Jump to content


Photo

Expositorís Bible Commentary (Original Edition)


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Dan Francis

Dan Francis

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 679 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alberta, Canada
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 17 June 2014 - 03:52 PM

Now I know that most people will have received this email too, but I also have seen in the past that there are people not getting emails and for them I am posting this portion of the email here. I own this and think the current price is a bargain. After July 1 things are not going to be such a good bargain one would guess to encourage purchase of their updated 13 volume set (which is a good update but loss of the articles volume is a blow to the set).

-Dan

___________________________________________________________________________________ The Expositor’s Bible Commentary -- Classic Edition is an outstanding value at $99.90 and adds a proven contemporary resource to Accordance. 153044-m.jpg

Last chance to buy at this price before the Publisher raises the price on July 1.  Read on for details…

Award-winning and highly-renowned, the classic edition of the Expositor’s Bible Commentary has long been the authoritative, go-to choice for pastors, researchers and serious Bible students who want consistent commentary on the Old and New Testaments.

Recently, we were notified of a publisher pricing increase for this 12-volume set, and want to make sure that you have a final opportunity to acquire it at our best, rock-bottom price of just $99.90! That’s a savings of $356 -- more than 78% off the suggested publisher’s price! After July 1, this incredible set will sell for well over $300 – and that will be at our discounted price.

Here are some important reasons to take advantage of our $99.90 best pricing before it goes away forever.

The EBC is a commentary for expositors by expositors. 
Academics, pastors and serious Bible students who depend on the accurate and authoritative exposition and doctrinal explanation found in the EBC rave about the quality of research and authorship that has gone into the eighteen-year long development of this work.

Contributors, including F. F. Bruce, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Bruce K. Waltke, Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Gleason L. Archer, Jr., Gordon D. Fee, William Sanford, and Edwin Yamauchi, read like an all-star list of twentieth century biblical scholars who are known for their dedication to helping pastors become better exegetes and expositors.

The EBC includes a free-standing Bible note set that makes a perfect companion for your daily reading and study. 
How often have you read a Bible passage and noticed a word or phrase that warrants further investigation? If you use Accordance-powered study note sets you know how they conveniently scroll with the Scripture you are studying. You also know the value they add to your on-the-fly understanding of words and passages. Now with the EBC note set, you have thousands of notes leading you through alternative wordings, succinct summaries of nuances in the original language meanings, and even significant opinions of commentators that have influenced the EBC scholars.

The EBC includes a full volume of 35 topical articles. 
These articles function as a Bible handbook focused on helping expositors in declaring the authority of Scripture. They expound on 35 topics of interest to every Christian, such as the authority and inspiration of the Bible, Old Testament history, Jesus in the Gospels, archaeology, and more.

Here is a sample of the titles included.

  • The Authority and Inspiration of the Bible by Carl F.H. Henry
  • Transmission and Translation of the Bible by F.F. Bruce
  • The Interpretation of the Bible by Geoffrey W. Bromiley
  • The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha by Bruce M. Metzger
  • Textual Criticism of the Old Testament by Bruce K. Waltke
  • The Theology of the Old Testament by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr.
  • The Chronology of the Old Testament by Gleason L. Archer, Jr.
  • The Canon of the New Testament by Andrew F. Walls
  • Jesus in the Gospels by I. Howard Marshall
  • The Theology of the New Testament by Samuel J. Mikolaski and 25 more.

The EBC includes many unique advantages when used with Accordance. 
How often have you wanted to comb through your favorite commentary for a particular word usage, phrase or concept as in a topical reference? With Accordance you can convert a commentary into a topically-searched work as well. Learn how to do this by signing up for a live Accordance class.

153210-s.pngTake advantage of this last opportunity to acquire the Classic EBC for only $99.90. List price $456, regular price $129.



#2 Timothy Jenney

Timothy Jenney

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 1,581 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sunny Winter Haven, FL
  • Interests:a good cup of coffee, sci-fi, playing bass, listing to jazz and the blues, camping, fishing and the great outdoors
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 17 June 2014 - 04:02 PM

I agree. This is a great value!


Blessings,
"Dr. J"

Timothy P. Jenney, Ph. D.
"Lighting the Lamp" Host and Producer

 

Early 2011 17" MBP (8,3), 2.3 GHz Quad core, 16 GB RAM, Mercury 6G 480 SSD + 1.5 TB HD, OSX 10.10, Yosemite

iPhone 6 plus 64 GB iOS 8.1


#3 Serpentium

Serpentium

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 124 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rome
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 17 June 2014 - 04:29 PM

I own this commentary on another platform, and I appreciate a lot its depth with simplicity and clear exposition. It goes to hebrew language without making me tired of it, and in a few lines it gives a lot of insight.

