Commentaries

Page 2 of 2 (35 items) < Previous 1 2
This post has 34 Replies | 4 Followers

Posts 390
Alain Maashe | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jul 27 2012 5:52 PM

George Somsel:

Jack Caviness:
Why is it that some posters on these forums seem to equate conservative with stupid?

That would be because it's not infrequently true.  It isn't necessary that all conservatives are stupid, but a good many seem to be such.  A resistence to even the thought that there might be a different view is unacceptable.  All views which have any claim to legitimacy must be considered and not simply rejected because they are the "Old Time Religion."  You may end up with that conclusion, but you should first examine the views carefully.

 

One must be especially naïve to believe that conservatives are the only ones who are reticent to operate outside the framework imposed by their own theological and philosophical presuppositions (it would also be beyond naivety to think that liberals do not have theological and philosophical presuppositions of their own). How else would one explain that the historicity of many biblical accounts is often summarily dismissed merely because of the presence of miracles/supernatural causation without even a discussion as to the validity of such anti-supernaturalistic presuppositions?  

 Is rejecting an interpretation because it requires acknowledging the supernatural or the existence of a God who is active in the universe any better than rejecting something because it does not fit what you call the “Old Time Religion”?

The man who is aware of his own prejudices can be helped; the man who is oblivious to his own prejudices has no hope to overcome them but can only glory in his “objectivity” as he uncritically accepts and applies the methodological skepticism that was handed down from generations (ironic indeed).

 I attended conservative seminaries and we had to consider the views and arguments from liberals, read and interact with the relevant literature (the diversity of my library reflects my academic training). From what I know of most liberal seminaries, the favor is seldom returned (why waste time with the rambling of “stupid” people?). My point being that at a similar level of education, the “stupid” conservatives are usually more acquainted with the views of the opposite side than their liberal counterparts. Maybe someone could explain to me how you can consider other views when you are barely aware they exist.

 

Posts 3571
Francis | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jul 27 2012 6:43 PM

Unix:
I tend to wonder what Scripture is not for me?

There is no part of Scripture that is not for you or anyone else. The Scriptures form a whole which is the context of all its parts. If it is compartimentalized, it will result in tunnel vision applications. I say this on the basis of how I understand your question. I hope I have not misunderstood you. 

As leader, it is even more crucial to be steeped in the Scriptures, able to teach that which is according to sound doctrine, able to refute, discerning in the ways of the Lord.

Posts 9945
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jul 27 2012 6:47 PM

Alain Maashe:
One must be especially naïve to believe that conservatives are the only ones

Greetings Alain.  If there's anything that is certain, it is that you will be around to criticize anything I post.  It's nice to know that I can count on my Moriorty.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 468
BKMitchell | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jul 27 2012 11:09 PM

Hello everyone,

BEHOLD!

Joshua Peeler:

Mostly what I am looking for are critical commentaries. I have found that devotional and pastoral are much easier to find in logos.

The original poster or thread starter doesn't appear to be concerned about the conservativeness or liberalness of commentaries.He inquired only about the availability of critical commentaries.

Sure, he stated that devotional and pastoral commentaries are far easier for him to locate, but he said nothing about whether they were conservative or liberal.

So, let's stop grinding axes and help him find some critical commentaries in Logos format.

 

Here are a few goodies:

 

A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament is a modern classic

http://www.logos.com/product/2190/a-textual-commentary-on-the-greek-new-testament

 

Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries (everybody knows this one its great)

http://www.logos.com/product/4470/anchor-yale-bible

 

The JPS Tanakh Commentary Collection is a growing collection of commentaries on the Hebrew Bible

http://www.logos.com/product/3868/jps-tanakh-commentary-collection


OLD, but it's good and it's complete: International Critical Commentary

http://www.logos.com/product/4099/international-critical-commentary

 

 

חַפְּשׂוּ בַּתּוֹרָה הֵיטֵב וְאַל תִּסְתַּמְּכוּ עַל דְּבָרַי

Posts 25935
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jul 28 2012 12:20 AM

I prefer Hermeneia to Anchor although I need both of them. I'm also fond of Forms of the Old Testament Literature but that also reflects my interests - it wouldn't be high on everyone's list.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 2037
Unix | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jul 28 2012 1:43 AM

I need actual answers to my actual questions!

