Tag: Philip Comfort

Commentary Roundup: “1-2 Chronicles (Cornerstone Biblical Commentary Series)” by Mark Boda

~ Bob Hayton

Commentary Roundup posts are a series of short reviews or overviews of Bible commentaries. I’m working my way through a variety of commentaries, new and old, and hope to highlight helpful resources for my readers.

Book Details:
• Author: Mark J. Boda
• Series Editor: Philip W. Comfort
• Publisher: Tyndale House Publishers (2010)
• Format: hardback
• Page Count: 442
• ISBN#: 9780842334310
• List Price: $29.99
• Rating: Recommended

Series Description:
The Cornerstone Biblical Commentary provides students, pastors, and laypeople with up-to-date, evangelical scholarship on the Old and New Testaments. It’s designed to equip pastors and Christian leaders with exegetical and theological knowledge to better understand and apply God’s word by presenting the message of each passage as well as an overview of other issues surrounding the text.

Structure:
The Cornerstone Biblical Commentary brings together a wealth of scholarship in a clearly presented and highly accessible format. Each larger section of text gets its own introductory section. Then each textual unit, usually of a chapter or two in length, gets its own separate treatment. The full text from the New Living Translation opens the section, then footnotes to the text, and detailed notes follow. The commentary section is next and covers sources used by the Chronicler, the structure and content of the section – which is where the primary exegesis happens, and then a concluding section titled “significance” where the author brings home the main themes from the text.

Features:
A detailed introduction to the books of Chronicles opens the work, and enumerates the setting, author, date, and audience. The canonicity and textual history of Chronicles are detailed, and literary and theological concerns are addressed. Space is also devoted to the major themes of the books of Chronicles, of which the author finds covenant relationship, an emphasis on renewing the present through remembering the past, and the prophetic office as key. And while the Chronicler emphasizes Judah’s history, he repeatedly refers to “all Israel,” Boda sees in this a concern for the fulfillment of a truly united Israel “comprised of inhabitants from both north and south united around the Temple, King, and Jerusalem” (p. 18). And intriguingly, he argues that “The omission of the history of the northern kingdom throughout the account is not intended as a slight against these tribes, but rather is used to play down the schism and to include them in ‘all Israel'” (p. 18). The introduction also includes a detailed outline of the books of Chronicles.

Other features of the commentary include a proprietary numbering system from Tyndale for the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek words – similar to Strong’s numbers, but coded to other reference works from Tyndale. Some numbers are also provided that key to Zondervan resources as well. A detailed list is also provided of key textual witnesses to 1 and 2 Chronicles, and the Old and New Testaments as a whole. Also included is an extensive explanation of the transliteration and numbering system employed in the commentary. Throughout the volume, charts, maps, chiastic structures, and timelines are provided, but all in black and white. The commentary makes thorough use of end notes after every section and introduction, as well. This allows it to remain highly technical but also more accessible to the average reader.

Excerpt:
The books of Chronicles are full of lists and genealogies, and the technical bent of this commentary proves helpful in catpuring what is being communicated theologically by the Chronicler. The following excerpt captures well the attention to detail shown by the author of this commentary. It also illustrates how helpful this commentary is for exegesis.

David’s Commission of the Military (27:1-15). With chapter 27 the Chronicler leaves behind the enumeration of the Levitical families, moving to the “secular” leadership of his kingdom. He begins with the military (27:1-15), then moves to the tribes (27:16-22), and finally, after a short note on the census, concludes with the property managers (27:25-31) and royal advisers (27:32-34).

Because this chapter, as part of the unit of chapters 23-27, stands out as the only one unconcerned with sacred personnel, some have suggested it was a later addition. However, although the Chronicler’s focus has been on the commissioning and organization of the sacred orders due to his concern for the Temple, the royal secular infrastructure of the kingdom is also important for sustaining the Temple worship. In addition, in the discussion of 23:1-2 it is noted that the term “summoned” (‘asap [TH622, ZH665]) in 23:2 is a literary signal from the Chronicler that summarizes the content of chapters 23-27. There David is depicted as assembling “all the leaders of Israel” (kol-sare yisra’el), a term that is distinguished in the list from “the priests and Levites.” Thus, it is now in chapter 27 that the Chronicler presents the “leaders” of Israel, with the term “leader” (sar [TH8269, ZH8569]) used seven times in the chapter (27:1, 2, 5, 8, 22, 31, 34). Finally, the national assembly that David convenes in chapters 28-29 is comprised of the very groups introduced in chapter 27. Thus, chapter 27 is not only appropriate in a work focused on the Temple but is expected both by the introduction to chapters 23-27 and also the introduction to chapters 28-29.