#4 Abram K-J

Abram K-J

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,739 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greater Boston, MA
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 17 June 2014 - 09:38 PM

+1. I've gotten some surprising mileage out of this set since getting it in Accordance not too long ago. Those articles at the beginning are worth at least half the sale price, if you've got the funds.


  • Timothy Jenney likes this
Abram K-J
Pastor, Writer, Freelance Editor, Youth Ministry Consultant, Blogger
Web: Words on the Word

#5 Paul Daunno

Paul Daunno

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lawrenceville , Georgia
  • Interests:The Bible / Reading books about the Bible / Gadgets & Technology / Woodworking / Photography
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 17 June 2014 - 10:02 PM

Would this set benefit a layperson like me? I have the Tyndale commentary as part of the Essentail Collection and often I find it too wordy for my needs.
Thanks,
-Paul

#6 Rick Bennett

Rick Bennett

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 1,836 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa Bay, FL
  • Interests: gadgets, coffee, running and cycling, Rays baseball
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 17 June 2014 - 10:08 PM

Those articles at the beginning are worth at least half the sale price, if you've got the funds.

 

Wholeheartedly agree.


  • Abram K-J likes this

Rick Bennett
Director of Content Development
iOS Working Group


#7 Dan Francis

Dan Francis

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 679 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alberta, Canada
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 17 June 2014 - 10:52 PM

Would this set benefit a layperson like me? I have the Tyndale commentary as part of the Essentail Collection and often I find it too wordy for my needs.

 

It generally is much briefer but often times more informative.

 

-Dan



#8 Dan Francis

Dan Francis

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 679 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alberta, Canada
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 17 June 2014 - 11:09 PM

The 2 volume abridgement (EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMMENTARY - ABRIDGED EDITION (2 VOLUMES)) might be more your style if you want brevity though. Here is the two of them  comparing gen 1:1 (sailhamer is particularly verbose on this opening verse).

 

I. Introduction to the Patriarchs and the Sinai Covenant (1:1-11:26)

 

Chapters 1-11 form an introduction to both the Book of Genesis and the Pentateuch as a whole. These chapters should be read with this dual purpose in mind. They set the stage for the narratives of the patriarchs (Gen 12-50) as well as provide the appropriate background for understanding the central topic of the Pentateuch: the Sinai covenant (Exodus—Deuteronomy).

The author of the Pentateuch has carefully selected and arranged Genesis 1-11 to serve its function as an introduction. Behind the present shape of the narrative lies a clear theological program. In nearly every section of the work, the author’s theological interest can be seen. His theological perspective can be summarized in two points. First, the author intends to draw a line connecting the God of the Fathers and the God of the Sinai covenant with the God who created the world. Second, the author intends to show that the call of the patriarchs and the Sinai covenant have as their ultimate goal the reestablishment of God’s original purpose in Creation. In a word, the biblical covenants are marked off as the way to a new Creation.

 

 

A. The Land and the Blessing (1:1-2:25)

 

A close look at the narrative style of the opening chapters of Genesis suggests that the first two chapters form a single unit. This unit has three primary sections. The first section is 1:1, which stands apart from the rest of chapter 1. The remaining two sections are 1:2-2:3 and 2:4b-25. The heading entitled toledot  (“generations”; NIV, “the account of”) in 2:4a serves to connect these last two sections. Two primary themes dominate the Creation account: the land and the blessing. In recounting the events of Creation, the author has selected and arranged his narrative so that these themes are allowed full development. The preparation of the “land” and the divine “blessing” are important to the author of Genesis (and the Pentateuch) because these two themes form the basis of his treatment of the patriarchal narratives and the Sinai covenant. In translating the Hebrew word ‘eres  “earth” in 1:1 and 1:2, the EVs have blurred the connection of these early verses of Genesis to the central theme of the “land” (‘eres ) in the Pentateuch.  Although ‘eres  can be translated by either “earth” or “land,” the general term “land” in English more closely approximates the use of ‘eres  in chapter 1. Thus from the start the author betrays his interest in the covenant by concentrating on the ‘eres  in the account of Creation (see fn. 5, p. 11). “Nothing is here by chance; everything must be considered carefully, deliberately, and precisely” (von Rad, in loc.).

 

 

1. The God of creation (1:1)

 

 

1 The account opens with a clear, concise statement about the Creator and the Creation. Its simplicity belies the depth of its content. These seven words are the foundation of all that is to follow in the Bible. The purpose of the statement is threefold: to identify the Creator, to explain the origin of the world, and to tie the work of God in the past to the work of God in the future. The Creator is identified in 1:1 as “God,” that is, “Elohim” (‘elohim ). Although God is not further identified in v.1 (e.g., 15:7;Exod 20:2), the author appears confident that there will be no mistaking this God with any other than the God of the Fathers and the God of the covenant at Sinai. The proper context for understanding 1:1, in other words, is the whole of the Book of Genesis and the Pentateuch. Already in Genesis 2:4b, God (Elohim) is identified with the Lord (Yahweh), the God who called Abraham (Gen 12:1) and delivered Israel from Egypt (Exod 3:15).

