You will find O'Brien's to be one of the very best commentaries on Philippians, but you will get more out of it if you are familiar with New Testament Greek. The author writes from a theologically conservative viewpoint, but is always prepared to evaluate other views, while also clearly articulating his own.

The long section on Philippians 2:5-11 has been painstakingly researched. It is thorough and magnificent.

If you read commentaries to help you to understand the text, so that you can better serve Jesus Christ, you will really appreciate this one, as well as the author's commentaries on Colossians and Ephesians.

Highly recommended.

I have used this commentary on Philippians for several years now in my classes. The students enjoy its balance between scholarship and devotion. It contains a wealth of insights into and applications of the text. It also shows an awareness of those discourse features of New Testament Greek that can make a real difference in interpretation. Highly recommended!

This is an outstanding commentary. It is obviously intended for pastors and students who know their Greek well. The commentary is very challenging and extremely exhausting, but it richly rewards those persistent enough to read it with many exegetical and theological insights.

I have rarely been brought to a point of worship while reading a theological text book, let alone while preparing for an assignment. But that's what happened reading through this excellent collection of essays on the book of Acts. Renowned New Testament commentator I.H. Marshall has put together a masterly series of perspectives on the wonderful, but often enigmatic, narrative book by Luke outlining the early days of the church. Each writer gives his unique perspective on various aspects of the book, such as historical accuracy, theology, and intended message. Particularly enlightening is Joel B. Green's essay on "God as Saviour", in which he argues that the "witnesses" of Acts are to proclaim not only the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, but also its salvific significance as a work of the God of grace. Says Green on page 39: "Salvation is the coming of the kingdom of God to displace other kingdoms, and entails membership in the new community God is drawing together around Jesus." Keen theological insights and profound expositions of its literary structures make this collection on Acts more than a must-have for any student or teacher of the Biblical text - it is a doxological treat as well. I hope it gets you on your knees like it did me!

The information in this book is comprehensive, well-referenced (including mention of non-scriptural resources related to the period), and quite absorbing. I found myself moving from one cross reference to another, avidly seeking the information which "fleshed out" the accounts, and made the meanings of scriptural texts, even those I had studied a number of times, richer and more complete. The relation of gospel texts, particularly Jesus's parables, miracles and the like, to historical perspectives is well done. There also is a valuable section relating how to use gospel texts in preparing sermons. In total, it is a fine reference for placing Jesus's words in context, and understanding the actions of those with whom he dealt. (For example, look up the article on Pontius Pilate... his fear at "you are no friend of Caesar" has an interesting and very natural basis.) With this said, however, this valuable book should not be one's only reference for scripture study. My five stars are for the book as it is intended - a "dictionary," with extensive and often fascinating explanations. It is not sufficient for most scriptural exegesis or advanced New Testament study, particularly because it is strictly composed from an evangelical perspective. Many distinguished contemporary scholars (Raymond Brown, N.T. Wright, E.P. Sanders, to name a few), equally orthodox in their Christology, would have viewpoints that are far less literalist than this work provides. Just as two minor examples, the Dictionary sees no reason to doubt that the apostle Matthew was the author of the first gospel, and the idea that the visit of the Magi was completely, literally true (with no allowance for its being a midrash at all) is unquestioned. The entire approach in this work is extremely conservative. I would place this book on the shelf of anyone studying the gospels, but it would be one of at least five.

IVP and Dr. Daniel Reid have outdone themselves with this great series of dictionaries. This volume on Jesus & the Gospels is packed with over 900 pages of detailed information on the four gospels. With dozens of the leading scholars of our day contributing, the vast coverage of subjects is breathtaking.

The contributors have been given a great degree of freedom to express their views, but this turns out to be good for stretching one's thinking. Matters that I disagree with in various articles have been nothing short of challenging. This is an extremely helpful work that will prove invaluable to the pastor and teacher. There are so many excellent and helpful articles in this work that we would probably do well to just read the entire volume.

