Darrell Bock on the Credibility of the Resurrection

In this clip from his course NT211 Introducing the Gospels and Acts: Their Background, Nature, and Purpose, Dr. Darrell Bock explains ways that we can be sure the Gospel accounts reflect a real historical event rather than a made-up story. He explains the significance of Jesus not being buried in a family tomb, being raised from the dead on the third day when even the disciples didn’t expect it, and having women—who were not recognized as legally credible witnesses in the first century—be the first witnesses to His resurrection. “You would never make up a story this way,” says Dr. Bock. He continues:

For these various reasons, these Gospel accounts have the appearance of being credible in reporting real experiences that the disciples believed they had and real experiences the disciples believed really took place. They believed it so much they were willing to die for it. They believed it so much they were willing to have their lives transformed by it. That’s the power of the resurrection. It is not only about the vindication of Jesus, but it is evidence of the presence of the life-giving, transforming power of God.

Continue studying the Gospels and Acts with Dr. Darrell Bock in his course NT211 Introducing the Gospels and Acts: Their Background, Nature, and Purpose and get 15% off during the Easter sale!

HiDef Mondays: All about Participles 2

Participles as Adjectives

In last week’s post, we looked at the role of participles substituted for nouns, creating a dynamic portrait, an alias for some other expression. Participles can also serve as adjectival modifiers, accomplishing the same kind of action-based portrayal as we observed with nouns, the difference between a simple label and a dynamic description.

Nametag

Versus

Action Label

There seem to be a couple of motivations for using participles in this way.

The first motivation we could call efficiency. Let’s say a writer wants to quickly introduce a participant and attribute certain activity to them. One strategy would be making each different action its own clause, e.g.,

  1. There was a virgin.
  2. She was promised to be married to a man.
  3. The man’s name was Joseph.

Describing the characters in this way is not only longer, it also focuses more attention on the activity than on the person. The version we find in Luke 1:27 uses a participle (and a relative clause) to convey the same information, but casts the action more as qualities that the characters possess than as things they have done. Luke also uses a relative clause to introduce Joseph’s name.

Luke 1:26–27 (SBLGNT) Ἐν δὲ τῷ μηνὶ τῷ ἕκτῳ ἀπεστάλη ὁ ἄγγελος Γαβριὴλ ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ εἰς πόλιν τῆς Γαλιλαίας ᾗ ὄνομα Ναζαρὲθ 27 πρὸς παρθένον ἐμνηστευμένην ἀνδρὶ ᾧ ὄνομα Ἰωσὴφ ἐξ οἴκου Δαυίδ, καὶ τὸ ὄνομα τῆς παρθένου Μαριάμ.

Luke 1:26–27 (LEB) Now in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a town of Galilee named Nazareth, 27 to a virgin legally promised in marriage to a man named Joseph of the house of David. And the name of the virgin was Mary.

Another motivation might be the characterizing function that participles can accomplish. The information they contribute can restrict the possible referents of the expression, helping us identify “who is doing what to whom.” This might explain the concentration of participles found in Luke 6:49, where participles function as substitutes for both nouns (underlined) and adjectives (bold):

Luke 6:49 (SBLGNT) ὁ δὲ ἀκούσας καὶ μὴ ποιήσας ὅμοιός ἐστιν ἀνθρώπῳ οἰκοδομήσαντι οἰκίαν ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν χωρὶς θεμελίου, ᾗ προσέρηξεν ὁ ποταμός, καὶ εὐθὺς συνέπεσεν, καὶ ἐγένετο τὸ ῥῆγμα τῆς οἰκίας ἐκείνης μέγα.

Luke 6:49 (LEB) But the one who hears my words and does not do them is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation, which the river burst against, and immediately it collapsed—and the collapse of that house was great!”

One could also argue that efficiency was a motivation, based on how the ordering of the propositions would need to change:

  1. There was a man.
  2. He built a house without a foundation.
  3. The are other people.
  4. They hear the words of Jesus but do not do them.
  5. These people are like the man first mentioned.

Okay, I’ll admit I made this more complex than I had to, but it’s to illustrate a point. Participles allow us to cover huge amounts of informational territory all within the convenience of a single clause.