The first section of chapter 27 focuses on the organization of the army. The term “list” here (mispar [TH4557, ZH5031]) is the one used regularly throughout chapters 23-27 for “numbering” (23:3, 24, 27, 31; 25:1, 7; 27:1). It is also the term used in 21:5 when Joab presents the results of the census to David, an event reflected in 27:23-24, where again the term appears twice. The initial list of personnel in 27:1 appears to reflect organization of groups through a chain of command, moving from the Israelites to “heads of the fathers” (not reflected in NLT) to generals and captains (lit., “[the leaders of] thousands and hundreds”) to their officers. The role of this chain of command was to supervise the army divisions, and they did this under the authority of the king. This is an important development in the sociology of Israel, signaling that the army was no longer linked to tribal chieftains and tribal authority but rather to a centralized royal figure and that military affairs would no longer be conducted ad hoc but would be directed by a standing army.

These army divisions are identified as those who “went in and went out” (habba’ah wehayyotse’th [TH935/3318, ZH995/3655]; NLT, “on duty”), a phrase related to the ancient “changing of the guard,” which is illustrated in 2 Kings 11:9 and 2 Chronicles 23:8. These latter passages identify the Sabbath as the time of the changing of the Levitical guard; they distinguished between “men reporting for duty that Sabbath” and “those who were going off duty [on the Sabbath],” a process dependent on an act of dismissal (“Jehoiada the priest did not let anyone go home after their shift ended,” 2 Chr 23:8). The specific duties of these troops is not made clear, although it obviously would have entailed battle in times of war, and in times of peace, as Japhet (1993:469) notes, “These reserves would be given the duty of guarding the kindom’s borders, doing police service and maintaining order in conquered territories, manning strongholds and castles, attending to the weapons and equipment–chariots, horses, etc.” For the royal army in chapter 27, the cycle was monthly rather than weekly, a fact reinforced by the list in 27:2-15. Although the list is based on the principle of 12 units, it is interesting that the division is not based on the 12 tribes, further evidence of the social transformation under David’s reign. The number 12, however, also bolsters the Chronicler’s presentation of this perfect kingdom and echoes the earlier divisions in chapters 24-26, which were based on the number 24. However, the fact that it is only half the number may privilege the role and organization of the sacred orders. (pg. 204-205)

Evaluation:
This commentary over and again proves faithful to a high view of Scripture. Yet it is also extremely helpful in sorting out the technical details in the text and catching the underlying theological vision of the Chronicler. Some of my readers may not be aware of how very different the books of Chronicles are from the books of Kings, and this commentary helps underscore and interpret these differences as being loaded with theological import rather than evidence against the divine inspiration of both groups of books. The material is presented in a clear way and remains accessible to a wide variety of readers. I recommend this book for anyone who desires to study the books of Chronicles. I’m confident that it will prove helpful and steer you right.

About the Author:
Mark J. Boda (Ph.D., University of Cambridge) has authored numerous articles and books in addition to editing several collections of scholarly essays on various topics related to the Old Testament and Christian Theology. He taught for nine years at Canadian Theological Seminary before joining McMaster Divinity College in 2003. Mark enjoys mentoring students and teaches with enthusiasm about the Old Testament and its continued relevance to the Christian life today.

Where to Buy:
  • Westminster Bookstore
  • Amazon
  • Christianbook.com
  • Direct from Tyndale

Disclaimer:
This book was provided by Tyndale House Publishers. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

“Opening John’s Gospel and Epistles” by Philip W. Comfort & Wendell C. Hawley

~ Bob Hayton

Teaching and preaching the New Testament text with vitality and faithfulness is a high calling. The tools for the faithful student of the New Testament are many and varied. A teacher’s needs will be different than those being taught however, and many times a commentary is designed more for the end audience than for the one teaching them. Some resources delve too deeply into biblical languages and critical analysis — much deeper than the average teacher needs. Others package up the application so nicely that there is no effort expected or required of the reader.

Philip W. Comfort and Wendell C. Hawley have given us a unique blend of particularly helpful scholarly material and pastoral insight. In Opening John’s Gospel and Epistles one finds detailed textual and interpretive notes, sprinkled throughout a warm exultation of the main points being taught in the text. The result is a manual or guide for the active teacher, rather than an application book or a detailed exegetical analysis.

The book is laid out in a helpful format, with 6-12 page introductions to the books (2 & 3 John are treated together), followed by separate discussions of each unit of text. The discussions include an exposition and notes on pretty much each verse. The section on John also includes a key words and phrases section.

The expositions set the stage and serve to provide a big picture and background for one’s study and preparation. This is the place helpful application points and themes are raised. The notes explain the text and cover critical or textual matters in some detail (but those discussions stay brief and accessible).

