Anchor Bible Dictionary

[circuitrider]

I am considering purchasing the Anchor Bible Dictionary. The reviews that I read have all been positive. The one thing that is giving me pause is the caveat from the review I read on Acccordance's website.

 

There are certain things that you need to be aware of and expect when using this kind of work. Most of the authors do not believe in the inspiration and complete historical and factual accuracy of the Bible. They would say, for example, that Ephesians was not written by Paul.

 

I am on the conservative side when comes to the issues mentioned in the quote. Is the dictionary rife with these assertions to the point I would not be able glean from it for being at odds with its premises?

 

I'd enjoy hearing from those of you who use this resource.

 

Thank you in advance!

[R. Mansfield]

I consider myself to be fairly conservative, and I believe Paul wrote the letter we call "Ephesians" (whether it was originally sent to the church in Ephesus initially is an open question, though).

 

Having said that, I heartily recommend the Anchor Bible Dictionary. It's my favorite and where I generally turn first when I need a Bible dictionary. I've yet to see it equaled from more conservative writers. The key is to be discerning. I have found that I don't necessarily have to agree with everything someone writes to acknowledge the value of the writing.

[circuitrider]

I have found that I don't necessarily have to agree with everything someone writes to acknowledge the value of the writing.

 

Agreed.

 

Thank you for the reply and encouragement concerning this resource.

[DaleV]

I second the comments by R. Mansfield. My views are also quite conservative, and I find Anchor to be an excellent resource.

[Timothy Jenney]

The ABD is THE accepted Bible dictionary in scholarly circles, as its wealth of information is unequaled in any other single series. I too am conservative, but am able to glean a great deal from the information therein, though I do not share may of its writers' assumptions. I DO think that I need to be aware of what is typically called the "Critical" viewpoint though. Besides, sometimes I disagree with so-called "conservative" authors too! The key is to use these books as a source of information, then make one's own decisions based on the data.

 

The IVP Essential Reference set is a good conservative alternative, especially for the NT (where it outshines the ABD). Unfortunately, the volumes for the OT are not yet complete, so it can't really compete in the OT. It can be difficult to search the various specialized dictionaries, which is why I suggested making them a folder in "My Groups" in the last podcast (#40).

[Anon]

I concur with the assessments above, and I might add that reading authors of different persuasions brings many benefits to the user, especially in regards presuppositions in hermeneutics. Having assumptions challenged is quintessential in the art of interpretation. I heartily recommend ABD for your library.

[Mark Allison]

I heartily agree with the comments above, and add that if all my Accordance modules were taken away, the one I would purchase first, after the necessary biblical texts, would be the ABD.

[RANorem]

It can be difficult to search the various specialized dictionaries, which is why I suggested making them a folder in "My Groups" in the last podcast (#40).

That specific suggestion was extremely helpful to me, Dr. J!

[Chuck Schneider]

ABD also has, for me, an unexpected style of writing.

 

For example, the summary text about Esther starts with:

 

"One day during a lavish stag party in the courtyard at Susa, ..."

[R. Mansfield]

ABD also has, for me, an unexpected style of writing.

 

For example, the summary text about Esther starts with:

 

"One day during a lavish stag party in the courtyard at Susa, ..."

 

Yes, that's another excellent point. I can't wait to have the full ABD on my iPad when Accordance iOS app lets us sync our modules. However, when I first got the ABD years ago for Accordance, I used to print out articles to take with me for "pleasure reading" if I was going to be at the doctor's office, DMV, etc. I rarely print anything these days, and carry my iPad with me everywhere, so it will be nice to have a "portable Anchor" again soon.

[circuitrider]

Thank you, gentlemen, for the great and informative posts. I am going to go for it.

 

Yes, that's another excellent point. I can't wait to have the full ABD on my iPad when Accordance iOS app lets us sync our modules.

 

I have also been greatly anticipating the benefit of being able enjoy my modules as and ebook. That is going to be WONDERFUL.

[Fr. Rusty]

Question: Why use and trust a resource that plainly indicates it does not believe the Bible?

It's just a question, not trying to be difficult.

This may not be the "place" for this question.

I understand critical analysis and that everyone comes to study "from somewhere", yet, if one is coming to the study in "effort to disprove", rather than " seek to find and understand truth" , then I would certainly have to question the validity of the work, no matter how scholarly.

 

My questions are simply asked from an honest position of trying to understand.

 

Thanks, and, if this is not appropriate for these forums, I will remove the question as I understand the need to keep things tidy and on track.

 

Grace and Peace,

 

Rusty+

[R. Mansfield]

Question: Why use and trust a resource that plainly indicates it does not believe the Bible?

It's just a question, not trying to be difficult.

This may not be the "place" for this question.

I understand critical analysis and that everyone comes to study "from somewhere", yet, if one is coming to the study in "effort to disprove", rather than " seek to find and understand truth" , then I would certainly have to question the validity of the work, no matter how scholarly.

 

My questions are simply asked from an honest position of trying to understand.

 

Thanks, and, if this is not appropriate for these forums, I will remove the question as I understand the need to keep things tidy and on track.

 

Grace and Peace,

 

Rusty+

 

(1) Well, first of all, I don't believe the ABD anywhere "plainly indicates it does not believe the Bible." I wouldn't think that anyone writing for the ABD (although obviously I can't speak to every contributor with certainty) is writing in an "effort to disprove."

 

On the other hand, there are certainly guides to the Bible with the actual goal to disprove the Scriptures (Penn Jillette has written one), and when I know for certain that such an agenda is in place, I am less likely to seek regular information from that source.

 

(2) There are hundreds of writers for the ABD from a variety of backgrounds. Looking at the list, I see FF Bruce, Douglas Stewart, and even some of my profs from my MDiv program in the nineties. I'd say these folks mentioned "believe the Bible."

 

(3) As I mentioned earlier, I know of no reference more conservative that covers the breadth and scope of the ABD--especially when concerning historical and literary matters. So should I reject the ABD entirely and settle for a source with less information, or can I read them both?

 

(4) Please understand what I mean by this, but I do subscribe to the principle that "all truth is God's truth" (but that doesn't mean that all positions are true). What this does mean, and as I apply it to the ABD, is that if I see a statement like "The textual equipment of the dead is called 'funerary literature'" (a random sentence that I just pulled from the ABD), I don't have to be in complete doctrinal agreement with the writer (who happens to be Jan Assmann--a rather unfortunate name when read by an English speaker) to gain benefit from that fact.

 

(5) I believe that the only way I'd be able to find any resource like this with which I could find complete doctrinal agreement, would be to write it myself. However, from personal experience, I know that within a few years, there would undoubtedly be sections of my own thought I'd disagree with.

[Fr. Rusty]

Thank you Rick, that is what I was looking for.

The prior comments were good also, just needed a bit more clarification and it directly related to the issue.

I have a lot of Bruce in my library, don't always agree with his position, but find him to be honest and thorough.

 

Thanks again,

 

Rusty+