Tuesday, May 01, 2007

Köstenberger articles

From the desk of Dr. Andreas Köstenberger:
  1. Favorite NT commentaries
  2. Helpful reference books
  3. A review of Jesus and the Eyewitnesses by Richard Bauckham

6 comments:

  1. How come no one puts William Hendriksen on their favorite commentaries list? Is he chopped liver or what? Steve?

    ReplyDelete
  2. In his favor, Hendrickson was a fine linguist. He’s reliably Reformed and conservative. He also writes in a more accessible style than some.

    That said, we need to resist the temptation of Calvinist clannishness and exclusive dependence on in-house scholarship. We can’t rest on our Reformed laurels.

    There are simply better commentaries on various books of the NT than Hendrickson penned. Even though a commentator may be less reliable in his overall theology than Hendrickson, his general and/or individual exegesis may still be superior much or most of the time.

    Competition is a good thing. Reformed commentators are all the better for having to come up with rigorous, alternative interpretations.

    There is, in some Reformed circles, the rather conceited notion that there’s “the Reformed way” of doing anything and everything. But Calvinism isn’t a self-contained tradition. It honors and preserves the Biblical witness better in some or many respects than some other theological traditions. But there’s a difference between Reformed distinctives, Reformed essentials, and what we share in common with other Christians.

    Many theological traditions cultivate blind partisanship. We need to do better than that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. CrazyManAndy5/01/2007 3:24 PM

    I notice that, in general, older writing's are not often recommended either, such as the Puritans, John Gill, or what have you. Is that for similar reasons? Or perhaps accessibility, relevance, theological differences, etc.?

    Andy

    ReplyDelete
  4. CrazyManAndy said...
    I notice that, in general, older writing's are not often recommended either, such as the Puritans, John Gill, or what have you. Is that for similar reasons? Or perhaps accessibility, relevance, theological differences, etc.?

    Andy

    *****************
    Older Reformed writers can be very useful in systematic, polemical, and moral/practical theology. But for detailed exegesis, it's best to read modern scholars.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thans for the link and, Patrick, for pointing out the Keller review. I've written a short response to Köstenbeerger's review on my blog.

    ReplyDelete