Francis:
There is no part of Scripture that is not for you or anyone else. The Scriptures form a whole which is the context of all its parts. If it is compartimentalized, it will result in tunnel vision applications. I say this on the basis of how I understand your question. I hope I have not misunderstood you.

Aply!
trulyergonomic.com 5,850own
12G A9-9420 V8.3 Acc 11
d:'13Q3 12G

Posts 2964
tom | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jul 28 2012 2:12 AM

Unix:

I need actual answers to my actual questions!

Francis:
There is no part of Scripture that is not for you or anyone else. The Scriptures form a whole which is the context of all its parts. If it is compartimentalized, it will result in tunnel vision applications. I say this on the basis of how I understand your question. I hope I have not misunderstood you.

Unix,

IMHO, and not to be a jerk, but only you can provide answers to your questions as it relates to scripture.

Posts 665
Jonathan Pitts | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jul 28 2012 4:23 PM

Choosing a good commentary is a very personal thing. As well as well as good scholarship, it needs to be one that you can read and take in—the two don't always go together. What suits one reader will not suit another.

Although many commentary series are of very mixed quality and the advice to pick individual volumes has some wisdom, one of the joys of Logos is that commentary series are much more affordable than in print. With a high-end base package plus one or two of the major commentary series, you can have a very good selection of works.

This then gives you the opportunity to sample different commentaries before committing to reading a whole one. When I approach a book of the Bible, I tend to read the introductory chapters to about three different commentaries (which are well regarded on bestcommentaries.com and are in my Logos library) and the first pericope in each. This gives a variety of views on the broader critical questions and gives me a good idea of which commentaries speak clearly to me. Commentaries are gradually discarded, until I find one or two that I will read from cover to cover.

I have found this in all fields that I have studied in, there is no point in dragging yourself through a book that others claim to be the best or is the most comprehensive if you don't find it easy to read. Choose something that speaks to you, and you will learn and understand much more.

Posts 2037
Unix | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jul 28 2012 8:55 PM

In this post I don't mean to give direct advice, I just tell what I'm doing. Ignore this post if You don't need personal explanations and go to the questions I had on page 1 of this thread!

First I bought some individual volumes, some in print and some in Logos. After that there wasn't much of a choice which set to buy. I'm not going to buy additional sets so my questions may differ a bit from the OP's question. If I would be very interested in different sets I would sneak into the biggest university theological library in the Nordic (soon a local area ticket is enough to get there) and read in some commentaries (but they don't necessarily have the sets I'm interested in as they theologically differ from my beliefs and since ICC is old for most parts) - but I would still have the problem that most sets in Logos have not been split up. So because of such reason my focus is now on which Hermeneia -volumes are worth to read (have bought), and what the ICC -commentaries on Ep (1998) and 2 Cor 1-7 (1994) contain (have not bought).

I just want to make an informed purchase, I feel much better that way. What I'm trying to say, is that the first stage is choosing and buying, the second stage is perhaps choosing, the next stage is reading, and the last stage is making use of the commentaries. So I'm aware of how this goes down.

Commentaries are not necessarily easy to read, but as I'm highly aware that I'm probably not going to study much theology (it's really hard to find any university or college over here in the Nordic that skips the filler classes and goes to the core and which I agree with theologically), I'll just read through while learning Gk and then read again after having gained skills in Gk. But I want this ahead start because I can't wait to read theology and I feel that some parts of the Bible I want to use for a very long time, starting soon. A book that is hard to read (the Bible, or a commentary) gives me a feeling that I don't know what it's all about or what the theological implications of it are, but at the same time the difficulty keeps me aware of that while I may not know yet I will know better in a few years.

Like I explained in my previous post, I'm allready closer to the point where I don't need more books anymore, than I was 3½ months ago.

When I'm done with the purchasing of commentaries (that'll be soon), most of the choosing I'll do will be regarding what parts of the Bible to focus on, therefore the questions in my first post in this thread.

tom collinge:
only you can provide answers to your questions as it relates to scripture.
Jonathan Pitts:
When I approach a book of the Bible, I tend to read the introductory chapters to about three different commentaries (which are well regarded on bestcommentaries.com and are in my Logos library) and the first pericope in each. This gives a variety of views on the broader critical questions [...] Commentaries are gradually discarded, until I find one or two that I will read from cover to cover.