The God of 1:1, then, is far from a faceless deity. From the perspective of the Pentateuch as a whole, he is the God who has called the Fathers into his good “land” (‘eres ), redeemed them from Egypt, and led them again to the borders of the ‘eres  a “land” he provided and now calls on them to enter and possess. He is the “Redeemer-Shepherd” of Jacob’s blessing in 48:15. The purpose of 1:1 is not to identify this God as such but to identify him as the Creator of the universe.

It is not difficult to detect a polemic against idolatry behind the words of 1:1. By identifying God as the Creator, a crucial distinction is introduced between the God of the Fathers and the gods of the nations, gods that to the biblical authors were mere idols. God alone created the heavens and the earth. The sense of 1:1 is similar to the message in the Book of Jeremiah that Israel was to carry to all the nations: “Tell them this,” Jeremiah said. “‘These gods, who did not make the heavens and the earth, will perish from the earth and from under the heavens’” (Jer 10:11). Psalm 96:5 shows that the full impact of Genesis 1:1 was appreciated by later biblical writers as well: “For all the gods of the nations are idols, but the LORD [Yahweh] made the heavens.”

The statement in 1:1 not only identifies the Creator, it also explains the origin of the world. According to the sense of 1:1 (see Notes), the narrative states that God created all that exists in the universe. As it stands, the statement is an affirmation that God alone is eternal and that all else owes its origin and existence to him. The influence of this verse is reflected throughout the work of later biblical writers (e.g., Ps 33:6John 1:3Heb 11:3).

Equally important in 1:1 is the meaning of the phrase “In the beginning” (bere’shith ) within the framework of the Creation account and the Book of Genesis. The term “beginning” (re’shith ) in biblical Hebrew marks a starting point of a specific duration as in “the beginning of the year” (re’shit hashshanah ; Deut 11:12). The end of a specific period is marked by its antonym, “its end” (‘aharit ), as in Deuteronomy 11:12: “the end of the year” (lit. tr. of ‘aharit shanah ) (H.-P. Muller, THAT, p. 709).

In opening the account of Creation with the phrase “in the beginning” (bere’shith ), the author has marked Creation as the starting point of a period of time. “Hence will here be the beginning of the history which follows.... The history to be related from this point onwards has heaven and earth for its object, its scenes, its factors. At the head of this history stands the creation of the world as its commencement, or at all events its foundation” (Delitzsch, p. 76). By commencing this history with a “beginning” (re’shith ), a word often paired with its antonym “end” (‘aha rith ), the author has not only commenced a history of God and his people, he has also prepared the way for the consummation of that history at “the end of time” (‘aharit ) (“Already in Gen 1:1 the concept of “the last days’ fills the mind of the reader,” Procksch, p. 425).

The growing focus within the biblical canon on the “times of the end” (‘aharit hayyamim ) was an appropriate extension to the “end” (‘aharith ) already anticipated in the “beginning” (re’shith ) ofGenesis 1:1. The fundamental principle reflected in Genesis 1:1 and the prophetic vision of the times of the end in the rest of Scripture is that the “last things will be like the first things” (Ernst Boklen, Die Verwandtschaft der judisch-christlichen mit der Parsischen Eschatologie  [Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1902], p. 136):  “Behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth” (Isa 65:17); “Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth” (Rev 21:1). The allusions to Genesis 1 and 2 in Revelation 22 illustrate the role these early chapters of Genesis played in shaping the form and content of the scriptural vision of the future (‘aharit hayyamim ).

 

 

 

John H. Sailhamer, Genesis, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas, vol. 2 of Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990), n.p.

 

 

 

Gen 1:1 The interpretation given to v.1 rests on the traditional reading of בְּרֵאשִׁית (bere’shith) in the absolute state: “In the beginning.” A strong case, however, can be made for reading the phrase as a construct and subordinating v.1 to vv.2-3: “When God set about to create the heavens and the earth—the world being then a formless waste ... —God said, “Let there be light’” (Speiser, p. 3). The implication of reading the phrase as a construct is that v.1 would then be a circumstantial clause and would no longer carry the traditional sense of “creation from nothing” (creatio ex nihilo). According to such a reading, the world, as unformed material, would have been present when the first act of Creation was performed, that being God’s command in v.3: “Let there be light.” The first act of Creation would have been the creation of light from darkness, and vv.1-3 would say nothing of an original Creation. The principle argument for this view is the lack of an article with רֵאשִׁית (re’shith  “beginning”) in v.1. Without the article, it is maintained, bere’shith  cannot be read as an absolute (“in the beginning”); it must be read as a construct (“in beginning”) (Speiser, p. 3).

