Great video, Did you ever see the Cheers episode where Woody and his fiancee get into an arguement over whose branch of Lutheranism is the right one? Too funny. I think you would enjoy it.
I found it just now and it _is_ funny. I think the script writer knew a bit about Lutheranism. This publisher is in Woody's branch. Thanks for commenting, Dani!
Thanks for the thorough review. I've been thinking about adding this volume to my collection. With the release of the ESV-CE Augustine Bible, I was hoping we'd eventually get an ESV-CE with study notes, but it appears that's not going to happen. From what I've read, Crossway won't allow for an annotated Catholic ESV. So for those of us who enjoy the ESV and want the deuterocanonicals with study notes, this may be an adequate substitute. The study notes don't seem so Lutheran in flavor that a Catholic would find them objectionable.
The complete Ignatius Press Catholic Study Bible will be released next month. 26 years in the making. But it is based on RSV2CE not the ESV. But, of course, the RSV and ESV are actually based on the KJV.
I have not contributed comments on videos for quite a long time. I was having many difficulties with correcting or changing my account. Your reviews have been as good as ever! It's nice to be back in touch.
I was pleasantly surprised to see this video. (I left a comment earlier, but it seems to have disappeared.) It's very helpful. By the way, I was on the Wartburg Project website just a couple of days ago, and I saw that they have a study Bible in the Evangelical Heritage Version now. It's a bit pricey. (Maybe my earlier comment auto-deleted because I stated the price.) There is a sample, but not a lot of information.
There is another Lutheran edition of the Apocrypha, also relatively recently published (and in paperback): The Apocrypha : Fortress Commentary on the Bible Study Edition / Gail A. Yea [et al.], editors. -- Minneapolis : Fortress Press, cop. 2018. -- ISBN: 978-1-5064-1587-3, This somewhat annotated edition is of considerably less value than Concordia's edition of the annotated Apoprypha which you reviewed. Fortress Press being a rather "liberal Lutheran" publisher, there is less worth to the annotations. The translation used within it is the New Revised Standard Version (of 1989). I mention this for those curious, not really to recommend it, except to "completist" collectors.
When it comes to studying doctrine that is contrary to what you yourself hold to, where do you draw the line? (Example; studying catholic theology if you are Protestant.) do you also read the New World translation and the Book of Mormon? If not, why not?
Thank you for reviewing this volume. I have thought about purchasing this edition for quite some time. I think I will put it on the "gift wish list" this year. I think some of the maps and temple drawings may borrowed from the Lutheran Study Bible. I will have to double check, but I have seen them before too. I do wish the publishers would have included engravings in the last section of books. It seems unbalanced without notes or wood-cut images. But, that is a small matter. On the whole, I think the volume is well worth the money.
I think it's worth the money too, Rachel. You're right about the illustrations, I think. I just checked one of the illustrations, Zerubbabel's temple. It's printed on page iii here, and it appears on page 730 in the Lutheran Study Bible.
There are four notes on that section, Rusky b. On the topic of free will, one note says, "We have a choice in how to act -- and yet Scripture teaches that we are bound in sin. [It references Eph 2.3 and Rm 7.18] ... The Lutheran Confessions explain this seeming contradiction by saying that men have free will in earthly matters but not in 'things above them.' That is, we can choose to avoid outright adultery, murder, and thievery -- but that does not mean that we have kept the whole law. For we are still sinners by nature, and even the wicked thoughts we have (which we cannot often control) are themselves true sins (cf Mt 5:21-46). Ultimately, our sanctification is only begun in this life, and we eagerly look forward to our complete healing in the resurrection on the Last Day. And this is precisely the reason we strive to live godly lives here: because we know our destiny as children of God (Rm 6:1-4)."
@@RGrantJones I might get this volume, as this appears to be the best conservative-devotional version available of entire 18 Apocrypha books. I think complete apocrypha is available only in historic-critic-liberal Bibles/commentaries.
@@RGrantJones About Apocrypha book order in Orthodox Bibles, Greek and Russian Bibles have different orders from each other and those are different from Catholic order of Apocrypha books. This not good for standardization. Orthodox canon is really fragmented and disordered. I was reading that many Orthodox Churches do not consider Book of Revelation to be useful for reading, they think its a problematic book.
Soo The Book of Enoch is never apart of the Apocrypha? I am still studying just the 66 Books of the Bible ...but it looks good all in one book like that. Thanks for showing it....📜💕
I wouldn't say that, but 1 Enoch hasn't been included in any editions I've seen. I believe some Ethiopians consider it canonical. Thank you for commenting!
