I apologize if this offends anyone. I am not trying to attack any theological position. This is only my own opinion, and I am the expert on my own opinion.
I am very tempted to buy the EEC. However, I have to be careful because with my budget to chose to buy one resource this big is to chose not to buy many other resources. So I am looking very carefully at the EEC. And one thing keeps me for buying - so far.
I am troubled by the narrowness of the scholarship represented here. By that I do not mean that it is evangelical, and there are no "bad" scholars in the set. I mean that EEC is overwhelmingly dispensational. Dispensational theology is an important part of evangelical Christianity, but it is not the only part. It should be represented, but not totally dominate. I think the value of this set commentaries would be increased if it represented a broader selection of evangelical scholarship.
For example, in the New Testament alone the books of Matthew, John, Romans, Galatians, Thessalonians, Hebrews, 1Peter, 2 Peter, Epistles of John, and Revelation are all by scholars with a direct connection (education from) Dallas Theological Seminary. (By the way, Dallas is one of the world's great seminaries. This is not a put down. However, Dallas only teaches dispensational theology.) In addition, numerous other of the New Testament volumes are also dispensational in theology. You will find pretty much the same in the Old Testament volumes.
I note that Daniel, Revelation, Thessalonians, and virtually all prophecy are by Dallas scholars. Maybe it should be called the DDC - Dallas Dispensational Commentary. Of course, that is pretty much what the Bible Knowledge Commentary is, and I have benefited from it. I use it often, but I don't want just a bigger Bible Knowledge Commentary.
For this to be successful, I think you need more Calvinist Covenant theology and more (much more) evangelical Wesleyan theology.
In fairness, the EEC does have a volume by the great Wesleyan scholar John Oswalt. In my opinion he is the finest Wesleyan scholar in the world. But it is pretty much Oswalt and a bunch of guys from Dallas. Okay, there are some Calvinists, too. Is Oswalt the only Wesleyan?
If I were a Dallas Dispensational guy, I would jump on this offer. However, I am an evangelical Wesleyan. I don't want my theology to dominate either. I would just like a more balanced representation.
If you don't think dispensational theology (or anyone's theology) will effect interpretation, then I have to disagree with you. I think this flaw will keep this set from being recongized as a really great set of commentaries. Of course, some scholars are yet to be named, and one can hope for more balance. Speaking of leaps of faith.
