Having used the first edition extensively years ago, I’m glad the PNTC series gave Moo the opportunity to revise and update his commentary on James. Moo himself in the preface tells us that this a substantial revision that extends the volume by 30%. That additional material does not, however, mean that he has changed his conclusions overall, but just that he took a stab at strengthening them. There’s not much I can say about this author as he is well known to most Bible students and so most readers enter this volume with some idea of what to expect. What stands out the most, perhaps, is that the majority of his work has been in the Pauline epistles and he sneaks off here to James of all biblical writers!

Though I had read the introduction of the earlier work in the past, I carefully read the introduction of this revised work. It’s exactly what I love in an introduction. The word that comes to mind is masterful. Far more important than reaching the same conclusion that I favor is the author’s ability to lay out all the major viewpoints, respectfully dive in and explain pros and cons, and then present his or her own conclusion. Again, I need an author to teach me things I don’t know and I’ll then make my on conclusions. The commentary that provides that succeeds. This one does.

As a case in point, after being thoroughly impressed with Moo’s presentation of what has been the major viewpoints of the overall theme of James, I couldn’t fully agree with his ultimate view of James and how he meshes with Paul. Still, in a masterful way he laid it out where I had the tools to make a conclusion myself. I always rate highly a commentary that does that for me. Additionally, he did it in less pages than many writers can accomplish. There’s something to be said for clarity.

Everything else is here too: bibliographic information, theology, exegesis and all from a guy who knows how to do it. In you don’t agree with his conclusions in the introduction, then his coverage of James 2 might raise an eyebrow at times. But isn’t that true of every commentary on James good or bad?

The Pillar commentary series has earned its lofty praise. Someone needs to light a fire under the authors of the remaining volumes needed to finish coverage of the New Testament, but every theological library simply must have the ones in print. Moo has only made this contribution on James better and so it will have decades of positive influence remaining.

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.

The latest in the New International Commentary on the Old Testament (NICOT) series covers three exceptionally interesting Minor Prophets. The term “under appreciated” comes to mind. Apparently, Thomas Renz appreciates them because he delivers here what must be one of the most thorough exegetical commentaries available on them. He almost doubles the page count of the O. Palmer Robertson volume he replaces. It’s not a matter of verbosity either as masses of content abound.

He gives both an Introduction to the three collectively and to each alone. He doesn’t see the unity of the Twelve Minor Prophets as scholars like Paul House do. That doesn’t materially affect the commentary, but in a similar vein, structure is by far the weakest attribute of this volume. It wasn’t a matter of laziness, but a genuine belief on his part that these big-picture structures are overdeveloped by many. I don’t agree with him, but with his belief what other choice did he have?

His conclusions otherwise are good and generally conservative. He tips his hat to form critics but gently admits that their contributions are unverifiable. To my mind, form critics are like the man who escaped an asylum, stole a nice suit, and entered the boardroom and sat down among the executives and miraculously convinced them he was part of the team. It worked so well that you could say the asylum merely changed addresses and expanded. In any event, you have to appreciate the masterful diplomacy that Renz displays as he deals with them as if they, wink-wink, nudge-nudge, really belonged.

The weaknesses on structure and occasional scholarly capitulation notwithstanding, this book is an exceptional scholarly exegetical commentary. That is clearly the trend of the series from its earlier expositional days, and Renz can hold his head high among his fellow contributors. In fact, it matches the quality of several recent titles covering various Minor Prophets that have appeared in this series.

The work on grammar and words as well as history is all you could want. That means the commentary provides solid value. At first, you might ask, where is the theology? You will find it immediately after commentary in each passage in a section called “Reflections”. When you look there you will find that theology is a strength of this book as well. I was impressed.

Maybe we will see this series completed eventually, but for now this is a winning contribution.

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.

The original edition of this book was already one of my favorites in the NIVAC series, but this revision distinctly raises its value. It doesn’t appear that many conclusions were changed, but those conclusions were bolstered. The writing was elevated. Just because this is a work with an academic bent don’t dare undervalue better writing or care with the big picture . It makes a difference. Some commentary writers think there’s a binding mandate to use five words when one will do and feel a call to plant more trees so the forest is more obscured for the common people . Apparently, such writers think that will impress other people though for the life of me I have no idea who those people are.

