The Lutheran Study Bible

[Dadoo]

Brother Jed's church order at the Severeville Full Gospel Holiness Church had three orders: been bit, not been bit yet, and got bit and died.

That's Sevierville, Brother Kruse.  (Named for John Sevier, pronounced same as severe, first governor of the State of Franklin, soon known as Tennessee.)  But you'd be mighty welcome at the Voice of Victory Full Gospel Church, with or without your own copperheads.

With all the hysterians it is always good to know that there are some historians present as well. 

[Dave_Poedel]

By the way,  there's a good review of TLSB on The Internet Monk's blog:  http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/some-thoughts-on-lutheranism-and-evangelicalism-a-brief-review-of-the-lutheran-study-bible

WOW, that was a good read....and the iMonk et al expressed my great frustration that we have kept the amazing resources currently being produced by CPH the best kept secret out there.

With all of our sectarian craziness (and we are definitely experts at that art form) the theology "on the books" is awesome and amazing, and a wonderful gift to the Church Catholic.  As was so gently put, the LCMS has a real problem with "knowing" ourselves to be good, right and salutary.  As a friend from another of my vocational fields in an earlier life used to ask me" Don't you ever get tired of being right?"  My response was, "No", to which he replied "Well, I do".  That taught me a lesson in humility that was lacking in my medical knowledge and ability to apply it.  I have striven to carry that humility into my vocation as a Pastor, and many folks offer thanks and appreciation for that striving.  Perhaps I could find a way to share this striving, without getting full of myself as a result?  Nah, you all will never let that happen, for which I am thankful.

[Daniel L. Gard]

 Perhaps I could find a way to share this striving, without getting full of myself as a result?  Nah, you all will never let that happen, for which I am thankful.

Cool. Now I know what my purpose driven life is to be about: keeping Dave from getting to full of himself! 

[Rik]

While I don't yet have The Lutheran Study Bible, I do have a copy of the 48 page Sampler.  It appears as thought TLSB has Biblical information not available anywhere else!!! 

On p. 16 of the Sampler, under "Reading Genesis" we are informed that "Bright orange, purple, and red fruit droop from branches like heavy drops of morning dew.  The trees bow with the weight, welcoming the glorious face of the sun.  Light glimmers through the branches stirring in the breeze..."

From what text do we get the colors of the fruit in the garden of Eden?  The Masoretic Text?  Or is that found in the Septuagint?

Or was this information determined from DNA samples from archeological finds?  Actually, no doubt, a church in Lutherland would have had samples of fruit from the original trees of the garden of Eden among their prized relic collections!

On a more serious note, I would venture to say that the more fiction is interjected, even into the commentary, the more it takes away from the non-fictional nature of Holy Scripture, making it all the easier for some to assert that it is all symbolic or poetic language anyway, and doesn't matter whether it really happened or not.

After all, if it weren't for "Adam Lay Ybounden" (15th century text), we wouldn't know that the forbidden fruit had really been an apple!

"Adam lay ybounden,
Bounden in a bond;
Four thousand winter,
Thought he not too long.

And all was for an apple,
An apple that he took.
As clerkes finden,
Written in their book..."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Lay_Ybounden

[Dave_Poedel]

 Perhaps I could find a way to share this striving, without getting full of myself as a result?  Nah, you all will never let that happen, for which I am thankful.


Cool. Now I know what my purpose driven life is to be about: keeping Dave from getting to full of himself! 

As you were, Chaplain...

[Weedon]

Rik,

You have laid your finger on one area that I think TLSB is less than helpful:  those goofy literary attempts at intros.  The good stuff in each case starts with Luther's assessment of the various books - I've just found the "story like" intros to be a most odd addition.  Nevertheless, that's about all I've found to raise an objection to in the work so far...  

Dave,

Thanks for linking to Spencer.  That was a GREAT review and so danged right about the need to bust out of the Lutheran ghetto with this stuff!

Pax!

[EarlOfOrmond]

Me not.  I ordered the normal hardback.  Where's mine?!?! 