 

In defense of the traditional view (that bere’shith  is in the absolute state), it can be said that re’shith  along with several other adverbials, does occur in the absolute state without an article  (e.g., Isa 46:10; cf. Konig, Syntax  par. 294g). Thus the argument that the article must  be with bere’shith  for it to be absolute does not hold in every case. There are other arguments that bere’shith  should not be read as an absolute (see Westermann, pp. 94ff.), but none of them is sufficient to stand against the traditional view without the central grammatical argument of the absence of the article in bere’shith  just referred to. An example such as Isa 46:10, then, is crucial in that it shows that the article is not  necessary for the absolute state.

 

The examples of Konig (Syntax  par. 294g) have been contested on the grounds that they are all from poetic texts, where the use of the article varies from that of prose texts such as Gen 1 (Gross, Syntaktische,  p. 144). But, although Konig has cited examples from prose texts (e.g., 3:22; 6:4), Gross’s insistence that examples be cited from prose texts alone, though methodologically sound, is too demanding in light of the frequent occurrence of the article in biblical poetry. The traditional reading has in its favor both the simplicity of its style, which is consistent with the remainder of the chapter, and the finite form of the verb בָּרָא (bara’  “to create”). Some have proposed that bara’  be vocalized as bero’;  but 5:1, which does in fact have bero’  following a construct, shows both that lengthy circumstantial clauses are not a feature of the style of the writer of Gen 1, and that the infinitive (bero’), not the perfect (bara’), is the expected form for such subordinate clauses (contrasted with that of the style of Hos 1:2, where the construct is used with the perfect). Genesis 2:4b cannot be used to show that lengthy circumstantial clauses are a feature of the style of the writer because of the marked contrast between the style of 1:1-2:4a and 2:4bff.

 

It has long been recognized that the stylistic features of the “framework” of the Pentateuch vary markedly from that of the narrative within it. Such variations should be considered in any comparisons of style with the Pentateuch. The interpretations of the medieval Jewish scholars Rashi (השׁלם רשׁי תורה חומשׁי חמשׁה [Jerusalem: Ariel, 1986], p. 2) and Ibn Ezra (‏מכראות גדולות‎ [New York: Abraham Isaac Fieldman, n.d.], p. 2) are often appealed to against the traditional view. Both scholars read bere’shith  as a construct phrase. It should be noted, however, that grammatical considerations did not motivate Rashi and Ibn Ezra in their choice. It was their own understanding about the order of Creation that led them to reject the traditional reading. Rashi, who was, as far as is known, the first to suggest the construct reading, recognized in the מֶרֵאשִׁית (mere’shith) of Isa 46:10 an exception to his rule that re’shith  always occurred in the construct state. He explained this as an exception by assuming (in the guise of an interlocutor) the re’shith  in Isa 46:10 was in fact in the construct state and was an elliptical expression for בְּרֵאשִׁית דָּבָר (bere’shith dabar  lit., “in the beginning of the thing, of history, of the matter,” etc.). Thus Rashi could say that the re’shith  in the mere’shith  of Isa 46:10was in fact a construct phrase.

 

Rashi, however, would not allow for a similar reading in Gen 1:1—“In the very beginning,” viz., the traditional reading—because he believed the מַיִם (mayim  “waters”) of v.2 had already been created before the creation of the heavens and the earth in v.1. Thus v.1 could not be the “very beginning of all things” (traditional view), and consequently reading bere’shith  as an absolute was impossible.

 

Though the argument is subtle, it is clear that Rashi himself did not oppose the traditional reading on grammatical grounds  but rather on the basis of the subject matter. He did not understand “the heavens and the earth” (v.1) as an expression of “totality.” Rather he held the two words to refer specifically and solely to the “heavens” and “the earth” as two limited and distinct entities. He also believed that the “heavens” (שָׁמַיִם [shamayim ]) were created from “fire” (‏אֵשׁ [‘esh ]) and “water” (מַיִם[mayim ]). Rashi reasoned quite simply that if the “heavens” were created from fire and water in v.1, the water  must have already been in existence prior to v.1. If such were the case, v.1 could not refer to an absolute beginning (traditional view) and so had to be read as a construct (circumstantial clause).

