Customer Reviews

The Epistles of John (The New International Commentary on the New Testament)

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I. Howard Marshall is a professor of New Testament at the University of Aberdeen (Scotland), an author in numerous conservative commentary sets, and contributor to many scholarly journals. This work, in the New International Commentary on the New Testament Series, was found to be an excellent read--not only because of its fluid prose, but also because of its excellent scholarship.

Commentators approach a text with certain assumptions. The positions that Marshall begins with include: that John, Son of Zebedee and disciple of Jesus wrote these three epistles as well as the Gospel of John (but not Revelation); that these letters were written to address certain schisms in local churches, but that they were not necessarily all written to address a single crisis; and that they were written between the 60s and 90s AD, with 2 John written first, followed by 3 John, and finally 1 John.

One unique characteristic of Marshall's commentary is that he treats each of the three epistles individually (as opposed to trying to matrix the theology of each--reading each through the window of the other) and in the order in which he believes they were written (2 John, 3 John, 1 John). The result is that the New Testament's briefest books--2 John and 3 John--receive a much more complete treatment than they normally receive. It was refreshing for this reader to see Marshall esteeming these often ignored books as divinely inspired Holy Scripture--which is what they are.

This reader also enjoyed Marshall's treatment of 1 John. He treats the epistle holistically, commenting on the particular verses while always keeping in mind what has preceded it and what will follow. The result is that (even though outlining the epistle is difficult) the reader sees 1 John as a logical, progressive whole. Marshall also does an admirable job as he wrestles with the most difficult passages of 1 John--statements that seem to indicate that Christians cannot sin (3:4-6, cf. 1:8-9), sins that do or do not lead to death (5:16-17), and the work of the antichrist (3:18ff), and the threefold witness of the Spirit, the water, and the blood (5:6-8). The author addresses each of these in a thoughtful, pastoral way. While I'm not sure I necessarily agree with all of his conclusions, I am thankful for them as they have given me much to think about and wrestle with as I continue my study of 1 John.

The flaws in this book are few, but one does merit mention. In the above mentioned "difficult passages" of John, this reader often had to go back and re-read certain sections because Marshall's position was difficult to pin down. For example, it took three reading to finally understand that Marshall views John's word that the Christian is free from sin as an eschatological reality, a process of sanctification that has already begun, and also a command for the Christian to keep himself free from sin. The fault either lies with this reader (which is entirely possible) or an editor could have asked Marshall to make his position more clear.

But on the whole this is an excellent commentary on some often-neglected (yet valuable) books of the New Testament. I highly recommend them to anyone who wants to study them as this book is equally accessible to pastors as well as laymen. Highly recommended.

This commentary is worth owning for a number of reasons. (I'm a pastor working in the Greek text developing sermons right now on John's letters).

Marshall's expository comments are well supported with clearly linked cross references that would fit well into any expository sermon. Sometimes he gives illustrations for the less transparent points of the text, which results in superior clarity for most readers. The augments which one reviewer called 'fluff' are not fluff at all. They are helpful meditative points that can be used in preaching. I love it when commentators bear their intended audience in mind and give a helping hand in context. That makes this commentary better than most.

If you desire to deal in the Greek text, his footnotes are an excellent add on to that study. He also references a number of other scholars in the footnotes for more on any crucial points Marshall brings out.

Overall, this is a five star commentary that anyone doing serious exegesis for a sermon ought to consult.

The Epistles of John are a set of three short works towards the end of the New Testament. Two are just short letters and one is a longer (what I would term) teaching document.

I appreciated Howard Marshalls treatment of the three works. He did something I had not considered before. He talked about his belief that 2 and 3 John were written before 1 John. So, his commentary starts with an introduction to the three works and then proceeds with the commentary on 2 John, then 3 John and finally 1st John.

Why does he do that way you ask? Because he feels that 2nd and 3rd John are short letters, one to the 'beloved lady" and the other to his dear friend "Gaius." They deal with two subjects. 2nd John deals with the subject of some teachers claiming that Christ was not both God and Man. They did not believe that Christ (God) could take on human form. Or they put a spin on it that the Holy Spirit descended on Christ at His Baptism and then left him before the crucifixion.

Either way, their teaching was wrong and disruptive to the church. The short letter instructs the lady and her children to not give hospitality to those and thus aid in their false teaching. Marshall believes this is a short letter to address the issue and that the Apostle John wanted to visit the church to correct the teaching in person. But when he couldn't get there in person he wrote 1st John as a longer treatment of the problem and addressed it in ink on paper.