 
[[Yes, yes, Paul.  I know that it'll probably show up tomorrow.]]

I would raise *holy hell* with Pr. McCain if I were you, esp. since you have good eyes.  Give him and Pr. Englebrecht what for since you were slighted and haven't got your Bible.   

I believe Brother Yakimow is in a different shipping zone. Also, the distribution team is filling a lot of orders all at once. I think they are going out in the order the purchases were received. That may have affected the arrival time. I would be interested to read people's reactions to the book in this forum.

In Christ,

Rev. Edward A. Engelbrecht, STM
Concordia Publishing House
Senior Editor for Professional and Academic Books
and Bible Resources

General Editor for The Lutheran Study Bible

I have the Augsburg Fortress version.  There is some good stuff in it, outside of the fact that the NRSV is not my preferred translation, but a great deal of the commentary, especially where homosexuality is concerned, is VERY revisionist and in some cases (1 Cor 6) directly contradicts the NRSV text.

Also, the "gender-neutrality" gets up my pipe.  Like the ELW, it refuses to assign a male pronoun to God the Father.

It's now sitting on my shelf, where it will probably remain.  I prefer my original Concordia Self-Study Bible, my REB Oxford Study Bible and my ESV Study Bible (even though it weighs a ton).

I haven't ordered the CPH version yet, but it's almost inevitable that I will.

My big gripe with BOTH versions: no Apocrypha/Deuterocanon, which I don't get, since both ESV and NRSV translate them.

[Scott6]

My big gripe with BOTH versions: no Apocrypha/Deuterocanon, which I don't get, since both ESV and NRSV translate them.

More good things may be in store...

From the CPH website FAQ on TLSB:

Does The Lutheran Study Bible include the Apocrypha?
No, it does not, though it does contain an explanation of the history between the two Testaments and an explanation of the books that were written during this time and traditionally included in Lutheran Bibles since the first edition of Luther’s Bible in 1534, continuing up the time that The Missouri Synod moved from German to English, at which time, the Apocrypha was no longer included. We did not feel it was wise to try to reintroduce these books to the English speaking Lutheran Church by including them in The Lutheran Study Bible since the vast majority of Lutherans are entirely unfamiliar with them. Rather, we are considering producing a separate volume detailing what these books are, offering more extensive history and background for them and including the books themselves. This will be a better way to introduce Lutherans to the heritage of including these books, which Luther said in his Bible that thought they are not canonical like the other books of the Bible, they are certainly good for reading.

http://www.cph.org/cphstore/pages/resources/tlsb/faqs.asp

Amen and amen.  Let it be so.

[Steven Tibbetts]

My big gripe with BOTH versions: no Apocrypha/Deuterocanon, which I don't get, since both ESV and NRSV translate them.

A better defense, IMHO, than CPH's own would have been that the ESV translation of the deuterocanonical books was not available until early 2009.

Pax, Steven+

[Mike Bennett]

I haven't ordered the CPH version yet, but it's almost inevitable that I will.

Unsolicited advice for anybody over 40 who doesn't have a bad back:  Order the Large Print edition.

Mike Bennett
Age 65
Ordered the Standard edition
Needs to sit in very good light to read it

[Iowegian]

Thanks for linking to Spencer.  That was a GREAT review and so danged right about the need to bust out of the Lutheran ghetto with this stuff!

There was an interesting reply from Pr. McCain with some 'inside baseball' regarding some of the decisions behind TLSB here:

http://theblackeagle.org/blog/2009/09/imonks-lutheran-frustrations/

(Disclosure:  this is my blog site.)

[Brian Stoffregen]

My big gripe with BOTH versions: no Apocrypha/Deuterocanon, which I don't get, since both ESV and NRSV translate them.

A better defense, IMHO, than CPH's own would have been that the ESV translation of the deuterocanonical books was not available until early 2009.

From what I've read, it is Oxford Press who did the deuterocanonical books, not Crossways who did the ESV.

