Jump to content

SALE! Anchor Yale/Eerdmans Spring Event


R. Mansfield

Recommended Posts

Not that I have "skin in the game" as i own it in other software. But i have noticed that Albright's Matthew in Anchor has made a reappearance in other software and was wondering if it was coming back here... I wouldn't call it a stupendous volume but I have found benefit in it over the years. So curiosity has got the better of me and had to ask.

 

-dan

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that I have "skin in the game" as i own it in other software. But i have noticed that Albright's Matthew in Anchor has made a reappearance in other software and was wondering if it was coming back here... I wouldn't call it a stupendous volume but I have found benefit in it over the years. So curiosity has got the better of me and had to ask.

 

-dan

I think it is one of the best commentaries on Matthew. Albright was a revolutionary. I am a big fan

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: All the people of the Bible

 

1) Bad editing?

 

Curious to read of Mary Magdaline [sic] on the web page https://www.accordancebible.com/All-The-People-of-the-Bible.

Your error or theirs? Makes me wonder, if they cannot even spell biblical names correctly, what else might be wrong in this module?

 

2) Anti-supernaturalist?

 

Judging by the following quote (on the same web page), I'm curious to know if the whole book has a 'liberal' take throughout, as it seems to take an anti-supernaturalist POV by relegating demonisation to some kind of mental/spiritual issue:

 

"Luke says that Mary was freed of seven demons, indicating some kind of mental or spiritual problem. She may have had a nervous breakdown, some serious neurosis, or deep depression, and apparently Jesus cured her. The statement that there were seven demons denotes that her condition was very serious and probably recurrent." 

 

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, that was our typo, which we will correct. The book and module use Magdalene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, that was our typo, which we will correct. The book and module use Magdalene.

OK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Alistair,

 

The Mary Magdalene entry is as follow: 

 ================= ENTRY ================

Mary Magdalene

Mary of Magdala, commonly known as “Magdalene,” was the most important of the women disciples of Jesus and is mentioned more often than any other woman in the New Testament. Some interpreters, in fact, have identified her as an apostle. In all four Gospels she is a leading character at the crucifixion and is the primary witness to Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection.

Mary does not appear in Matthew, Mark, or John until the crucifixion. She is mentioned there in such a way that the writers apparently assumed that their readers would know who she was, indicating that she was well known in the early Christian community.

She is also the center of much controversy. In recent years, because of the novel The Da Vinci Code, a number of ancient and mostly forgotten traditions have resurged. These include the claim that she was Jesus’ wife and that she was chosen by Jesus to lead the apostles, only to be suppressed later by the male apostles and by the church. These stories have gained wide popular interest, but they are given little credence by most scholars.1

The most commonly believed story about Mary is that she was a reformed prostitute. There is absolutely no evidence for this claim, and the consensus among scholars is that it is patently untrue. The reason for this misconception is that Luke introduces her immediately following a story of a prostitute (Luke 7:36ff.), and readers have associated the two women. In the sixth century CE Pope Gregory I made this association in a sermon, and Mary has been identified as a prostitute ever since. Luke introduces her in the next chapter (8:2) as one of several women who had been cured of diseases and evil spirits. Prostitution (or any moral lapse) was not considered by the Jews to be the work of possession by evil spirits but the result [p. 278] of human sinfulness. Luke says that Mary was freed of seven demons, indicating some kind of mental or spiritual problem. She may have had a nervous breakdown, some serious neurosis, or deep depression, and apparently Jesus cured her. The statement that there were seven demons denotes that her condition was very serious and probably recurrent.

Luke also identifies her as a financial supporter of Jesus (8:3), indicating that she was one of his patrons. (For a discussion of patronage see Twelve Apostles, The.)

The claim that Mary was Jesus’ wife has no support in the Bible, and non-scriptural writings and early traditions can be held to support the claim only if one indulges in some rather imaginative interpretation of what they say. Most scholars (even some usually conservative ones) agree that there are some arguments for Jesus’ having been married, but the consensus is also that these arguments are far from compelling. One is that in Jesus’ time it was extremely uncommon for a man of his age to be unmarried, and if he were unmarried then some explanation probably would have been given as to why. Celibacy was frowned upon not only by the Jews but by most cultures and religions. On the other hand, if he were married it is likely that there would have been some reference to his wife. That he was married to Mary is particularly unlikely, because there would certainly have been some mention of it in the passages that deal with her, if nothing more than calling her “Mary the wife of Jesus” rather than “Mary Magdalene.”

Another association that is very old and completely unsupported is that Mary Magdalene is the same as Mary of Bethany, the sister of Lazarus and Martha. That misconception probably arose from two stories of the anointing of Jesus’ feet. The story of the harlot who washed Jesus’ feet with her tears, wiped them with her hair, and then poured perfume on them (Luke 7:36ff.) immediately precedes the introduction of Mary in the next chapter (Luke 8:2). This led to the erroneous conclusion that they were the same woman and thus that Mary was a harlot. In another story Mary of Bethany anoints Jesus’ feet with nard and wipes them with her hair (John 12:3). There is no justification for identifying Mary of Bethany with Mary Magdalene other than the similarity of these stories, and that is totally inadequate evidence. Although it is not recorded as such, it is entirely possible that anointing the feet of a highly honored guest with perfume and wiping them with the hair might have been a custom of the time to show great respect and deference.