One final motivation to mention is the recharacterization of someone or something akin to Phil 1:6 mentioned in the last post. Here the information in the participles is not restricting the potential person, but activating a new and specific picture of them to shape how we think about them in the context. Consider the impact of the participles in James 1:5 (a twofer!):

James 1:5 (SBLGNT) Εἰ δέ τις ὑμῶν λείπεται σοφίας, αἰτείτω παρὰ τοῦ διδόντος θεοῦ πᾶσιν ἁπλῶς καὶ μὴ ὀνειδίζοντος, καὶ δοθήσεται αὐτῷ·

James 1:5 (LEB) Now if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask for it from God, who gives to all without reservation and not reproaching, and it will be given to him.

The participles are not helping us determine which god James is referring to. Instead they shape how we think about him. Of all of the potential images that might come to mind in the context of asking him for something, James portrays him as the giving God, giving to all without reservation. He is also the “not reproaching” God. This is great news for those of us who might be too intimidated to ask him for things like wisdom. After all, what if our request makes him angry? The portrait that James paints of God serves to disabuse us of wrong ideas like this, and participles offer a great alternative to adjectives and nouns for creating evocative pictures.

If you’d like to look at more examples of participles that serve as attributive modifiers, here is a syntax query to help you find them in Logos 6.

AttPart

Master Participles and More . . .
To learn more about how participles and other devices affect how we conceive of things, check out  the chapters on Overspecification and Changed Reference in Discourse Grammar of the Greek New Testament. You can also search the Greek New Testament for more examples of these concepts using the Lexham Discourse Greek New Testament.

Dr. Tremper Longman III—The Fear of the Lord Is the Beginning of Wisdom

In this episode of Mobile Ed Conversations Dr. Tremper Longman III talks about how the book of Proverbs is more than just moral teaching; it’s also meant to develop our relationship with God.

Learn more from Dr. Longman with his Mobile Ed course OT306 Book Study: Exodus, and stay tuned for his upcoming courses on Proverbs.

HiDef Mondays: All about Participles

Today’s post is the inaugural edition of HiDef Mondays, in which Faithlife’s Scholar-in-Residence Steve Runge and his team explore peculiarities and practicalities in Greek and Hebrew grammar. Check back every Monday to find a new insight for studying and teaching biblical languages.

Participles: Part 1

Participles have been called the workhorse of the Greek language. They occur far more frequently in Greek discourse compared to English, and in ways that don’t work naturally in English. Here’s how Wallace describes the situation:

Wallace Grammar - Participles

Wallace’s final comment about versatility will be the point of departure for the series of posts that follow. We’ll take a look at participles from a functional linguistic perspective in order to see how a core quality of participles can unify our understanding of their diverse uses.

Greek participles are a morphological hybrid, featuring components of both verbs (tense and voice and mood) and nouns (case, number and gender). Wallace treats them as “verbal adjectives” (ibid.) construed in a broad sense, and for good reason as we will see.

One of the most helpful ways I’ve found to better understand something is by considering what it is not. In other words, let’s take a look at what other forms might be used instead of a participle. Then we will be in a much better position to understand the unique contribution this hybrid nature of participles offers that other forms do not.

Participles are often found in noun phrases, either substituting for a simple adjective or for the noun itself. In other words, participles may be used in place of an adjective or a noun. So what does a participle offer that adjectives and nouns do not? Dynamism! The “nouniness” of participles (case, number and gender) allow them to convey the very same morphological information as any noun or adjective. But participles have the added bonus of including an action. Where nouns and adjectives are largely static, participles can paint a dynamic portrait. To put it crassly, the choice of a participle over an noun or adjectictive represents to choice of an action-oriented image versus a simple label, illustrated below.
Nametag

                                      vs.

Action Label

Use of a verbal adjective allows writers to paint an image that might be nearly impossible using simple nouns or adjectives. Just consider the dynamic image created by Paul in Philippians 1:6 by changing the reference from the simple noun “God” to a dynamic participle. Compare the image that each evokes.

Philippians 1:6 (SBLGNT) πεποιθὼς αὐτὸ τοῦτο ὅτι ὁ ἐναρξάμενος ἐν ὑμῖν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἐπιτελέσει ἄχρι ἡμέρας Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ·

“God” calls to mind any number of images, whereas the participle “He who began a good work in you” significantly constrains the possibilities.
HiDef Philippians - Good Work
It makes you think about God in a particular way based on the activity pictured in the participle. No simple noun could do that.

