Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 51: 1,2,3 John [Hardcover]

Stephen S. Smalley (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: November 15, 1984

The Word Biblical Commentary delivers the best in biblical scholarship, from the leading scholars of our day who share a commitment to Scripture as divine revelation. This series emphasizes a thorough analysis of textual, linguistic, structural, and theological evidence. The result is judicious and balanced insight into the meanings of the text in the framework of biblical theology. These widely acclaimed commentaries serve as exceptional resources for the professional theologian and instructor, the seminary or university student, the working minister, and everyone concerned with building theological understanding from a solid base of biblical scholarship.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 428 pages
• Publisher: Thomas Nelson (November 15, 1984)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0849902509
• ISBN-13: 978-0849902505
• Product Dimensions: 9.4 x 6.4 x 1.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.9 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (6 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #778,806 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

11 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Best so-far on the Greek text but with some caveats, November 15, 2002

By 

Parableman (Syracuse, New York USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 51: 1,2,3 John (Hardcover)

Smalley really has put together the best commentary on the Greek text of I, II, and III John we've got at this point. He is well-versed in the scholarship on these books and presents others' views well even when he disagrees. He is fairly good at sorting through the issues in a balanced way, giving good arguments for most of his conclusions.

His treatment of the historical setting for these books seems to go a bit beyond the evidence. In the spirit of Raymond Brown, Georg Strecker, and other contemporary scholars, Smalley seems to place much emphasis on reading these books as a response to how some had misinterpreted the Gospel of John, reconstructing a whole historical situation behind the letters reflecting this speculative scenario behind this so-called "Johannine community". While this sort of work is imaginative, it is hardly worthy of the name of historical scholarship. At best it can show us a possible background to the texts at hand.

Compared to Brown and Strecker, Smalley is a breath of fresh air. At times, Brown seems more sympathetic to the heretics John is confronting, and Smalley does seem to identify more with the elder and his concern for purity of maintaining the apostolic doctrine. Brown seems open to taking both the heretics and the orthodox on these matters as legitimate interpretations of the apostolic message, an approach that minimizes the apostolic message and ignores much of the indisputably earlier epistles. Strecker's work reflects outdated scholarship. His now outdated history-of-religions method, together with his placing these books well into the second century despite all the recent evidence to the contrary, makes his work far less appealing than its scholary reputation would otherwise lead one to believe.

Smalley's own unique contribution is in his view that two heresies are at work in the Johannine community. Some Jewish heretics err on the side of Jesus' humanity, not admitting to his divinity because of Jewish monotheistic concerns, and other proto-Gnostic heretics err in denying his full humanity. The evidence shows no such thing, and all the language of these letters fits just fine with some sort of proto-Gnostic heresy, so the two-heresy view seems unnecessary, though showing such a thing will take some significant work in future commentaries on these letters.

I'm not entirely happy with everything in this commentary, but it stands far above the others available with this much detail on these books. I eagerly await D.A. Carson's commentary in the NIGTC series, which will easily be the best work on these letters. On the more popular level, John Stott's Tyndale volume and Colin Kruse's Pillar commentary will provide some balance to the idiosyncrasies of Smalley, but his attention to detail and interaction with the whole of scholarship will prove invaluable, at least until Carson's book is finally published. Schnackenburg's older commentary could also be quite useful as a more in-depth foil to balance out Smalley.

This volume is currently under revision. I don't know when the second edition will be appearing, but it's supposed to be the next NT volume of the series to be appearing. I'm guessing that it will probably be published in 2007 or 2008.

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars At the top on John's letters, July 21, 2008

By 

David A. Bielby "Ev Xpistw" (Normal, IL USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 51: 1,2,3 John (Hardcover)

I was pretty stunned to see a very negative review on this commentary, because it is probably my favorite commentary so far in the Word Biblical Commentary series. Here are some reasons why I like this one.

