Bibles Bible Studies Books

Fee's work and exegesis on the first of the Corinthian letters, actually the second if you have paid attention to this letter, is excellent. Although I do not agree with him on everything his scholarship is second to none. After having gone through this wonderful letter with Fee and his workmanship you will have an obviously more profound view of the letter to the Corinthians and the many things that is dealt with in this letter by Paul. It is a must for true scholarship.

I would pay top dollar for just the section of this commentary that covers the cross of Christ and human wisdom. The remainder of this commentary is also highly beneficial particularly for pastors (like me). I read this commentary in preparation for preaching through 1 Corinthians. At times, the discussion of textual criticism was more than I needed as a pastor, but it was interesting.

Although I don't share Fee's beliefs pertaining to spiritual gifts, it didn't diminish the value of this commentary for me. While this was one of the most expensive commentaries I've ever bought, my preaching series through 1 Corinthians lasted 10 months and 40 sermons, making this book worth the price.

Highly recommend for study of Paul's writings. We used it to supplement a class and were very happy with it.

One of my principle in pick up a commentary is when everthing equal, the newer is the better one. So when I planned to bought one commentary on 1 Corinthians, I prefered Garland's more than Fee's. Both come from a conservative point of view. They have almost the same size (Fee: 904; Garland: 896) and the same prize (Fee US$ 54; Garland US$ 50). Both also get very positive reviews. The different is Fee wrote his 1 Corinthians commentary in 1987 while Garland wrote in 2003, so there is almost twenty years gap between them.

Then when I planned to gave an expositionary preaching from 1 Corinthians 15, I knew that I need Fee's as a comparison. What a surprised! I find that at least for 1 Corinthians 15, I gain more insight from Fee than from Garland. For me, Fee's argument is more mature, and he is also braver and firmer when he must to state something. Garland make Fee as one of his sparring partner but when he disagrees with Fee, it seems to me that he do not give enough power to send his counter attack.

Both are good, really! But now if I must choose one commentary in 1 Corinthians, my choice is clear. For this time, the old recipe is the better one.

NB. I am also skimming Thiselton's work. This one is a huge commentary but at least from the preacher's point of view I must agree with D.A. Carson that "I do not have a good feel for it yet." Too many debate in it. If you need a third choice for 1 Corinthians, I will recommend Ancient Christian Commentary Series produced by Gerald Bray (ed.). You will be surprised with what you can get inside.

Fee taught a course on 1 Corinthians for about 15 years at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary before completing this commentary (I only took his course on Textual Criticism). Thus, this book represents mature scholarship, thought, and an awareness of the kinds of questions people want answers to. The students at Gordon-Conwell were from every confessional background, so his teaching and writing has been for the whole church, and not geared toward charismatics. With about a dozen reviews already posted, I not only review Fee's book, but respond to some recurring comments in the other reviews.

Fee's logic is impressive. He takes 30-35 pages to untangle 1 Cor. 11:2-16, which represents one of the most difficult passages in the Greek NT. His evidence and reasoning are strong, and I've concluded the NIV (and most translations) botch this difficult passage. In trying to smooth out the difficulties in the Greek, our translations create meanings that are not well supported by the Greek nor the culture. Fee offers a sane exposition of this section.

Fee's argument that 14:33b-35 was not original to Paul but an early textual corruption may seem radical. Donald Carson, in his book on commentaries, inappropriately calls Fee's conclusion a "lapse," as if Fee thought this up himself. Yet this scholarly opinion goes back a long, long time. A. T. Robertson & A. Plummer's ICC on 1 Corinthians (1911) indicate that various scholars before their time thought those verses were an interpolation (e.g., Weinel, 1906, Schmiedel 1892, Holsten, 1880, and Hilgenfeld, n.d.). It would be difficult to argue that those scholars were motivated by our modern "feminist" movement! In more recent times, C. K. Barrett's Harper's/Black's commentary (1968) prefers the interpolation hypothesis, F. F. Bruce's NCBC commentary (1971) discusses it but passes no judgment (but he notes how several aspects of those verses are very awkward and difficult to square with the rest of the context and the epistle), and H. Conzelmann's Greek Hermeneia commentary (1975) is more adamant than Fee. Those who flippantly dismiss Fee's arguments seem not to have grasped his evidence nor his logic. The "hypothesis" that these verses were not in Paul's original letter has multiple stands of strong evidence, (mostly internal, but some external). By contrast, the "hypothesis" that the text as it stands was originally from Paul's hand is fraught with difficulties (but makes us feel good because we don't like the concept of later interpolations). The church is divided on issues related to women, so Fee's conclusion is controversial. Yet, our view of the role of women should have NO bearing on the question of the originality of those verses. That must be determined by the evidence.