Texts like 1 Enoch are usually classified as pseudepigrapha rather than apocrypha. Technically, the word "apocrypha" only applies to the 7 additional books of the old testament (and additional chapters of Daniel and Esther) accepted by the catholic church (ie what catholics call the deuterocanonicals). Howeve, 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, and the prayer of Manasseh were often included as an appendix to Latin vulgate manuscripts of the old testament and tended to be lumped together with the apocrypha. Therefore protestant bibles from 1500-1800s that included the "apocrypha" usually included the catholic deuterocanonicals plus the three texts from the vulgate's appendix. However, today "apocrypha" usually also includes the old testament texts unique to the Eastern orthodox canon and its appendices. The Orthodox Church accepts the catholic deuterocanonicals as well as 1 Esdras (ie 3 ezra), 3 maccabees, and the prayer of Mannasseh. However orthox old testament manuscripts often included 4 maccabees, 4 ezra (ie 2 esdras), and psalm 151 as an appendix. The technical term for this collection is in the Orthodox Church is Anagignoskomena. Today, "apocrypha" typically refers to all of the above, and bibles with apocrypha usually include: judith, tobit, wisdom of solomon, wisdom of ben sirach, baruch, 1-4 maccabees, 1-2 esdras (ie 3-4 ezra), prayer of Mannasseh, psalm 151, and additional chapters of Daniel and Esther.
Good question. From the preface to the first edition: "This edition of the Book of Concord is a 'reader's edition' because it is designed to serve the needs of those who may not be familiar with the Lutheran Confessions. It is intended for use in homes, congregations, classrooms, parish halls, and any place that people gather to reflect on God's Word and how that Word is correctly believed, taught, and confessed. We trust that the various resources and features we have included will help the reader understand the persons, places, events, and teachings discussed in these documents."
@@jimmu2008 - Yes. "Our text for the Book of Concord is not a brand-new translation from the German and Latin texts. This reader's edition is a revised and updated version of the translation originally prepared by William H.T. Dau and G. Friedrich Bente for the Concordia Triglotta, published in 1921." So, modern standard English, neither archaic nor replete with the singular they.
Great video, Did you ever see the Cheers episode where Woody and his fiancee get into an arguement over whose branch of Lutheranism is the right one? Too funny. I think you would enjoy it.
I found it just now and it _is_ funny. I think the script writer knew a bit about Lutheranism. This publisher is in Woody's branch. Thanks for commenting, Dani!
Thanks for the thorough review. I've been thinking about adding this volume to my collection. With the release of the ESV-CE Augustine Bible, I was hoping we'd eventually get an ESV-CE with study notes, but it appears that's not going to happen. From what I've read, Crossway won't allow for an annotated Catholic ESV. So for those of us who enjoy the ESV and want the deuterocanonicals with study notes, this may be an adequate substitute. The study notes don't seem so Lutheran in flavor that a Catholic would find them objectionable.
The complete Ignatius Press Catholic Study Bible will be released next month. 26 years in the making. But it is based on RSV2CE not the ESV. But, of course, the RSV and ESV are actually based on the KJV.
I have not contributed comments on videos for quite a long time. I was having many difficulties with correcting or changing my account. Your reviews have been as good as ever! It's nice to be back in touch.
Thanks for the kind comment, Gerald! I wondered what had happened to you.
I'll have to add these books to my wanted list. I like the background information is is a lot more deeper than what I was expecting. Nice review sir.
Thanks for the kind comment, IG 4WDI!
I must say, that Pentel Graph gear 500 really shines.
I was pleasantly surprised to see this video. (I left a comment earlier, but it seems to have disappeared.) It's very helpful. By the way, I was on the Wartburg Project website just a couple of days ago, and I saw that they have a study Bible in the Evangelical Heritage Version now. It's a bit pricey. (Maybe my earlier comment auto-deleted because I stated the price.) There is a sample, but not a lot of information.
I'd heard about the EHV Study Bible also, and I had the same reaction regarding the price. Thanks for commenting!
There is another Lutheran edition of the Apocrypha, also relatively recently published (and in paperback): The Apocrypha : Fortress Commentary on the Bible Study Edition / Gail A. Yea [et al.], editors. -- Minneapolis : Fortress Press, cop. 2018. -- ISBN: 978-1-5064-1587-3, This somewhat annotated edition is of considerably less value than Concordia's edition of the annotated Apoprypha which you reviewed. Fortress Press being a rather "liberal Lutheran" publisher, there is less worth to the annotations. The translation used within it is the New Revised Standard Version (of 1989). I mention this for those curious, not really to recommend it, except to "completist" collectors.
When it comes to studying doctrine that is contrary to what you yourself hold to, where do you draw the line? (Example; studying catholic theology if you are Protestant.) do you also read the New World translation and the Book of Mormon? If not, why not?
Thank you for reviewing this volume. I have thought about purchasing this edition for quite some time. I think I will put it on the "gift wish list" this year.
I think some of the maps and temple drawings may borrowed from the Lutheran Study Bible. I will have to double check, but I have seen them before too. I do wish the publishers would have included engravings in the last section of books. It seems unbalanced without notes or wood-cut images. But, that is a small matter. On the whole, I think the volume is well worth the money.
