Advice Needed: Collector's Upgrade: Classic Commentaries Bundle for Academic Work?

I am at the point where I can get the Collector's upgrade for around $750 with Dynamic Pricing. The vast majority of what I would get would be all of the classic commentaries, as well as some of the Eerdmans Bundle 2 works that I don't already have (there are probably $150-$250 worth of works there that I wouldn't mind having).

I do mostly academic work, so my question is do you find the classic commentaries helpful in academic work? Newer works are generally going to reference works in the last 50 to 100 years except for those older volumes which are standouts. How many standouts are there among these sets?

Of course an added benefit would be that my dynamic price would go down as well for other packages and future upgrades. I would get a total of about 1200 new works.

Any insight one way or the other would be appreciated!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

mab

Quite frankly, I think the overall return on commentary use is much like the lament about the making of books. Some of it still matters. You might want to sift through the listings to see if there are enough peaches. What have you used among the classics so far? Your own use defines your own value return.

When I began to acquire Logos classic commentaries on pre-pub. I knew there were about two or three volumes in a set for a given book that were worthy gems, but the rest was unknown to me.

I'm considering this upgrade too at the moment, but there's more in it for me. You are looking at 1200 books so that pegs it about 60 cents apiece. Not too shabby.

But you alone get to ask yourself about how much of it is really useful.

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1070211#Comment_1070211

Save your money for a more recent better bundle or upgrade. Collector’s ironically includes a lot of collector’s old fillers. Highest I’d go is portfolio and buy as needed. Ultimate is even worse!

DAL

David Ames

I do mostly academic work, so my question is do you find the classic commentaries helpful in academic work? Newer works are generally going to reference works in the last 50 to 100 years except for those older volumes which are standouts. How many standouts are there among these sets?

Question: How do you feel about the King James? The "Older" commentaries would more likely base their idea there.

Jan Krohn

I've found the classic commentaries quite helpful. Even if I don't cite them in a paper, they're a good litmus test to determine whether a concept or idea is influenced by contemporary culture and thinking, or has withstood the test of time and has remained unchanged since the reformation.

The amount of classic commentaries to be of use is debatable though.

MJ. Smith

It depends upon what you believe about reception history. As an academic, you are probably very aware that you "stand on the shoulders of those who went before". The classics allow you to see those shoulders with all their strengths and flaws ... which at times help you to recognize your own hidden biases ... which occasionally allow you to have a real epiphany in understanding that is truly worth sharing.

Dave Moser

I do mostly academic work, so my question is do you find the classic commentaries helpful in academic work?

"Academic work" is a very broad category. What kind of academic work are you doing?

The classic commentaries, in my experience, are mostly homiletical in nature. They vary widely in how technical they are, but if I had to assign them a modern category, I'd call the median "intermediate." (Roughly NAC or Tyndale range)

If your academic work borders on historical theology, history of reception, or something related, they might be useful additions.

Joseph Turner

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1070237#Comment_1070237

I do mostly academic work, so my question is do you find the classic commentaries helpful in academic work?

"Academic work" is a very broad category. What kind of academic work are you doing?

The classic commentaries, in my experience, are mostly homiletical in nature. They vary widely in how technical they are, but if I had to assign them a modern category, I'd call the median "intermediate." (Roughly NAC or Tyndale range)

If your academic work borders on historical theology, history of reception, or something related, they might be useful additions.

I guess this boils it down somewhat. I would want at least a good many of the works to be more technical in nature than homiletical.

Thank you all for the comments. I think I will pass.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1070245#Comment_1070245

I would want at least a good many of the works to be more technical in nature than homiletical.

If by technical, you mean technical as used by the historical-grammatical school, then the works by philologists are "technical". Look for titles such as "Notes on the Hebrew Text", "Book of Genesis in Hebrew with Various readings", "critically and exegetically" ... however, the "technical" titles that are of interest to me tend to be "with a Talmudic commentary", "legends of", "types in" ...

Joseph Turner

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1070255#Comment_1070255

Thank you all again for your opinions and guidance. I ended up upgrading as a strategic move for dynamic pricing on future upgrades. There was enough that I wanted to get me close to my actual cost, and having all of those classic commentary sets on my account will drive down future upgrades, such as Collector's 9 or whatever may come, so that was enough to push me over the line.