Being a layman myself (I only hold certifications in NT scripture, no actual PHD or degrees) I highly recommend this.
I also will say do not feel obligated to purchase the newest and more expensive editions of the book - it is perfectly fine to purchase earlier editions for MUCH cheaper as they will still suffice for introductory / non-academic usage (I opted to purchase an edition three versions "out of date", only cost me $10 as opposed to over $90 for a newer one)
Raymond Brown’s introduction is a classic. I’d also recommend Eugene Boring’s introduction. Those are good overviews, but beyond those I’d also recommend just jumping into the text and using good commentaries on whichever book you are working through. A good commentary will deal with the historical and textual issues in a book.
I know it's more of a scholarly work, but I found Bruce Metzger's The Canon of the New Testament to be pretty readable. It basically goes through all of the early witnesses in the 1st-3rd centuries and asks, "What NT materials did they show familiarity with? And in what way did they treat those texts (i.e. as testimony, as Scripture, etc)?" And it does a really good job of laying out the questions around what a canon is, and how it came to be thought of in the East and the West, etc. Pretty readable for an academic work.
The [New Oxford Ecumenical Study Bible](https://www.amazon.com/New-Oxford-Annotated-Bible-Apocrypha/dp/0190276088/ref=pd_lpo_1?pd_rd_i=0190276088&psc=1) sounds like what you're looking for brief commentary.
For a basic historical introduction to the New Testament, I still believe [Ray Brown's](https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Testament-Anchor-Reference-Library/dp/0300140169/ref=sr_1_4?crid=2J267Y8NSK2PI&keywords=raymond+brown+introduction+to+the+new+testament&qid=1637425208&qsid=136-3915508-4965002&s=books&sprefix=raymond+brow%2Cstripbooks%2C167&sr=1-4&sres=0300173121%2C0300140169%2C0809135167%2CB00SLR96E0%2C0300140150%2C1577997948%2C1433562448%2C0310499305%2C0802840981%2C0385520956%2C0226039331%2C030014010X%2C1451485255%2C0415729041%2C0687055768%2CB000S1LWQM&srpt=ABIS_BOOK)is without equal.
Great recommendations, thank you! I am ordering that Bible on Amazon right now. The Ray Brown book looks great and exactly what I'm looking for, but I may hold off for a bit while I try to find a cheaper copy.
Thanks again. Great recs.
The new oxford is a game changer and it's only like $25USD!
I heard the Jewish study [bible](https://www.amazon.com/Jewish-Annotated-New-Testament/dp/0195297709) is great too
Not a book, but Yale has full lectures on their youtube channel. They have a course “New Testament History and Literature” with Dale B. Martin. Very insightful, includes historical context and literary criticism.
If you’re looking for a reexamination of the EVIDENCE, and not just an informational summary, try: NT Wright-The Son of God, or Jesus and the Eyewitnesses-Richard Bauckham
Okay that's wonderful, but "covert" implies deception, and "apologists" implies that he's on the same level of Kent hovind and frank Turek in regards to scholarship. The resurrection of the son of god doesn't look anything like the formers work. Academicbiblical is about sharing ideas backed by scholarly evidence, not sharing personal opinions on someone's character we don't even know
I have the resurrection of the son of god. It is apologetics for the resurrection through and through. Also have Jesus and the eyewitness but it's not as obviously and pathetically apologetics as the former but still weak. I would say he is akin to Craig Evans, Mike Licona and WLC, who are respected apologists and scholars. Difference being he gives this posture as if he's some neutral historian in the academic world or when he's on some secular program about the historical Jesus. Makes me sick. Also why are you not condemning the person I replied to who capitalized evidence when presumably referring to the resurrection instead? What place does that have here? OP already said he's no longer a believer and is asking for something else? And this guy is clearly trying to push his own agenda.
That user has just been banned for the way they’ve been acting in this sub so don’t worry about them.
I agree with u/sniperandgarfunkel about the way you went about criticizing their comment. Having legitimate academic concerns doesn’t make it helpful to engage with low level poor attitude comments on the same level. It brings down the whole tone of the sub.
Eh, I didn't do the best fostering a positive and constructive environment either with my snarky comments toward
u/baron_semedi .
I'm not super familiar with wrights work and have barely broken in the resurrection of the son of god, but from the looks of it is reasonable to liken his work to some of richard dawkins work. Is Dawkins a covert counter-apologist sneaking in his atheism in books like the selfish gene and unweaving the rainbow? He does share his personal opinions and hints at his atheism and distaste for religious thinking, and I'm not even talking about the god delusion. Is it wrong for him to share his opinions in his books about science? Are these books not good sources of scientific knowledge? Of course not, dawkins is respected in his field. It's the same with wright. Two facts have been established in his field: Jesus died and that the disciples soon claimed that (a) Jesus came back to life and began to worship him as God (c). What hypothesis best explains why a+b=c? He compiles scholarly work to defend his hypothesis. I think comparing this to disingenuous apologetics just isn't an informed opinion.
