How does one choose a Bible commentary?

“When you’re deciding which commentary to add to your library, what are the most important things to consider?” So asked Logos Bible Software on Facebook? To summarize my response:

1. Careful attention to the text, not an “agenda” (I see too many famous “exegetes” who merely reiterate what they already “know to be true”). I’m Reformed, but also thoroughly enjoy Wesley, the Greek and Latin Fathers, Catholics, Pentecostals, so long as they’re really dealing with the text. An ability to see the Big Picture. A commitment to theology and praxis. Open to seriously consider new ways of looking at the text.

2. Date. I read a lot of ancient works; for my 1 Corinthian commentary, I was constantly in 1 Clement, Tertullian, Origen, John Chrysostom, Theodoret of Cyr and others. Nevertheless it’s hit-and-miss with the “classic” commentaries. Logos just put out a large group of century-old commentaries on 1 Corinthians for $40 – a great price, but I’ve used Goudge et al.in my own studies, and would have rather spent that same money on a single book, such as Fee, Thiselton or Witherington. Books are usually cheap for a reason – their copyright is expired. You will get what you pay for.

Look for value, not a bargain

There is a myth that “older is better,” but this simply is not so: older writers worked with much less reliable data than do modern writers; they were not necessarily more sound in their theology nor spiritually deeper. I could not imagine recommending, for example, the Pulpit Commentary.

3. Grasp of the Original Languages. A commentary is not reliable just because it refers to the Greek and Hebrew. There are plenty of works, especially those published before the 1960s, where the author shows a poor grasp of semantics. I found Ernest Best’s commentary on 1-2 Thessalonians to be very useful; nevertheless, it is sprinkled with misunderstandings about the meaning of the Greek verb system. I won’t list other commentators, but there are very popular preachers and writers who apparently have just a couple of years of seminary Greek, and it shows.

4. Doctrine of the Spirit’s Illumination. The more I study and write, always hoping I’m using a sound hermeneutic, the more I discard the idea of “don’t look to the Spirit for a true interpretation.” I was taught to read the Bible like I would read a newspaper, but now that idea is repellant to me. When I read a paper, I have no prior commitment to accept it’s spin on the news; if I don’t like an editorial, I feel free to shrug if off or to write a letter to the editor. When I read the Bible, I’ve already decided to believe it, AND obey it, AND share it with others. None of this is possible without the Spirit’s direct help. One of the reasons I like authors like, for example, Gordon Fee or J. I. Packer or the late John Stott, is that without flaunting their spirituality, they give the impression of, “Here is a believer who seeks the Spirit in his research.” Bible study is a science, but not purely a science. Click HERE for an article on prayer and preaching.

5. I also would add that there is usually excellent help in Tremper Longman’s Old Testament Commentary Survey; and D.A. Carson’s New Testament Commentary Survey. Both are regularly updated.

Published in: on February 9, 2012 at 3:26 pm  Comments (4)  
Tags: ,

Tim Tebow punts on false teaching

Along with all true New Englanders, I cheered when the Patriots beat back the Denver Broncos on Jan 14, and went on to win the AFC championship.

Tebow spots a wolf

Nevertheless, Denver’s Tim Tebow earns a tip of the cap, not just for his prayers and public testimony, but for his spiritual discernment. He had agreed to speak at a conference by Rev. Rod Parsley, but quickly cancelled when he learned exactly what Parsley preaches.

Rod Parsley (the “Breakthrough” TV show, World Harvest Church) represents the Pillage-and-Plunder Division of the Prosperity Gospel, aka Word of Faith or Rhema teaching. Word of Faith shows up on our TV screens through the Trinity Broadcasting Network and in the words of Kenneth Hagin, Kenneth Copland, Creflo Dollar, and throughout Latin America. Like several other prominent Word of Faithers, Parsley teaches the Oneness doctrine, that is, he denies the trinity. Last year he asked his followers to donate $1 million each in order to buy protection from Satan. This is not Christianity; it’s a protection racket.