[Edward Engelbrecht]

Rik,

You have laid your finger on one area that I think TLSB is less than helpful:  those goofy literary attempts at intros.  The good stuff in each case starts with Luther's assessment of the various books - I've just found the "story like" intros to be a most odd addition.  Nevertheless, that's about all I've found to raise an objection to in the work so far...  

Dave,

Thanks for linking to Spencer.  That was a GREAT review and so danged right about the need to bust out of the Lutheran ghetto with this stuff!

Pax!

Thanks Rik and Will for your feedback on the introductions in The Lutheran Study Bible. Decisions about what to include in the introductions were based on research with Study Bible users. I’m not able to share specifics about CPH R & D but I think I can give you some perspective by telling you a few stories.

First Story
In 2005 when we published “Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions,” I was berated by a seminary colleague for compromising the purity of the Confessions and “dumbing down” the Confessions. After the book sold about 50,000 copies, I saw the same colleague again, who told me, “Well, of course, a popular edition of the Book of Concord makes sense. Perfectly obvious.”

Second Story
This week a friend stopped me to say how excited she was to get into the new Study Bible. She told me that she was gathering with some other folks to use it in morning devotions. They would be reading---get this---the introductions to the biblical books as devotions.

I invite you to ponder these two stories. They will help you understand. : )

In Christ,
Rev. Edward A. Engelbrecht, STM
Senior Editor for Professional and Academic Books
and Bible Resources

General Editor for The Lutheran Study Bible

[James Gustafson]

Rik,

You have laid your finger on one area that I think TLSB is less than helpful:  those goofy literary attempts at intros.  The good stuff in each case starts with Luther's assessment of the various books - I've just found the "story like" intros to be a most odd addition.  Nevertheless, that's about all I've found to raise an objection to in the work so far...  

Dave,

Thanks for linking to Spencer.  That was a GREAT review and so danged right about the need to bust out of the Lutheran ghetto with this stuff!

Pax!

Thanks Rik and Will for your feedback on the introductions in The Lutheran Study Bible. Decisions about what to include in the introductions were based on research with Study Bible users. I’m not able to share specifics about CPH R & D but I think I can give you some perspective by telling you a few stories.

First Story
In 2005 when we published “Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions,” I was berated by a seminary colleague for compromising the purity of the Confessions and “dumbing down” the Confessions. After the book sold about 50,000 copies, I saw the same colleague again, who told me, “Well, of course, a popular edition of the Book of Concord makes sense. Perfectly obvious.”

Second Story
This week a friend stopped me to say how excited she was to get into the new Study Bible. She told me that she was gathering with some other folks to use it in morning devotions. They would be reading---get this---the introductions to the biblical books as devotions.

I invite you to ponder these two stories. They will help you understand. : )

In Christ,
Rev. Edward A. Engelbrecht, STM
Senior Editor for Professional and Academic Books
and Bible Resources

General Editor for The Lutheran Study Bible

 

God Bless Us, Every One.
-Tiny Tim

[Jim Butler]

Rik,

You have laid your finger on one area that I think TLSB is less than helpful:  those goofy literary attempts at intros.  The good stuff in each case starts with Luther's assessment of the various books - I've just found the "story like" intros to be a most odd addition.  Nevertheless, that's about all I've found to raise an objection to in the work so far...  

Dave,

Thanks for linking to Spencer.  That was a GREAT review and so danged right about the need to bust out of the Lutheran ghetto with this stuff!

Pax!

As for the Lutheran ghetto...

When I did my D.Min. ten years ago at Gordon-Conwell, my OT prof was Walter Kaiser, Jr., one of the truly great evangelical OT scholars. During one class, he looked over at me and asked, "Jim, why don't your seminaries let your professors write? You have so many great men: Walt Maier III, Paul Raabe, Horace Hummel, Andy Bartelt" (I was shocked that he knew them by name!). We need their knowledge. We need the Missouri Synod to provide theological leadership!"

I'm pleased to see that we are now doing that: the Concordia Commentary series, the Lutheran Study Bible, and the Chris Brown additions to Luther's Works. I think this stuff will have an opportunity to break out of that ghetto as others hear about it and use it.