This is one of the better reference works available from a conservative evangelical publishing company (IVP). The text itself is a very detailed dictionary of the four Gospel accounts. The editors include articles regarding people, places, events, dates, cross-references, etc. The articles are broad in the sense that they include various opinions and views but not so broad that they are too muddled in what they communicate. There is an enormous amount of detail in this volume. The editors discuss things such as the ethics of Jesus, certain feasts, genealogies, historical reliability of the Gospel accounts, the doctrine of Hell, historical quest of Jesus, Josephus, the phrases "Kingdom of God" and "Kingdom of Heaven," miracles and miracle stories, passion narratives, the Resurrection, what the term Son of Man means, etc. and what I have listed does not even begin to scratch the surface of the material that is within these pages. This work is over 900 pages of great material about the Gospels and their content, history, dating, etc. If you are wanting a great research tool, then this is one of, if not the best one you could add to your library. Another great reference work by the same publishing company (IVP) which works well with this volume is titled "Dictionary of Paul and His Letters." See my review, here at Amazon, on that gereat reference work which is a type of vol. 2 in connection with "Dictionary of Jesus . . ."

This commentary is simply too much: too many words, too many concepts, too many theories, and paradoxically, too few conclusions. It is overly technical and often gets lost in overly subtle hermeneutical or linguistic arguments. I am very grateful for his own translation (why France writing on Mark in the same series opted not to do the same is a mystery). It should also be noted that Thiselton is much more of a philosopher/hermeneut/semanticist than he is a theologian. In defense of others who find the book too technical, it must be recalled, in the words of the editors, "the purpose of the series is to cater to the needs of students who want something less than a full scale commentary . . .the authors will bear in mind the needs of the beginning Greek student as well as the pastor or layperson...who does not use the language on a regular basis." If that is the stated aim of this series, Thiselton has failed that aim since this is the largest, most technical commentary on 1 Corinthians in the history of the English language. It fails to connect with its own purported audience.

For this review, it may help to know that I am a pastor and a Ph.D. candidate. On the one hand, this is an amazing scholarly achievement. Having read several key passages, I am thoroughly impressed by Thiselton's abilities: his mastery of secondary material, his sophisticated understanding of language and interpretation, his exegetical nuance and synthetic skill. This is simply the best commentary on 1 Corinthians in English for the scholar or seminary student. On the other hand, if you are a pastor trying to preach/teach through 1 Corinthians, I recommend you look elsewhere. There is just too much extraneous information in this book which does not directly bear on our tasks. Also, while I commend Thiselton for listing nearly every possible position on a subject, it is frustrating to read so many pages and not be sure what Thiselton's opinion is or why he holds it. There is an astonishing amount of erudite information in this book, but often too much! I wish the publishers of the ever more girthsome commentaries would realize that often, less is more! Thus, I rate the book 4 stars (5 for scholars, but only 3 for preachers). For the pastor, I still recommend Fee as the best commentary, with Barrett and Kistemaker as great complements.

First of all, the NIGTC series has never claimed to be anything but a scholar's series. So it needs to be judged on those terms. Judging it on value to the pastor who may or may not have the advanced Greek knowledge this commentary demands (2 years minimum, probably exegesis experience as well), is like judging the NIV Application series' value for scholars. This is not to say Thistleton does not deal with issues of application, he does. But the primary purpose is to survey the critical literature in view of the text.

Thistleton is one of the leading British scholars of hermeneutics today, and it shows in the work. This is thorough and careful exegesis, often much more careful than Fee's work, which I also admire. This, plus Thistleton's immense vocabulary, can daunt even the most sophisticated reader. But his style is lucid, and, for a commentary, enjoyable. His scholarship is impeccable, and even when one disagrees with him in the end, one understands why one can come to such a view rationally even if you don't accept his presuppositions, which is not always possible in Fee's work.

In short, this commentary is the new standard in Greek scholarship, and is set to be it for a long time. If you don't have the background for this commentary, it is very difficult going. But it rewards careful study.

This is just what the title suggests, a commentary to the book of Acts. The only thing that this text lacks is considerations for different interpretations of scripture.

