1, 2 Peter, Jude
1, 2 Peter, Jude
Pastoral
Evangelical

1, 2 Peter, Jude

in New American Commentary

by Thomas R. Schreiner

4.64 Rank Score: 6.18 from 11 reviews, 3 featured collections, and 27 user libraries
Pages 400
Publisher Broadman & Holman
Published 2003
ISBN-13 9780805401370

Collections

This book appears in the following featured collections.

Reviews

Add Your Review

BRathbun BRathbun May 8, 2021
For 1 Peter and Jude, Schreiner was so helpful(haven't read 2 Pet.). When I felt as if the majority were wrong, he'd usually be a great corrective. Although sometimes he would leave the good consensus behind too. Would rate Davids slightly better on 1 Pet., but I think I would give the nod to Schreiner over Davids on Jude. Both are excellent, but I was lost on Davids position on Judes use of 1 Enoch as an authoritative document and praying in the Holy Spiirt as referring to tongues. Schreiner is so valuable on any commentary he writes. His clarity, charity and theological rigor is admirable and to be imitated in my opinion. Some commentaries I know I can get rid of after I've read them, Schreiner is not one of those. Get it and enjoy.
Tim Challies Tim Challies December 16, 2013
There appears to be a strong selection of excellent commentaries on 1 Peter and most of the experts rate Schreiner’s at or very near the top. This is hardly a surprise since many of his commentaries are considered excellent. Carson commends it as “one of the most impressive volumes in the [NAC] series, nicely displaying Schreiner’s combination of exegesis and theological reflection couched in admirable clarity.” Where Schreiner’s volume is at or very near the top of the list for 1 Peter, it does not stack up quite so strongly when compared to the other volumes commenting on 2 Peter and Jude. Still, Carson commends it as “one of the most impressive volumes in the NAC series, nicely displaying Schreiner’s combination of exegesis and theological reflection couched in admirable clarity.” [Full Review]
Phillip J. Long Phillip J. Long August 7, 2012
While this volume covers 2 Peter and Jude as well, Schreiner’s commentary is worth reading as an example of evangelical scholarship. He supports the traditional view that Peter and Jude are the authors of the respective letters. In contrast to Bauckham, he argues that the evidence for accepting pseudepigraphical letters is weak. He cites the punishment of the author of Paul and Thecla, for example, as evidence that the early church considered writing in the name of Paul was not accepted, even if the intentions were good (271). Bauckham did not say that 2 Peter was a letter written under a pseudonym, but rather that it is a testament, which were always written as if the historical person were addressing contemporary needs. Schreiner deals with this argument in detail, pointing out that not all testaments are fictional; Acts 20:17-38 is a “testament” created by Paul himself (274). With respect to Jude, Schreiner finds the evidence that the brother of Jesus wrote the short letter compelling. In the commentary portions, Schreiner moves through paragraphs, commenting on the English text, Greek is found in footnotes. Both of these books make heavy use of the Hebrew Bible and other Second Temple Period literature, Schreiner does an excellent job showing how these allusions function in the letter. [Full Review]
Russ Reaves Russ Reaves December 2, 2010
My biggest complaint with this entire series is that usually a passage is treated to briefly to be of any real help. Schreiner's volume is excellent, but not better than Jobes or Grudem, so not necessary if the other two are purchased.
Peter Krol Peter Krol June 5, 2010
I read Schreiner's comments on 1&2 Peter, and they were superb. He does a great job at observing the text and explaining the flow of thought. He is easy to read, while still scholarly. Also, and I rarely find this done well in biblical commentaries, he handles Old Testament quotes and allusions very well. Sometimes in brief and sometimes at length, he goes back to the OT context to show what the passage meant then and how Peter is using it now. Just one beef I had was that he didn't do so well showing how grace drives our obedience in 1 Peter. His perspective often came across (as the usual evangelical approach) as though we need grace to become Christians, but then we need more discipline to grow as Christians. Grace was not absent, but he was not very skilled at connecting grace into the details of our sanctification. For example, in the text, we're commanded to be holy as God is holy (1:15-16), but the power and resources for that holiness come through reminding ourselves of the Gospel and letting it change us (1:17-21), not just through our own elbow grease!
As I mentioned in the blog post on 1 Peter, Thomas Schreiner's work is always worth consulting. His strengths in the field of biblical theology shine through in this helpful commentary. [Full Review]
Thomas Schreiner's work is always worth consulting. He has written some very good works on New Testament theology,and his strengths in this area shine through in this commentary. Very helpful. [Full Review]
John Glynn John Glynn September 20, 2008
Brian LeStourgeon Brian LeStourgeon July 31, 2008
Another fine example of what the NAC should be. Good semi-technical, good expositional uses. Other promising commentaries are hitting the shelves, but get Schreiner first and add others as you need them later.
Unnatributed-d Unnatributed-d May 26, 2008