Customer Reviews

Letter to the Ephesians (Pillar Commentary)

5 star:		(14)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Peter T O'Brien's commentary on Ephesians is the newest volume in the Pillar New Testament Commentary, which is edited by D. A. Carson. In the past, O'Brien has written the best commentaries on Colossians and Philippians, so I had high expectations for this current volume. After reading the entire book, I was definitely not disappointed; in fact, it exceeded my expectations. It is very well-written and insightful. O'Brien swims against the current of much popular opinion on the interpretation of the epistle. For example, O'Brien defends Pauline authorship of Ephesians, not a widespread view among New Testament scholars today. He adopts a Reformed exegesis of Ephesians 1:4, writing: "It is inappropriate... to suggest that election in Christ is primarily corporate rather than personal and individual" (p. 99). O'Brien also rejects the feminist "mutual submission" view of Ephesians 5:21, instead advocating the view of Wayne Grudem and other complimentarians : "The apostle is not speaking of mutual submission in the sense of reciprocal subordination, but submission to those who are in authority over them" (p. 404).This is definitely the best commentary on Ephesians avaialable today, easily surpassing previous commentaries by F.F. Bruce, A.T. Lincoln, and others. Lincoln is very good, both exegetically and theologically. He is also worth reading. But Lincoln denies Pauline authorship and his commentary is more difficult to read quickly. O'Brien is better. O'Brien's commentary is about 500 pages so it is comprehensive, but not excessively exhaustive. If you can only own one commentary on Ephesians, buy this one.

I simply cannot overstate the importance of this work on Ephesians by Senior Research Fellow at Moore Th. Coll (Sydney), Peter T O'Brien. This the newest addition to the rigorous Pillar series is a gem in conservative exegesis.

O'brien convincingly takes on E. Best (Ephesians:ICC) on Pauline authorship. (In the process, O'brien singles himself out as a rare New Testament scholar who is willing to defend Pauline authorship on this letter, and again, he does so convincingly). All this, just for his section on pro-Pauline authorship! Take this is an accurate measure for the rest of his work.

O'brien is simply one of the top conservative scholars in the world today. His two other commentaries-(Colossians & Philemon:WBC), (Philippians:NIGTC), display the same sharp exegesis and profound insight as does this, his most recent commentary.

In short, I recommend you get this work ASAP, for any serious current work on Ephesians.

Rick E Aguirre Southern California (Aguirre100@aol.com) <><

O'Brien's Ephesians is simply wonderful. O'Brien has become one of my favorite commentators. Having been a minister, missionary, and now a professor and academic, O'Brien has a wealth of personal experience to draw on.

Not much more can be said that hasn't already been covered in terms of praise for this book. O'Brien sets down a thesis statement for the book of Ephesians, that of "the summing up all things in Christ" from the first chapter. Working with this, he expounds on Paul's understanding of that summation: namely the church, the world, and even the angelic powers. My only difficulty with reading this book was my own unfamiliarity with the Ephesian text forcing my constant need to flip back to see what was actual text being discussed.

Keeping with the Pillar Series format, O'Brien transliterates Greek words in the text proper. He does, however, provide their original Greek in the footnotes, a valuable addition that prevents me from having to backward transliterate into Greek to see what word is being discussed. Footnotes also free up the body of the text from those pesty in-line sources that break my train of thought in the paragraph. This makes the Pillar Series quite a bit easier to read then the Word Commentary Series (which is otherwise excellent).

Three cheers for O'Brien. If I can slip it in: I also recommend his Colossians and Philemon in the Word Series. I think it is the best source for these two books, despite the aforementioned in-line sources.

