In the previous post, Which Greek New Testament?, I mentioned and recommended several different GNTs for those who are just starting out with NTG. This is just a short note to update and mention some exciting development on the topic.
Often, it is the case that when your English Bible becomes good and broken in, right when you begin to feel comfortable with it, you find that it is also time to replace or rebind it. Many of us want a Bible that will last for years, one to write in, underline in, one that you grow to love and know like the back of your hand. For those who study NTG, this is no different. One of the very things which is often greatly desired by us is a durable, long-lasting, genuine leather-bound Greek New Testament; something that will endure the test of time and not have to be rebound or replaced every few years. This has for some time been nothing more than a far-fetched dream, but now, it is available! I learned recently that Crossway is publishing two UBS Greek Reader NTs. One will be in Genuine Leather Burgundy, the other in Black Calfskin. You can find them here: Black Cowhide & Genuine Leather Burgundy. UPDATE Since being released at the end of November 2011, these genuine leather GNTs have not lived up to expectations: Pros: The thicker paper in these editions means there is less bleed through, something which is common in Crossway Bibles. The binding is solid and should last a long time. Cons: The paper is very thick, making these GNTs 1/3 inch thicker than the original hardcover version. They are also a bit heavier due to the increased paper thickness. Conclusion: I have not and do not plan to purchase either of these, but will stick with the hardcover edition. You can find reviews of these leather editions here at amazon.
14 Comments
_Bible commentaries can be very useful in helping the Christian to understand the Scriptures. After all, we are nearly 2000 years removed from the culture, background, and language of the New Testament. There are many details and things which we cannot learn or know about if we don't turn to a commentary (i.e. history, culture, or original meaning of the language). As useful as these tools may be though, we want always to remember that they are written by fallible men and are not inspired by God, even though they may often times speak correctly about things that are inspired by God. The Bible itself must always be our first and last resource. It was said of George Whitefield that he primarily read 3 books: His English Bible, the Greek New Testament, and Matthew Henry's Commentary of the Bible. Those men of old knew God well, and had but few resources compared to the wealth of writings available to us today. This is not to say in any way though that we should not use the resources available to us, indeed we should use and consult them, though not in an unhealthy way.
There are many different Bible commentaries today, some are good, some are not so good. Some are written by trustworthy men of doctrinal integrity, some are written by men which lean more toward a liberal or critical approach. Some fall in between. As always, this is a matter in which we must exercise great discernment. We would not want to read a commentary written by an unreferenced source. Our selection should be based on some reliable knowledge or hearty recommendation of the author by men whom we know and trust. At the same time, it is so important to remember that no commentary will see eye to eye theologically with everything in which we believe. We will at times find ourselves disagreeing with the writer's interpretation of this or that passage or of other important issues. This should not at all though discourage us from consulting them. It is helpful when reading commentaries to always remember to, "chew up the meat and spit out the bones" or "take the good and leave the bad". Who is to say that we are always right anyway? More so, commentaries are not all the same, different types of commentaries serve different purposes. Many are good in their respective areas of attention. I have chosen to divide them up into three groups of my choice to see the differences and purposes of use more clearly: Devotional, General, and Greek Exegetical: ![]() Choosing a Greek New Testament is not something to take lightly. Before the 20th century the answer to this question would have been very slim and narrow. Today however, there are significantly more options regarding the GNT. It is similar to that of English Bibles today: wide-margin, large font, regular font, etc. Part of the answer to this question though has to do with the scope of interest and purpose of study of the reader. Is your primary goal long term reading, devotional reading, textual criticism, etc? First, I should state that I am of the persuasion that the manuscripts used in the NA26-28 and UBS4, commonly known as the Critical Text or Alexandrian Text, most closely resemble the Original Autographs. Those of the persuasion that the Textus Receptus is superior would disagree with this; and there are respectable arguments on both sides of the issue. Nevertheless, I do not believe that one's choice of manuscripts will affect the purpose and use of this Greek blog, especially as I will not be pointing out differences between the two sides. For more reading on the matter of manuscripts, I would suggest the following: The King James Only Controversy: Revised Edition – James R. White and The Text of the New Testament 3rd Edition 1992 used (not 4th Edition) – Bruce Metzger. |
Categories
All
Archives
July 2019
Pages I like |