Also, I am NOT in any way, shape, or form, charismatic (I'm a high churchman). But I acknowledge that the Bible never teaches an "end" to the spiritual gifts (well, we can make some verses teach that if we try). However, I'm very SKEPTICAL of most of today's alleged display of gifts. My fellow non-charismatics seem uncomfortable with Fee's interpretations, but such fears are unwarranted. To say God is free to give gifts as he chooses does not oblige us to accept modern Pentecostal practices.

The "problems" with Fee's book brought up by other reviewers represent one of the book's strengths. It is very scholarly and typically lets the chips fall where they may. We need a fresh look at this epistle that isn't laden with all of our traditions and perspectives that have affected us over the last 1900 years. While Fee is not without his biases, any disagreement with him (as a high churchman, I disagree with him at points) must be met with an equal level of evidence and logic, not with an ad hominem argument that Fee is a charismatic. Fee has given the church a great tool for interpreting God's Word, and I am very grateful for that.

Gordon Fee has provided us with such a "packed" and well-reasoned commentary that I can't recommend it more highly.

I've read this book twice now, and I keep it on hand as a reference particularly when I am doing studies on the prophetic books of the Old Testament. It is a good concise reference for the historical background in which the Old Testament was written, but there are a few things that some of the other reviews did not seem to realize:

This book is not an exhaustive study of Israelite history. It appears to be written for a well-read lay audience. The footnotes are particularly helpful for nonprofessional Bible 'scholars,' as they point the reader to more in-depth sources of information that they might otherwise be unaware of. It is also written for Evangelicals (this is explicitly stated in the introduction). Those looking for a 'critical' history will be disappointed at his tenaciousness in reconciling ancient history with the Biblical narrative, but he is perfectly honest about what he is trying to do.

On a related thought, the two reviewers who claimed that Merrill was ignorant or intentionally ignored the Biblical account in place were sorely wrong. They either have not read the entire book, or grossly misunderstood what he was saying. For instance, it is true that he talks about the theory that several of the tribes of Israel were already in Canaan prior to the Exodus, but he then rejects that idea, and provides reasons why it does not make sense historically.

Merrill also presents a compelling system of chronology for the Exodus and for the period of the Kings. Personally, I disagree with his chronology, but he is consistent and does an excellent job of presenting his own views, and it is still a good system for obtaining an overall grasp of the approximate times that various events in the Bible took place.

With that said, the reason that I gave this book 4 stars instead of 5 is because I felt that Merrill would at times arbitrarily dismiss opposing views in favor of his own. I do believe from looking at his other works that he has a deep understanding of these other views and could refute them at length, and so my only disappointment is that he did not choose to devote more time to explaining why some of the opposing views are invalid, rather than quickly glossing over them and moving on to his own theories.

The second time that I read this book, I was also reading Wolfram Von Soden's "The Ancient Orient" and the two books complemented each other very nicely. Merrill is concerned primarily with chronology and political history. Von Soden's work is more of a social and cultural history (although it is on Mesopotamia and not Israel). They went very well together because one explained 'what happened' and the other explained 'what ordinary life was like' in the ancient Near East. I would thoroughly recommend reading these two books together as an introduction to the study of Old Testament history.

One wonders if the previous "reviewer" simply did not like Merrill's conclusions, which are more in line with conservative Biblical scholarship than the (questionable in my view) documentary hypothesis school of Biblical studies... Merrill has a useful ability to take a great deal of information - hundreds of years of history - and make it manageable wihtout losing the humanity of it. Granted this is done at the expense of increased detail (my reason for 4 stars, instead of 5), but the work is made more accessible by doing so. His language is understandable, which is all the more laudable as he is overtly a scholar. One might prefer different emphases than Merrill, but he can't be faulted for not consulting "me" before he wrote the book! I can recommend this without qualms or hesitation.

Merrill's work is certainly well-done. Although the work is obviously scholarly, the reader is not lost in a morass of technical jargon. Footnotes are generoulsy sprinkled at the bottom of every page and Merrill is always careful to include a reference to the work of other scholars, even those who do not agree with him, for the sake of those readers who might wish to do a little more research and receive both sides of the argument. At the same time, he gives cogent arguments for his own conservative stance on controversial issues and I must say that, barring one or two, I found his arguments very persuasive and, overall, whether I always agreed with him or not, he certainly provides a strong defense of his own position. Throughout the work I was consistently reminded of the experience, learning and concentrated insight that any reader can gain from a true scholar. Merrill did a fine job.

