|
2 Peter and JudeGood and not so good2 PETER AND JUDE The IVP New Testament Commentary Series is that hardback series with the really boring blue and white cover. It’s a series which is aimed at pastors, Bible study leaders and teachers. It seeks to move from the text to its contemporary relevance and application. This volume on 2 Peter and Jude completes the series. The commentary on 2 Peter was written by Robert Harvey. It’s very good. There’s a short introduction of 14 pages. There’s some discussion concerning the issue of authorship; he comes down in favour of the apostle Peter. He gives a brief overview of the contents of the book. He shows how relevant 2 Peter is to the contemporary scene with its proliferation of cults and off-beam manifestations of Christianity. He challenges our own coldness. There is a neat outline of 2 Peter. Then follows the commentary proper, with an average of two pages per verse. Robert Harvey has researched the epistle well. His comments are well set out. He includes helpful points to guide the preacher in application. He adds a number of illustrations which serve to make the commentary very readable. Some of his comments are very brief, and there are some divisive issues which he could have gone into more. I didn’t agree with everything I read, but I came away feeling very positive. Sadly, Robert Harvey died before he could write the commentary on Jude. Philip H. Towner was therefore commissioned to write it. There’s an introduction of 21 pages. This discusses authorship and comes down in favour of Jude, the brother of James. It also covers the theological and literary character of the book, and the identity of Jude’s opponents. Philip H. Towner writes in a far more academic way than Robert Harvey. The commentary itself averages about three pages per verse. It is quite technical, but contains lots of helpful detail. There’s an excellent breakdown of the contents of Jude on pages 173-174. As I read, however, I found myself disagreeing with Philip H. Towner’s analysis fairly often. I wasn’t sure about what he said about the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah, or about the way the Bible portrays Balaam. I felt uneasy about some passing comments about the canon of Scripture. And I think he is way too soft on Jude’s opponents. All in all, I would recommend the commentary on 2 Peter. ‘Nuff said. James Muldoon, © Evangelicals Now - March 2010 |