<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Still One of the Finest
Review: After spending time in the new BECNT by David Garland and the NIGTC by Anthony Thiselton, I must revise my brief review of this NICNT commentary by Fee. Before Garland and Thiselton, the NICNT by Fee was simply the best commentary available on 1 Corinthians. But Garland and Thiselton have now produced equally brilliant commentaries. One must remember, however, that Garland and Thiselton have built on the great works of many others, including that of Gordon Fee. In fact, even though Thiselton's work is more detailed and up-to-date, I still prefer Fee's work simply because it is so lucid. Fee always challenges me to think contextually through the exegesis, rather than trying to cram verses into a catagorical framework.
Please do not be put off by those who try to pigeon-hole Fee's work as a "charismatic approach." Chapters 12-14 do contain arguments against cessation of the sign gifts, but I assure you that you will find it nothing less than challenging and thought provoking. His exegesis throughout this commentary is profound and lucid. His arguments are careful and takes other scholarly work into account. Since Fee is a textual scholar of the highest caliber, his considerations of textual issues are far more thorough than most other work on this epistle. Fee ends each section with wonderful practical insights and application. However, I must mention that there are times when Fee goes off the deep end. The prime example is his insistence that 14:34-35 is a very early interpolation.
I definitely recommend you get the BECNT by Garland and the NIGTC by Thiselton, but please do not neglect Fee. The NICNT on 1 Corinthians by Gordon Fee is a goldmine of lucid, well-reasoned and thorough exegesis of 1 Corinthians.
Rating:
Summary: Still One of the Finest
Review: After spending time in the new NIGTC commentary on 1 Corinthians by Anthony Thiselton, I must revise my brief review of this NICNT commentary by Fee. Before Thiselton's work, the NICNT by Fee was simply the best commentary available on 1 Corinthians. But the sweep of Thiselton's work is breathtaking and has really surpassed Fee's work. One must remember, however, that Thiselton has built on the great work of many others, including that of Gordon Fee. In fact, even though Thiselton's work is more detailed and up-to-date, I still prefer Fee's work simply because it is so lucid. Fee always challenges me to think contextually through the exegesis, rather than trying to cram verses into a catagorical framework. Please do not be put off by those who try to pigeon-hole Fee's work as a "charismatic approach." Fee does not take charismatic presuppositions to the text. Chapters 12-14 do contain arguments against cessation of the sign gifts, but I assure you that you will find it nothing less than challenging and thought provoking. His exegesis throughout this commentary is profound and lucid. His arguments are careful and takes other scholarly work into account. Since Fee is a textual scholar of the highest order, his considerations of textual issues are far more thorough than most other work on this epistle. Fee ends each section with wonderful practical insights and application. However, I must mention that there are times when Fee goes off the deep end. The prime example is his insistence that 14:34-35 is a very early interpolation. I definitely recommend you get the NIGTC commentary by Thiselton, but please do not neglect Fee. The NICNT on 1 Corinthians by Gordon Fee is a goldmine of lucid, well-reasoned and thorough exegesis of 1 Corinthians.
Rating: 
Summary: Good commentary
Review: Fee does a great Job of explaining the text from an evangelical point of view. He gives a in depth understanding of the text while not bogging down in scholarly elements that are confusing. I do not have any greek background training yet the commentary presented no problems for me. The only objections I have come in chapters 12-14 where his charismatic leanings are clearly evident. A conservative who doesn't believe that tongues are part of today's Christian life would disagress with Fee's interpretation of chapters 12-14. In Chapter 14 Fee considers verses 34-35 to be a scribal addition instead of part of the text. In my view this is a circuitous way of sidestepping the issue of women in the churcn. Overall the book will be a blessing to those who love the Lord Jesus Christ.
