Customer Reviews

The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary of the Greek Text (New International Greek Testament Com (Eerdmans))

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

 

 

This is an excellent commentary, one of the best, in fact, I've ever seen, and definitely THE best on the Gospel of Mark (out of the eighteen or twenty that I'm regularly dipping into). It is a commentary on the Greek text, and the Greek is not transliterated or translated, but it is still amazingly readable, lucid, and engaging. France's introduction to the Gospel of Mark is the best intro I've read, and alone worth the price of the book. He views Mark's gospel as a narrative - a drama in three acts; yet he resists imposing superficial structures on the book. He writes with a desire to hear Mark's text afresh, and tends to focus in his comments on the unfolding theological narrative itself. Yet he is obviously well-read and conversant with both the primary ancient documents themselves and the relevant literature on Mark (commentaries, monographs, essays in journals, etc.) and engages them frequently when helpful. His theology is generally conservative, with a high Christology. He is cautious with overly novel interpretations. He articulates a partial-preterist position on Mark 13. France would probably be a bit too technical for the purposes of a lay-person, but preachers can hardly afford to be without him. I would recommend reading him along side the commentaries by James Edwards (Pillar), William Lane (NICNT), and David Garland (NIVAC). Excellent!

The NIGTC series positions itself as intending to be somewhat conservative, to deal in detail with the Greek text as well as to focus on the theology of the book. France is in that mold. He considers Mark as a storyteller, even as a "raconteur." Thus he is doing very much a literary critical approach to the text. There isn't much here on history of interpretation, form criticism, etc. He focuses on Mark as Mark, not as a defective first draft of a gospel.

A couple of examples. He take the two-stage healing in 8:22-26 as a bridge passage, linking both what came before and what followed and sees this unique story as referencing the disciples inability to clearly "see" who Jesus is. In discussing the ending he takes the view that 16:8 isn't likely to be the real end of the text. While ending at 16:8 excites us moderns due to its existential, open, daring character, he thinks it very unlikely that Mark or his culture would see it that way. He thinks the real ending has likely been lost and 16:9-20 was written later to replace what was lost. While he defends what is a minority view, his discussion of the topic is sober, presents other points of view fairly and he definitely has reasons for his view.

That is typical of the entire commentary. Albert Lukaszewki in a review for SBL called the book a "model of tempered scholarship." I agree. Even if you disagree with a specific conclusion, you will find much to appreciate in his careful, reasonable, and intellectually honest presentation.

I have begun to learn Greek and decided to test the waters with this volume on Mark. What I found was one of the most outstanding commentaries I have ever read. This book is incredibly well organized, well written, thoughtful and thought provoking as well. France writes with an easy lucid style that is as entertaining as it is informative. This book will give you a great insight into the life of Christ as well the gospel of Mark. France does not deal with other synoptics very often, but sticks to the story as told by Mark. I highly reccommend this volume especially if you are beginning to study the gospels.
As far as the greek goes, you need a good command of the alphabet and pronunciation. It would help to understand verb forms and tenses, but you can get by without that knowledge. I read the commentary with an indexed Greek new testament and I had no problems following the text. Actually, I felt like I was reaching closer into Mark's mind, and also in a way into that of Jesus, by reading and studying the Greek.

For the minister who faces climbing into the pulpit 52 Sundays a year -- France's commentary repays careful reading. We, fellow servants of the Word, are in France's debt; the commentary is well organized, beautifully written, and easy to understand. There are a few good commentaries on Mark's gospel--this is one of them. For those faced with the upcoming lectionary year B - Mark's gospel; buy this book!

I work slowly through the Greek text in preparation for sermons or classes. France's commentary is a great aid for me in this process because of his discussion of key Greek words and terms. But, you do not have to know Greek to profit immensely from this commentary! I would recommend it to anyone who wants to get deeply in the context of Mark. There is material here for the theological student writing his paper, but also for the minister working up a lesson for this Sunday! His engagement of the text helps to move you right into the stories he is discussing, and then right into your own presentation. You won't be disappointed with this purchase.

I liked this commentary a lot. I have not focused much effort on Mark over the years, but wanted to look at it while I did a complete rereview of my Greek. It was better than I expected. The interesting comments on the Northern - Southern Kingdom's impacts on the cultures of Jerusalem and Galillee were helpful, as were the comments on the book's unlikely chronological layout. It is all good and balanced and worth reading. I for one would have liked more Greek, but it is not a real problem and makes the book for useful for a wider audience.