I think it's worth the money too, Rachel. You're right about the illustrations, I think. I just checked one of the illustrations, Zerubbabel's temple. It's printed on page iii here, and it appears on page 730 in the Lutheran Study Bible.
Would be interesting to know what it says about Sirach/Ecclesiasticus 15;11-20.
There are four notes on that section, Rusky b. On the topic of free will, one note says, "We have a choice in how to act -- and yet Scripture teaches that we are bound in sin. [It references Eph 2.3 and Rm 7.18] ... The Lutheran Confessions explain this seeming contradiction by saying that men have free will in earthly matters but not in 'things above them.' That is, we can choose to avoid outright adultery, murder, and thievery -- but that does not mean that we have kept the whole law. For we are still sinners by nature, and even the wicked thoughts we have (which we cannot often control) are themselves true sins (cf Mt 5:21-46). Ultimately, our sanctification is only begun in this life, and we eagerly look forward to our complete healing in the resurrection on the Last Day. And this is precisely the reason we strive to live godly lives here: because we know our destiny as children of God (Rm 6:1-4)."
Thanks 👍 for reviewing interesting.
Thank you for commenting, Larrym.!
This is good information. For those interested in the apocrypha this one seems to be a godd starting point.
I think so, Edward. Thanks for commenting!
The notes and essays look quite useful. Nice review.
Thank you for commenting, Hassan!
@@RGrantJones
I might get this volume, as this appears to be the best conservative-devotional version available of entire 18 Apocrypha books. I think complete apocrypha is available only in historic-critic-liberal Bibles/commentaries.
@@RGrantJones
About Apocrypha book order in Orthodox Bibles, Greek and Russian Bibles have different orders from each other and those are different from Catholic order of Apocrypha books. This not good for standardization.
Orthodox canon is really fragmented and disordered. I was reading that many Orthodox Churches do not consider Book of Revelation to be useful for reading, they think its a problematic book.
Soo The Book of Enoch is never apart of the Apocrypha? I am still studying just the 66 Books of the Bible ...but it looks good all in one book like that. Thanks for showing it....📜💕
I wouldn't say that, but 1 Enoch hasn't been included in any editions I've seen. I believe some Ethiopians consider it canonical. Thank you for commenting!
Texts like 1 Enoch are usually classified as pseudepigrapha rather than apocrypha. Technically, the word "apocrypha" only applies to the 7 additional books of the old testament (and additional chapters of Daniel and Esther) accepted by the catholic church (ie what catholics call the deuterocanonicals). Howeve, 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, and the prayer of Manasseh were often included as an appendix to Latin vulgate manuscripts of the old testament and tended to be lumped together with the apocrypha. Therefore protestant bibles from 1500-1800s that included the "apocrypha" usually included the catholic deuterocanonicals plus the three texts from the vulgate's appendix.
However, today "apocrypha" usually also includes the old testament texts unique to the Eastern orthodox canon and its appendices.
The Orthodox Church accepts the catholic deuterocanonicals as well as 1 Esdras (ie 3 ezra), 3 maccabees, and the prayer of Mannasseh. However orthox old testament manuscripts often included 4 maccabees, 4 ezra (ie 2 esdras), and psalm 151 as an appendix. The technical term for this collection is in the Orthodox Church is Anagignoskomena.
Today, "apocrypha" typically refers to all of the above, and bibles with apocrypha usually include: judith, tobit, wisdom of solomon, wisdom of ben sirach, baruch, 1-4 maccabees, 1-2 esdras (ie 3-4 ezra), prayer of Mannasseh, psalm 151, and additional chapters of Daniel and Esther.
I am curious about that Book of Concord. What makes it a "reader's edition"?
Good question. From the preface to the first edition: "This edition of the Book of Concord is a 'reader's edition' because it is designed to serve the needs of those who may not be familiar with the Lutheran Confessions. It is intended for use in homes, congregations, classrooms, parish halls, and any place that people gather to reflect on God's Word and how that Word is correctly believed, taught, and confessed. We trust that the various resources and features we have included will help the reader understand the persons, places, events, and teachings discussed in these documents."
@@RGrantJones Have you thought of doing a brief review of it? Sort of a belated unboxing video? I would be learning more about the
@@jimmu2008 - sure, I may be able to do a brief "short topics" video on it one day this week.
@@RGrantJones Wonderful. I am thinking i might buy it for reference. It is a recent translation, right?
@@jimmu2008 - Yes. "Our text for the Book of Concord is not a brand-new translation from the German and Latin texts. This reader's edition is a revised and updated version of the translation originally prepared by William H.T. Dau and G. Friedrich Bente for the Concordia Triglotta, published in 1921." So, modern standard English, neither archaic nor replete with the singular they.
concordia sells commentary on ot, apocrypha and nt (lutheran bible companion) which are probably the better buys.