Peter O'Brien's outstanding commentary on Ephesians completes his trilogy on the Prison Epistles (see his commentary on Philippians in the NIGTC and Colossians-Philemon in the Word series) and, in my judgment, ranks as first among commentaries on Ephesians. Writing from a solid Evangelical stance, O'Brien defends Pauline authorship and wrestles honestly with Paul's majestic, but often complex, letter. While Harold Hoehner's commentary is broader in its coverage, O'Brien brings an amazing depth of insight to the table, and interprets Paul with skill and clarity. I especially appreciated O'Brien's keen eye for biblical-theological connections, which helped draw out many of the Old Testament references which lie behind Paul's letter. O'Brien is excellent with the Greek (though all Greek words are transliterated in the actual text of the book - actual Greek words are in the notes) and almost always has good reasons for his positions. Also, unlike Hoehner, O'Brien doesn't seem tied to a theological system (like Hoehner's dispensationalism, which occasionally slips in) and lets the text say what it says. I've read most of this book as I've preached expositionally through Ephesians over the course of nearly two years, and it is the main commentary I would recommend to others. Hoehner is a close second. The two commentaries together will serve an expositor well. But if you can only get one technical commentary on Ephesians, get O'Brien.

I simply must join in the laudatory chorus: O' Brien has definitely written the best commentary on Ephesians. It is well-written, balanced and exegetically sound and can be used with great profit also by those who can't read Greek.

Although at times the comments are wordy and at other points one would wish a longer treatment, I warmly recommend O'Brien's work without any reservation.

(I'm involved in Bible Translation in the former Soviet Union)

This is a really great commentary on Ephesians. I went through it with a bible study and it was extremely helpful. It is thorough and academic (others are probably more qualified to talk about the scholarship) but also readable and devotional. O'Brien, of course, is solidly evangelical and very well respected in the academic world. If you are looking for a commentary on Ephesians for use in a Bible study or personal devotions, this is the one, provided your group is already fairly grounded in the scriptures and in theology and is willing to invest some time into their study. Other commentaries in this same series (Carson on John etc) are also excellent.

This is an important commentary on a wonderful letter from Paul. It completes O'Brien's trilogy of commentaries on the prison epistles. It was a rare privilege to be able to attend his Ephesians class just before the commentary was due to be published.

I find that in each of his commentaries Dr O'Brien discusses the issues fairly, while still presenting clearly, and even forcefully, his own points of view. [This is so much better than those books which present several views without ever giving away what the author thinks!]

The author is theologically conservative and presents the arguments for Paul's authorship and a compassionate, complementarian approach to the roles of men and women convincingly.

Highly recommended.

Overall, this commentary is one of my favorites. (I'm a pastor who does exegetical sermons from the Greek text).

He interacts with many scholars on a variety of details without getting bogged down. It's easy to read yet gives substantive arguments that summarize well the opposing views as well as explaining his own view.

One issue I would take exception to is his exegesis in Ephesians 2:1 where he labels the phrase 'trespasses and sins' as a hendiadys. The term is probably simply a synonym use-not a hendiadys. I checked with a number of Greek experts who all concur that he is probably off on that point...not a biggie...but I did remember it for some reason.

One issue I really liked was his handling of Ephesians 5:18 ff. Some miss the linkage of the participles which follow 5:18...but O'Brien nails it. His explanations of the Household Table and it's header/title in 5:21 are more convincing than most I've read. I think coupled with FF Bruce on Ephesians and Stott for preaching/teaching phraseology this commentary ranks right up there as a top notch..ya gotta have it...commentary for the 'prince of epistles'. I highly recommend it and still use this book.

The binding on my copy was pretty cheap. The book started falling apart the first time I opened it...and I am seeking another copy. Hope that was just a fluke.

If you are a pastor or bible teacher who works through Ephesians I think you will find yourself referring to this book over and over. Buy it if you have the funds...you won't be sorry if you are a serious student of Ephesians.

This commentary on Ephesians is a mainstay in my research on this letter by Paul. I am reading and researching Ephesians for the purpose of writing my own commentary for eventual use in a sermon series, and use this book as well as others as a check on my own exegesis. It is highly readable, very insightful, and contains enough detail without being overly simplistic on one hand and overly academic on the other. This was one of the first commentaries I picked up and just read, and found that it read well, unlike some commentaries that are great reference books but just plain hard to read. O'Brien rigorously defends Pauline authorship of Ephesians, and falls squarely within the conservative evangelical camp. The book is technical, with solid exegesis and transliteration of Greek words in the body text with actual Greek in the notes. I would highly recommend this book on Ephesians along with Hoehner and Stott and Bruce. If you can only get one commentary on Ephesians, O'Brien is a good balance of technical and pastoral insight.