 

Ibn Ezra, who also was an early advocate of the view that bere’shith  is a construct phrase, like Rashi, held to the construct view because of the mention of water in v.2. He assumed that the water must have been created before 1:1 since “heavens” meant only “expanse” (v.8) and “earth” meant “dry land” (v.9), and since the water, which was neither a part of the “expanse” or the “dry land,” was already present in v.2. Neither Rashi nor Ibn Ezra appears to have rejected the traditional view on grammatical grounds, thinking the construct reading was the better reading. Rather they believed it was the only reading that would solve the apparent difficulty of the “water” in v.2 not being accounted for in v.1. In fact, Ibn Ezra warned his readers not to be “astonished” at the suggestion of a construct before a verb, which suggests that he himself felt some difficulty in reading bere’shith  before a finite verb as a construct and that he anticipated the same reaction in his readers.

 

Both Rashi and Ibn Ezra produced examples to show that a finite verb after a construct noun was permissible. But both the fact and the nature of their defense of their reading in 1:1 betrays their own uneasiness with such a reading. The use of the accent tifcha  in bere’shith  is sometimes used as an argument for the traditional view, suggesting that a construct noun could not or would not have a disjunctive accent. However, not only do construct forms commonly take a disjunctive accent (e.g.,זֲהַב [zahab  “the gold of”], 2:12; ‏עֵץ [‘es  “the tree of”], 2:17), but also since אֱלֹהִים (‘elohim  “God”) has been given the athnach  a dichotomy must divide its line either where it does in bere’shith  or in bara’  thus breaking the connection of subject and verb. The position of the dichotomy in either case is permissible and does not affect the grammatical relationship between the members of such a small line.

 

Notice the contrast between v.1a and the accentuation of the short athnach  lines in nominal clauses (2:11a, 13a) where the tifcha  divides the subject and predicate and the subject is conjoined with its adjuncts. The accentuation of 2:6a is also consistent with this distinction since the clause is a nominal clause (see R. Meyer, Hebraische Grammatik  vol. 3 [Berlin: Satzlehre, 1972], par. 92, 4b). In the verbal clauses in 3:2a, 4a, however, the subject and predicate are kept together in the short athnach  lines and the adverbial adjunct is separated. Genesis 3:12 shows that in verbal clauses subject and verb can be separated in very short athnach  lines.

 

The above examples are not  given as “rules” of the accentuation system but only to show that various combinations of accents (conjunctive and disjunctive) are possible within athnach  lines of three words or less and that the combinations do not carry grammatical importance. In light of these examples, it is not possible to argue that the accent in bere’shith  implies the Masoretes read it as an absolute.

 

Indications within Genesis itself suggest that the author intentionally chose רֵאשִׁית (re’shith) in v.1 because of its close association with אַחֲרִית (‘aharith) and thus had the “end” in view when he wrote of the “beginning.” For example, re’shith  as an adverbial of time meaning “beginning” or “first” occurs only in v.1 in the Pentateuch (Gen 10:10—substantival, not temporal). Elsewhere in the Pentateuch the author uses בַּתְּחִלָּה (battehillah  lit., “at the first”; four times, all in Genesis: 13:3; 41:21; 43:18, 20) andבָּרִאשֹׁנָה (bari’shonah  lit., “at the first”; ten times, three in Genesis: 13:4; 28:19; 38:28). Both tehillah  and ri’shonah  differ from re’shith  in that they mark a “beginning” of a series in opposition to the “second” or “next” member of the series (see 13:3-4). Re’shith  on the other hand, marks the “beginning” in opposition to the “end” (‘aharit;  cf. Job 8:742:12Eccl 7:8Isa 46:10).

 

As Rashi argued, if the author had wanted only to say that the heavens and the earth were created first in a series, he would have used bari’shonah.  The use of re’shith  in 1:1 strongly suggests that the author’s choice of this word was motivated by its association with ‘aharith .  If that is so, it suggests that an intentional anticipation of the “end” (‘aharith) lies behind the author’s choice of the word “beginning.” In other words, the author’s depiction of Creation appears to be controlled by an eschatological anticipation of the “end times” (‘aharith).

 

Another indication that re’shith  was used for its association with ‘aharit  comes from a consideration of the structure of Genesis and the Pentateuch. It has been noted that, in the narrative style of much of the Pentateuch, the conclusions of minor and major units are marked by poetic texts followed by a brief epilogue (see Introduction: Compositional analysis of the Pentateuch). On these stylistic grounds, the conclusion of the Book of Genesis is chapters 49-50 and the conclusion of the Pentateuch is Deuteronomy 32-34. Both narratives consist of poetic texts with an epilogue. In both of these “conclusions,” the poetic texts are framed by a short prologue (Gen 49:1Deut 31:28-30) in which the “patriarch” (Jacob and Moses) called together the “elders” (Gen 49:1Deut 31:28) and spoke his final words to them (cf. O. Eissfeldt, “Die Umrahmung des Mose-Liedes Dtn 32, 1-43 und des Mose-Gesetzes Dtn 1-30 in Dtn 31, 9-32, 47,” Kleine Schriften  [Tubingen: J.C.B. Mohr, n.d.], 3:322ff.).