Another powerful portrait from participles is found in Acts 15 justifying Paul’s decision to split with Barnabas:

Acts 15:36–39 (SBLGNT) Μετὰ δέ τινας ἡμέρας εἶπεν πρὸς Βαρναβᾶν Παῦλος· Ἐπιστρέψαντες δὴ ἐπισκεψώμεθα τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς κατὰ πόλιν πᾶσαν ἐν αἷς κατηγγείλαμεν τὸν λόγον τοῦ κυρίου, πῶς ἔχουσιν. 37 Βαρναβᾶς δὲ ἐβούλετο συμπαραλαβεῖν καὶ τὸν Ἰωάννην τὸν καλούμενον Μᾶρκον· 38 Παῦλος δὲ ἠξίου, τὸν ἀποστάντα ἀπʼ αὐτῶν ἀπὸ Παμφυλίας καὶ μὴ συνελθόντα αὐτοῖς εἰς τὸ ἔργον, μὴ συμπαραλαμβάνειν τοῦτον. 39 ἐγένετο δὲ παροξυσμὸς ὥστε ἀποχωρισθῆναι αὐτοὺς ἀπʼ ἀλλήλων, τόν τε Βαρναβᾶν παραλαβόντα τὸν Μᾶρκον ἐκπλεῦσαι εἰς Κύπρον,

Acts 15:36–39 (LEB) And after some days, Paul said to Barnabas, “Come then,let us return and visit the brothers in every town in which we proclaimed the word of the Lord, to see how they are doing.” 37 Now Barnabas wanted to take John who was called Mark along also, 38 but Paul held the opinion they should not take this one along, who departed from them in Pamphylia and did not accompany them in the work. 39 And a sharp disagreement took place, so that they separated from one another. And Barnabas took along Mark and sailed away to Cyprus,

Notice the shift from calling him John (Mark) in verse 37 to the portrait painted by the participles in v. 38. What a difference! Contrast this to what would have happened if Luke had continued calling him by his proper name.

Master Participles and More . . .

These examples illustrate the power of participles used as nouns or adjectives to paint a dynamic portrait. If you are interested in learning more about how participles and other devices are used to affect how we conceive of things, the chapters on Overspecification and Changed Reference in Discourse Grammar of the Greek New Testament provide a great overview. If you are interested in searching the Greek New Testament for more examples, be sure to check out the Lexham Discourse Greek New Testament. The image just above is taken from the High Definition Commentary: Philippians, a unique project designed to help you better understand and communicate ideas like this.

Next week we will tackle more about the use of participles.

An Interview with Ben Witherington III

In this behind-the-scenes interview, Dr. Ben Witherington III shares insight into his scholarly and personal pursuits. He explains his process for writing a commentary and tells the story of how he discovered old manuscripts of J. B. Lightfoot that had never been published. Dr. Witherington then divulges his love for 1970’s folk rock and his experience working at a record label. He also shares about his love of fiction—what he’s reading, what he’s writing, and how he uses fiction to communicate theology and ethics to a lay audience.


We recorded this interview while Dr. Witherington was in studio, filming his course NT221 The Wisdom of John: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on Johannine Literature for Logos Mobile Education.

The Infinite Hotel: William Lane Craig’s Ingenious Argument for a Finite Universe

In the years since its publication, William Lane Craig’s The Kalām Cosmological Argument has become a favorite of Christian apologists—and has been subject to fierce debate with prominent atheists such as Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris.

In the book, Craig attempts to demonstrate that, at some point, the universe began to exist. This seems simple, but by doing so, he can then argue that the universe was caused to exist by a creator. To prove that the universe had a beginning, Craig employs a paradox conceived by the German mathematician David Hilbert:

 Let us imagine a hotel with a finite number of rooms, and let us assume that all the rooms are occupied. When a new guest arrives and requests a room, the proprietor apologizes, ‘Sorry—all the rooms are full.’

The Tremont House in Boston, Massachusetts was the first hotel to provide indoor plumbing—but, alas, it contained a finite number of rooms.

Of course, if this hotel contained an inifinite number of rooms, this wouldn’t be a problem . . . even if all the rooms were full. Craig explains:

When a new guest arrives and asks for a room, the proprietor exclaims, ‘But of course!’ and shifts the person in room one to room two, the person in room two to room three, the person in room three to room four, and so on . . . The new guest then moves into room one, which has now become vacant as a result of these transpositions.