I have found this in all fields that I have studied in, there is no point in dragging yourself through a book that others claim to be the best or is the most comprehensive if you don't find it easy to read.

Aply!
trulyergonomic.com 5,850own
12G A9-9420 V8.3 Acc 11
d:'13Q3 12G

Posts 10362
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jul 29 2012 2:50 AM

Unix:
I just want to make an informed purchase,

You could take advantage of Logos' 30-day money-back policy.

Posts 2037
Unix | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jul 29 2012 4:11 AM

No, I'm not gonna do that because of 2-reasons:
1) I don't want to be forced to read it through with comprehension immediately
2) I've promised myself not to because I would be very tempted to keep it anyway regardelss if it has the content I want
Better option to go to the biggest university library and have a look there.

Jack Caviness:
Unix:
I just want to make an informed purchase,
You could take advantage of Logos' 30-day money-back policy.

 

Aply!
trulyergonomic.com 5,850own
12G A9-9420 V8.3 Acc 11
d:'13Q3 12G

Posts 10362
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jul 29 2012 4:28 AM

Unix:
1) I don't want to be forced to read it through with comprehension immediately

You could review a few key passages

Unix:
2) I've promised myself not to because I would be very tempted to keep it anyway

Now, that could be a problem Geeked

Posts 2037
Unix | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jul 30 2012 9:46 PM

Here is someone who recommends Thrall (ICC) or Furnish (AB) first:
http://www.amazon.com/Epistle-Corinthians-International-Testament-Commentary/product-reviews/0802823939/ref=cm_cr_dp_qt_hist_three?ie=UTF8&filterBy=addThreeStar&showViewpoints=0
on July 11. 2005.

On Nov 19. 2011, in:
http://community.logos.com/forums/p/41036/306796.aspx#306796

... Mark Smith is saying that the Ro Cranfield -volume is one of the few volumes in ICC he'd be glad to have in Logos, but I'm not going to buy that one, I allready have a Ro -commentary that I'm fully pleased with (Paideia by Frank J. Matera, 2010, as printed matter, I have only that volume).

Unix:
Do You recommend the ICC 2 Cor 1-7 (by Thrall, M.) [...] -volume?
Mark Smith:
selected ICC volumes,
As I've found out the other day that I stand very far from Calvinism (I'm still closest to the RCC and second closest to Anabaptism)...
http://www.christianforums.com/t7663680-post61076898/
..., and as Ernest Best seems to have been a Church of Scotland Reverend:
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-23583145.html
... I'm skipping the Ep ICC -volume!

Aply!
trulyergonomic.com 5,850own
12G A9-9420 V8.3 Acc 11
d:'13Q3 12G

Posts 1586
Ken McGuire | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jul 31 2012 7:15 AM

Both Best (Eph) and Thrall (2 Cor) are highly regarded.  I own the print versions of both, but to be honest, but because of more time working on Ephesians, have used the Best volume more.  They are probably the most through treatments of modern "critical" scholarship as of when the books were written - about 10 years ago.  If you have the tools to understand them, they are probably the best available at this moment.

But they make extensive use of greek.  In addition they follow most of the rabbit trails that others have argued before them.  This is their strength, but for those not in the "guild" it can be overwhelming.  I can't imagine facing them without some training in modern scholarship...

The Gospel is not ... a "new law," on the contrary, ... a "new life." - William Julius Mann

Posts 9029
Forum MVP
Mark Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Aug 3 2012 1:18 PM

Unix,

The ICC volumes I own are Matthew, Acts, Romans (Cranford and Sanday and Headlam), Ephesians, and The Pastoral Epistles. I own no OT volumes. I have used Romans and Ephesians the most and find both helpful but neither would be tops for either book. Mark, Acts, and The Pastorals are new to me and I havn't used them much.

I haven't made much use of Hermeneia/Continental since buying them. Attridge on Hebrews is an exception to that. He is quite worth having. Can't comment at this point on the Minor Prophets in that series (I believe there are only 4 volumes covering 4 prophets). Westerman on Genesis in the Continental Series is valuable.

Pastor, North Park Baptist Church

Bridgeport, CT USA

Page 2 of 2 (35 items) < Previous 1 2 | RSS