At times, because he is fair in his representation of differing opinions among certain historio-literary schools of thought (even going so far as to make explicit the fact that some of his views are in the minority among scholars), he might fool some of his readers into thinking that he holds certain views which he, in fact, does not. This is why I must disagree with the first reviewer who mentions Merrill's supposed belief that three or four tribes of Israel left Egypt at once and met the others later... In truth, Merrill was relating the views of another and not his own.

The crucial fact to consider in this work is that Merrill explicitly states that his position stems from the assumption that the Bible is the revealed Word of GOD (itself a minority view among "Biblical scholars"). Because of this, Merrill looks to the accounts rendered in the Old Testament first and compares what is found there with the claims of his peers. I found this approach extremely refreshing and of the utmost integrity.

All in all, it is quite obvious that Merrill is right in the thick of things and brings an up-to-date approach to the study of the Old Testament and he provides references for on every page. If you desire to know more about the economical, political, religious and geographical influences which helped shape the thoughts and actions of GOD's first covenant people from a well-written, conservative Christian perspective, "Kingdom of Priests" is an invaluable guide.

I would have to agree with a previous "reviewer" and say that the book itself is written quite well, but Merril states certain things that are obviously not true and can be picked up by almost any sunday school student. For instance, he states that three, maybe four, of the twelve tribes of Israel left Egypt at once and met up later, before the Ten Commandments were given. This, obviously cannot be true because the book of Exodus itself that all twelve tribes left together. His Biblical flaws aside, his writing was good, making the book easy to read and I believe that most of his dates were right on target. It could be hard for some people to ignore his Biblical ignorance, however, and I suggest that those people do not read this book looking for an indepth study, survey and education of the Old Testament.

I found the writing style in this book very well developed but the theology and Biblical ideas of it were glaring contradictions of specific things in the Bible. This book is not one that a serious theology student should consider to be a good source of knowledge.

This is one of those good books that actually treat the Psalms for what they are: prayers. Many introductions and commentaries neglect this, treating the Psalms as though they were history, instruction or whatever. While history, instruction and a lot else is in the Psalms, their primary purpose is that we may pray after God, speaking His words back to Him.

The best introduction to the Psalms is probably to begin praying them, perhaps with the help of a good prayer book. But if someone's really green, this book will provide an understanding of the different types of Psalms, different human authors within the Psalmnody, and an overview of some of the difficulties we perceive within the Psalms.

My big complaint with the book is Bonhoeffer's occasional over-emphasis on his perceived need to pray (using the Psalms in this case) against an also-perceived wrath of God. This reflects an unfortunate -- in my opinion -- emphasis, one likely stemming from his Lutheran background. But it's a relatively minor issue with the book.

This book is a quick (it could easily be finished in an hour), easy read. The book's also divided into sections which could be used as subjects for daily meditation or for a series of classes.

In this beautiful little book, Bonhoeffer guides the Christian to the Scriptures for lessons in how to pray. He affirms that the Lord's Prayer is the primary prayer of the Christian, which he asserts contains every prayer that a Christian ought to pray. Bonhoeffer also makes a startling but wise claim that jolts us out of the narrowness of our focus in prayer: "The richness of the Word of God ought to determine our prayer, not the poverty of our heart." Thus we find the book of Psalms to be a rich treasury of prayers that are part of God's inspired word, and therefore a true place to learn how God would have us pray.

The book proceeds to give some general background on the history and use of the Psalms as the prayer book of the Bible. In the main part of the book he presents one possible system of categorizing the Psalms according to their petitions, and also points out that they can be organized according to the petitions of the Lord's Prayer. But the most valuable part of the book, in my opinion, is how he shows us how the Psalms are to be prayed in Christ, of whom the Psalms also testify (Luke 24:44). As Bonhoeffer says, "It is the incarnate Son of God, who has borne every human weakness in his own flesh, who here pours out the heart of all humanity before God, and who stands in our place and prays for us."

This is a fine book for the devotional/prayer life of the Christian.

An amazing way to read and understant the Psalms.

Psalms: The Prayer Book of the Bible
Though a small book in size, a powerful presentation of prayer in various settings. Additionally, for those who perhaps stumble around about prayer, Bonhoeffer blesses such that the relationship with God is personal and precious. The power of Bonhoeffer's witness reminds one that we live a privileged life. Christians ought to have this in their library for rereading and rereading.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, hung by the Nazis for his principled resistance to perversion of Christian life, leads us through the themes and value of psalms. These song-prayers, brought forth from thousands of years of human longing for connection with God, are just as powerful in their meaning of human life, today. Use this tiny volume as a study guide to psalm themes for better prayer life.