Because there is an infinite number of rooms in the hotel, the proprietor can continue to shift the guests around in order to free up rooms—even though every room is full! If that concept doesn’t make your brain hurt, perhaps the next part will:

But now let us suppose that an infinite number of new guests arrive, asking for rooms. ‘Certainly! Certainly!’ says the proprietor, and he proceeds to move the person in room one into room two, the person in room two into room four, and the person in room three into room six, the person in room four into eight, and so on . . . In this way, all the odd-numbered rooms become free, and the infinity of new guests can easily be accommodated in them.

William Lane Craig is pretty smart, but he would argue his genius is not "actually infinite"

William Lane Craig is pretty smart, but he would argue his genius is not “actually infinite.”

If you’re having trouble keeping track of all this gerrymandering, don’t feel alone. Mathematicians, philosophers, and theologians have long puzzled over this paradox, but they are in agreement on one thing: such an absurd hotel could never actually exist.

And that is precisely Craig’s point. This seems like a simple conclusion to draw from such a complex, mind-bending thought experiment.  However, it has profound implications. Craig argues that physicists and philosophers who propose a beginningless universe simply cannot be right.

Here’s how he puts it in his introduction to apologetics, Reasonable Faith:

If the universe never began to exist, then prior to the present there have existed an actually infinite number of previous events. Thus, a beginningless series of events in time entails an actually infinite number of things, namely, events.

However, as the paradox of Hilbert’s hotel demonstrates, such a notion is absurd. Having established that the universe must have had a beginning, Craig is free to argue that someone must have caused the universe to exist, namely, God.

Save on the Select Works of William Lane Craig!50144

For one week you can get the Select Works of William Lane Craig (4 vols.) for only $29.99! Including The Kalām Cosmological Argument and The Cosmological Argument from Plato to Leibnizi, this collection is a great introduction to the work of an influential apologist. Hurry—this deal only lasts until Thursday, March 12.

Podcast Roundup: Faithfulness, Counseling, Philippians, and Leviticus

We’ve had some fascinating dialogues in the past few weeks with outstanding professors on the Mobile Ed Conversations Podcast. Here’s a roundup of our conversations with Lane Tipton, Gary Barnes, Jay Sklar, and Robert Sloan Jr.


Dr. Lane Tipton, the Charles W. Krahe Chair Associate Professor of Systematic Theology at Westminster Theological Seminary, talks about becoming faithful rather than trying to become popular. He also shares his excitement about a revival of hermeneutics in the academy.


Dr. Gary Barnes, professor of biblical counseling at Dallas Theological Seminary, talks about his educational journey and about the need for more pastoral counselors in the church today.


Dr. Robert B. Sloan Jr. is the president of Houston Baptist University and previously served as the president and chancellor of Baylor University. He talks about his journey into scholarship, the challenges of Christian higher education, and some of the richest themes in the book of Philippians.
Get Sloan’s courses on Philippians and Pauline theology in the Paul’s Letters Bundle and save over 35% when you pre-order!


Jay Sklar, professor of Old Testament at Covenant Theological Seminary in Saint Louis, talks about why we should study the book of Leviticus and why Leviticus can be so intimidating to us today.

Hear more episodes by subscribing to the podcast on SoundCloud or iTunes.

Then visit Logos.com/Mobile-Ed to find new and upcoming courses by professors like Dr. Sloan and others.

The Deliverance of God: An Interview with Douglas Campbell

douglas-campbell-sept2013-90Recently, I sat down with Dr. Douglas Campbell, Professor of New Testament at Duke Divinity School and author of this month’s Plus One, The Deliverance of God: An Apocalyptic Rereading of Justification in Paul.

DM: What pushed you to write The Deliverance of God? What aspects of current scholarship were you wanting to address in this work?

DC: Well there were a couple of things going on. The thing that was really driving the book was the realization that there’s a fundamental difference between a covenant and a contract. So a covenant, understood in the most theologically constructive sense, is an unconditional relationship in which you covenant to someone – you commit to an unconditional covenant. You initiate a relationship and you stay in a relationship with that person, or that group of people. For good. Permanent. It’s irrevocable. And you have very strong expectations about how people should behave within the covenant. You don’t break it. That’s a fundamentally different account of relationships from a contract, where I enter into a relationship with you only on the proviso that you fulfill certain conditions. And if you don’t fulfill all those conditions, I break off the relationship with you.

