This volume joins two others on Colossians and Philemon by Scot McKnight to replace the influential and long-standing volume by F. F. Bruce on these three wonderful New Testament books in the venerable New International Commentary on the New Testament (NICNT) series. Don’t you suppose contributing this commentary on Ephesians would be a daunting task both for its high-altitude theology and in following in Bruce’s footsteps? Cohick mentions as much in the preface.

Did Cohick succeed? I think for the most part she did. The farther I got into the introduction the more I liked it. The conclusions are pretty conservative. As you are probably aware, if you are going to write on Ephesians these days, you must address authorship and pseudepigrapha issues. As she notes, the answer to the question of whether Ephesians is a genuine Pauline letter will profoundly affect the trajectory of a commentary. If you were like me and have no doubt about Paul’s writing of this letter, these issues are something of a pothole on the road to understanding. Nevertheless, any good commentary must discuss it in depth and she does a good job. She lays out the arguments clearly and if you are wrestling with this you would do well to read what she has to say. Textual and historical background are also sufficiently covered, as are structure and theology. The NPP gets only about three pages which is precisely what it deserves.

I found the commentary proper to be thoughtful and helpful. It was neither too slim nor too verbose. She is especially adept at laying out arguments and reasoning to conclusions. You don’t have to, of course, agree to profit from that skill she brings to bear.

I do have one caveat in my recommendation. It’s only about one small section and perhaps I would rank its importance higher than you would, but I will share and you can decide. In her preface she mentions the “inflammatory” Household Codes, not in quotes but her words. That bias seemed present in the commentary on that section. Perhaps it was just me, but I thought her fine reasoning skills were not as present here. My more conservative position is disagreed with in many commentaries I read, so I’m used to that; but this section seemed a little agenda laden to me. When I rechecked her biography, it does turn out that she has written on the subject much in the past. It wouldn’t be fair to withhold a good recommendation over this one point involving one small section of the whole book, but you can at least be aware of it and see what you think when you look at it.

After reviewing the two new volumes on Colossians and Philemon recently, I feel that she has produced a work equal to the more well-known Scot McKnight. Warmly recommended.

I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.

Wow! What a great commentary! I can’t really think of a category where this commentary couldn’t be described with superlatives. It just happens to be the first commentary in the EEC series to be released with this attractive new design. There’s far more than an attractive cover here, however, as this is a first-class commentary. I know the term “instant classic” is cliché, but I’m willing to argue that is the case. If you see some lower ratings out there, ignore them. Unfairly, commentaries on the book of Daniel are often assigned a grade based on the authors prophetic opinions before the book is even opened. I don’t personally see how someone with a different background on prophecy matters would not feel duty-bound to admit what an incredible work we have here.

What I found between these covers was incredible depth, perceptive insight, clear reasoning, and good writing. The scholarship is impeccable, yet isn’t overly dense as is so often the case. I think you will agree with me before you are even halfway through the introduction. Discussions about the text, Aramaic words, and other grammatical and literary questions is all you could hope for and certainly all you would ever need. I find discussions of structure more helpful to pastors and Bible students than some of the other information in these commentaries, and what he presents here could be a clinic on how to discuss structure in a way that enlivens one’s understanding of a biblical book. He not only explains varying opinions on structure, but more importantly he gives cogent analysis of their strengths and weaknesses. You are left with an opportunity to conclude on your own.

The commentary proper is equally commendable. There is the explanation that pastors and Bible students need along with discussions of grammar in the original languages and plenteous bibliographies for scholars.

To put it in perspective, I found this commentary markedly more helpful than, say, the recent revision of Goldingay’s WBC work. That work is more critical than some like to admit while this work is not afraid to believe as it explains. Some might prefer the more straightforward NAC volume, but by design it doesn’t cover everything as this one does.

Force me to only keep one commentary on the book of Daniel, and this is the one you will see in my hands.

I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.

Several of these earlier volumes in the ZECOT series have gravitated to the relatively shorter Minor Prophets. This volume by Jerry Hwang continues demonstrating the promise that the distinctive style of the ZECOT holds. Perhaps the series emphasis on discourse analysis shines even brighter in these Minor Prophets, though I look forward to all its volumes. Hwang grasps clearly all aspects of discourse analysis and similar scholarly tools and makes a real contribution here.

The introduction is thorough. At times the prose is stuffy, but the content is rich. I think pastors and students will be rewarded for waiting through language that might be a bit more scholarly than preferred. Still, this is not a scholars-only commentary.

The select bibliography is a bit too select, but the historical background to the prophecy as well as what the author calls “Hosea’s distinctive theology in its cultural context” is well done. The concepts discussed strike me as the best scholarship can offer the Bible student. Again, it may be heavy going it is verbiage, but you will be able to weigh the ideas that make up the theme of Hosea. The section on the contribution to Christian theology is too brief but on target. There is also a detailed outline for the book.

The commentary proper is never trite. Clearly the author took his time to produce a significant commentary. By now you are probably familiar with the ZECOT style and he is comfortable in it and puts it to good use. This commentary does not duplicate other volumes and is good as either a first or a second choice. I’m glad to have this commentary at my disposal.

I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.