...that Dick France's new commentary on Matthew is really rather good.
« Your First Day on Earth | Main | Advent Hope »
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
Comments
The comments to this entry are closed.
Keeping in Touch
- Readers and Friends
Work
Currently Reading
Currently Reviewing
Recent Posts from My Blogroll
Search
Recent Posts
- SNTS in Perth: 23–27 July 2013
- Forthcoming Volume on Grace
- Lent Resources from the Centre for Theology and Ministry
- Durham PhD Studentship: The Fourfold Gospel and its Rivals
- Beverley Gaventa to move to Baylor
- Come and Work at the United Faculty of Theology
- Ebeling on Interpretation
- New Book on Baptism: Recovering the Evangelical Sacrament
- New Testament Position at International Christian College in Glasgow
- Paul and the Restoration of Humanity: New Book
Recent Comments
- Paul Lavender on Beverley Gaventa to move to Baylor
- Remnantofgiants.wordpress.com on Ebeling on Interpretation
- Brandon Jones on New Book on Baptism: Recovering the Evangelical Sacrament
- Jonthewatson on Ferdinand Christian Baur
- FaithTheology on SBL: Good and Bad
- Bloggingbooks1 on The One Poet I Know
- Goodacre on Luke's Use of Matthew: Luke 1:31 as a Test Case
- ConnorO on Luke's Use of Matthew: Luke 1:31 as a Test Case
- James McGrath on Luke's Use of Matthew: Luke 1:31 as a Test Case
- Sean Winter on Creation, Conflict and Cosmos: Short Paper 1 (Douglas Campbell)
Much better in my view Paul. France's work on Matthew has a long pedigree and his earlier work always seemed to me to be instinctively right. If you are going to buy a Matthew commentary and can't afford £120 or so for 3 volumes of Luz - this is the one I think.
Posted by: Sean | Saturday, December 08, 2007 at 01:34 AM
I have to say...
Is it better than his commentary on Mark?
Posted by: Paul Lavender | Friday, December 07, 2007 at 07:20 PM
We used to have a wonderful senior minister who stood up at our Baptist Assembly in Scotland and with great courtesy and aplomb, announce, 'Mr President, I would like to endorse the sentiments of the previous speaker, as sensible, helpful and much to the point'.
Likewise me too! France's Matthew commentary is all that a middle range commentary should be - readable, enough information on most of the points that NEED comment, restricted use of secondary sources, and an independent engagement with the text.
Posted by: Jim Gordon | Thursday, December 06, 2007 at 06:07 AM
I have to agree with you Sean. I've been using it for the past few weeks as we preach through the discources in Matthew and I've been finding really helpful.
Posted by: simon jones | Thursday, December 06, 2007 at 03:40 AM