Tebow was to have spoken at Parsley’s “Contending for the Faith Weekend” in March, along with Kenneth Copeland. The Saturday schedule will include an “anointing meeting” for which the entry fee is, you guessed it, to be a financial contributor to his ministry. I guess “it is not to the sick I came to save,” but the sick who are still strong enough to write a check.

The sad thing about Tebow’s decision is that plenty of Christians will not grasp why “trivial” theological details should affect where one should or shouldn’t speak. Can’t he go and give a nice pep talk for the young people and trust the Lord for the results? In fact, no. The only appropriate message from such a toxic pulpit is “Why Your Pastor’s Message is a Deception.” To do anything else is collusion. A true Christian is not simply “nice”; he or she also makes unpleasant decisions when necessary.

I’ve spoken before groups of many denominations, and I don’t focus on “why my group is right and yours is wrong”; in fact, I prefer to lead off with a smile and a “Now, what do we have in common?” and go from there. But I don’t do that in the case of Word of Faith groups – If I am invited, I plan to speak against their doctrine. Word of Faith is not “another denomination”; it is another gospel, which distorts the doctrines of sin, the atonement and in many cases, the trinity.

Tebow had the spiritual sense to punt on this one.

Published in: on February 3, 2012 at 1:24 pm  Comments (4)  
Tags: , , ,

The just shall live BY FATE?

I occasionally visit an English-language church in San José, attended by African-Caribbean believers. For me, their English is harder to understand than most Spanish.

A few months ago, a lady behind me was leading us in prayer, and for a heart-stopping 15 seconds I thought she said that we Christians “live according to Fate.” What in the world…? Then I realized that with her accent the “th” sound comes out as “t” – ah, that’s better, she said that we live according to faith. Phew. One the truth, the other not, and just one letter separating them.

Two philosophies vie for our attention. One is Fatalism, the belief in Fate: qué será, será, whatever will be, will be.

The 3 Fates from Greek myth

And so, for example, a girl asks, Will this boy like me? and her friend answers, “Well, I believe that if it’s meant to be, then it’ll happen.” Into this category of Fate we can also throw other odds and ends: astrology, Mayan Calendars, Nostradamus. But some Christians view the world that way: “If it’s God’s will, it’ll happen, if it’s not, it won’t, so relax, what will be, will be.” Listen, I believe in the Sovereign God, but we sometimes act as if “God’s Will” is binding on God himself. “God cannot act contrary to his will,” to be sure; but that doesn’t mean that his will is a straitjacket.[1] Part of this error is the idea that prayer does not change things, but only changes the attitude of the pray-er to accept what would have happened anyway. More about prayer later (more…)

Published in: on February 1, 2012 at 5:51 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , , , ,

Can stay-at-home Dads be “real men”?

I guess I came in late for this controversy: from 2008 there’s a YouTube clip of a famous preacher and his wife, responding to the question: “What are your thoughts on stay at home dads if the woman really wants to work?”[1]

“Too many guys take too little responsibility” was part of the answer, one with which I fully resonate. We have a culture where men play at being boys well into their adult years. At a time when their fathers and grandfathers had buckled down to marriage and a job or were off fighting Nazis, some guys focus on playing the field or playing paintball until they’re, well, practically my age. The women are complaining and they oughta be. These guys need to hear a Word about their behavior.

But let’s put them to one side, since the gist of their response was something else: If men are not the primary bread-winners in the family, they are not doing “what the Word says.” Parenting must be done principally by the mother, not just “anyone,” not even the father. The idea of a father staying at home to focus on raising children is a perverted idea, taken from our modern culture, not the Bible. These men are “conformed to this world.” Such behavior would even by “a case for church discipline.”

