Fred Sanders

Fred Sanders

Occupation Professor

Reviews

France, R. T. The Gospel of Matthew. NICNT. Eerdmans, 2007.
Fred Sanders Fred Sanders May 28, 2011
Shortest introduction I’ve ever seen for a comprehensive commentary: barely 22 pages, after which France gets down to the verse-by-verse exposition. All the information is exactly where I want it to be in this volume. So good. France finished this volume in 2005, in his late sixties, and I love his ability to shrug off some of the unnecessary complications of gospel criticism. Though he knows everything about synoptic parallels, he refuses to speak simply of Matthean redaction in a “rigid x-copied-y approach.” The result is a great reading of Matthew’s own gospel. France also has more to say about the Galilee-versus-Jerusalem dynamic than other commentators, which I found fascinating and illuminating. [Full Review]
Carson, D. A. “Matthew” in Matthew, Mark, Luke. EBC. Zondervan, 1984.
Fred Sanders Fred Sanders May 28, 2011
I can’t tell whether this shiny new 2010 revision is much different from the 1984 edition (it doesn’t seem to be). 650 pages of sober, balanced, reasonable commentary. Carson at his best always manages to hit that sweet spot between details and readability. I also made good use of his earlier books, God with Us: Themes from Matthew, The Sermon on the Mount: An Evangelical Exposition of Matthew 5-7, and When Jesus Confronts the World: An Exposition of Matthew 8-10. [Full Review]
Turner, David L. Matthew. BECNT. Baker Academic, 2008.
Fred Sanders Fred Sanders May 28, 2011
I enjoyed Turner’s recent article “Matthew Among the Dispensationalists” in the Journal of the ETS, and was glad to find this 2008 full-length commentary written from a progressive dispensationalist viewpoint. Growing up, I imbibed a pretty hard-line dispensationalist take on Matthew (especially the “offer of the Kingdom”), and there are parts of the Gospel that I don’t think I’ll ever be able to read any other way. Turner is an excellent guide to what is best in that tradition of interpretation. [Full Review]
Osborne, Grant R. Arnold, Clinton E. ed. Matthew. ZECNT. Zondervan, 2010.
Fred Sanders Fred Sanders May 28, 2011
I didn’t use this one as much because I didn’t get a copy until after the class had already started, and I had my study habits already too set to admit a fourth jumbo commentary. But I like the layout of this brand new series (can’t wait to read general editor Clint Arnold’s Ephesians volume), which takes you through the full text of the book repeatedly in each section. [Full Review]
Wilkins, Michael J. Matthew. NIVAC. Zondervan, 2004.
Fred Sanders Fred Sanders May 28, 2011
I went to Wilkins last of all, to make sure I had my head on straight and was taking the right overall message to the class. If he had identified the main thrust of a passage as lying somewhere different from where I was planning to take the class, I stopped in my tracks and reconsidered. I also swiped a lot of his ideas about practical application. [Full Review]
Glasscock, Ed; Glasscock, Lawrence. Matthew. MGC. Moody Publishers, 1997.
Fred Sanders Fred Sanders May 28, 2011
A former student gave me a copy of this commentary, and I was impressed with how well Glasscock brought together the most important things in concise, non-technical comments. [Full Review]
Ryle, J. C. Matthew. CCC. Crossway, 1993.
Fred Sanders Fred Sanders May 28, 2011
Nice to have an old evangelical Anglican bishop to say things like “May we all think often about Korazin, Bethsaida and Capernaum! Let us settle it in our minds that it will never do to be content with merely hearing and liking the Gospel. We must go further than this, we must actually repent and turn to God.” [Full Review]