Unique perspective from a scholar. He takes a topic that is written about extensively and brings a new perspective to it (the eyewitness factor). Great read!

This book, in my opinion, will become a classic reference to counter the flurry of books in the 1900's and recent times that have attempted to discredit first century authorship of the gospels and letters that make up the canon of scripture. The author has done a marvelous job at providing a well-researched and cited assessment of the facts, using internal and external analyses of the texts themselves and extra-biblical literature. Biblical scholars and enthusiasts will come away with a renewed appreciation of the historicity and authenticity of the gospels.

I heard many good things about this book, and Richard Bauckham is a terrific New Testament scholar, so I ordered it. His thesis is that the gospels are largely records of eyewitness testimony. He rejects the form critical conclusions of Bultmann and others, and argues that the gospels are more indebted to oral traditions and oral history.

He bases a lot of his views on the reliability of the early 2nd century church father Papias. Papias heard testimony from those who were with the first century Christians. He was told that the Gospel of Mark was a repository of the apostle Peter's memories. He also says that this gospel was the one with the least chronological order.

He also sees John as being the eyewitness testimony of the beloved disciple, who Bauckham takes to be John the Elder (not John the apostle, son of Zebedee).

Bauckham talks alot about the differences between personal memories and collective memories and relates this to the study of the gospels.

Bauckham also has an interesting chapter about the names in the gospels. He arrives at the dubious conclusion that Levi the tax collector in Mark's Gospel is not the same as Matthew the tax collector in Matthew's gospel, believing that the author of Matthew changed the name to apply Levi's story to a bona fide member of the Twelve apostles. Kind of strange.

It is more likely to me that Matthew changed his name from Levi to Matthew because the name "Matthew" is close to the word mathete, meaning "disciple," and Matthew wanted his name to reflect his changed status as a disciple of Jesus.

Other than that, the book was loaded with dense argumentation and analysis, and I had to really concentrate to follow the discussion. This is definitely not light reading. I recommend it to the scholarly Christian leader, but I can't see the average layperson reading it.

Much better reading is Bauchkam's book on the theology of Revelation, and his excellent commentary on 2 Peter and Jude, which is coming out again in a revised edition. I also enjoyed his book of the female witnesses of Christ - Gospel Women.

Bauckham accomplished, in my opinion, his goal of demonstrating that the canonical Gospels contain eyewitness testimony and that the Gospels themselves indicate this in the same ways as Roman biographies of that period. I felt that he spent far too much time and energy though, presenting his theory as to the identity of the Gospel of John's "beloved disciple" - a point he admitted, early on, really had no bearing on recognizing eyewitness material in the NT. Also seemed to be a great deal of repitition of throughout the book. Bauckham makes some truly excellent points in this work, but he could have delivered them in a slimmer volume.

Often I come across the idea that the four Gospels are creations of the early Christians to express and justify their beliefs. The Gospels, it is said, offer no reliable access to the earthly Jesus. To question this assumption you then are chided for being a literalist.

I don't think Adam and Eve were literal people. I don't worry whether Jonah was swallowed by a big fish. But it has always mattered to me whether Jesus actually did and said the things the Gospels portray.

So I am grateful to this scholar for helping me to see the reasonableness of this position. He offers plenty of evidence to show that the four Gospels are based on eyewitness testimony, each having been written in the living memory of the events they describe. He spends most of his energy on Mark and John, and he explores the issues and the evidence in great detail.

I appreciated his understanding of testimony as something integral to all human knowing, as well as something that inherently blends observed facts with perceptive interpretation. This is what the Gospels do. I also appreciated the restraint in his presentation. These are things that are not able to be proved, so he uses the word "plausible" to describe his conclusions.

On almost every page there were names in the footnotes of scholars he disagreed with, and who likely would disagree with him. There must be a vigorous debate about these things in scholarly circles, and it seemed like I listened in on that debate in this book, or at least part of it.

There were a couple of times when it seemed like Bauckham's conclusions exceeded the evidence, but they were rare. On the whole, he presents a satisfying picture. I feel like I can trust the Gospels to tell me about the real Jesus.

I liked the consistent inclusion of the Divine Name represented by the letters YHWH and some of the interesting renderings of certain texts.

Our Disciple Bible Study used the first version of this book in our Basic Resource Library. When the original book "went missing" we had to reorder, and discovered to our delight that the new book now included The Five Books of Moses. What a wonderful resource for Bible study, or personal use! It has become one of my favorites and I plan to purchase the next volumes as well.

Never before have I experienced a translation of Old Testament scripture that truly brought me into what the essence of the text was. Fox makes it perfectly clear that these books were written in Hebrew, not English. I would reccommend this translation to anyone who is curious what it is like to peek in on an ancient text and learn from the first five books of Moses in the way it was more likely intended to be learned from.