Mary Magdalene met all the requirements of being an apostle, having followed Jesus from the beginning of his ministry and having been a witness to the Resurrection. Many scholars believe that if she had been a man, she rather than Peter would have been the leader of the apostles. It is on this basis that the very dubious claim is made that her story and authority were suppressed by the men who took the leadership of the early church.

Her deep devotion to Jesus is demonstrated by her activities, and in all four Gospels she is credited with being one of the first to witness the Resurrection and report it to the Apostles. John reports her as the first actually to see the resurrected Jesus in the garden of the tomb (John 20:14ff.). A number of non-scriptural writings, most of which are quite fanciful and of very doubtful authority, tell many stories about Mary indicating that she took a key role among Jesus’ disciples. While these documents are unreliable, they show a strong tradition that denotes at least the validity of the claims that she was very close to Jesus and the apostles and was a leader and probably a teacher of the faith.

 

1 Many of the historic and theological claims made in the novel are completely false or taken out of context. The novel weaves a fascinating tale, but it must not be taken as a scholarly or historically accurate work.

 

 ================= END ENTRY ================

 

 

PS: I got the module because I thought it'll provide a helpful list of all the bible characters in an easily accessible format. So it'll be helpful in preparation of lessons or preaching; it should used in additional to other materials we have. We should never just take any research materials just at face value anyway but evaluate them based on the Word of God if possible, so a different theological stance of the author should not prevent it from being helpful.

Edited by lesterchua
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last chance to save on essential Anchor Yale & Eerdmans titles for your Accordance Library. The ACCORDANCE SPRING EVENT ends at midnight EDT tonight!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Alistair,

 

PS: I got the module because I thought it'll provide a helpful list of all the bible characters in an easily accessible format. So it'll be helpful in preparation of lessons or preaching; it should used in additional to other materials we have. We should never just take any research materials just at face value anyway but evaluate them based on the Word of God if possible, so a different theological stance of the author should not prevent it from being helpful.

 

 

Hi Lester,

 

Thanks for your post. I decided against this module thinking I probably have everyone in the Bible covered by the range of Bible dictionaries I own in Accordance (and in paper and PDF).

 

Best wishes

 

Alistair

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your post. I decided against this module thinking I probably have everyone in the Bible covered by the range of Bible dictionaries I own in Accordance (and in paper and PDF).

 

Alistair, I’ve been a day or two behind on catching up on email, and I’m sorry I didn’t write this response while the title was on sale. However, I’m sure it will go on sale again eventually.

 

Anyway, I wanted to address what you said above. Yes, I’m sure you have every entry in All the People of the Bible covered in other Bible dictionaries. But this title has two distinctions worth mentioning that is not easily found in your other titles. (1) The narrative style is quite different from the regular, straightforward, systematic progression of facts found in most Bible dictionaries. I found Losch to be immensely readable, and even entertaining at times. That’s why I included the excerpts in my blog post. Not only is the narrative style a breath of fresh air for personal study, but I believe sections could be read to great effect in group settings, too. And (2) All the People in the Bible actually covers more than just what its name suggests. There are numerous entries for individuals who were not in the Bible but had effect upon the biblical story or was somehow related. I found these entries to be quite interesting, too. 

 

Just a few thoughts for future reference :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alistair, I’ve been a day or two behind on catching up on email, and I’m sorry I didn’t write this response while the title was on sale. However, I’m sure it will go on sale again eventually.

 

Anyway, I wanted to address what you said above. Yes, I’m sure you have every entry in All the People of the Bible covered in other Bible dictionaries. But this title has two distinctions worth mentioning that is not easily found in your other titles. (1) The narrative style is quite different from the regular, straightforward, systematic progression of facts found in most Bible dictionaries. I found Losch to be immensely readable, and even entertaining at times. That’s why I included the excerpts in my blog post. Not only is the narrative style a breath of fresh air for personal study, but I believe sections could be read to great effect in group settings, too. And (2) All the People in the Bible actually covers more than just what its name suggests. There are numerous entries for individuals who were not in the Bible but had effect upon the biblical story or was somehow related. I found these entries to be quite interesting, too. 

 

Just a few thoughts for future reference :-)

Thanks Rick for the considered response. That's the sort of information one tries to get about a new module, not so much the bibliographic data but the 'feel' of the thing. I'm not plugged not the publishing or academic worlds any more, so usually all I know about Accordance modules is only what I read about them here. Sadly I've bought a few 'duds' in my time but on the whole I'm happy with my purchases. Still, the more information I can glean about a module, the better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that I have "skin in the game" as i own it in other software. But i have noticed that Albright's Matthew in Anchor has made a reappearance in other software and was wondering if it was coming back here... I wouldn't call it a stupendous volume but I have found benefit in it over the years. So curiosity has got the better of me and had to ask.

 

Without saying too much, we looked into this, and we believe the “other software” is in error to release this. Albright’s estate reached an agreement with the publisher to bring the volume back to print, but retained digital rights. That’s where it currently stands. No digital version is being allowed at the current time.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pity I enjoy my copy.

 

-Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pity I enjoy my copy.

 

And it now looks like “other software” has pulled the Matthew commentary by Albright, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...