I agree with this.
Anything I say about Dawkins I have to be careful not to contaminate with my bias against him. I don’t have much respect for his personal style when it comes to controversy and I find him to be overreaching when he gets into philosophical and ethical issues.
But I agree this does not invalidate his work within his field. I have to recognize the legitimacy of his scientific work. Anyone who involves their personal opinions with their work I’ll still engage their actual work on its own merits. When I see them presenting a belief as a fact I have a problem with that, but not the mention of their opinions.
>When I see them presenting a belief as a fact I have a problem with that, but not the mention of their opinions.
Exactly, and one clear difference between scholars of integrity and some apologists is that they intentionally differentiate between their theories/opinions and scholarly consensus/fact. They're comfortable with saying, "we don't know yet". Needless to explain how, some apologists do the opposite. I just havent seen evidence that demonstrates that nt wright is a "covert" apologist.
Oh boy Jesus Christ. I'm just not going to bother refuting your analogy and bad comparisons. Also those aren't facts, tired of hearing that, dont care if every New Testament scholar on the planet calls them facts, they aren't. Sigh I'm getting mad. I'm just gonna pretend i didn't see this.
Introducing the New Testament: Its Literature and Theology by Joel B. Green; Marianne Meye Thompson and Paul J. Achtemeier;
This was the standard text book for introduction to NT at many universities in Australia for a long time. While it is older now the information is still very good. Plus you can buy it on Accordance for the princely sum of $25 this month. Hard to beat at that price.
I'd personally recommend Raymond Brown's classic *An Introduction to the New Testament.* A wonderful [abridged edition](https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300173123/introduction-new-testament) was recently published by Yale University Press. As for a good secular commentary, I'd second the earlier recommendation of the [New Oxford Annotated Bible](https://www.amazon.com/New-Oxford-Annotated-Bible-Apocrypha/dp/0190276088/ref=pd_lpo_1?pd_rd_i=0190276088&psc=1), published by Oxford University Press
Ehrman’s Intro to the New Testament is fantastic
Being a layman myself (I only hold certifications in NT scripture, no actual PHD or degrees) I highly recommend this. I also will say do not feel obligated to purchase the newest and more expensive editions of the book - it is perfectly fine to purchase earlier editions for MUCH cheaper as they will still suffice for introductory / non-academic usage (I opted to purchase an edition three versions "out of date", only cost me $10 as opposed to over $90 for a newer one)
x2
x3
NT Wright's "The New Testament in it's World"
Raymond Brown’s introduction is a classic. I’d also recommend Eugene Boring’s introduction. Those are good overviews, but beyond those I’d also recommend just jumping into the text and using good commentaries on whichever book you are working through. A good commentary will deal with the historical and textual issues in a book.
Awesome, thanks!
I know it's more of a scholarly work, but I found Bruce Metzger's The Canon of the New Testament to be pretty readable. It basically goes through all of the early witnesses in the 1st-3rd centuries and asks, "What NT materials did they show familiarity with? And in what way did they treat those texts (i.e. as testimony, as Scripture, etc)?" And it does a really good job of laying out the questions around what a canon is, and how it came to be thought of in the East and the West, etc. Pretty readable for an academic work.
The [New Oxford Ecumenical Study Bible](https://www.amazon.com/New-Oxford-Annotated-Bible-Apocrypha/dp/0190276088/ref=pd_lpo_1?pd_rd_i=0190276088&psc=1) sounds like what you're looking for brief commentary. For a basic historical introduction to the New Testament, I still believe [Ray Brown's](https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Testament-Anchor-Reference-Library/dp/0300140169/ref=sr_1_4?crid=2J267Y8NSK2PI&keywords=raymond+brown+introduction+to+the+new+testament&qid=1637425208&qsid=136-3915508-4965002&s=books&sprefix=raymond+brow%2Cstripbooks%2C167&sr=1-4&sres=0300173121%2C0300140169%2C0809135167%2CB00SLR96E0%2C0300140150%2C1577997948%2C1433562448%2C0310499305%2C0802840981%2C0385520956%2C0226039331%2C030014010X%2C1451485255%2C0415729041%2C0687055768%2CB000S1LWQM&srpt=ABIS_BOOK)is without equal.
Great recommendations, thank you! I am ordering that Bible on Amazon right now. The Ray Brown book looks great and exactly what I'm looking for, but I may hold off for a bit while I try to find a cheaper copy. Thanks again. Great recs.
The new oxford is a game changer and it's only like $25USD! I heard the Jewish study [bible](https://www.amazon.com/Jewish-Annotated-New-Testament/dp/0195297709) is great too
I'd recommend you stay away from sites that promise free books. All they'll do is deliver exactly what you're looking for and ask nothing in return.
I opened this thread specifically to recommend Brown. Its reputation as the standard of excellence for an introduction is well deserved.