I used to say that it was pointless to try to study the Bible without Hebrew - that it was impossible to "feel" the text, to get the humor, the irony, the poetry. Not anymore. This is a must for any student of the Bible, as it captures the liveliness and strangeness of the original and expose it as the allusive, alliterative, jabberwocky text that it is.

Hebrew is best, but this is, finally, a good second choice. It would be perfect if it had Hebrew written alongside - a great way to learn for students.

This is not the only edition with English translation of the Pentateuch/Chumash that I own, and I don't think it's the only one anyone should own, but it is an essential part of my collection. Fox has combined precision in translation with interpretation and poetry, and the combination makes me run to it very often to see his version, which often makes a challenging and provocative comparison to more traditional translations. The type is large and well-spaced. My only criticism is that the Hebrew is not included; at times I'd like to be able to compare the original words to Fox's renderings, to see how they compare.

I really enjoyed how Liz Curtis Higgs wrote this book in two separate parts; the first being a fictional story and the second being the study. It helped to develop the relationship between Jesus and Mary M. The Study was super informative as well, however I did feel that she was distracted by tangents that we not completely relevent to Mary's story. Overall it was very informative and enjoyable.

If the Bible labels Mary Magdelene a prostitute, need we speculate about her race? The same goes for Rohab, Jezebel, etc. It's the sick side of the Old and New Testaments.
Donald Redford calls them the most maligned race in history.

I bought this book because I love Liz's sense of humor and thought that was what I was buying. I took it on vacation with me and read the novel portion of the book and was pleasantly surprised that it was a well written novel with a very serious side (it made me cry on the airplane). I enjoyed it so much that I am going to suggest it as a book/bible study at church. Liz is a multi-talented sister and I wouldn't hesitate to purchase anything that she wrote.

Karen Lancto

This is a very unique way to study the Bible and its interesting characters. Higgs is extremely witty and creative!

Reviewed by Debra Gaynor for ReviewYourBook.com, 3/08
Unveiling Mary Magdalene was previously published as Mad Mary. I am glad Ms. Higgs changed the name. This wonderful Biblical character deserved a superior title. Liz Curtis Higgs is the expert (in my opinion) when it comes to insight into women of the Bible. Unveiling Mary Magdalene begins with a fictional account of Mary Delaney. Mary is mentally ill; she was drawn to a church where she finds grace, forgiveness, love, and acceptance. Her church family assists her in cleaning up her home and finding homes for her numerous cats. Farris C. (a great play on words) was the epitome of a modern day Pharisee. The second section of this book begins at chapter nine. This is the non-fiction section. I find it gratifying that someone is willing to tell the true story of Mary Magdalene. There are many myths circulating about this wonderful woman; she was not a prostitute, nor was she the lover or wife of Jesus Christ. Mary was most likely a middle-aged woman, possibly a widow with an income. She was a woman that had demons cast out of her. She was respected, and she is mentioned by name in the Bible as one of the followers of Christ.
Liz Curtis Higgs has a gift for writing with wit and drama. Her style is over the top; however, that does not detract from her research and knowledge. Each chapter has discussion questions, and there is an in-depth study guide that can be purchased separately. Currently I am leading a co-ed study of this book. The members of this group are enjoying it. They have found the study both informative and entertaining. Even more importantly, they have found it spiritually moving. Kudos to Ms. Higgs. She has done it again. Unveiling Mary Magdalene is a must read!

Each day there are about 2-3 pages of commentary and instruction from Beth Moore followed by 2 or 3 questions to consider and a space with a suggested prayer starter.

I purchased this book as part of an infomal bible study gathering with a few other ladies. We aimed to complete 6 days each week and compaired our impressions with each other once a week.

I highly recommend this book even if you don't have a group to share with. Just be sure to take the time to consider the questions and write out your answers and prayers.

I have just recently started this book. And I just love it. It is a wonderful work book that I will treasure forever. I love exploring the world of King David and the struggles he goes through. In comparison his struggles are not unlike our own. It is nice to see that the Old Testament is relevant in today's world. Every day I look forward to reading the Bible and working in this book. I recommend this work book to anyone who is looking to dig deeper into their faith and get closer to God.

Beth Moore is an awesome teacher of the Father's word to us. My wife and I love her books and study materials! We use them for life group study, topics, and couples reading to build one's personal responsible to the call of Christ and who we are in Him.

There is a high value to do this devotional. Writing out your prayers helps you to remember to pray them more thru the day. Also you can go back and write when they are answered and how.

