Full or nearly full NT Reformed Commentary set/series

Page 1 of 1 (7 items)
This post has 6 Replies | 0 Followers

Posts 3613
Milkman | Forum Activity | Posted: Sat, Mar 11 2017 10:32 AM

Does FL carry a complete or mostly complete sets of Reformed commentaries. Not looking for the "old guys" I have enough of them, but something more current.

I'd prefer several authors and not just one, i.e., Matthew Henry, Lenski...

More pastoral with application and less grammar and syntax. Been there done that.

One thing I've noticed is that there aren't many Reformed commentary sets out there. We have 'evangelical' whatever that means today, we have many RC, and non-evangelical ones too, but not many Reformed ones.

I wonder why? I'd love to see more and I know there are others too. Anyway that's my two cents worth.

Any help with this would be much appreciated.

mm.

mm.

Posts 1079
William Gabriel | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Mar 11 2017 11:06 AM

You may be interested in:

Pillar

Focus on the Bible

There are other sets that Reformed fellows will get a lot from, even if they're not strictly Reformed: NIVAC, NICOT/NT

Posts 82
Joseph | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Mar 11 2017 11:07 AM

Here is a list of Reformed commentary sets that meet your criteria in no particular order. I have defined Reformed as broadly Calvinistic in soteriology and may include different perspectives on a range of other doctrinal issues. 

1. Boice's Expositional Commentary series

2. Reformed Expository commentary series

3. The Bible Speaks today Series

4. Baker's NT Commentary Series

5. McArthur NT Commentary Series

6. ST Andrews Exposition commentary collection

*Please also check out this collection.

Posts 13413
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Mar 11 2017 11:17 AM

Milkman:
One thing I've noticed is that there aren't many Reformed commentary sets out there. We have 'evangelical' whatever that means today, we have many RC, and non-evangelical ones too, but not many Reformed ones.

There are loads, particularly at the pastoral level. They just aren't always labelled as such.

Milkman:
More pastoral with application and less grammar and syntax. Been there done that.

The following sets are pastoral, reformed and evangelical:

  • Baker New Testament Commentary (although only two authors)
  • Boice's Expository Commentary (only one author)
  • EP Study Commentary (slightly technical, but not much)
  • Focus on the Bible Commentary
  • MacArthur NT Commentary (only one author, and virtually dispensational)
  • Mentor Commentaries (perhaps a little technical)
  • Opening Up Commentary (perhaps a little light)
  • Preaching the Word
  • Reformed Expository Commentary
  • Spurgeon Commentaries
  • Welwyn Commentary Series

The following are mostly or implicitly reformed:

  • The Bible Speaks Today
  • IVP NT Commentary
  • New American Commentary
  • NIV Application Commentary
  • Teach the Text
  • Tyndale Commentaries
Posts 3613
Milkman | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Mar 12 2017 9:10 AM

Thanks Guys, much appreciated. 

mm.

Posts 3047
Doc B | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Mar 12 2017 12:57 PM

Mark Barnes:

  • New American Commentary
  • NIV Application Commentary

Mark, I'm curious as to why you rated these two sets (and to a lesser degree, Tyndale) as 'mostly' reformed.  I know of reformed authors in the series, but I'm not sure I would have classified the sets as such.

What did I miss?

(And don't get me wrong, I like all of these sets and use them.  I'm just wondering if I missed something.)

My thanks to the various MVPs. Without them Logos would have died early. They were the only real help available.

Faithlife Corp. owes the MVPs free resources for life.

Posts 13413
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Mar 12 2017 1:25 PM

It rather depends on what you mean by 'reformed', of course. I'm thinking mostly of soteriology, not covenant.

By 'mostly' reformed, I didn't mean that most of the volumes were reformed, whereas some were not. I meant that most of the comments throughout the volumes were compatible with reformed theology, whereas some comments were not. I do agree with you that these two sets aren't explicitly or consistently or self-consciously reformed. I've found a lot of the NAC stuff, whilst not covenantal, is either Calvinistic or at least not Arminian. 

Page 1 of 1 (7 items) | RSS