Given Comfort’s expertise in textual critical matters, the work abounds with detailed textual notes explaining alternate readings and the manuscript evidence behind various readings. This can be a strong point, as when the publication and canonicity of the Gospel and epistles are explained, and when the leading papyrii witnesses to John’s writings are described. It can also be distracting to those less familiar or concerned about such matters. I think Comfort aims to make the wider church more aware of such discussions, and this work will make such points more accessible for sure. Of particular note, is the decision to set off the story of the woman caught in adultery (7:53-8:11) as an appendix to the section on John. The manuscript evidence argues against the inclusion of the story in the text of John’s Gospel, and Comfort and Hawley correspondingly treat the passage as less than fully inspired.

The commentary reflects a conservative evangelical approach to Scripture. Detailed theological points of controversy are generally avoided, however, in favor of the explication of the text. In John 6, for instance, the transubstantiation debate and the unconditional election question (6:44), are only referenced obliquely. In John 3:5 the various interpretations for “born of water and of the Spirit” are offered, and the preferred choice defended briefly. That discussion was quite helpful, and the discussion stayed very irenic.

I found the claim that John’s version of the Last Supper was not a Passover meal to be somewhat confusing. The introduction and also the discussion in chapter 19 assert that John asserted the Last Supper to be prior to the Passover meal. But the discussion in chapter 13 was referenced for more information, and there the commentary explained the Last Supper likely was a Passover meal.

The combination of two separate works into one presented some problems. Opening the Gospel of John was the original title. The work on the epistles was published as a separate work later in the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary series. Bringing the two works together is great, but I would have liked to see a greater attempt at standardizing the work as a whole. The Cornerstone Biblical Commentary Greek numbering system was used in the epistles of John for instance. Each Greek word is transliterated (as in the Gospel section), but it is a Strong’s number, as well as another number as well. This convention is not followed in the Gospel of John. What makes this even more confusing, is there is no mention of what the numbering system is or means in this book at all. I had to pick up a Cornerstone commentary to find that the numbers with a prefix “TG” refer to a Tyndale’s modified Strong’s Greek number, and “ZG” refers to a similar numbering system popularized by Zondervan. “TH” and “ZH” refer to the numbers for the Hebrew words in such a system. A similar matter is the absence of end notes in the epistles of John entirely, whereas every section of the book of John had several end notes. Also the NLT is emphasized in the work covering the epistles whereas the section on John (produced before the publication of the NLT Bible) ignores it.

Along these lines, I encountered a few editing errors. Following the appendix to the Gospel of John, a list of three papyrii is found with no explanation as to why it is there. At the very end of the book a list is given of all the papyrii and major manuscripts and there are a few obvious typos in that list as well. Furthermore in at least two places (pg. 335 and 351) a single Greek word is followed by a reference to a Greek and a Hebrew number (TG & ZH).

These minor quibbles aside, the notes and commentary provided in this work seem especially clear, straightforward and eminently helpful. It will be a volume that I’ll be keeping in arm’s reach, whenever I teach from John’s Gospel or his epistles. I recommend this book highly.

Pick up a copy of this book at Amazon.com or direct from Tyndale House.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by Tyndale House Publishers for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

“New Testament Text and Translation Commentary” by Philip Comfort

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

Author: Philip W. Comfort
Format: Hardcover
Page Count: 899
Publisher: Tyndale House
Publication Date: 2008
ISBN: 9781414310343
Rating: 5 of 5 stars

I have always been intrigued by textual criticism and the study of how we got our Bible. The Bibles we have today are the descendants of hand written manuscripts, written on papyri, vellum or paper, and in either large (uncial) or small (miniscule) letters. Those manuscripts were written originally in Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic, and later translated into Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, and other languages. Today we have English Bibles finely produced from the magic of printing presses and publishing houses. But how can we know that these Bibles accurately represent what was originally written? This is where textual criticism comes in — a highly disputed field, especially in today’s skeptical age. Textual scholars referred to as critics, take the time to compare all the hand written manuscripts that have been preserved down to our day. Using various methods of comparing, contrasting and evaluating the readings of numerous manuscripts (over 5700 for the NT!), they help guide today’s church in deciding which textual variants are the likely original readings.

Philip Comfort is one of these scholars, and he has provided a fabulous resource for Bible scholars, pastors, and others to study the textual data on all the 3,000 or so places in the New Testament where we find textual variants that may affect the Bible translations we have in our hands. Comfort focuses primarily on the variants which result in differences between the various English Bible versions in use today (KJV, NKJV, NASB, NIV, ESV, HCSB, NLT, TNIV, NRSV, etc.). He also highlights some of the intriguing variants and places where the Western family of manuscripts often expands the text. What makes Comfort’s work so especially valuable is that his discussion is all in English! He discusses the Greek and other languages, but is mindful of the non-technical, English speaking reader. This makes New Testament Text and Translation Commentary (NTTTC) very accessible, opening up the intricacies of textual critical studies to the average Bible student.