Beth Moore's insights never stop amazing me. The length is just right for a daily devotional. The book is so high quality you feel as if you have an old world treasure in your hands.

Very well written and thought provoking book with plenty of room for contemplative notes ans exercises to help one evaluate and study David. My only problem, and hence the 3 not 5 stars, is she relates and compares, way too often, David to Jesus. It is a book about David according to its title and yet she falls in the same trap as most Christian authors. Everything in the bible is NOT about Jesus nor is there any need to try and force every verse, person, etc. to fit to some explanation or elaboration of him. It is about GOD and his message via his prophets. I would love to see some of the great Christian authors, Mrs. Moore included, give the Bible its just treatment especially when dealing with the Hebrew Scriptures portion (aka OT).

`The Book of the Acts, Revised' in `The New International Commentary on the New Testament' series, written by F. F. (Frederick Fyvie) Bruce, is an excellent addition to this series, and a worthy follow-up to Joel Green's commentary on `The Gospel of Luke' in the same series. I once made two mistaken statements about this series, commonly abbreviated as NICNT. The first is that the editors tend to commission relatively junior scholars to do their commentaries, often as revisions of their doctoral dissertations. The second is that the series uses the relatively old `American Standard Version' translation of 1901. Both Professors Green and Bruce are distinctly senior, highly qualified commentators, both of whom contribute their own translations. As I always use the NRSV as a primary translation, I look forward to a commentator's own personal translation, based on a deep knowledge of the particular scripture. And, Professor Bruce has a deeper knowledge than most, as he finished a commentary on the Greek text of Acts before doing this commentary.
The separate commentary on the Greek has a salutary effect on the current work, as it separates out all the tedious philological and text critical findings for those who are primarily interested in such things. That leaves only professor Bruce's commentary on the literary, historical, and theological matters we find in Luke's Acts.
Acts does not have quite as many interpretational difficulties as Luke's Gospel. Therefore, some commentators' approach, such as the more recent work by Darrell Bock, tends to obscure the relatively cleaner text by discussing many different interpretations, including many from this volume. Like many of the commentators in `The New Interpreter's Bible (NIB)', Bruce focuses on a clean and illuminating organization of the text, with excellent material for applying the text to modern church and pastoral questions. Unlike the NIB, Bruce has excellent references to Hebrew sources, primarily the Mishnah. If fact, it was Bruce's commentary which pushed me to finally get a copy of the Mishnah as an aid to understanding references to Jewish practice in both the Hebrew and Christian scriptures.
It may not count for much in many reviewers' evaluations, but I also find the design of the NICNT volumes' typesetting to be superior to many other series, especially to the Word Biblical Commentary volumes. It does little good to have excellent material if aging eyes find it difficult to read it.
Like Green's commentary, I would suggest Bruce's volume over many others, with the one caveat that it is at least ten (10) years older than several important new commentaries, such as the Anchor Bible contribution by Joseph Fitzmyer and at least five (5) years older than Luke Timothy Johnson's Sacra Pagina volume, and both are important and useful for the lay or pastoral user. So, I strongly recommend this volume, used together with Fitzmyer's volume or some other recent commentary. For those reviewers who do not find much new, I sympathize with their observation, but suggest that this is more evidence for the fact that this is a very good first (but not only) commentary on Acts for the pastoral or lay user.

Overall, this commentary is rather well done. Bruce does an excellent job at providing an insightful commentary, and has a very strong command of the history, geography, and culture of Palestine and Rome, and the persons mentioned in the book of Acts.

It is especially interesting to see that Bruce seems to be rather Pentecostal in his interpretation of the outpouring of the Spirit passages. However, he avoids popular phrases such as "the baptism of the Holy Spirit" and "initial evidence" and the like. He also shows that he seems rather open to such a modern phenomenon, citing the biography of Sundar Singh, who was a missionary in India claiming to have had a Damascus like experience where he saw Christ.

However, some of the commentary seems a little lacking. The last 10-15 chapters of the commentary seem a lot skimpier than the earlier parts. Perhaps because there is not as much controversy with these parts, or who knows, maybe Bruce was under some sort of deadline. This is the main reason I don't rate this commentary 5 stars.

F.F. Bruce is a great scholar and many of his commentaries have held the attention of many pastors and laymen to this day. No matter what your view is of his conclusions, his exegesis is almost always a force to be reckoned with.

Moderate/conservative and reformed in his roots, this commentary wins five stars because of it's valuable sholarship. I would also recommend Acts commentaries by I. Marshall Howard (Tyndale) and Richard Longenecker (Expositor's) if you are looking for exegesis and sholarly contribution... if you want "application" and "light devotional" material there are plenty of others to choose from (that are generally mediocre in terms of interpreting and explaining the meaning of the text).