 

The function of both prologues is to situate the poetic texts within the framework of the “end times” (be’aharit hayyamim  Gen 49:1cDeut 31:29; NIV, “in days to come”). It is not important at this moment whether the ‘aharit  is intended to be read as eschatological (Hugo Gressmann, Der Messias  [Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1929], p. 223) or only historically future (Joseph Klausner, The Messianic Idea in Israel  [London: Allen and Unwin, 1956], p. 30). The important point here is that the author of Genesis turns directly to the theme and terminology of “the end times” (‘aharith) when he draws his narrative to a close in Genesis and in the Pentateuch as a whole. If the use of ‘aharit  is intentional at the conclusion of the narrative, which it surely must be, then it is likely that the use of its semantic antipode, re’shith  is also intentional at the beginning of the narrative. Thus, again, it seems apparent that the choice of re’shith  in 1:1 is intended to introduce an anticipation of the “end” into the “beginning.” In thus consciously grounding the future in the past, the author of Genesis follows a “fundamental principle” in biblical eschatology: the last things are like the first things (Boklen, Die Verwandtschaft,  p. 136).

 

The phrase הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֶת הָאָרֶץ (hashshamayim we’et ha’ares  “the heavens and the earth”) is a figure of speech (merism) for the expression of “totality.” Its use in the Bible appears to be restricted to the totality of the present world order and is equivalent to the “all things” in Isa 44:24 (cf. Ps 103:19Jer 10:16). Particularly important to notice is that its use elsewhere in Scripture suggests that the phrase includes the sun and the moon as well as the stars (e.g., Joel 3:15-16).

 

 

EBC Notes. 1st, Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990), n.p.

 

I. Introduction to the Patriarchs and the Sinai Covenant (1:1-11:26)
 
Chapters 1-11 introduce both the book of Genesis and the Pentateuch. They set the stage for the narratives of the patriarchs (Ge 12-50) as well as provide the appropriate background for understanding the central topic of the Pentateuch: the Sinai covenant (Ex 1-Dt 34).
 
A. The Land and the Blessing (1:1-2:24)
 
1. The God of creation (1:1)
 
1 The Creator is identified as “God” (Heb. Elohim; GK H466), the God of the Fathers and of the covenant at Sinai. The proper context for understanding 1:1 is the whole of the book of Genesis and the Pentateuch. By identifying God as the Creator, a crucial distinction is introduced between the God of the Fathers and the gods of the nations (i.e., idols). This verse also explains the origin of all that exists in the universe, affirming that God alone is eternal and that all else owes its origin and existence to him. The term “beginning” marks a starting point of a specific duration (cf. Dt 11:12), namely, the beginning of the story of God and his people.
 
Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger, eds. Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), n.p.

 

 

Hope the above helps, EBC is not typically as in depth as above.

 

Here are three more  examples:

 

b. The author’s comment  (3:16-21)
 
 
[John 3:]16 Commentators are divided as to whether vv.16-21 are a direct continuation of the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus or whether they represent only the author’s comment on Jesus’ words. In either case, they express the most important message of the Gospel (emphasized elsewhere in many ways)-that salvation is a gift received only by believing God for it. The nature of belief is implied in the illustration of Moses lifting up the serpent in the wilderness (v.14). Belief consists of accepting something, not doing something. The result of belief is that one receives eternal life. He is freed from condemnation and lives in a relation of total honesty with God, for he does not fear having his real self exposed.
“Eternal,” the new life God gives, refers not solely to the duration of existence but also to the quality of life as contrasted with futility. It is a deepening and growing experience. It can never be exhausted in any measurable span of time, but it introduces a totally new quality of life. The believer becomes imperishable; he is free from all condemnation, he is approved by God.
The verb “perish” depicts the opposite of salvation. It is used of death as opposed to life (Mark 3:6, transitive), “destroy” as opposed to preserve (1Cor 1:19), “loss” as opposed to win or gain (2John 8). It may be used of sheep that have gone astray (Matt 10:6) or a son who has wandered from his father’s house (Luke 15:24). Its use here clearly implies that those without God are hopelessly confused in purpose, alienated from him in their affections, and futile in their efforts. Positive belief in Christ is necessary; all that one has to do to perish is nothing. To perish is to fail completely of fulfilling God’s purpose and consequently to be excluded forever from his fellowship.
The presentation of the good news of God’s love offers only two options: to believe or to perish. Eternal life, which is accepted by believing, is a gift of God and brings with it the fullest blessings God can bestow. To perish does not mean to cease to exist; it means to experience utter failure, futility, and loss of all that makes existence worthwhile. Its use with reference to Judas in John 17:12 is a vivid illustration.
 
