6 replies to this topic

[Abram K-J]

I've seen a few forum posts here and there about these resources, but wondering if anyone can help compare the Jewish NT Commentary and the Jewish Annotated NT?

 

It seems the former is written from a Messianic Jewish perspective, while the latter is Jewish, but not necessarily Messianic. Is that right? Any other points of comparison?

Working my way through the Sermon on the Mount right now--particularly interested in that section.

[Abram K-J]

Oh, also meant to ask--is the Jewish Annotated NT hyperlinked to Mishnah, DSS, etc.? I know the newer modules tend to be.

[Helen Brown]

You are correct in your first post. Yes, the Jewish Annotated NT is linked to the Mishna and the Qumran documents (for those who own them).

[Abram K-J]

Thanks!

[Brian K. Mitchell]

In paper form I own both the Jewish New Testament commentary and the Jewish Annotated NT. So, I am willing to attempt to answer the OP's question. Here in a nutshell is what I think about the matter:

 

 

The Jewish Annotated New Testament:

1. Is written by various authors (the view point expressed in its notes vary from book to book. The section on the sermon on the mount is very good)
2. Is Written from an Academic and Scholary view point (non-confessional)
3. "Highlights in its annotations and essays aspects of first-and second-century Judaism that enrich the understanding of the New Testament: customs, literature, and intepretations of biblical text" JANT pg Xi
4. "Highlighs connections between the NT and later Jewish (especiall rabbinic) literature" JANT pg Xi
5. "adresses problems that Jewish readers in particular may find in reading the New Testament" JANT ph xi
6. The notes are brief and apear as footnotes in the printed edition.

 

 

The Jewish New Testament Commentary:

 

1. Is written by one author
2. Was original written (in part) to explain why the Jewish New Testament translation differs from mainline Christian translations of the NT  
3. Is written from a confessional view point
4. Is, more devotional than academic
5. Highlighs connections between some modern Jewish interpertations as well as many traditional ones
6. Is highly appologetic in nature in that part of it's purpose is to prove the that the NT is a Jewish text and defened (and define) Messianic Judaism.  

Edited by bkMitchell, 01 March 2014 - 05:38 PM.

[Abram K-J]

This is super helpful--thank you!

[Anon]

Although not in Accordance, Samuel Lach's commentary has been a resource I consult frequently, esp. for connections between Rabbinic lit. and the Synoptics.

 

Lachs, Samuel Tobias. A Rabbinic Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. New Jersey: Ktav Publishing House, 1987.

 

I believe I've requested the resource in private correspondence, but never heard anything in response.

Edited by James Tucker, 01 March 2014 - 10:27 PM.