Just to say thanks again - I have now finished my essay and found your recommendations on Mark incredibly helpful! Really saved me time looking through different texts 🙂
Hello Pastor. Praying for you and your ministry. I have learned and been inspired by it. Excellent and accessible for those of us in the laity. Blessings for you and yours. Have you highlighted some of your favorites from the Pentecostal tradition? Anything focused on the work of the Holy Spirit? Thank you,Sir.🌹⭐🌹
It's very useful to know about the number of pages, layout and font because simple things like this really do matter! You've covered such a wide range which makes this really useful for all of us and your recent guide to commentaries helped me to see which type of commentary I would find useful and would enjoy. Thank you!
That's a good one. Witherington is the only main one I can think of who really comes out in favour of the longer ending. Most others are for a shorter ending or are a bit woolly! Bless you!
Hello! I just finished a PG essay on the endings of Mark. Many modern commentators are in favour of a lost ending. Thanks to a handy footnote in Deppe's fantastic book, 'The Theological Intentions of Mark’s Literary Devices': "The long ending of Mark 16:9-20 was the dominant thesis until Wellhausen’s commentary in Germany (1903) and Lightfoot’s influence in the English-speaking world (1950). The intended ending at 16:8 reigned throughout the second half of the twentieth century, but the landscape is changing in the twenty-first century with evangelical scholars arguing for a lost ending (Craig Evans, Robert Gundry, Grant Osborne, Bob Stein, Richard Swinburne, Ben Witherington, N.T. Wright). See section 5.3c." - Ch 1 Many of these scholars cite the Greek at the ending of Mark as the reason that the ending is missing or was never written, but a compelling paper suggests that this is insufficient: Kelly Iverson, “A Further Word on Final Γάρ (Mark 16:8).” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 68, no. 1 (2006): 79-94. www.jstor.org/stable/43725642. After my own studies, I am inclined to agree with scholars like Deppe and Fowler who suggest the shorter ending is actually as intended and is very purposeful. I would really recommend Deppe's very balanced analysis of Mark in his book cited above - it's incredibly thorough and impressive!
As always a nice presentation of a wide range of commentaries. There are many fine commentaries on Mark thanks to an explosion of scholarship in the 1990s and 2002 seems to have been a watershed year for publications. If you're only reading for your personal edification (as I do) I would also recommend Eugene Boring's NTL volume (2006) and Francis Moloney's stand alone volume (2002). I found Black's commentary extremely engaging and thought provoking as he pares the Gospel down to its assured theological essentials. I found it compelling reading.
Your choices are excellent. I have got a lot of benefit from R. Alan Culpepper’s Mark in the Smyth & Helwys series, and in the second iteration of the Reading the New Testament series, F. Scott Spencer has contributed the volume on Mark’s Gospel. These two authors are among my favourite biblical commentators.
@@pastorslibrary I so agree that the Smyth & Helwys series is too expensive. I only got it because I really like the Culpepper’s work on John’s Gospel, Luke and Matthew. However, I think the second edition of the Reading the NT Is turning out some outstanding volumes.
Excellent video. I think we are ready for some new ones on the gospel of Mark. I took Ben Witherington on the gospel of mark at Ashland Seminary, and his commentary is like being in class with him again. I love it. It’s a little long in the tooth, but I still go to James Edwards, I think he and William Lane work well together, Robert Stein is good. Strauss is good. RT France is very good, although I am ambivalent on his Mark 13 read. Maybe, but…..
Just to say thanks again - I have now finished my essay and found your recommendations on Mark incredibly helpful! Really saved me time looking through different texts 🙂
Wow! Thank you so much pastor! 🙏🏽
Bless you and thanks for commenting
Great recommendations, thank you. Perfect timing... It's just what I need for an upcoming essay I have to write!! 📝
You must tell!!!
Really waiting for this episode
I was thinking of you! Blessings!
Thank you for this - great to have recommendations specific to Mark!
Bless you for commenting!
Thanks for these! Reading Mark in Context sounds really helpful. I do have BWIII’s Mark. Reading his 1 & 2 Thes now. He is really good.
He is hard to beat! Bless you!
Thanks so much for this!
Blessings!
I wait the new edition of mark in WBC by Evans.... And of course the ICC one's by Keener. 😊
So true...I am anticipating those also!Blessings!