Merrill C. Tenney, John, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas, vol. 9 of Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984), n.p.
 
John 3:16 Morris says: “In the first century there were no devices such as inverted commas to show the precise limits of quoted speech.... Perhaps the dividing point comes at the end of v.15.... But in v.16 the death on the cross appears to be spoken of as past, and there are stylistic indications that John is speaking for himself” (NIC, p. 228).
 
EBC Notes. 1st, Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990), n.p.
 
16 Commentators are divided as to whether vv. 16-21 are a direct continuation of the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus or represent only the author’s comment on Jesus’ words. In either case, they express the most important message of the Gospel, emphasized elsewhere in many ways, that salvation is a gift received only by believing God for it. The nature of belief is implied in the illustration of Moses lifting up the serpent in the wilderness (v. 14). It consists of accepting something, not doing something. The result of belief is that one is freed from condemnation, receives eternal life, and lives in a relation of total honesty with God.
“Eternal” (GK G173) refers not only to the duration of existence but also to the quality of life as contrasted with futility. Eternal life is a deepening and growing experience. It can never be exhausted in any measurable span of time, but it introduces a totally new quality of life. The verb “perish” (GK G660) depicts the opposite of salvation. It means to fail completely of fulfilling God’s purpose and consequently to be excluded forever from his fellowship. Its use here clearly implies that those without God are hopelessly confused in purpose, alienated from him in their affections, and futile in their efforts.
The presentation of the good news of God’s love offers only two options: to believe or to perish. Eternal life, which is accepted by believing, is a gift of God and brings with it the fullest blessings God can bestow. To perish does not mean to cease to exist; it means to experience utter failure, futility, and loss of all that makes existence worthwhile.
 
Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger, eds. Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), n.p.

 

[Hebrews 10:]31 The sinner should not regard the judgment of God calmly. It is “a dreadful thing” to fall into God’s hands (“dreadful” renders the word phoberos, which is translated “fearful” in v.27—i.e., it is frightening). David chose to fall into God’s hands (2Sam 24:14; 1 Chronicles 21:13; cf. Ecclesiasticus 2:18). But David was a man of faith; he committed himself in trust to God, not man. It is different with one who has rejected God’s way. He must reckon with the fact that hey will one day fall into the hands of a living, all-powerful deity. Such a fate is a daunting prospect, not to be regarded with equanimity.
 
Leon Morris James, Hebrews, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas, vol. 12 of Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), n.p.
 
31 The sinner should not regard the judgment of God calmly. It is “a dreadful thing” (GK G5829; cf. v. 27) to fall into God’s hands. David chose to fall into God’s hands (2Sa 24:14; 1Ch 21:13). But David was a man of faith; he committed himself in trust to God, not other people. It is different with those who have rejected God’s way. They must realize that they will one day fall into the hands of an all-powerful deity. Such a fate is a daunting prospect.
 
Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger, eds. Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), n.p.
 
Psalm 131: Contentment With God
 
 
This is one of the “Songs of Ascents” (see introduction to Ps 120). The writer shares his own experience with God as an encouragement to the community (v.3). In form it is an individual psalm of confidence.  (131:1-3)
 
 
1 The psalm begins with an emphatic reference to Yahweh in the MT: “O Yahweh, my heart.” In the presence of the covenant God, the psalmist has experienced how wonderful complete submission to God is. Submission implies an attitude of humility (cf. Mic 6:8). The opposite of humility is “haughty eyes” and a preoccupation “with great matters” (v.1). The proud person looks, compares, competes, and is never content. He plans and schemes in his heart as to how he can outdo and outperform. The godly knows that true godliness begins in the “heart” that is not proud (cf. Prov 18:12), with eyes that do not envy (cf. 18:27; 101:5; Prov 16:5), and with a walk of life (MT, “I do not walk” for NIV, “I do not concern myself”) that is not preoccupied with “greatness” (cf. Jer 45:5) and with accomplishments (“wonderful,” i.e., “difficult” or “arduous”; cf. Deut 17:8; 30:11).
 