I find it truly amazing that there is still so much lively discussion about a Gospel of the New Testament which has been a cornerstone of Christian faith for almost 2000 years; however, the more I study New Testament exegesis, the less I'm surprised. The thing that makes the dialogue over The Gospel of Mark special is not Romans' deep theological arguments. Martin Luther, for example, in his 55 volumes of works translated into English barely mentions the Gospel, while doing an entire commentary on the Gospel of John.

The primary interest lies in the fact that less than 200 years ago, the basic opinions on dating Mark changed from its being considered a copy of Matthew to being an earlier source of both Matthew and Luke. This lively discussion was enriched even further by exegesis in the last 50 years, with the founding of `redactive' analysis by Marxson in Germany.

I've surveyed five different exegeses of Mark and have found much common ground, but also many differences, lying primarily in the translations and in the extent to which they address the history of commentary on Mark. Even though some of the volumes deal much more deeply with previous scholarship than others, all limit themselves to work done in the 20th century, and even to work done in the last 50 years. One thing I must say that although there are important differences, all of these volumes represent sound work at the deepest levels of scholarship. Some are more suitable for pastoral use than others, but none are `lightweights'.

The six volumes I surveyed follow:

`The Gospel According to Mark', William L. Lane, 1974, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., `The New International Commentary on the New Testament' Series.

`Mark 1-8:26', Robert A. Guelich, 1989, Nelson Reference & Electronic, `Word Bible Commentary' Series based on the author's own translation.

`Mark 8:27-16:20', Craig A. Evans, 2001, Nelson Reference & Electronic, `Word Bible Commentary' Series based on the author's own translation.

`The Gospel of Mark', Pheme Perkins, 1995, in Volume VIII of The New Interpreter's Bible with side by side NIV and NSRV translations.

`The Gospel of Mark', R. T. France, 2002, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., The New International Greek Testament Commentary Series.

`The Gospel According to Mark', James R. Edwards, 2002, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., `The Pillar New Testament Commentary Series'.

After having read commentary volumes from most of these series on both The Epistle to the Romans and The Epistle of James, I find a lot of consistency across volumes in the same series, so if you become comfortable with the way that `The New Interpreter's Bible ` approaches things, then you are probably on solid ground if you continue with that source, especially if you invested some big bucks in the complete 12 volume set (or there is a set available in your library's reference section, as it has appeared in every library I have visited).

`The New International Commentary on the New Testament' may be the weakest of the five series, as all it's volumes use the `American Standard Version' translation of 1901, considered to be a very literal rendering of the Greek text. While I like this over the NRSV's `politically correct' translations here and there, I suspect the newer NIV may be more up to date on the latest scholarship, especially, as I said, there has been so much done over the last 50 years. William Lane's volume in particular is nicely done, especially since it relegates a lot of the details to footnotes, so you can skip a lot of the lexical stuff.

The two volumes from the `Word Bible Commentary' series by Guelich and Evans should be your first choice if you are especially interested in the literature from the last 50 years, as their bibliographies are superb. While they are also quite deep, they nicely separate the material one wants for pastoral work from the linguistic analyses. It also represents by far the largest and most detailed work of the five. Professor Evans took over work on the second volume after Professor Guelich's death, and much of the material is based on notes from Guelich. I also like these authors' outline, as it simply deals with all the individual pericopes, and does not incorporate any speculative hypotheses about what author John Mark had in mind as he wrote.

`The Gospel of Mark' by Pheme Perkins in Volume VIII of The New Interpreter's Bible may be my least favorite; however, it may be the best option for pastoral users. It raises the fewest questions and presents two of the very best modern translations (NIV and NSRV) side by side. It also offers excellent reflections on the theological use of the paragraphs.

`The Gospel of Mark', R. T. France in `The New International Greek Testament Commentary Series' is also near the bottom of my list, as the volume offers no translation of the text on which it is commenting. While this is actually a plus for many readers, it also makes a point of not offering a lot of commentary on other interpreters' writings, even though it does have a lot to say on other writers' opinions on the structure of `Mark'.

`The Gospel According to Mark' by James R. Edwards in `The Pillar New Testament Commentary Series' is a step down from the quality of Douglas Moo's commentary on James in the same series. And, unlike Moo, Edwards offers no translation. He also seems to have the most speculations about the intentions of author Mark in pointing out irony and structural details. Edwards and France may be the two most enjoyable to read; however I suggest you buffer your reading of these authors with copies of Guelich and Evans at your elbow.

Guelich and Evans together is my favorite for serious study. France and Edwards may be the best modern introductions, if you don't mind having a copy of the Gospel open to follow their commentary.

the author really supposes you have the greek text of Mark by your side as you read the book. so you'd better know greek to know what he's talking about. since i dont know greek, i cannot evaluate this work.