When it comes to commentaries on Ephesians, I still turn first to the Ephesians commentary that I first learned from so much... Markus Barth, but I'm getting ahead of myself. This series is intended to help pastors who are preparing sermons and are looking for solid exegetical studies, but I am in need of your help with the recommendations you have. Which commentary on Ephesians do you like most?As I said, I like Markus Barth and have ever since college when I spent gobs of time working on Ephesians 4. His was one of the early Anchor Bible commentaries and he managed to find one volume inadequate: Ephesians: Introduction, Translation, and Commentary on Chapters 1-3 (Anchor Bible, Vol. 34)
and Ephesians: Translation and Commentary on Chapters 4-6: Anchor Bible 34A (Anchor Bible)
.Next I turn to Andrew Lincoln who wrote that commentary at St John's College in Nottingham when I was doing my doctorate at the University, and I often saw Andrew -- I remember standing in the library when he told me he thought Eph 2:8-9 was not Pauline theology -- his commentary is thorough and sensitive to the theological contours: Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 42, Ephesians
.If you've got some funds, buy Ernest Best's volume in the ICC series: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Ephesians (International Critical Commentary)
. As with many in this series, there is a shorter version: Ephesians: A Shorter Commentary
.There's much to harvest from the above, but there's always something to glean from Klyne Snodgrass, Ephesians: The NIV Application Commentary
.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Snodgrass' NIV Application Commentary is a surprise and incredibly good. I agree that Hoehner's is exhaustive, but theologically slanted.
I like different ones for different reasons - O'Brien for theological reflection, Hoehner for grammar and sources, Barth for creative thinking. Best and Lincoln are good too, but the "author of Ephesians" bit (assuming someone other than Paul) gets tiresome and detracts from the exegesis.
Interestingly, Barth and Blanke's Colossians commentary has the best and most thorough treatment of the relationship between Colossians and Ephesians (over 50 pages on the topic!).
John,
Please tell me, what commentary is not "theologically slanted"? Just because Hoehner taught at DTS does not mean his commentary is full of apocalyptic doom and gloom rhetoric as found in the Left Behind series (the common caricature about DTS and dispensationalism from most people). Every single commentary mentioned on this page is just as theologically slanted as the next one. I've actually found some of Hoehner's conclusions quite surprising given the common caricature of "dispensationalism." It doesn't pervade every page of the text like others would have us think and is possibly the system of theology I have seen caricatured and blown out of proportion more so than any other.
Luke (#12) makes some excellent points. If Hoehner were slanted in the ways that some might think, then why would the likes of Frederick Danker say that "all other commentaries can be put in storage for retrieval as needed"? Maybe Danker is a closet dispensationalist! ;-)
For exegesis, I am surprised no one has yet mentioned Schnackenburg's commentary.
For rich pastoral insight, it is hard to beat John Stott, and his commentary on Ephesians is one of his best.
I also second Scot and John's affirmation of Kyle Snodgrass, whose NIVAC commentary has some great insights and applications, as well as some keen observations on exegesis and structure.
I appreciate Witherington's commentary, with its insightful assessment of and wise corrective to O'Brien's (and also Hoehner's) reading of Ephesians 5. Witherington really helps us capture the flow of the chapter in a way that O'Brien misses, IMHO.
I would also commend Michael Gorman's excursus on "Cruciform Love in Ephesians, with Special Reference to Ephesians 5" in his wonderful Cruciformity: Paul's Narrative Spirituality of the Cross. Gorman grounds the entire discussion about marriage "in the larger context of the letter and what it says about the fundamental responsibility of believers to one another: self-sacrificing, mutually submitting love."
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.