Brett K. Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Zondervan is withdrawing WBC v. 44 in print and digital format and destroying all copies.I assume they will instruct Accordance to do the same. Will Accordance be updating the WBC NT module to remove volume 44? If so, is there any way we can keep a copy? Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Allison Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Our normal procedure would be to remove it at the publisher's request, but continue to have it available as a separate module for anyone who had purchased the volume in the past. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brett K. Posted November 7, 2016 Author Share Posted November 7, 2016 Thank you for the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 "Commonly accepted standards" sounds quite vague to me. Why didn't the series editor catch this when the MS was submitted? Are they planning to examine all the works of all their authors in the light of this? I don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Francis Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Feels like a witch hunt... I would like to know why they do not simple add in the proper citation of works.. Perhaps I am over simplifying the case but I am upset that we are loosing (to the public) another fine resource. And for those who have them these works become a poison pill in that one may not quote them because of their taint. -Dan PS: I know that Barclay DSB is not an academic resource but thank God for that since most of his references were not attributed, indeed he said he often did not even remember his source. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ιακοβ Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 (edited) So there is a short window of time in which it can still be purchased. Is this one people would recommend? I imagine a replacement edition would be years off. From the academic perspective it is quite frustrating. How can people be expected to follow citations to books if they are no longer available, and furthermore, how can someone cite a book, if you know its now unavailable. The whole thing irritates me, they should just fix these books. I know the author would have been more than happy to rectify the problems. Edited November 7, 2016 by Ιακοβ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukfraser Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Dan's comment about witch hunt relates to this thread i guess. https://www.accordancebible.com/forums/topic/19192-eerdmans-statement-on-three-new-testament-commentaries/ ;o( Glad ive got it and not in a position of needing to reference my sources. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilT Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Last I heard was it was being revised and due to be reissued under O'Brien and the reviser. I heard about this possible revision a few years ago. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukfraser Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 (edited) Hi phil, The wording refers to emerging concerns over the use of secondary sources: November 4, 2016 In the summer of 2016 Zondervan Academic became aware of emerging concerns that one of its authors, Dr. Peter T. O’Brien, may not have followed commonly accepted standards for the use and documentation of secondary resources in Bible commentaries he had written. Consequently, we began a careful review of Dr. O’Brien’s commentary on Colossians and Philemon, volume 44 in the Word Biblical Commentary (WBC). It is with sadness and regret that we have concluded this volume does not follow commonly accepted standards for the use and documentation of secondary resources. Dr. O’Brien is revered by his colleagues in the academy and by his former students. His commentaries, including volume 44 in the WBC, have been used with great benefit by the thousands who have purchased them. While we have no reason to believe that Dr. O’Brien intentionally misused secondary resources, our commitment to high publishing standards leaves us no choice but to put volume 44 of the WBC out of print in both its print and digital formats and to destroy the remaining inventory. Edited November 7, 2016 by ukfraser 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Palmer Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 So there is a short window of time in which it can still be purchased. Is this one people would recommend? I imagine a replacement edition would be years off. From the academic perspective it is quite frustrating. How can people be expected to follow citations to books if they are no longer available, and furthermore, how can someone cite a book, if you know its now unavailable. The whole thing irritates me, they should just fix these books. I know the author would have been more than happy to rectify the problems. The individual volume is no longer available. We will rework our current bundles to exclude that volume as soon as we can get them restructured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ιακοβ Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 (edited) I assume its only a matter of time until his UBS Commentary volume is rescinded and removed as well. While I respect the rights of companies such as Zondervan to manage their content according to the legislation afforded them under law, I can't help but wonder if we will ever see a time that legislation will be changed such that, information—once it "escapes"—can't be rescinded in such a way that it appears to the next generation that it never existed. At least with print books, they can live on into the next generation. Perhaps we will get to the point one day, open source/collaboration mediums will surpass the need for printed/controlled published volumes? Edited November 7, 2016 by Ιακοβ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukfraser Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 It would be interesting to know how much of the text is actually affected. in an ideal digital world, the identified text would be redacted or correctly assigned and the etext updated. One day we may get the technology. Until then, stockists and publishers will have to jump And we, the paying public will have to suffer the inconvenience. ;o) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Francis Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Julie for those of use owning the set is there anyway to get the individual volume so that when the upgrade comes we do not need to keep collection X.2 as well as the current X.2.1? -Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Palmer Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Julie for those of use owning the set is there anyway to get the individual volume so that when the upgrade comes we do not need to keep collection X.2 as well as the current X.2.1? -Dan I hope so. We have done that with other series that had this issue, and I am fairly certain that is how we will set this one up as well. However, I'm not sure what the Publisher stipulations will be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael J. Bolesta Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 The individual volume is no longer available. We will rework our current bundles to exclude that volume as soon as we can get them restructured. It would be desirable let those who purchased the series to retain the individual volume separate from the reworked bundle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ιακοβ Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 (edited) Julie