A word of caution to the traditional "charismatic": You may not agree with all he has to say about the traditional "baptism of the Spirit" proof text passages... I still recommend reading it so that you may be challenged to interpret Acts again.

The late Dr. F.F. Bruce was a well respected biblical scholar and his commentaries and books have greatly benefited the Church of Christ. It is no different than with this work on the Book of Acts.

This book falls in line with the rest of the New International Commentary on the New Testament edited by Gordon Fee. The NIC is a solid evangelical commentary on the New Testament with the differing opinions stated in the works (see Revelation for example). Dr. Bruce has gone to great lengths to point out the differences among evangelicals in Acts. The commentary itself is full of Greek word studies, historical and geographical points, maps, and solid exegesis of every passage in Acts.

My only drawback with this work on Acts as well as the other works of the NICNT is that they are not laid out in expository outlines. It would be helpful if every section was given an expository outline to help the reader when moving through the sections of the Scriptures that the authors are working through. For a better expository outline see the commentaries of John MacArthur or John Phillips.

I don't want to write a lengthy review, but I do want you to know that this is a very well written commentary. I thought that I truly understood the book of Acts. After all, I've read the book of Acts over twenty times in my lifetime, but now I truly believe that I was missing about 60% of what Luke is trying to show his audience. With the help of F.F Bruce you will begin to see how from the beginning of the church God intended to bring the gospel to Jews and Gentiles and how he seamlessly brought that about. It also becomes very clear that the Apostles vigorously stressed the diety of Christ from Peter's very first sermon in Acts chapter two. You'll be able to understand, and appreciate how James ended up being the leader of the church in Jerusalem despite the fact that Peter was the undisputed leader early on.

I don't want to drone on, but this is an excellant commentary. Of all the commentaries that I've read, and I've read a fair number, this is my favorite. You'll probably read it cover to cover. I did.

This book is a response to the recent barrage of anti-christian books by atheist evangelists. The book serves as an excellent primer to answer the most popular atheist arguments, all of which are old recycled arguments that have been answered time and time again. While the chapters on alleged Bible errors and biblical archeology are light and the book tries to skim by design/evolution, the book shines when it comes to topics I would consider cultural apologetics. For example, Hutchinson writes excellent chapters on what the Bible really states about slavery, homosexuality and government. There is also an excellent chapter on the origins of science in Christianity. While not meant to be an exhaustive book on any of these topics, and a little light on references, it is overall a valuable resource.

2 May 2008 - This is a is a useful antidote to faith-phobic propaganda currently disseminated by bestselling authors like Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris. Hutchinson outlines material from less accessible, heavily scholarly works that confirm the wisdom and truth of the Judeo-Christian tradition. I loved the way he, systematically refutes claims made in an episode of the television show "The West Wing" that deliberately misrepresented the Bible even though I am a fan of the show. Hutchinson also does a great job addressing several popular faith-phobic talking points: that Christianity has murdered billions of people; that the Bible is an absurd book; that there is an inevitable war between Christianity and science or Christianity and democracy; that Christians invented slavery, etc. In dismantling these faith-phobic canards, he calls on published experts in a variety of fields: archaeology, theology, sociology and history.

The book is mistitled. It is the most politically correct book I have ever seen. It completely misrepresents any interpetation of the bible other than the biblist idolotry of the modern evangelical christianist junta. It drips with contempt at healthy a Christian approach to scripture.

This book shoud be required reading, for both Christians, to remind them why we're RIGHT, and for Atheists, to let them know they're way out in LEFT FIELD, pun intended. Christianity offers hope, because God values each individual. Atheism offers only despair; nothing matters because people are only a mistake of biology, just a random result of evolution.
The premise of the book can be summed up as follows:
The Atheist needs a belief system that states that human beings are only animals; that way, the Atheist can behave like an animal. After all, evolution teaches that only the dominant deserve to survive, so go ahead and do whatever pleases and benefits oneself, all others be damned.
Fortunately, we all have the ability to make our own decisions. If Christianity isn't true, then it does not matter. If it is true, then it is the ONLY THING THAT MATTERS.

presented as factual research.

While book is chock full of various argumentative gimmicks used to limit cogent thought on the topics covered, I find the book's most significant shortcoming to be constant use of one-sided and partial research (carried out only to the depth required to support biased conjectures). For example, when touching on Nazism the book conveniently sidesteps Hitler's predilection for "Positive Christianity", etc.

The book is supposed to be about the bible itself, independent of a specific religion [...] but it completely fails to review its real cost to humanity, its legacy of divisiveness ("We are better than them") and the resulting bloodshed.

sad, very sad...