Okay, let’s see “what the Word says.” (more…)

Published in: on January 19, 2012 at 11:04 am  Comments (5)  
Tags: , , ,

‘Twas the Day after Christmas (Luke 2:8-20) – Part II

In the first part of this blog, we saw how the shepherds heard the angels’ message, saw the Christ child and went out to proclaim what they had seen. We too should pass on the entire gospel message, not just parts of it. But there is a second application for the Christian, one that pushes us past superficial application of Luke’s gospel:

 II. We should tell the message in a way that will be understood

In this case, we will not simply imitate what the shepherds did, but will honor their spirit and intention. Please notice that the shepherds were Jewish, and the people they told about Jesus would also have been Jewish. In fact, the angel spoke in terms that a Jewish person would have understood, using words like city of David, a Savior, Christ, the Lord, “Glory to God in the highest”.

Let’s play a game of “what if.” As far as we know, the shepherds did not speak to non-Jews, that is, gentiles. If the gentiles had heard the same message in the same language they would have understood it very differently than the Jews did. For example, “Savior” was one of the titles used by the Roman emperor – Caesar Augustus was “Savior” of the world, the one who brought it peace. “Christ” means “the Anointed One,” that is, a royal figure. The pagans also applied the terms “lord” and “god” to their idols. This means that if gentiles had accidently heard their message, they would not have heard it the way it was intended. To them it would have come across as badly distorted: “A new king has been born, he is a divine offspring of the Greek god Zeus, may Zeus be highly praised!”

If you and I are not speaking to people just like us, with our background, they will likely misunderstand us. Whose job is it to make him- or herself understood? One fundamental rule of communication is that it is the speaker, the person who is trying to communicate a message, who is responsible to make the message understandable. One of the things we do when someone doesn’t speak English is we speak louder, under the assumption that the message will get through with higher volume. Christians do the same thing, with equally poor results. (more…)

Published in: on January 6, 2012 at 8:10 pm  Comments (2)  
Tags: , , ,

Is there healing in the atonement?

A friend writes asks about 1 Pet 2:24-25, where Peter alludes to Isa 53:4-6 – “He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross, so that, free from sins, we might live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. For you were going astray like sheep, but now you have returned to the shepherd and guardian of your souls.” He states: I have always taken this to mean that by His stripes we are “forgiven”, not “physically” healed of some infirmity, though certainly, by being forgiven of something, especially of our sins, there can certainly be a physical healing as well. I have always bounced this verse off the verse in Isaiah 53:5 where it says that “by his wounds we are healed”. I’ve been hearing a lot of teaching where our physical healing comes through His stripes that He bore for us….

Thanks for the question! I know of three perspectives on this question of “healing in the atonement.” I agree with one, partially affirm the second, and wholly reject the third. (more…)

Published in: on January 4, 2012 at 3:19 pm  Comments (4)  
Tags: , , , ,

‘Twas the Day after Christmas (Luke 2:8-20) – Part I

Burned into our memory is the fact that the shepherds saw the angels, went to Bethlehem and worshiped the baby Jesus. All the Nativity displays end that way, with the shepherds fixed in place. But in fact, Christmas day was the very beginning of the shepherds’ story, since they rushed right out and began to tell others what they had seen.

We read Luke’s gospel and see what the shepherds did – but what do we do to wrap up the Christmas season?

  • We measure the diagonal on the wide-screen TVs,
  • We rush out to spend our Christmas money.
  • We Facebook our friends about going on diets to work off the eggnog.
  • We return the gifts we didn’t like, plot to regift others in 2012, or wonder whether we should wait two years to regift, to make sure memories will have faded.
  • We haul the tree to the curb, because they won’t let you burn it.
  • We buy the discount wrapping paper and ribbon and store them away until next time.

The shepherds’ spiritual career began on Christmas. (more…)

Published in: on January 4, 2012 at 11:02 am  Comments (3)  
Tags: , , ,

It’s not enough to read your Bible – you have to pay attention

The first time I listened to a music CD was in late 1986, at my friend Tim’s house. I’d been out of the country for some years, so I was probably the last of my circle of friends to actually hear one. Tim had a monster sound system, and he put on “In the Digital Mood” by the Glenn Miller band.

He had me at “Chattanooga Choo-Choo.”