Want to know where the clear writing and big picture prowess are most on display? In the Introduction on structure and theology. You abuse yourself if you skip reading it. “Profound” is an overused word in reviews, but you can safely throw it out here. Some say this volume is more scholarly than others in the series, but I don’t personally think readability was sacrificed. Still, only a disingenuous scholar would rank it low.
Everything I mentioned positively in the review of the original edition remains, but there’s more. I surprised myself in how many lines I underlined. I’ll return to this book I assure you. Even those who feel this series isn’t their cup of tea better boil some water and grab a tea cup. Can you tell I like this book?

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.

This unique series continues with this latest entry covering John 13-21. In contrast with the earlier volume covering John 1-12, Christopher Boyd Brown edits. His background as a professor of church history makes him a natural for this commentary that thrives on history rather than exegesis. The quality that was found in the earlier volumes I’ve seen remains constant.

After a General Introduction given to describe the series and its historical parameters, there is a specific Introduction to Reformation history regarding John 13-21. As you can guess, that is a review of what the Reformers focused on in these chapters. While there are distinct overlaps with our day, you quickly see that some burning issues burn out and are replaced with new ones in subsequent generations. To my mind, that is instructive in and of itself.

You will find numerous fascinating observations along with some that lack punch. As for me, I was only surprised that there was not as much offered on the Trinity, particularly in John 17, as I expected. I can’t necessarily fault the editor because I have never dug into the source materials he had available. I just assumed there would be more.

For that matter, that’s the biggest challenge for the whole series. Did the editors really collect the best passages? Who knows. The value, then, is what you can get out of their labors. On that level, they clearly scored. There are both interesting contributions for individual passages as well as help when taken in aggregate for what the Reformers thought. Help for study of passages and historical evaluation—what more could you ask for in a Reformation Commentary on Scripture (RCS) volume?

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.

Andreas Kostenberger has been writing on John’s Gospel for years. I’ve used all of his titles on John to advantage. While this volume may never be as well-known as his commentary on John, nor his upcoming major new commentary on John, I think this book is something of a little jewel that Bible students ought not to overlook. To be sure, it is a perfect example of where a scholar writes some of the best the profession can give pastors or those doing intense study of Scripture. Or what is even better is that there is little jargon or extraneous material to have to wade through to get to the good stuff! When scholars take the details of a book and formulate its structure they present to us something that is truly helpful. That is what you will find here!

The introduction is not a complete introduction to the gospel of John, but rather an explanation of what this book is trying to accomplish. It takes the signs (you will learn what they are if you don’t already know) and break the gospel of John down into units. Within the unit, he explains the sign that was given and what Jesus was accomplishing and the Book of John particularly. There are riches in every chapter.

I thought the several charts throughout the book were a wonderful aid to what you were learning and crystallized in one visual what you were trying to grasp.

I disagreed with a few fine points of detail, many of which were only in the footnotes, but overall I agreed with his conclusions and thought the work was awesome. This book will probably never be the most famous one written by this author, but it will do you as much good as any of them.

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.

There is always cause for celebration when a major commentary series reaches completion. That is the case with this final volume in the NIV Application Commentary (NIVAC) series covering Ezra and Nehemiah. Some series never reach that milestone, or if they still will, we can at least say that multiple decades have not been long enough yet. As I understand it, this series has also been widely used, so reaching completion is even more praiseworthy.

This last volume, not counting revisions that may come in the years ahead, is up to the level that you usually get in this series. I can’t recall a case where I’ve seen an important commentary being written by a married couple like this one written by Donna and Thomas Petter. It is almost comical to imagine what this entry entailed to produce. In the preface, you can even tell that they are a little self-conscious about it. After a little chuckle, you will see, though, that the finished product is one where the authors pulled off what they set out to do.

There is a solid introduction to both Ezra and Nehemiah that addresses literary and historical setting, political background, authorship and date, intended audience, structure, and theological themes. The scholarship is mostly conservative. That is followed by some nice maps and charts, a detailed outline, and a select bibliography.

The commentary proper follows the typical NIVAC style of translation, original meaning, bridging contexts, and contemporary significance. I found the original meaning section to be outstanding. The application is more hit than miss. I don’t think I’m being harsh in reviewing it in those terms because I ultimately see most such attempts at contemporary application that way. To be fair, what we have here is better than most.

Most people don’t study Nehemiah and Ezra as often as they do many other biblical books, so this commentary may suffice as the only resource for many Bible students for those neglected books. For pastors and those doing deeper studies, this will be a worthwhile volume to have at hand with other key titles. I recommend it.

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.