Lost Books are VERY good scripture that was taught to Christians in the first century A.D.. A particularly great text is in Bartholomew where abortion is directly addressed and is CLEARLY forbidden, something you cannot find in traditional, canonized scripture.

I bought this back in college and just now got around to reading it. It's basically a collection of apocryphal and otherwise "unaccepted" texts regarding Jesus of Nazareth and his apostles.

Most of it was letters to various congregations, with messages such as "Be more patient with eachother. Infighting doesn't do us any good" and "Jesus still love you even though he's gone to Heaven". However, the parts I found interesting as a former Catholic were the books that filled in some of the blanks about Jesus' life, particularly as a child.

Apparently Jesus was not the nicest kid to be around. He was incredibly intelligent and confounded his teachers to no end because he already knew everything. However, what really got me was how he treated people who made him angry. On more than one occasion he killed his playmates if they made him made, transformed them into goats for the fun of it, or otherwise wreaked havoc til the neighbors complained and Joseph and Mary had to bring him inside. No wonder the early church fathers cut these out of the Bible! Not a very flattering picture!

However, there were some interesting "rest of the stories" about his adulthood, too. Apparently the robbers who were crucified next to him came from an incident in his childhood, and that was an intrguing tie-in. In fact, a lot of the folks from his childhood came back to play key roles as her got older; many of the apostles were children he healed of illnesses. I also thought the description of Jesus descending into Hell after the crucifixion and pulling Adam out of there was an appropriate story.

I like this because it makes the Christian mythos more complete. Some of it, to be sure, came about long after his death, but then again great figures in history and mythology often grow greater with the passing years.

To be sure, I'm still comfortable in my own (non-Christian) beliefs. However, this is a nice addition to the traditions I was raised in as a child, the stuff they don;'t teach you in Catholic school.

This book contains many writings that were simply left out of the final version of the Bible. The inside flap notes that the church suppressed many of these documents. Nevertheless, these writings do not provide any information that is truly spectacular by 21st Century standards. These documents were likely omitted because they did not fit into the neat chronology of the Bible, showed women in a stronger role than was acceptable in medieval times, or suggested that Christ made mistakes as a youth.

"The Acts of Paul and Thecla" describe a woman who helped spread the word of God. The document clearly shows her as a strong woman and a true disciple. Church elders of the medieval period probably felt that a story of a strong female was inappropriate for women of that period. The events surrounding her persecution are filled with miracles. She survived attempts to kill her through burning and attacks by wild beasts. In the end, she disappeared into a crack in a rock that was created by God. God then closed the opening behind her.

The first part of the book describes the birth of the Virgin Mary and her marriage to Joseph. The book also contains writings that describe the adolescent years of Jesus and the magical powers of the cloth used to wrap him as a baby. Some events show Jesus in a less than perfect light. These writings nevertheless describe a part of the Gospel that is not widely known.

Some parts of the book flow easily while other writings are difficult to follow. The books of Hermas provide an example of easy reading and tedious reading. "The First Book of Hermas," tells an interesting story. He passes near a great beast, one hundred feet long with locusts coming out of its mouth. Hermas was not killed by the beast as he had faith that the Lord would protect him. The third book talks of mountains and stones that are used to build a tower. Only after struggling through this document does the reader learn that the tower is a metaphor for the house of God.

The end of the book contains multiple letters from Pontius Pilate and Herod. Herod talks about how he is paying the price for killing John the Baptist. Pilate sends letters to Tiberius Caesar, which recount his reasons for crucifying Jesus. His letters also discuss the miracles surrounding Jesus such as the raising of Lazarus, and the earthquake following the crucifixion. These documents note that Tiberius subsequently killed Pilate for his role in the crucifixion.

Like the Bible itself, this book is a compilation of ancient writings. Also like the Bible, the documents are presented in two vertical columns per page. This book is a fascinating companion to the Bible. It provides insight to events surrounding the New Testament that are mostly unknown. Bottom line: a semi tough read but well worth the effort.

As a student of the gospel, clarity is everything. The Lost Books of The Bible allow a student to achieve a better grasp of the "why(s)" in the Word.

II. I was very excited about the book (The lost books of the Bible I consider this books I liked the I. Clement, II. Clement, Barnabus, Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadelphians, Smyrnaeans, Polycarp, Philippians, I. Hermas-Visions, II. Herman-Commands, III. Hermas-Similitudes, Letters of Herod and Pilate, The
III. Very interesting for early Christians writings some this are Gnostic influence like Infancy, Christ & Mary childhood so oblivious false
IV. I Give this Bible 5 star Good translation Like this Book