This is a great, focused, commentary on Ephesians. Peter O'Brien doesn't try to interpret Ephesians based on its rhetorical conventions, or on how it relates to our lives today. This is a straight forward, solid, verse by verse exposition of the epistle to the Ephesians. The introduction takes up around 80 pages or so and has a strong argument in support of Pauline authorship. He acknowledges that some have noted that there is an emphasis on realized eschatology as opposed to the future eschatology of the earlier epistles. He also is well ware of the lack or personal reminisces and the lack of an intimate knowledge of the Ephesian people, which seems inexplicable, seeing that he spent several years living with them and ministering to them.

Yet O'Brien feels that denying the Pauline ascription that the text has creates more problems than it solves. The original text probably didn;t have the reference "to the Ephesians," making this a circular letter. Also, its dependance on "the more Pauline" Colossians argues in favor of Pauline authorship here as well. Also, the emphasis on speaking the truth in love throughout this epistle would be a lot of hogwash if someone was pretending to be Paul. And if Paul was allegedly already dead, as some suppose then why does Paul ask for prayer for himself in Ephesians 6?

Moreover, the alleged stylistics differences between this epistle and earlier Paulines are a bit overdone and exaggerated. Paul wrote Ephesians!

O'Brien identifies Ephesians 1:9-10 as the key to the epistle. He notes that the central thought is God's cosmic plan to make His people unified and mature in Christ. 1:3:14 functions as a one long blessing to God for choosing us and predestining us. One area where I disagreeed with O'Brien was in verse 11, where he contends that this a reference to Jewish people being predestined, where to me, it refers to the Ephesians, who may be both Jewish and Gentile.

He points out that the seal in 1:14 is a sign of ownership and protection. He points out that chapter one climaxes with Christ seated with God in the heavenlies, far above all other authorities, and yet in 2:6, we were seated with Christ when we were saved. Awesome!

O'Brien seems to have Calvinist leanings in his understanding of predestination and in how God prepared works in advance for us to do (Eph 2:10), but he never allows his personal predilections to intrude on his reading of the text (and I lean toward an Arminian take on these texts).

In Ephesians 3, O'Brien contends that the gospel itself was not the mystery, but the manner in which it was revealed was a mystery. Making Jew and Gentile one in Christ was the mystery part.

In chapter four, O'Brien observes that Paul begins to make his exhortations. We need to put on the new self that God created for us in Christ.

At the end of chapter four (4:31), O'Brien highlights the different emphases in the words bitterness (a state of sharp resentment), rage (outbursts) anger (seething), brawling (shouting back and forth), and slander (blasphemy) and malice (attitude of wickedness). Bringing out the meaning of the Greek text was very helpful for me.

In chapter 5, O'Brien says that Paul mentions being filled with the Spirit instead of being drunk not because the Ephesians were a bunch of drunks, but that drunkenness was an example of the old life that needed to be put off, and that we should instead be controlled by God.

I am questioning O'Brien's take on Ephesians 5:21, where he says "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ" means submitting to those who are higher in authority than you are, and that it is not referring to a mutual submission. So wives submit to husbands and children to parents, and slaves to masters. But he does make clear that those holding positions of authority are commanded to be loving and fair rather than being bossy.

O'Brien also mentions that the mystery in verse 31-32 is the union of Christ and the church as typified in marriage.

The book concludes with a stimulating discussion of the armor of God. O'Brien observes that the themes of salvation and the word and faith and prayer have already been highlighted earlier in Ephesians.

This is one of the best commentaries on Ephesians that you can get. Not too short and not too long, and very helpful. The main areas for improvement would be for O'Brien to focus more on the structure of the text and to the rhetorical and literary conventions used by the author. Also, more of the social and cultural background would have been illuminating.