Hello Pastor. Praying for you and your ministry. I have learned and been inspired by it. Excellent and accessible for those of us in the laity. Blessings for you and yours. Have you highlighted some of your favorites from the Pentecostal tradition? Anything focused on the work of the Holy Spirit? Thank you,Sir.🌹⭐🌹
Thanks Brenda for your kind words... idea for as future video I think.... Blessings!
It's very useful to know about the number of pages, layout and font because simple things like this really do matter! You've covered such a wide range which makes this really useful for all of us and your recent guide to commentaries helped me to see which type of commentary I would find useful and would enjoy. Thank you!
Thank you for your comments. Blessings!
Im waiting on a 1 Corinthians. Thanks pastor.
Very close...I will be filming it this week....
@@pastorslibraryawesome cant wait
One element that I would like to know is the position of the different authors on the end of Mark.
That's a good one. Witherington is the only main one I can think of who really comes out in favour of the longer ending. Most others are for a shorter ending or are a bit woolly! Bless you!
Hello! I just finished a PG essay on the endings of Mark. Many modern commentators are in favour of a lost ending. Thanks to a handy footnote in Deppe's fantastic book, 'The Theological Intentions of Mark’s Literary Devices':
"The long ending of Mark 16:9-20 was the dominant thesis until Wellhausen’s commentary in Germany (1903) and Lightfoot’s influence in the English-speaking world (1950). The intended ending at 16:8 reigned throughout the second half of the twentieth century, but the landscape is changing in the twenty-first century with evangelical scholars arguing for a lost ending (Craig Evans, Robert Gundry, Grant Osborne, Bob Stein, Richard Swinburne, Ben Witherington, N.T. Wright). See section 5.3c." - Ch 1
Many of these scholars cite the Greek at the ending of Mark as the reason that the ending is missing or was never written, but a compelling paper suggests that this is insufficient: Kelly Iverson, “A Further Word on Final Γάρ (Mark 16:8).” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 68, no. 1 (2006): 79-94. www.jstor.org/stable/43725642.
After my own studies, I am inclined to agree with scholars like Deppe and Fowler who suggest the shorter ending is actually as intended and is very purposeful. I would really recommend Deppe's very balanced analysis of Mark in his book cited above - it's incredibly thorough and impressive!
As always a nice presentation of a wide range of commentaries. There are many fine commentaries on Mark thanks to an explosion of scholarship in the 1990s and 2002 seems to have been a watershed year for publications. If you're only reading for your personal edification (as I do) I would also recommend Eugene Boring's NTL volume (2006) and Francis Moloney's stand alone volume (2002). I found Black's commentary extremely engaging and thought provoking as he pares the Gospel down to its assured theological essentials. I found it compelling reading.
Thanks for the tips! It is always good to have recommendations! Bless you!
Your choices are excellent. I have got a lot of benefit from R. Alan Culpepper’s Mark in the Smyth & Helwys series, and in the second iteration of the Reading the New Testament series, F. Scott Spencer has contributed the volume on Mark’s Gospel. These two authors are among my favourite biblical commentators.
Thanks for the tips, I haven't tied either, I have only got two volumes in the S&H series...they are quite expensive over here
@@pastorslibrary I so agree that the Smyth & Helwys series is too expensive. I only got it because I really like the Culpepper’s work on John’s Gospel, Luke and Matthew. However, I think the second edition of the Reading the NT Is turning out some outstanding volumes.
@@crusaderboy1976 Agree! if only the books we wanted cost what top ten paperbacks do! Bless you!
Excellent video. I think we are ready for some new ones on the gospel of Mark. I took Ben Witherington on the gospel of mark at Ashland Seminary, and his commentary is like being in class with him again. I love it.
It’s a little long in the tooth, but I still go to James Edwards, I think he and William Lane work well together, Robert Stein is good. Strauss is good. RT France is very good, although I am ambivalent on his Mark 13 read. Maybe, but…..
Thank you so much for these tips and comments! Blessings!
Robert Guelich died in 1991 of an apparent heart attack
Thank you for that info. Bless you!
What about Robert Stein's volume in BECNT? Didn't you read it or it wasn't that good?
Unfortunately I haven't had my hands on a copy, but the series tends to be good in general, bless you!