JacobSoul

JacobSoul

Reviews

Osborne, Grant R. Arnold, Clinton E. ed. Matthew. ZECNT. Zondervan, 2010.
JacobSoul JacobSoul October 27, 2021
It’s got nothing on France’s excellent volume, but I personally found this volume to be much more valuable than Carson. Many wonderful insights given throughout. After reading a bit of Osborne’s Revelation commentary, and now this one, I really have an appreciation for his style. I find him to be very quotable, and the insights he had made me glad I read it.
France, R. T. The Gospel of Matthew. NICNT. Eerdmans, 2007.
JacobSoul JacobSoul October 27, 2021
I have now read both this volume and the same author’s volume on the gospel of Mark. Though that volume is rated as the best commentary on the gospel of Mark, I would consider this Matthew volume to be the better of the two. I am using this commentary to teach through the gospel of Matthew alongside Carson and Osborne, and I find this one to be the most valuable of the three by far. It really makes the other two unnecessary most of the time. If you are only getting one commentary on the gospel of Matthew, this should be your choice. 5 stars.
France, R. T. The Gospel of Matthew. NICNT. Eerdmans, 2007.
JacobSoul JacobSoul October 27, 2021
I have now read both this volume and the same author’s volume on the gospel of Mark. Though that volume is rated as the best commentary on the gospel of Mark, I would consider this Matthew volume to be the better of the two. I am using this commentary to teach through the gospel of Matthew alongside Carson and Osborne, and I find this one to be the most valuable of the three by far. It really makes the other two unnecessary most of the time. If you are only getting one commentary on the gospel of Matthew, this should be your choice. 5 stars.
Carson, D. A. “Matthew” in Matthew, Mark, Luke. EBC. Zondervan, 1984.
JacobSoul JacobSoul September 26, 2021
This one seemed to be the best reviewed commentary on Matthew, and so I picked it up to prepare to teach through the book of Matthew, alongside France and Osborne. Of those three, I have found Carson to be the least helpful by far. To be sure, if you’re looking for information on all three of the synoptic gospels, this will definitely be helpful for you, as Carson will constantly compare the three. While this is helpful in some respects, it makes the Matthew section less of a commentary on Matthew itself, and more of a commentary on how the three relate. This causes a lot of information specific to a particular gospel, such as specific themes a particular author chooses to use, to be lost through the trees. In addition, Carson seems to spend a significant amount of print dealing with issues that are not very relevant to understanding the text (in my opinion) which is noteworthy for a commentary on Matthew that is around 600 pages (compared with France at over 1100!). I understand that France is the more technical of the two, but you wouldn’t always know it with all the side trails that Carson chooses to go off on. This was quite disappointing after reading Carson’s commentary on John, which I would call a masterpiece. Overall, I would only recommend this for someone doing a study of all three synoptic gospels concurrently. If you are specifically seeking to teach or understand Matthew, I would not use this commentary. My recommendation would be France.