Now, think about that. Our society structures most of its public relationships in terms of a contract. Political relationships, legal relationships are contractual. But our most important relationships are covenantal. Our family relationships are covenanted. I have a daughter and I have a son. And they’re not my daughter and my son because they fulfill certain requirements and we’ve entered into a contract of parenting and childhood so that if they fail to fulfill those requirements that relationship will be terminated. My relationships with my daughter and my son are irrevocable. They will always be my son and my daughter. No matter what they do and no matter what I do, I will always be their parent. They will always be my children. And that’s how God relates to us. It’s terribly important that our relationship with God is covenanted because that’s a relationship of love. A contractual relationship is not a relationship of love. It’s a relationship of justice. These two moral narratives are fundamentally incompatible as accounts of God.

I realized a lot of Pauline debates were caught up in this distinction without recognizing it. The old perspective is unfortunately basically a contractual account of how God relates to us. It’s a contractual account of how God relates to humanity, based on works. If you do these things, you’ll be saved, and if you can have faith, you’ll be saved.

In the parts of Paul that I really resonate with, like Romans 5:1-11, God loves us and commits to us in Christ before we do anything right. While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. That is the covenant. So I suddenly realized there was an interpretative collision going on, deep down in the way we were interpreting Paul, which was messing up everything else that we were doing. I had to address it. I had to find out, “Was Paul confused? Was he an old perspective guy deep down all the time? Was he a covenantal thinker all the time?” This is what we want. And the stakes are fairly high here.

And so the book came out of the realization that we can read Paul in a way that is consistently covenantal. We don’t have to pay this price. We don’t have to say that Paul is muddled up. We don’t have to say that Paul was ever committed to a contract. The enthusiasm of some interpreters for contractual salvation has led to them finding that in Paul, but it’s not really there. That’s what led to the book. But it’s quite a deep issue. It’s a big one, it’s broad, it’s complicated.

DM: Based on some push-back that I’ve read regarding your view as a whole, especially Tom Schreiner’s response to your chapter in Four Views on the Apostle Paul, his main critique was that you don’t have a role for judgment in your understanding of Pauline theology. Would you like to respond to that?

DC: Yeah, well he’s wrong. I’ve got plenty of room for judgment. There’s a lot of accountability in what I’m talking about. Everybody in Christ will rise and have to give an account of themselves to God. What’s missing from my account is Tom Schreiner’s version of judgment. I consider this to be a great advantage because I wouldn’t want Tom’s view of judgment to be in my account of the Gospel because I don’t think it’s compatible with the Gospel, because any notion of judgment has to be reconstructed by the Gospel.

I work a lot in justice and prison work, and one of the first things that you learn is that there are a lot of different definitions of justice out there. Some of them are harsh, some of them are nasty, and some of them are kind and constructive. What we need to do as Christians is let our understandings of restoration and accountability be reconstructed by Christ, and by Christology, and by the pressure of our Christian situation, and not bring in our cultural baggage.

I don’t see any indication that Tom’s account of final judgment has been reconstructed by Christology. All I see is a political and cultural override of what Christ is trying to say about justice and judgment. And I think this is a major problem. God is not characterized fundamentally by retribution. God is not characterized fundamentally by the need to punish. If he is, then the doctrine of the Trinity is ruptured, which I think would be a very bad idea. God is certainly characterized by justice conceived in terms of restoration, and covenantal accountability, and transformation, and resistance to evil, and these things are entirely legitimate. So we’re probably a little closer together at these points than he thinks.

DM: At Duke, not only are you training up the next generation of scholars and professors but you’re also training pastors as well. How do you want the next pastoral generation to take the essence of your understanding of Pauline theology and implement that into their congregations in their ministries?

DC: Well I do spend entire semesters on this – it’s huge. Let me just say a few things. I encourage people to really submit themselves and allow God to be in charge of the truth process. Trust God to reveal stuff to you, rest in God. Don’t try and work it out for yourself, don’t try and base it on your own understanding. Kind of, let go and let God, and rest in that. So I think that’s actually very important, because it stops people falling into a set of traps, where you might try and work it out yourself and then what you’re working out proves to be a foundation that collapses. It’s a house of sand. You’ve got to build your house on the rock— on God. And it’s believing that God actually does stuff in your life now, God’s alive, that’s very important. Which sounds kind of basic, but actually standing up in a classroom and saying repeatedly, “God is here now and works in your life and your relationships and the communities,” is actually shocking to some folks. But that’s what needs to be said.