I. Howard Marshall does an absolutely amazing piece of scholarly work and wisdom in this commentary. This book has some detailed analysis of the text, however, if you do not know Greek, you won't be lost (if you do know Greek it will be helpful though). His commentary defends much of what has been called a "conservative view" of the book of Acts (however, he does offer some innovative (and good) interpretations himself). This is an invaluable tool, not just because of the scholarship of Marshall, but also because of the scholarship Marshall engages in. His main academic task is to engage the influential liberal commentary on Acts recently published by Ernst Haenechen. This interaction is not only academically important, but as one can see, it is also vitally important to application. The background study material is excellent (even if you disagree with his conclusions), and his verse by verse discussion is probably the best work on the book of Acts in the last 15 years. I recommend this to anyone who wants to have a great resource for understanding the book of Acts.

Marshall's commentary on the three epistles on John is an outstanding commentary. It is a commentary that is useful to the scholar as well as the lay preacher. This commentary, like others written on the epistles of John, seems to avoide the issue on 1 John 5:7. All the commentators seem to be following the likes of Westcott and Hort, and refuse to comment on this verse. The part of the verse I would like to discuss here is the Johannine Comma. Marshall says, 'This form of wording appears in no reputable modern version of the Bible as the actual text.'(pg. 236) I disagree for it was removed by the heretics of Alexandria, and was in the original. I will agree with Jerome for he says that the Johannine Comma was omitted through design rather than a mistake, and I will go one step further and say that Satan was behind the removal of this text. The Johannine Comma can be found in St. Cyprian's 'The Treatises of St Cyprian, On the Unity of the Church, sec.V.p.135.Oxford Edition. 1876,' where he writes, " The Lord says, "I and the Father are one; "and again it is written of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, "And these three are one." " This was written in AD 250 long before the two Alexandrian manuscripts were written. It is sad to see that scholars and Greek grammarians have fallen for the Alexandrian reading, even though they are not the oldest manuscripts or the most accurate. I think it about time Greek grammarians and textual critics are honest with their readers, and not repeat what Westcott, Hort or Metzger say, for the former two did everything in their power to reject the Traditional Text. I ask those commentators like Marshall, Smalley, Kruse and the likes to examine the works of Cyprian and then fairly comment on the Johannine Comma.

I. Howard Marshall's commentary on the Epistles of John has much to commend it to the pastor, Bible teacher, or scholar. His treatment of the passages is thorough, and his text critical footnotes are helpful. The only problem with the commentary is the bit of fluff that it contains. Marshall tends to interject his scholarship with things like old hymn lyrics, which the reader may not find helpful, yet this book is highly recommended based on both scholarship and readability.

This book is a very detailed, verse-by-verse commentary on the Gospel of Luke (based on the NRSV translation). Used as an aid to help understand the meaning of phrases, words, references, etc., it is a good resource-- but be wary of limiting your understanding of the passage to the way it is explained in this book. This book is probably most appropriate for ministers or as a useful reference for someone who reads the Bible from a faith perspective.

I am sorry, but I cant give this commentary a high mark. I am not unused to technical commentaries, I use the Word- and NIGTC-series alot. But I am always disappointed with this one. He puts alot of effort into synoptic questions and textvariants (which I am not interested in), but not much into what Luke really meant, the theology of the text and how it fits into the doctrinal big picture. I like technical commentaries because they analyze the meaning of important greek words, but this one does not. So now I am still lacking a good commmentary on Luke (Geldenhuys and Ellis wont do either). Thinking of getting the NICNT one.

Marshall does a splendid job in his commentary giving the reader a better understanding of the theology of Luke through his meticulous analysis of the Greek. Even the devotional reader who does not know any Greek will be blessed by this volume for the detailed information it contains. This volume can be ranked alongside those by Geldenhuys, Godet and Plummer. I strongly recommend the reader to purchase this volume along with Marshall's 'Luke: Historian and Theologian.'

This is a great commentary, if you can make what for with all of the Greek in it. I love it. It was my favorite commentary on Luke for a long time. But it is long on exegesis and theology and short on practical stuff. And it doesn't have much of an introduction at all! Marshall's "Luke: Historian and Theologian should be purchased with this to compensate for a lack of an introduction. But the great thing about this commentary is how accurate Marshall is on his interpretations of the passages.