The author does know his stuff. He knows the gospel of John and the book of Revelation (having written a unique and worthy contribution to Apocalyptic studies). In this volume on 1, 2, 3 John he really does blend help for a pastor who is preparing sermons into the mix of technical language about Greek words and nuances in the text. I think this is the my favorite WBC volume because I have found more than one inspiring insight (the key word is inspiring here) on the same verse! I'm sure some of the volumes in WBC series are like this, but it seems like I always draw the dry ones (that's just my perspective).

After reading the Pillar, NIBC, Hermeneia, and several other commentaries on 1 John 2:1 & 2 last week, I was so refreshed when I finally read Smalley's overview. His was better than all of the others. It made sense and grasped the crucial issues and pulled them together so I could fairly quickly meditate on some preaching points I had already come up with from my own study. So many other commentaries lost me. Smalley hit the heart of the matter.

As an example, if you study the hot topic of 'propitiation' or 'expiation' that comes up in this passage, I think you will be convinced by Smalley of not only his position on this term in 1 John 2:1-2, but also of it's practical preaching impact. Here is a bit from his book to help you see what I mean.

From page 40:

Perhaps we should not use Paul to interpret John. Nevertheless in 1 John 2:2 (cf. 4:10) both senses of (ilasmos) also seem to be present. Jesus is regarded in this passage as a heavenly intercessor (v 1), pleading the cause of the sinner and asking for his pardon. He does this, and can do it effectively because he is righteous, and is 'himself' (autos) the offering (not the offerer!) for our sins (cf. v 7b). To this extent God is the object of the saving action. But he is also the subject, since in v 9 we learn that the forgiveness and purification of the sinner ultimately stem from the Father: he is righteous, and on the basis of the Son's offering he will forgive our sins. Here, then, is not contradiction but complementarity. John is declaring that the source of the offering is God the Father, but that the means are to be found in God the Son, and our translation, 'atoning sacrifice' attempts to capture both senses. In his life, but supremely in his death and resurrection, in the 'entire work of Christ' (Dodd, 27) salvation (initiated by God) is achieved for the believer....he goes on to cite more scholars and add on more points...but I hope you see the gist of his work here.

Personally, I had read through several others on this very verse and was frustrated until I read Smalley. He did a great job here. He ties together major issues in single sentences that represent a depth of study sometimes on each phrase in the sentence. This commentary has actually made it into my backpack for transport from home to my office (I only use my top books for that-because who wants to lug a lot of books around every day?). None of the others used 'intercessor' as the preferred translation for the function of Jesus in this passage, yet it makes the most sense to me. His overview of 'ilasmos' was also easier to follow than almost any other I read, except for Vaughan's short study guide that is out of print now (it's worth getting if you can find a copy-but it is a lot shorter and not designed for scholarly research, only pastoral).

I really love this commentary and highly recommend it!

One criticism that I hope they have fixed in the new version. Some segments of Smalley's treatment are so long that it is almost impossible to find a specific verse. Unbelievably there are no verse by verse markers that are set apart for the reader who wants to look up what he says about a specific verse! This has a net result of making the commentary worthless if you don't have time to sift through a 40 page section looking for a Greek phrase that is simply italicized. Sometimes common sense for the user is overlooked by the editors of technical books.

My suggestion is that you put a sticky flag by the spot you are working on once you find it, lest you incidentally close the book and then have to search all over again!!

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A superb commentary, January 7, 2008

By 

Jason L. Merritt (Fort Worth, TX USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 51: 1,2,3 John (Hardcover)

In this installation of the Word commentary series, Stephen Smalley has given us what may very well be the best commentary on these three epistles and one that is useful and accessible to both scholars and pastors. This, in fact, is the greatest strength of Smalley's commentary, namely that he does a masterful job of bridging the concerns of the scholar and pastor. Reading this commentary was both an intellectual and devotional exercise; Smalley makes other commentators on these books look almost inept by comparison in this area (Strecker comes immediately to mind). His reconstruction of the Johannine community's situation is highly nuanced, but all reconstructions are (Brown's reconstruction is highly detailed, and the more complex the theory becomes the higher the likelihood that one misses the mark). It is imaginative and does not press the evidence further than it can bear, even if the evidence may be legitimately interpreted in other ways. On the whole, a fantastic commentary.