Thank you for making this review. I've been looking forward to it since you told me you were going to do it.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting, Paul the Pilgrim!

"I was puzzled by [James White's] puzzlement." Aptly put.

@Cataphract3

Жыл бұрын

I'm puzzled by him in general

@servantofchristSDG

Жыл бұрын

@@Cataphract3 The defense of biblicism thing lately has puzzled me.

@Cataphract3

Жыл бұрын

@@servantofchristSDG I imagine its defenders consider it another one of those culture war issues to protect against "progressive or woke" ideologies or whatever. It's less about biblicism itself and more about the optics.

This will be a good addition to my library collection on Reformation.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting, Orthodox Pilgrim. I think it was a good addition to mine. I anticipate that I'll consult it often.

This is a very interesting proposition and even designed for my older eyes. Thanks for sharing this title R Grant Jones.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting, David!

You’re a naughty boy, tempting me to buy this book; and I’m a naughty, having bought it! I have been doing a lot of thinking recently around two topics : 1. a clear move is taking place towards “evangelical catholicism”; and 2. there is growing interest in Biblical Unitarianism. I am guessing(!) that our author would cheer 1. and boo 2.! 😊

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

I don't doubt your guess is right. Thanks for commenting, alex!

Excellent review - thanks so much for this!

@RGrantJones

11 ай бұрын

Thanks for the kind comment, Paul!

Thank you for this, I do enjoy your book reviews.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

You're welcome, Ryan. Thanks for commenting!

That sounds like an interesting read. Hopefully it will be added to my bookshelf soon.

@alex-qe8qn

Жыл бұрын

We must make some comments once we have read it!

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

I definitely enjoyed reading it. Thanks for commenting, Zach!

This book looks excellent. Thanks for the review! More book reviews please

Excellent review. You peaked my interest in this work.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the kind comment, Adam!

Mr. Jones, please please please review the Word On Fire Bible. It would be so great! I found your channel recently and it has been such a blessing. Thank you for your efforts, they are deeply appreciated. God bless you!

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for that encouraging comment, Stefan, and for the recommendation! I've heard about the Word on Fire Bible, and others have recommended it to me, but I haven't made it a priority because it seemed to me that a number of good reviews were already available. And Tim Wildsmith reviewed it more recently. But if I can locate the publisher's contact information, I may request a review copy for each of the volumes.

Thanks so much for reviewing this volume. I, too, was puzzled by James White’s puzzlement. Have you any plans to review the CSB Life Counsel Bible? A while back, you reviewed the Reformation Heritage Study Bible. In that review, you expressed your appreciation for the articles on practical Christian living. I am eager to hear whether you find the new CSB Life Counsel Bible similarly helpful.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting, Kenneth, and for the recommendation. I'll look into the CSB Life Counsel Bible.

I read this behemoth this summer as well.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting!

@alex-qe8qn

Жыл бұрын

What did you make of it?

@paul-the-pilgrim

Жыл бұрын

Speaking of behemoth books, and based on your name, have you ever read through Gill's 'A Complete Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity' in its entirety?

@Particularly_John_Gill

Жыл бұрын

@@paul-the-pilgrim I have not at this time. I use his Biblical commentary as my primary commentary. I recently purchased the first two volumes of his works (which include 'The Cause of God and Truth' Parts 1-4) that are in the process of being published by Particular Baptist Heritage Books, but Gill's 'Complete Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity' will be volumes 4 & 5 which have not been published by them yet.

@Particularly_John_Gill

Жыл бұрын

@@alex-qe8qn I quite enjoyed it, but I'm also a bit biased as I tend to agree with Dr. Barrett's historical interpretation and methods.

Thank you for your review. Your audio has had some static the past few videos.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for letting me know. I didn't hear any in this one, but I did hear a peculiar background sound in one of the recent Bible reviews.

I've been looking for a work that presents a good argument for Protestants being the "actual" catholic church and in continuity with the early church as opposed to Roman claims. Maybe this is it?

@RGrantJones

11 ай бұрын

The author does present some evidence of continuity, but he's also aware of discontinuities. He doesn't address the larger question of criteria that would allow us to determine whether a group or organization has maintained its identity through change.

I have an interesting question. Before the death of Jesus and closing of both Jewish and Christian canons of the Bible, I think there was no tradition of commentaries on the Bible in ancient Israelite kingdoms. I think they had written extra Biblical material like Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha and other writings. Similarly there was NT apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha in first century AD, but both Rabbinic and Apostolic/Church Fathers commentary tradition developed after 70 AD, , is this a correct statement?

@RGrantJones

8 ай бұрын

The New Testament suggests that the Pharisees had an settled way of interpreting the Law, but I'm not sure whether that interpretation was in written or oral form, nor whether it would qualify as a commentary. That's a very good question, but one for which I don't have a good answer.

