Comment on Commentaries

I’ve written on commentaries before, such as here and here, and even here. I was just prompted by something I read to point out something else concerning commentaries. As well as the standard sage advice to not overly revere the commentaries, but rather treat them as conversation partners; as well as the solid suggestion to not invite them into the conversation too early; one more suggestion:

Don’t only read commentators that are solidly within your own theological tradition or denominational stream. It is tempting, especially with limited resources, to always buy from the same denominational publishing house, or in a series that is largely of your kind theologically.  Some people seem to only read Reformed Calvinists, others look for well-known Arminian theologians, others like anything connected to Dallas, others want Abingdon Press, others only John MacArthur, others only Tom Wright, others only buy UK/Australian authors, etc.  Tempting as such an approach may be, you will find that richer insight is gained by engaging with a variety of voices.  All of these that I have mentioned can be helpful, as can Roman Catholic commentators, or Jewish commentators, etc.

A couple of caveats (since I know some readers will take me out of context and write me off theologically for one of the items in that list, or perhaps for all of them – I could list more until I find your favorite!)  (1) Just because it’s different, doesn’t make it right, any more than it makes it wrong.  That is to say, whatever their tradition or theology, some commentators deal with the text better than others – you are still looking for good commentators.  (2) Make sure you have some grounding yourself before you bounce around in other camps.  Reading multiple voices is part of good seminary training, but be careful not to intellectually buy into anything and everything in print.  (3) Don’t neglect quality commentators from “your camp.”  They will probably form the “spine” of your collection.  (4) It is helpful to know where a commentator is coming from.  It helps to know that this guy always looks for an obscure position and takes it.  It helps to know that that one comes from a theology that tends to read these kinds of verses in this way.

Finally, I’ve mentioned John Glynn’s helpful book in the past.  I’d like to point you to a very helpful online resource strongly influenced by John Glynn’s book.  Perhaps you have not come across it yet – bestcommentaries.com. I would not say that I always agree with the scores given to a commentary, of course, but it largely seems to be a very helpful guide.  Take a look around it, you will probably be glad to add it to your bookmarks!

Only Preach Positive?

I just started John Piper’s response to N.T. Wright, The Future of Justification. It seems to be a very courteous and carefully written challenge of Wright’s presentation of justification.  Piper is careful to note that he is past the stage in life where he needs to score points in academic debates, yet he is writing a critique of Wright’s work.  Why?  Because, he says, people don’t bring him books written by other New Perspective scholars like Dunn or Sanders, but they do bring him the popular works of Wright.  Here is the scholar Piper writing as the pastor Piper in order to seek to protect others from an emphasis or understanding that is perceived to be harmful.

I haven’t read the book yet, so I won’t comment on the issues being addressed (although I could from my own study).  But one quote on pages 28-29 really caught my attention and resonated deeply.  It comes early on in an introductory section entitled On Controversy.  It addresses the issue of whether we should contend at all, or whether it is better to simply be positive, without pointing out error in others. It comes from a 1932 speech by J. Gresham Machen delivered in London:

Men tell us that our reaching should be positive and not negative, that we can preach the truth without attacking error.  But if we follow that advice we shall have to close our Bible and desert its teachings.  The New Testament is a polemic book almost from beginning to end.

He goes on to tell of a time when he heard a theology prof urge his listeners away from the unfortunate controversies in Paul’s writings and give their attention to the inspiring hymn to Christian love found in 1st Corinthians 13.  Machen continues:

In reply, I am bound to say that the example was singularly ill-chosen.  That hymn to Christian love is in the midst of a great polemic passage; it would never have been written if Paul had been opposed to controversy with error in the Church.  It was because his soul was stirred within him by a wrong use of the spiritual gifts that he was able to write that glorious hymn.  So it is always in the Church.  Every really great Christian utterance, it may almost be said, is born in controversy.  It is when men have felt compelled to take a stand against error that they have risen to the really great heights in the celebration of truth.

Preaching Easter (Pt4): Resurrection Implications

NT Wright made an interesting comment this week. He suggested that the New Testament presents many implications that come from the resurrection. However, the one that most preachers tend to emphasize is not really presented in the New Testament. Namely, “Because Jesus rose from the dead, we can go to heaven when we die.” I mention this not to affirm the comment, but to prompt our thinking and Bible study.

Before preaching the resurrection this Sunday, check your text for the implications that are present. For instance, in 1st Corinthians 15 we read that His resurrection gives us hope of our own (v16-20), the fear of death is removed (v26, 54-57), there are ethical implications (v32-34), motivation for ministry (v58), and even prompting to practical help for the poor (16:1, note Galatians 2:7-10).

Let’s preach the truth of the resurrection, let’s even allow our excitement to show, but let’s also try to be specifically clear in presenting the implications. It is easy in our excitement about the event to fall short in our relevance and application. Truly, everything is changed because Jesus rose from the dead. Part of our task is to help people see how that is true.