In 3rd John we have 'The Elder' addressing the problem of Demetrius wanted to take over control of the church and not share what the Elder and other traveling missionaries were teaching. Again it is a short work addressing a problem. In the letter itself the Elder states I don't want to put on paper in ink what I want to say, I would prefer to come in person and address it then.

But then when he couldn't come in person he then wrote 1st John to address both issues.

Well, I don't know whether you will agree with Howard Marshall, I'm not sure I am in full agreement (but I like how he addresses it) but I know this, the commentary is well written. The issues are well developed and addressed and much of what he says is very helpful for teaching others.

Marshall does not flaunt his theory and make it a major issue. He just addresses it as well as other theories and then goes on to give us good teaching on the issues the 3 documents address.

This is well worth your time to work through and use if you are going to teach a series on the Epistles of John.

Enjoy!

I've only gone through 1 John so far, but I've done this book in detail and the NICNT was a great additional commentary. It's not as technical as I wanted it to be, but I. Howard Marshall has a way of being able to keep the main thing the main thing, instead of getting lost in exegetical details. That's something I got to say that I like about this book. There is good insight, background, etc.
If you are looking for a technical commentary, let me just say about this one that it's read as you would hear a sermon from a pastor. He doesn't tell you all the parsing info and stuff, he'll just tell you something like "the two commands are linked together as one idea..." It doesn't say all the technical details, but you can see that Marshall did his homework when preparing this commentary.
If you are trying to find the main point of the passage with details in each verse, then this commentary is for you. I was a little disappointed when I didn't see much for technicality since it's the "NIGNT" N.I.Greek N.T., but overall it's well worth the price.

I. Howard Marshall's commentary on the Epistles of John has much to commend it to the pastor, Bible teacher, or scholar. His treatment of the passages is thorough, and his text critical footnotes are helpful. The only problem with the commentary is the bit of fluff that it contains. Marshall tends to interject his scholarship with things like old hymn lyrics, which the reader may not find helpful, yet this book is highly recommended based on both scholarship and readability.

Since im a calvinist I did not enjoy this commentary. His theology, made him unable to do good exegesis of the text, and forced him to communicate a surface-level understanding of Gods love, which by his theology, is not electing and particular in its direction, but somehow equal to all people, henche we find comments like this: "(1 Joh 2:2)...John rules out the thought that the death of Jesus is of limited efficacy; the possiblitiy of forgiveness is cosmic and universal." s. 119. As if John didnt expect his reader to understand that the atoning sacrifice of Jesus, fully and totally justifies you in Gods sight. Johns point is obviously not that all individuals are justified and atoned for. But that the Gospel and Gods redemption not are restricted to a specific nation, but will go out the the whole world. Instead of a full sacrifice for sins, Eerdmans,embrace this synergistic theology who says that Jesus only made it possible for all people to be saved, which is such a misunderstanding of Jesus' death and absolutly not thought in Johns epistle or in any of the writings of the new testament. His comment on 1John 5 is also likewise as bad, when he make this horrific statement: "...faith is thus a sign of the new birth, just as love and doing what is right are also indications that a person has been born of God. At the same time, however, faith is a condition of the new birth: "to all who received him, to those who bleieed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God (Jn. 1:12)"" Mark the words that faith is a condition of the new birth. In other words, Gods children are those who without help from God chose to become his children. Which makes man the determening factor of the saved and the lost. Not only so, but this kind of theology totally miss Johns point who uses this excelent metaphor of new birth, in order to prevent his readers to believe that they somehow by themselves were able to come to the knowledge and fellowship with the true God. No one chose to be born into this world, neither chose anyone to become Gods children. However given our new nature, we love Him and choose to follow our God and Father daily, giving all up for Him, and wanting His name to be gloryfied. So in a sense we can speak of our choosing in the matter, but we were only able to choose God because He chose us first and loved us first and therfore also enabled us to love Him and choose Him.

This commentary produced by I. Howard Marshall is an excellent resource for any Biblical Scholar's library. Dr. Marshall opened his commentary by handling the easiest epistles first (2nd and 3rd John) and then he very capably handled the more difficult epistle of 1st John.

His comments were very clear, and coherent in exegeting the texts of these epistles.

I highly recommend this book to all serious Bible students.

Surely there will be someone else writing about this book, so I'm going try to help you in another way.

When you start reading biblical commentaries you will need to be aware that the thoughts expressed by the author deal with facts and speculations that should of happened. You can NEVER rely on only one commentary to affirm something about the Bible. You need at least three good commentaries.

