Favorite commentary Series from a Reformed Perspective

Page 1 of 1 (7 items)
This post has 6 Replies | 2 Followers

Posts 169
Pastor James | Forum Activity | Posted: Fri, Jan 4 2013 7:36 AM

I know individual volumes vary in quality, but overall what is your favorite commentary series from a reformed perspective?

Posts 0
Christ Alone | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jan 4 2013 7:58 AM

Do not mean to be evasive, but it depends on which book I am studying and how I am studying it ...


http://thirdmill.org/answers/answer.asp/file/40515

http://thirdmill.org/answers/answer.asp/file/40431

 If I were purchasing a "set" then I guess I would definitely include Calvin's and Baker's NT Commentary (by Hendriksen and Kistemaker), but in saying this I do not mean to leave a lot of other ones - good ones - out .... See the Commentary Guide - Covenant Theological Seminary:

http://www.covenantseminary.edu/library/

Yours In Christ

Posts 5065
Forum MVP
Richard DeRuiter | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jan 4 2013 8:10 AM

Pastor James:

I know individual volumes vary in quality, but overall what is your favorite commentary series from a reformed perspective?

Without a doubt, or much competition: Calvin's Commentaries. He is really quite good, and often overlooked. He is also very dated, and sometimes goes off on tangents that are relevant to the events of his day, but he usually covers the significant points of interpretation.

Baker New Testament is also pretty good, though sometimes it rambles on about some obvious point, while missing what I'm interested in. And in the case of John 21:15,ff, (e.g.) Hendriksen just plain gets it wrong about agapao and phileo. But other places the commentaries can be quite helpful.

There are also Reformed theologians scattered throughout other series.

Note: by "helpful" I mean helpful in understanding the Biblical text, not helpful in speaking about the text from a Reformed perspective - in fact, I would consider the latter to be an unreformed approach to the text! In the reformed view of Biblical authority, exegesis must precede interpretation, which must precede application. At least, that's how I understand Reformed theology.

 Help links: WIKI;   Videos; Logos 5 FAQ (Phil. 2:14, NIV)

Posts 0
Christ Alone | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jan 4 2013 8:58 AM

I agree with you that there are some errors in Baker. I took some classes from Kistemaker years ago and we had some interesting discussions. That said, Calvin is controversial on a few himself - i.e. 1 John 2:2. Of course Calvin said someplace  that his Commentaries and Institutes sometimes disagreed, and that when this occurred his Institutes were to be understood as presenting his actual view. Of course, in his Last Will and Testament 

 April 25, 1564" as printed in the History of the Christian Church, Vol. 8, pp. 828-29, by Philip Schaff [as published by Eerdmans in Grand Rapids, 1972], states: "I testify also and declare, that I suppliantly beg of Him, that He may be pleased so to was and purify me in the blood which my Sovereign Redeemer HAS SHED FOR THE SINS OF THE HUMAN RACE, that under His shadow I may be able to stand at the judgment-seat...."(op. cit., p 829). 

but note that version disagrees with others ... The French reads “shed for all poor sinners,” and the absence of the article might favor the connotation “all kinds of poor sinners.”

Yours In Christ

Posts 3515
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Jan 4 2013 5:23 PM

I like the REFORMED Reformed Perspective Commentary. According to the publisher, any contributor who varies even slightly from a Reformed perspective is caned unmercifully. In fact, I think all of the contributors are caned at least once just for good measure. That way potential readers can be assured that only the perspective they want and expect will get into the commentary

I hear they are working on a REFORMED Reformed Reformed Commentary, which sounds even more promising and uniform, but they seem to be having a problem with the contributing writers for the project--so far, none of them have survived the process.

Posts 0
Christ Alone | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Jan 5 2013 5:06 AM

The "REFORMED Reformed Reformed Commentary" - that is the Trinitarian Reformed Commentary - one Reformed essence, three Reformed Persons - is already written. It is the commentary of commentaries ALREADY prepared for those after glorification. You are right it is more promising and uniform - it is an absolutely perfect TULIP. Wink

David Paul:

I like the REFORMED Reformed Perspective Commentary. According to the publisher, any contributor who varies even slightly from a Reformed perspective is caned unmercifully. In fact, I think all of the contributors are caned at least once just for good measure. That way potential readers can be assured that only the perspective they want and expect will get into the commentary

I hear they are working on a REFORMED Reformed Reformed Commentary, which sounds even more promising and uniform, but they seem to be having a problem with the contributing writers for the project--so far, none of them have survived the process.

 

Yours In Christ

Page 1 of 1 (7 items) | RSS