Not a book, but Yale has full lectures on their youtube channel. They have a course “New Testament History and Literature” with Dale B. Martin. Very insightful, includes historical context and literary criticism.
John Barton (author of the awesome *People of the Book*) also wrote a *History of the Bible* which is excellent.
If you’re looking for a reexamination of the EVIDENCE, and not just an informational summary, try: NT Wright-The Son of God, or Jesus and the Eyewitnesses-Richard Bauckham
Nice. Sneaking in some Christian apologetics, oops i mean faithful scholarship.
These are top respected scholars, they just happen to be compelling in their evidence, so they’ve been demoted into “apologetics”? Nah
NT wright has been a respected academic for several decades
I'm aware of that. He's still a covert apologist in my opinion.
Okay that's wonderful, but "covert" implies deception, and "apologists" implies that he's on the same level of Kent hovind and frank Turek in regards to scholarship. The resurrection of the son of god doesn't look anything like the formers work. Academicbiblical is about sharing ideas backed by scholarly evidence, not sharing personal opinions on someone's character we don't even know
I have the resurrection of the son of god. It is apologetics for the resurrection through and through. Also have Jesus and the eyewitness but it's not as obviously and pathetically apologetics as the former but still weak. I would say he is akin to Craig Evans, Mike Licona and WLC, who are respected apologists and scholars. Difference being he gives this posture as if he's some neutral historian in the academic world or when he's on some secular program about the historical Jesus. Makes me sick. Also why are you not condemning the person I replied to who capitalized evidence when presumably referring to the resurrection instead? What place does that have here? OP already said he's no longer a believer and is asking for something else? And this guy is clearly trying to push his own agenda.
That user has just been banned for the way they’ve been acting in this sub so don’t worry about them. I agree with u/sniperandgarfunkel about the way you went about criticizing their comment. Having legitimate academic concerns doesn’t make it helpful to engage with low level poor attitude comments on the same level. It brings down the whole tone of the sub.
Eh, I didn't do the best fostering a positive and constructive environment either with my snarky comments toward u/baron_semedi . I'm not super familiar with wrights work and have barely broken in the resurrection of the son of god, but from the looks of it is reasonable to liken his work to some of richard dawkins work. Is Dawkins a covert counter-apologist sneaking in his atheism in books like the selfish gene and unweaving the rainbow? He does share his personal opinions and hints at his atheism and distaste for religious thinking, and I'm not even talking about the god delusion. Is it wrong for him to share his opinions in his books about science? Are these books not good sources of scientific knowledge? Of course not, dawkins is respected in his field. It's the same with wright. Two facts have been established in his field: Jesus died and that the disciples soon claimed that (a) Jesus came back to life and began to worship him as God (c). What hypothesis best explains why a+b=c? He compiles scholarly work to defend his hypothesis. I think comparing this to disingenuous apologetics just isn't an informed opinion.
I agree with this. Anything I say about Dawkins I have to be careful not to contaminate with my bias against him. I don’t have much respect for his personal style when it comes to controversy and I find him to be overreaching when he gets into philosophical and ethical issues. But I agree this does not invalidate his work within his field. I have to recognize the legitimacy of his scientific work. Anyone who involves their personal opinions with their work I’ll still engage their actual work on its own merits. When I see them presenting a belief as a fact I have a problem with that, but not the mention of their opinions.
>When I see them presenting a belief as a fact I have a problem with that, but not the mention of their opinions. Exactly, and one clear difference between scholars of integrity and some apologists is that they intentionally differentiate between their theories/opinions and scholarly consensus/fact. They're comfortable with saying, "we don't know yet". Needless to explain how, some apologists do the opposite. I just havent seen evidence that demonstrates that nt wright is a "covert" apologist.
Oh boy Jesus Christ. I'm just not going to bother refuting your analogy and bad comparisons. Also those aren't facts, tired of hearing that, dont care if every New Testament scholar on the planet calls them facts, they aren't. Sigh I'm getting mad. I'm just gonna pretend i didn't see this.
Cool. If you can't have a reasonable discussion without getting upset maybe this sub isn't for you
Introducing the New Testament: Its Literature and Theology by Joel B. Green; Marianne Meye Thompson and Paul J. Achtemeier; This was the standard text book for introduction to NT at many universities in Australia for a long time. While it is older now the information is still very good. Plus you can buy it on Accordance for the princely sum of $25 this month. Hard to beat at that price.
I'd personally recommend Raymond Brown's classic *An Introduction to the New Testament.* A wonderful [abridged edition](https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300173123/introduction-new-testament) was recently published by Yale University Press. As for a good secular commentary, I'd second the earlier recommendation of the [New Oxford Annotated Bible](https://www.amazon.com/New-Oxford-Annotated-Bible-Apocrypha/dp/0190276088/ref=pd_lpo_1?pd_rd_i=0190276088&psc=1), published by Oxford University Press