Try to read biblical commentaries from different confessions of faith (e.g., Calvinism vs. Arminianism; Pentecostal vs. non-Pentecostal; Catholic vs. Protestant; Egalitarian vs. Complementarian; Amillennialism vs. Premillennialism vs. Postmillennialism; etc). Look for their arguments: What do they agree or disagree on? Which of them is closest to the biblical text? It's not a sin to read commentaries written from other points of view. You will notice that what is fact or solid argument will be seen over and over on different commentaries, so you will start learning what is speculation and what is not.

As Haddon W. Robinson said in his book, Biblical Preaching, (second edition, page 22), "In approaching a passage, we must be willing to reexamine our doctrinal convictions and to reject the judgments of our most respected teachers."

Remember, a commentary is not the biblical text. Do not replace the authority of the Bible with a commentary. The same apply for Study Bibles. The study notes there are not written by "apostles and prophets," so never confuse the "gospel" with the teacher or preacher. Learn to separate it.

Commentaries are important because nobody can get a poem from one language and translate it with the same structure to another language. This simply does not exist. Words, phrases, and sentences are rooted in a specific time, culture and custom. About Bibles, the best way is to check different translations, but be cautious about a very loose translation.

For you to appreciate any biblical commentary you need to know what level of reading you are. I'm going call them beginner, intermediate and advanced. I recommend the following biblical commentaries that you can start from. All of them have both Old Testament and New Testament. (If you're thinking of buying the whole set, look for the CD edition; it's cheaper and you can take it with you where you go.)

Beginner - NIV Application Commentary (NIVAC) by Zondervan.
(or) The Bible Speaks Today Series (BST) by IVP (This is a growing series and not yet complete.)

Intermediate - New International Commentary on the New Testament (NICNT) and New International Commentary on the Old Testament (NICOT) by Eerdmans

Advanced - Word Biblical Commentary (WBC) by Thomas Nelson

These are basic commentaries on their own level, but there are a lot of commentaries today, so don't forget to look for more information. Maybe you can get information from one of these: (1) Commentary and Reference Survey: A Comprehensive Guide to Biblical and Theological Resources by John Glynn, (2) New Testament Commentary Survey by D. A. Carson, (3) Old Testament Commentary Survey by Tremper Longman.

There are good and expensive commentaries such as the Anchor Bible (AB); International Critical Commentary (ICC) or Hermeneia (HERM). [Do not forget of Calvin and Luther].

I don't know about catholic commentaries, but you can check reviews on "Sacra Pagina" and "Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture."

Other than those mentioned above (NIVAC; BST; NICNT; WBC; AB; ICC; HERM) you can also check: Expositor Bible Commentary (EBC); New American Commentary (NAC); Pillar New Testament Commentary (PNTC); New International Greek Testament Commentary (NIGTC); Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (BECNT); and others.

Another thing, it can be a very good commentary, but it does not mean that you will agree with everything in it. Remember, "new" does not mean it's updated, and "updated" does not mean it's better.

Purpose - You can read a book to get information, even if you are not interested in a deep study of the biblical text. In this case it's better to start reading something from your own confession of faith and always on your level of reading. If after some time you become interested in more, go check other commentaries, but please, do not skip "How To Read A Book" by Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren.

Responsibility - It is your responsibility study the biblical text before checking a commentary. Sometimes this is not an easy task so I'm giving you some other references that you can check at the end of this review. If I had read a review like this before, I would know how to prevent some mistakes.

Do not let you knowledge kill your faith! - "For we also have had the gospel preached to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because those who heard did not combine it with faith." Hebrews 4:2 NIV - (Read also 1 Corinthians 1:21-24; 2:13-14; 3:18-23; Jude 1:3).

I can't leave without suggesting some other tools to help you: (1) How To Read A Book by Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren; (2) Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation by Henry Virkler and Karelynne Ayayo; (3) New Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors by Gordon Fee; and (4) Old Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors by Douglas Stuart. [Although book #3 and 4 deals with Biblical languages (Greek and Hebrew), you can learn a lot from them even if you do not know the languages]. (5) "Basics of Biblical Greek" Grammar by William D. Mounce [after you start reading it maybe you can add "Biblical Greek Survival Kit" and "Sing and Learn New Testament Greek" audio CD by Kenneth Berding]; (6) "English Grammar in Use" by Raymond Murphy (Third Edition with Cd-Rom). (7) Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History: Complete and Unabridged. - All of these will help you to understand HOW a good commentary must be written. Good Luck!