While Comfort may not include all the textual data accessible to scholars in the UBS4 or NA27 Greek texts and other scholarly resources, he does format his work and provide relevant information in a much more user-friendly format. In places where there are two or more variants that have affected the English Bibles, Comfort will first give each variant reading in Greek and English, then he lists the Greek manuscripts and other supports for each variant, and he also adds which English Bibles follow that variant in their text or margin. Following all of this, he offers a brief discussion of that particular variant, taking us step by step through how a conservative, evangelical scholar will assess this textual evidence to arrive at a conclusion concerning this particular reading.

This detailed analysis of each major variant in the Greek New Testament makes up the bulk of the book and provides an easy to look up reference for practically any passage where one might encounter a variant. Comfort also provides a brief overview of textual criticism and a very interesting assessment of the major textual witnesses for each section of the New Testament. He displays an extensive understanding of the papyri manuscripts in particular as well as the history of textual criticism and all the relevant data. A few appendices are also included for more specialized discussions.

NTTTC doesn’t stick to strictly textual critical matters. In Mk. 7:3 a discussion of manners and customs of Bible times is required to understand the Greek phrase “wash their hands with a fist” . Exegetical matters are also addressed, such as in the conservative and delicate handling of the variant at 1 Cor. 14:34-35. NTTTC’s format makes difficult and highly technical discussions much easier. When discussing the ending of Mark, he helpfully lays out all 5 variations of the ending providing a few pages of discussion. At Acts 20:28 he discusses two variants together, by first delineating all the various combinations of the two variants, and helpfully summarizing the options and discussing each option in light of exegetical matters as well.

The discussions in NTTTC prove enlightening. One learns the importance of understanding the patterns of particular scribes when discussing variants such as Luke 24:3 where Comfort explains why Westcott and Hort were wrong. The major passages like the ending of Mark and John 7:53-8:11 are covered in depth. Comfort is honest about some variants being driven by theological considerations, such as in Heb. 2:9. Interestingly, the theological bias in textual variants was almost always rejected by the church in days of old as well as today.

One excerpt of this work will serve to illustrate its value well. Regarding Jude 4, Comfort states:

The reading in TR, poorly attested, is probably an attempt to avoid calling Jesus δεσποτην (“Master” ), when this title is usually ascribed to God (Luke 2:29; Acts 4:24; Rev. 6:10). Hence, θεον (“God” ) was appended to δεσποτην. However, 2 Pet. 2:1, a parallel passage, identifies the redeemer, Jesus Christ, as the δεσποτην. So here also the WH NU reading, which is extremely well documented, shows that Jude considered Jesus to be the absolute sovereign.

As one well attuned to the issues relating to King James Onlyism, I found this volume especially helpful. 26 times I found a KJV reading to be supported by no Greek manuscripts. Western additions such as “full of the Holy Spirit” at Acts 15:32 and “Jesus” at Acts 17:31 reveal that “omissions” are in the eye of the beholder. Does the TR omit these important phrases or the Western texts add them? It was through my KJV Onlyism debate lenses that I discovered a few minor errors in Comfort’s text. He wrongly claims the KJV followed Stephanus’ 1550 TR (along with the WH/ NU modern Greek Text) at Rev. 16:5 when in fact they followed Beza’s conjectural emendation “and shall be” instead of “holy one” . He also seems to state that a variant at Rom. 7:6 was introduced by Elzevirs’ TR and then later adopted by the KJV, however the KJV was translated 22 years prior to the Elzevirs’ work. The reading in question was introduced by Beza in one of his editions used by the KJV translators. Also at Luke 2:38 he lists the Vulgate as the sole support for the KJV reading, but Robinson-Pierpont’s Majority Text edition includes the KJV reading “Lord” .

I would have liked Comfort to address more passages relevant to the KJV Only debate. It would have been great if he had mentioned which variants the printed Greek Majority Text’s of Hodges-Farstad or Robinson-Pierpont adopted as well. But space constraints are totally understandable. I also wish he had somehow indicated if the manuscript listings given for a particular passage are complete or not. If more evidence is available (or not) for a given variant, it would be nice to know. Perhaps using an asterisk when all the known witnesses to a variant were listed would help.

All in all, I can’t recommend Comfort’s work more highly. This is an important volume and I will be referring to it often in years to come.

Disclaimer: this book was provided by the publisher for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to provide a positive review.

This book is available for purchase at the following sites: Amazon.com or direct from Tyndale House.