![]() |
Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
![]() |
#1 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: texas
Posts: 86
|
![]()
Is anyone aware of a good bible with concordance written from a scholarly, rather than evangelical, perspective. I'm looking for something with included textual and higher criticism. I'd like included history from the likes of Koester and Mack, comparative texts and discussions of heresies from folks like Ehrman and Pagels, Christologies from Crossan, Funk, Meier, and the like.
So when it's time for Bible study - you receive an unbiased look at a pericope or epistle; you can learn who scholars think the text was meant to counter, support, distinguish; you can find areas where people believe interpolation and editing occurred. Can Santa drop such a thing in my stocking? |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
![]()
I think he want something more sophisticated than the SAB.
I don't know of a single such book. I think it would have to be an encyclopedia to include all of what you list. |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Posts: 619
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 464
|
![]()
The Oxford Annotated and the Harper Collins are both probably as close as it gets to what you're looking for. There is a scholarly introduction before each chapter, and all the verses that are in dispute are noted in the footnotes, along with the usual helpful footnotes found in any decent study bible. Or you might want to try an Intro text like Brown's.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 932
|
![]()
Thanks, all.
I guess I'm really looking for something that doesn't exist. As Toto indicates, an OT and NT bible that even references a fair cross section of critical biblical scholarship might be too heavy to transport. |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: washington state
Posts: 7
|
![]()
Sounds like a good idea! You should write it
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|