar, and Aaron, the son of Amram, are both seen as descendants of the priestly family of Levi (Exod 3:16–18; Num 3:17–19; 16:1). However, for the Priestly writer it is only Aaron’s branch of the Levitical family which can claim the legitimate right to the priesthood at the temple and tabernacle. Other material in Numbers (except Numbers 12) conveys the same basic positive evaluation of Aaron. As with the Chronicler, the Priestly writer presents a positive image of Aaron.

In contrast to that perspective, one can find materials in which there is a negative, or at least neutral, image of Aaron. One example is in Deuteronomy. This material is examined first because it can be identified, with a comfortable degree of certainty, as having originated in a pre-exilic context. One example, in particular, is Deuteronomy 9, which contains part of Moses’ presentation to the people. Of interest here is the telling of the story of Moses’ descent from Mount Horeb after having received the two tablets of stone. Moses comes upon the people who have sinned and made a GOLDEN CALF (Deut 9:15–16). The story continues with a statement that Yahweh is so angry toward Aaron that he was about to destroy him. It appears that it is only Moses’ intercessory prayer and his utter destruction of the Golden Calf which saves Aaron. It is certainly not a glowing recommendation of Aaron. Indeed, the only other appearance of Aaron in Deuteronomy is in 32:50, where Aaron is merely mentioned as a brother of Moses. Thus Deuteronomy neither presents a positive image of Aaron, nor contains a reference to Aaron as priest (unless one considers Aaron’s role in the building of the Golden Calf as priestly—but even then it would not be seen as consistent with the mainline worship of Yahweh).

This negative perspective is not confined to this passage in Deuteronomy. In Exodus 32, although there is some discussion as to the integrity of the passage, Aaron is portrayed as the villain who receives the gold from the people (Exod 32:4a), makes the calf (Exod 32:4a, 35), declares, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you out of the land of Egypt!” (Exod 32:4b), and builds an altar before the calf (Exod 32:5). When Moses returns from the mountain, he indicates that Aaron has brought a great sin upon the people (Exod 32:21) and has allowed the people to “break loose” (Exod 32:25). While Aaron seeks to redirect Moses’ anger (Exod 32:22–24), his culpability is clearly indicated.

A third example of this negative image of Aaron is found in Numbers 12. Here Aaron and his sister Miriam challenge Moses’ authority (12:1) and claim that Yahweh speaks through them as well as through Moses (12:2). The response of Yahweh is clear; Moses is the specially chosen spokesperson, and no one should challenge him (12:5–8). As punishment, Yahweh makes Miriam leprous and subsequently V 1, p 3 heals her only after Aaron pleads with Moses to petition Yahweh on their behalf.

All three of these passages which convey either a negative or a nonpriestly image of Aaron are generally considered to be preexilic in date. The single reference to Aaron in the prophets (Mic 6:4), which is preexilic, merely refers to Aaron as having been sent to Egypt with Moses and Miriam. In addition, there are precious few references to Aaron in the pre-exilic and exilic work of the Deuteronomistic Historian, which is surprising, given the number of times priests or priestly factions are mentioned. It is only in Joshua, where cities are distributed to the Levites (Josh 21:4, 13, 19), that Aaron is referred to as a priest. Finally, Ezekiel, an exilic work which spends much time discussing the roles and functions of the priests and priestly groups, never refers to Aaron or the Aaronites.

The implication of this examination of the biblical passages which refer to Aaron is that the positive image of Aaron and the Aaronites, and of their role as priests, arises in the post-exilic period. This may be expected since it reflects, in general, the prominent position of priests in the postexilic period, and, in particular, the emergence of the role of the high priest. In contrast, in the pre-exilic period Aaron is mentioned only a few times, often in a neutral or negative way, and very rarely as a priest. Thus one must conclude that the prominence of Aaron and the Aaronites as priests is a post-exilic phenomenon.

C. Aaron/Aaronite Relations with Others

A second area of consideration is the relationship of Aaron to other individuals and of the Aaronites to other priestly groups. Aaron’s relationship to Moses is of primary importance. In terms of the associations of the Aaronites, there are two other priestly factions which have a significant role in the Hebrew Bible—the Zadokites and the Levites. It is clear that there is struggle, conflict, and competition among these three groups over who is going to have control of the priesthood. As indicated in the previous section, one must remember that all of these relationships are fluid and that Aaron’s priority is emphasized in the later biblical materials…

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/114202#Comment_114202

Andy, it sounds like you have a good approach, taking advantage of the discounts. I would not suggest any differently.

You can see everybody has a different view and favorites. Let me add my own experience of AYBD, which I bought during the twelve days of logos:

Yes, there are some articles that are clearly more academic, and some more liberal. That said, again and again, some of the insight of the authors, and their ability to deal with a wide scope in a very clear way amazes me. And there are several authors that I consider conservative who also write articles (Christopher J H Wright, IH Marshall, etc). I am blown away many times by the quality.

Before this, ISBE was my mainstay. the Old Zondervan Picotorial was for me useless in both pictures and in articles. I don't know much about ZEB, but I have heard better things about the articles and the pictures look amazing (that I have seen). I would like to get it for my daughters to use in Bible study (in my household on my account . . . I think that is okay . . . ).

But i would get ZEB first in your case, because of the discount.