 
2-3 The psalmist has been like a child in the presence of God. Oh the wonder of quiet contentment with God! He has enjoyed the walk with God in which he “stilled” (“composed”) himself and “quieted” (i.e., “silenced” or “found rest,” 62:1, 5) his soul (v.2).
The psalmist was also like “a weaned child.” The age of the child in the simile of the “weaned child” (gamul ) should not be stressed. The word gamul  may also mean “contented” (W.A. VanGemeren, “Psalm 131:2—kegamul.  The Problem of Meaning and Metaphor,” Hebrew Studies  23 [1982]: 51-57). The suggestion is sometimes made that a weaned child is no longer restless when it is with its mother because it no longer frets for milk. However, a baby satisfied with its mother’s milk can also lie contented on its mother’s breast. The essential picture is that of contentment, regardless of the age. So the psalmist feels a deep sense of peace, tranquility, and contentment with his God. Gottfried Quell suggests that the psalmist speaks of the experience of children being carried by their mothers on the pilgrimage to Jerusalem (“Struktur und Sinn des Psalms 131,” Das Ferne und Nahe Wort: Festschrift Leonhard Rost zur Vollendung seines 70. Lebensjahres am 30. November 1966 gewidmet  ed. Fritz Maas [Berlin: Topelmann, 1967], pp. 173-85). Based on his wonderful relationship and walk with the Lord, David calls on Israel to trust in the Lord forevermore (cf. 130:7).
 
Willem A. VanGemeren, Psalms, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas, vol. 5 of Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991), n.p.
 
Ps 131:1  For a brief discussion of the technical words and phrases in the superscription, see the Introduction.
 
EBC Notes. 1st, Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990), n.p.
 
Psalm 131: Contentment With God
 
This is one of the “Songs of Ascents” (see Ps 120). In form it is an individual psalm of confidence.
 
1 The psalmist has experienced how wonderful complete submission to God is. The godly know that true godliness begins in a “heart” that is not proud, with eyes that do not envy, and with a walk of life that is humble rather than being preoccupied with “great matters.”
 
2-3 David has enjoyed his walk with God in which he “stilled” himself and “quieted” his soul. He was like “a weaned child.” This is a picture of contentment. Based on his wonderful relationship and walk with the Lord, David calls on Israel to trust in the Lord forevermore.
 
Kenneth L. Barker and John R. Kohlenberger, eds. Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), n.p.

Edited by Dan Francis, 17 June 2014 - 11:17 PM.


#9 Paul Daunno

Paul Daunno

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lawrenceville , Georgia
  • Interests:The Bible / Reading books about the Bible / Gadgets & Technology / Woodworking / Photography
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 18 June 2014 - 05:54 PM

Thanks Dan.  I actually have EBC Abridged (formerly NIV Commentary) and do reference it occasionally. 


Thanks,
-Paul

#10 Dan Francis

Dan Francis

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 679 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alberta, Canada
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 18 June 2014 - 08:56 PM

I do think the EBC would be of benefit to you and generally in the NT EBC is less verbose than Tyndale. In the OT it is hit and miss but still often more brief int he EBC, but like I inferred above written a bit better than many of the earlier Tyndale OT volumes.

 

-Dan


Edited by Dan Francis, 18 June 2014 - 08:57 PM.


#11 Chuck Schneider

Chuck Schneider

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 517 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vienna, Austria
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 19 June 2014 - 01:59 AM

Abram K-J  mentioned that the introductory volume is worth half the cost. I purchased with the EBC-R with the understanding that it was an improvement over the EBC. Is there anything else besides the first volume (which is not included in the revised) that might make it worth purchasing if I already have the revised?


OSX Yosemite
Version 10.10
iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014)
4 GHz Intel Core i7
32 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB

#12 Dan Francis

Dan Francis

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 679 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alberta, Canada
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 19 June 2014 - 12:32 PM

Merrill C. Tenney's Gospel of John is a good reason. The majority of the commentaries were updated. The commentary on John was simply replaced. I remember years ago thinking that Tenney's work on John didn't quick seem as good to me as say them wonderful depth down on Matthew, but with times passage I find myself going to his work on John for his great insight more and more.  Robert H. Mounce has given us a fine job in the revised version. But I value the former as well. Leon Morris's Hebrews was also replaced in the revised series. These are the ones that come off the top of my head as reason's to get EBC beyond Volumes one's great value. 

 

-Dan

PS: Jeremiah: Charles L. Feinberg is another just popping into my head.


Edited by Dan Francis, 19 June 2014 - 12:37 PM.


#13 ukfraser

ukfraser

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 141 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nottingham, UK
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 19 June 2014 - 06:05 PM

You make a good salesman Dan. Hope you are getting a commission! that's one extra sale! ;o)
Fraser Sims

#14 Dan Francis

Dan Francis

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 679 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Alberta, Canada
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 19 June 2014 - 06:33 PM

lol would be nice but never have been offered anything... just a love for the study of God's Word and desire to see people with good resources... all in all it is more than enough to know people are getting good resources.

 

-Dan



#15 Abram K-J

Abram K-J

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,739 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greater Boston, MA
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 19 June 2014 - 08:15 PM

Well said, Dan.


Abram K-J
Pastor, Writer, Freelance Editor, Youth Ministry Consultant, Blogger
Web: Words on the Word




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users