for those of use owning the set is there anyway to get the individual volume so that when the upgrade comes we do not need to keep collection X.2 as well as the current X.2.1? -Dan For what its worth, if the individual books, where grouped in to a module, only in a sense that they are in a folder, then users would be free to delete what they don't want. I don't know about how others use accordance, but having books not all "joined together" in one scrollable window would be a huge plus. For example, when I search for "Heb 2:14" while reading the Hebrews WBC module, I don't want to find myself having been thrown into a commentary on Ephesians. Edited November 7, 2016 by Ιακοβ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabian Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 (edited) It would be interesting to know how much of the text is actually affected. in an ideal digital world, the identified text would be redacted or correctly assigned and the etext updated. One day we may get the technology. Until then, stockists and publishers will have to jump And we, the paying public will have to suffer the inconvenience. ;o) To be honest. In my opinion >90% is always copy from the past and in <10% is "new" content. Read Keil Delitzsch or Theodor Zahn or Schlatter and then a newer one to compare. Often the newer has a less high standard. But the cover looks nicer and a little part is on the last research results. Except for example the research on the DSS which was not available in their time. Like an Accordance staff member wrote or talked in a podcast. He had a friend with 90 books about Revelation. But he wasn't impressed, because these 90 say all the same stuff. In other words all copied from the same Q(uelle or source). Greetings Fabian Edited November 7, 2016 by Fabian 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ιακοβ Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 (edited) Like an Accordance staff member wrote or talked in a podcast. He had a friend with 90 books about Revelation. But he wasn't impressed, because they 90 say all the same stuff. In other words all copied from the same Q(uelle or source). Well this is really my point. If there was an open online collaboration of ideas that were peer reviewed, then this online resource would be superior to all 90 of them. (Assuming the material was contributed and distributed without restriction) You could assumedly then just export this material in the WBC structure, or the NICOT structure, or so on, if that is what someone prefers, although you might have to use a different shade of green and black on the cover to avoid copyright problems Edited November 7, 2016 by Ιακοβ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukfraser Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 When i look in my reference library, my original 1986 2 corithians is listed as a separate volume and the 2014 revised edition is in the nt 26 vol set. Im not sure how the erdmans set was handled when the corresponding volumes were removed but like dan said, it would be great if the volume was still available as a stand alone in our library. just need to remember its there, but certainly better for storage and not having to switch sets. ;o) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair Posted November 8, 2016 Share Posted November 8, 2016 So why haven't the Word Study Dictionaries been withdrawn? Wasn't there some controversy regarding plagiarism with the OT volume? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabian Posted November 8, 2016 Share Posted November 8, 2016 Well this is really my point. If there was an open online collaboration of ideas that were peer reviewed, then this online resource would be superior to all 90 of them. (Assuming the material was contributed and distributed without restriction) This is available its called Wikipedia. But its not approved by the Universities and Seminaries. But if you look which sources Wiki quotes then often its the same as the not kostenlosen Tools for Accordance. Greetings Fabian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Francis Posted November 8, 2016 Share Posted November 8, 2016 (edited) The word study dictionary particularly the OT one did heavily borrow from Moody's theological wordbook of the Old Testament but Moody made a deal allowing the dictionary to remake n n print as long as future editions acknowledged TWOT was one of the sources. Had his been a more academic work and not aimed at laypersons different actions may well have been taken. But for me this is the answer your correct the issue not destroy a worry for its flaws. Dan Edited November 8, 2016 by Dan Francis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Francis Posted November 8, 2016 Share Posted November 8, 2016 #15 Spiros Zodhiates/Baker Complete Word Study Dictionary: post #15 R. Mansfield Mithril Accordance 2,221 posts Gender:Male Location:Kentucky Accordance Version:11.x Posted 02 November 2012 - 08:12 AM Well, you kind of have half of it now already in Accordance. Back in the 90s, AMG paid a hefty sum to Moody Publishers after it was discovered that Zodhiates had plagiarized much of his Hebrew work from The Theological Word Book of the Old Testament. Moody didn't make AMG withdraw the titles that had used the cribbed content (which I believe included both the Key Study Bible and the Complete Word Study Dictionary), but they did have to pay a royalty, and they also had to begin including Moody copyright notices in addition to their own. At the time I was working in a Baptist Book Store (now Lifeway) and editions of these works that were already printed began arriving with an insert regarding the additional copyright information. Obviously, Zodiates is more well known for his Greek than his Hebrew expertise. His excuse when the plagiarized sections came to light was something along the lines that he didn't have time to research the Hebrew content, and it was just easier to "borrow" it from other sources. Obviously, he's not the first to do so, and he won't be the last. Anyway, like I said, since The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament is available in Accordance, you kind of have half of Zodhiates' work now :-) You, Alistair, Lester P. Bagley and 1 other like this Unlike Rick Mansfield Technology Evangelist Accordance Bible Software Gear for Running Accordance: OS X 2014 Mac Mini - 2.6 Ghz dual core Intel Core i5, 8 GB RAM, 1 TB HDD, El Capitan/OS X Server 2015 12" MacBook - 1.3 Ghz Core M, 8 GB RAM, 512 GB SSD, Sierra Windows 2014 15.6" Acer R7-572 - 1.6 Ghz Core i5, 16 GB RAM, 256 GB mSATA, 512 GB SSD, Windows 10 iOS 2016 iPhone 7 Plus - 256 GB, Verizon, iOS 10.x 2016 iPad Pro (12.9") - 256 GB, Verizon, iOS 10.x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair Posted November 8, 2016 Share Posted November 8, 2016 Mercy triumphs over judgment. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ιακοβ Posted November 11, 2016 Share Posted November 11, 2016 This is available its called Wikipedia. But its not approved by the Universities and Seminaries. But if you look which sources Wiki quotes then often its the same as the not kostenlosen Tools for Accordance. Wikipedia doesn't even come close to having a small fraction of the information available in a useful commentary, nor does it provide an easy way to make that information available in one of the various layouts/structures chosen by the various commentaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.c3123c857d1029f98e39c9394adc358d.png)
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now