So I bought a CD component for our stereo, and picked up a few discs, but got a harsh surprise. When I put one on for the first time, I heard all the pops, hisses and scratches that my old LPs had. What a rip-off!

I went over and turned the music up louder, and listened very closely. The noises disappeared, and I heard only the pure digital sound. Huh. I turned away, got involved looking at the paper, and it happened again – my CD sounded scratchy. Again, I listened closely, and the noises disappeared.

It took a few minutes to figure it out: my mind had tricked me.

I was so used to listening to records, that when I turned on my stereo, the brain knew what a recording should sound like. And so it fed me the music that I expected to hear, not the music that was playing. In a day or two, the residual effect wore off, and whether I paid close attention or not, it started to sound like a CD.

How often do we see or hear what we expect, instead of what’s right in front of us?

Reading your Bible is not enough. You must read with great care, making sure that you see precisely what is there or not there. It is natural that when you study the Bible, your mind is rigged to jump ahead – “I know what this says already” – and skips lightly over the text. Or it says, “Ah, I already know what this means, think no further!” You once heard someone say what it meant or you have a neat theological pigeon-hole for its message.

The Holy Spirit wishes to steer us, and we must consciously ask for his guidance every time we open the Book or meditate on it. This is pure grace; nevertheless, we shouldn’t give the Spirit more responsibility than is his due – why demand that he give the white flash of illumination to dull students of his Word?

The next time you see a difficult verse (turn the other check; give away your coat; give up everything to follow Jesus), take your time. Ask for help. Forbid your first impressions from becoming the Truth.

Additional note: a percentage of textual errors in the ancient Bible manuscripts are due to scribes hearing or seeing the text of, say, the gospel of Mark, but perceiving that it said something different. That’s why Mark includes wording or snippets of phrases that are found in Matthew or Luke in the better manuscripts, but which crept into Mark by accident. The scribes copied down what they “knew” they had seen or heard, not what was actually there.

Published in: on November 27, 2011 at 10:26 am  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , ,

The 99% Solution

At times long-lost Greek manuscripts pass by my desk. They add a bit of class to the place, to counter-balance the Oreo wrappers, orphaned keys, and cats who like to see if they can type out their names.

I put on my special mittons and saw that this particular manuscript is from Luke 15. It starts off properly enough:

So Jesus told them this story: “If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them gets lost, what will he do? Won’t he leave the ninety-nine others in the wilderness and go to search for the one that is lost until he finds it? And when he has found it, he will joyfully carry it home on his shoulders. When he arrives, he will call together his friends and neighbors, saying, ‘Rejoice with me because I have found my lost sheep.’ In the same way, there is more joy in heaven over one lost sinner who repents and returns to God than over ninety-nine others who are righteous and haven’t strayed away!

Then mysteriously this manuscript states, “And he asked his disciples, saying…” (̓Ηρωτήσεν δε τοῖς μαθηταῖς λεγών) and adds these additional lines:

And he asked his disciples, saying, “So, what do you think?”

One disciple consulted a chart and answered, “That was all very well under the Law, but it doesn’t apply to us. It’s not for this age.” He carefully rolled the chart back up and put it in its protective tube. (more…)

Published in: on November 15, 2011 at 3:53 pm  Comments (5)  
Tags: , , ,

Oct 21, 2011 has passed, and Harold Camping is wrong again

On May 21, it was all over the news, that Harold Camping’s prediction of the rapture had not taken place and that a worldwide earthquake had not wracked the planet. We predicted on this blog that Camping would

  • Backpedal: for example, change the date, say that the earthquake was “symbolic” not literal
  • Denial: Jesus really did come for the faithful, you just can’t see it

In fact, he did what many false prophets have done throughout history, interpreted the rapture and the earthquake symbolically. Without a doubt, though, Christ would literally return on Oct 21, 2011.

This time I didn’t see Harold Camping on CNN (more…)

Published in: on November 1, 2011 at 9:08 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , ,
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 68 other followers