@hassanmirza2392

8 ай бұрын

@@RGrantJones Both Rabbinic Judaism and Christianity are 2000 years old, before that there was Temple Judaism of ancient Israel. If they had written commentaries or something similar to Midrash, there will be some manuscripts available. I read something about it, all I can find are the extra-Biblical sources like Apocrypha, and Pseudepigrapha or Greek and Aramaic (Targamum in Aramaic is similar to Arabic word 'Tarjama' or translation) translations of OT books. Maybe there was no extensive commentary tradition. On Rabbinic tradition and its comparison with competing Christian one, the essays in Oxford Jewish Study Bible are really good. It states that Christian interpretation was much more systematic, theologized and allegorical than the Jewish one. The Jewish commentaries were a lot of times about the Law and its intricacies and applications. Christian ones about Logos-Jesus, and reconciliation of NT with Hebrew Bible.

Very good review- I was wondering, have you looked at various systemic theory authors? I’m very interested in the reformation, yet, being Southern Baptist, we pretty much plow our on field as it were in gathering any information as it pertains to the reformation or where did baptists gather themselves. Always a pleasure Dr.Jones, your translation continuum must be printed off or a download.

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Thanks for commenting, Prentiss! No, I'm much more interested in history than in systematic theology. I believe Michael Barrett's next book will be a systematic theology, and I may read it to get more insight into why he believes classical Trinitarian theology is so important (and the eternal subordination of the Son to be avoided).

@alex-qe8qn

Жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJonesTo me, Nicene 325 is definitely subordinationist. Subordinationism was a classic Anglican position - witness Bishop Bull’s classic “Defence of the Nicene Faith”.

I wanted to buy a one volume Protestant Bible commentary, which is conservative in flavour. I thought about getting Moody Bible commentary, but it has Dispensational Theology , which is similar to the theology of Scofield Bible, I have read that one should avoid such kind of Christian Bibles. But Is there any Covenant Theology Bible commentary out there? Are MacArthur or DA Carson Commentaries based on Covenant Theology?

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

Hassan - MacArthur's commentary is unlikely to present covenant theology - at least not consistently, since MacArthur himself is a dispensationalist. Anything Carson has written is probably very good, but I don't know what he thinks about covenant theology in particular.

@hassanmirza2392

Жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones I meant any Bible commentary which is moderate and not dispensation theology oriented. Which Protestant Bible commentary will be conservative yet academic? I have noticed that Oxford Catholic Study Bible and Jerome Bible Commentary might be in the category of Harper Collins and Oxford Bibles/commentaries which are accepted by mainline protestants and reform-conservative Jews. I am surprised that Catholics have also such theologians who are liberals, I remember you have mentioned this in your excellent video reviews. It is fine to read these commentaries too, to get a broader perspective of Bible, but conservative yet moderate is always better.

@ardensvirens

Жыл бұрын

The Reformation Study Bible in the ESV or NKJV, or the KJV Reformation Heritage Study Bible, would be what you’re looking for. The former is more classically Reformed (or Covenantal) and the latter more Puritan Reformed. Both include the Creeds and some Reformed Confessions of Faith. The Lutheran Study Bible could also be an option.

@mj6493

Ай бұрын

@@ardensvirens I just want to point out that The Lutheran Study Bible published by Concordia Publishing House is more substantive than the Lutheran Study Bible published by Augsburg Fortress.

Hi Mr. Jones. Thanks for sharing this. I watched this video twice looking for certain topics but didn't see them. Is there mention of the importance of Apostolic Succession? I assume not since their primary go-to people are St. Augustine for certain things and Thomas Auinas for others (mentioned in this book's Part 1 Ch 5).

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

I don't recall that topic being discussed, though my memory isn't what it once was. "Apostolic succession" doesn't rate a subject index entry, nor does "bishop."

@shawnbrewer7

Жыл бұрын

@@RGrantJones Thank you, Sir. That tells me all I need to know.

Thank you for this review, doctor. It has long been my view that over 1,500 years layers of superfluous and extra-biblical doctrine made its way into RC theology, and the Reformation was at its heart a movement to get back to the true catholic apostolic faith. I am glad to see this book affirm that. As you say, though, I am sure our RC friends would disagree. Too bad they are wrong. 😉

@RGrantJones

Жыл бұрын

😅 Yes, and I hope they read this book. Thanks for commenting!

@hassanmirza2392

Жыл бұрын

I am a Muslim, but I think every interpretation/sect of Christianity or Islam are human attempts to revive/understand/getting-back whatever the first practitioners of these faiths were doing, and no human interpretation can be 100% infallible. I think the Protestant tradition is much more Bible focused than Catholic and Orthodox traditions. Catholic and Orthodox churches give equal importance to the Bible and their respective traditions. As I understand, Protestants consider reformed tradition to be subservient to the Bible, and hold Biblical text supreme.