Second, I think this will push you into very practical, very particular relationships. God is interested in friendships, what I call “strange friendships”. He’s interested in Christians that can be flexible enough and confident enough to reach out to people who don’t look like them and to create covenantal relationships with these people. This is how Paul operated. He made friends. He was an expert friend maker and he made friends with very odd people; with prisoners, with women, with hand-workers, with high-status people, with low-status people, with non-Jewish people, with Jewish people. He was always making friends and this is what made the whole thing work. So that’s another thing that I emphasize; friendship evangelism and network evangelism. I talk about that a lot. And going in with the right attitude and acting in the right way within those relationships.

I also emphasize the importance of prisons and the prison-industry. Paul wrote 40% of his letters from an incarceration. And it’s very difficult to understand what that means if you haven’t visited a place of incarceration. Maybe even spent a little bit of time there. Go and hang out with some prisoners as Paul certainly did. This was a very, very big part of his life. And it should be a very big part of the church’s life. So I’m theoretically, but also practically, very strongly committed to getting prison visitation programs going, restoration processes going, restorative justice processes going, re-entry programs going, etc. This is part of what Paul was about, and if you’re not doing it, you’re not getting it.

* * *

the-deliverance-of-god-an-apocalyptic-rereading-of-justification-in-paulThe Deliverance of God is available for only 99 cents during the month of February. You can also get a differing opinion with Justification Reconsidered by Stephen Westerholm, February’s Free Book of the Month.

Get both books today!

The Importance of Prioritizing Your Commentaries

Why prioritize your library?

Screenshot 2015-02-15 14.15.50
Prioritizing your library allows you to pull up the resources you want quickly. The beauty of Logos Bible Software is that it allows you to quickly search thousands of resources. But not all resources are equal. Each of us has a preferred commentary series, like the Evangelical Exegetical Commentary Series, the International Critical Commentary Series (on sale this month) or the Hermeneia and Continental Commentaries. Prioritizing these resources brings them up first in the guides.

Get step-by-step direction on prioritizing your library.

Setup a one or two-volume commentary

A one or two-volume commentary provides a quick survey of the text and is guaranteed to open. Often, time is at a premium. Rather than survey numerous sources, a reliable a one or two-volume commentary provides quick treatment of a passage. It can provide the scholar with a starting point for future study and point him or her n the right direction.

Screenshot 2015-02-15 14.28.13

 

Additionally, what if your preferred commentary set doesn’t have a volume for the book you’re studying? Sometimes, a commentary set only covers a specific set of books, like the JPS Tanakh Commentary Collection. Or, a set only covers part of Scripture, like the IVP New Testament Commentary Series. A one or two-volume commentary is guaranteed to open, regardless of what book you’re in.

Suggested commentaries include:

The Bible Knowledge Commentary is available in most base packages. Additionally, the New Bible Commentary is edited in part by respected scholar, D.A. Carson. However, the recently released in print, Fortress Commentary on the Bible promises to outshine both these works. Unlike either of the other two works, The Fortress Commentary includes a section on the Apocrypha. It is sure to hold a prominent place in any scholar’s library.

Save when you pre-order the Fortress Commentary on the Bible

The Fortress Commentary on the Bible includes a broad array of scholarship from multiple traditions. Additionally, it makes a concerted effort to assume very little on the part of the reader. For example, as Matthew Coomber notes in his introductory section, “Reading the Old Testament in Ancient and Contemporary Contexts”:

Only a handful of my students claim to have been exposed to the stories of the Old Testament outside of either Sunday school or in episodes of the popular cartoon series Veggie Tales. Due to this lack of exposure to the Old Testament, I feel compelled to give them fair warning about what they have gotten themselves into . . . .

The importance of prioritizing a one or two-volume commentary cannot be overstated. Be sure to setup your library today for optimal performance. And now, for a limited time, save $25.00 when you pre-order the Fortress Commentary on the Bible. This exciting work takes critical scholarship to the next level with a rich diversity of perspectives.

Pre-order the Fortress Commentary on the Bible today!

 

Learn to Use Interactive Resources with Logos Academic Training

In this video, Morris Proctor shows you how to use the new Before and After feature, one of the many interactive resources in Logos 6. Morris is our official Logos Bible Software trainer, make sure to check out his newest Mobile Ed course here: Logos Academic Training.

Logos 6 features