Rating: 
Summary: almost always objective
Review: Gordon Fee is a skilled exegete, and this is a good commentary. But when he reaches 1 Cor 11 or 12:13 he forgets to be an expositor of God`s Word and he follows his Zwinglian tradition. For example he says that I Cor 12:13 isn`t about the sacrament of Baptism, but Fee doesn`t prove that Paul taugh two baptisms: the so called water baptism and the Spirit Baptism. Paul teaches One Baptism on Ephesians 4. Fee only forgot this.
His commentaries on 1 Cor 12:13 shows how acrobatic an exegete can be, and the fantastic mind games he can play when he follows his tradition instead of the Bible. Read Baptism in the NT by George Beasley Murray.
Rating:
Summary: A monumental work
Review: It is unfortunate that several reviewers with axes to grind have driven down the score on Fee's commentary, which is a momumental work. As a person with an M.Div. and other graduate degrees, I found the book to be lucid in its exegesis and useful in its application sections.
But let reviews from more credible sources than I be allowed to speak. Granted the following come from the book's jacket, but consider the weightiness of these sources. From the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, "Fee has given us a paradigm of what a commentary should be." From the Journal of Biblical Literature, "This is an excellent commentary. Writing in the best tradition of evangelical scholarship, Fee has produced the most thorough interpretation of 1 Corinthians to have appeared in English in this generation." And from Studies in Religion, "This commentary is a full and thorough reading of the text, reliable in its discussions of the scholarly debates, cautious in its exegetical judgments, sensitive in its handling of Paul, and constructive in its theological content. It offers more substance than any other available commentary."
Rating:
Summary: A good commentary on 1 Cor
Review: This is about as good a commentary on 1 Corinthians as you will find. That does not mean it is without flaws however. It only means that 1 Corinthians has not been as adequately explained yet as we would like. If you are committed to the cessation of the gifts, seeing his interpretation in 1 Cor 12-14 is going to get you annoyed. However, I would say he is largely right. (And I am not a charismatic.) The biggest issues for me in the commentary are the problematic ways he takes the passages rgarding the role of the women in the Church at Corinth. Most notorious is his conclusion, on textual critical grounds, that 1 Cor 14:34 does not belong in the text. This is despite the fact that evidence FOR the passage is overwhelming. Otherwise, this is a good commentary, but one with flaws.
Rating:
Summary: A good commentary on 1 Cor
Review: This is about as good a commentary on 1 Corinthians as you will find. That does not mean it is without flaws however. It only means that 1 Corinthians has not been as adequately explained yet as we would like. If you are committed to the cessation of the gifts, seeing his interpretation in 1 Cor 12-14 is going to get you annoyed. However, I would say he is largely right. (And I am not a charismatic.) The biggest issues for me in the commentary are the problematic ways he takes the passages rgarding the role of the women in the Church at Corinth. Most notorious is his conclusion, on textual critical grounds, that 1 Cor 14:34 does not belong in the text. This is despite the fact that evidence FOR the passage is overwhelming. Otherwise, this is a good commentary, but one with flaws.
Rating:
Summary: Fee on I Corinthians
Review: This is an 880 page volume published by Eerdmans, hence the binding is a cheap glue injection, the book lies open only in the middle section. The paper is a cheap non-ANSI certified stock. The page layout is neat and easy to read. This is a valuable commentary in that it is a defense for the charismatic position (or interpretation) for this great epistle. Fee himself, declares that he is a person of the holiness persuasion (which declaration in the preface, is appreciated). He does a fine job in arguing for his position and the meaning of the texts discussed. At times he really brings out some nice details. For example: on pages 562ff, he declares that the "body" discussed in chapter 11, is the group of believers at the supper, which is very valid. He presents this insight after he discloses other options. Aternatively, he can miss valuable points: for example, at I Corinthians 7:37, he could have noted that this text concerns a man who PROVIDES for the care of his mature, and virgin, unmarried daughter, should she decide to remain single for the Lord (though many commentators miss this). Probably Fee's greatest flaw in this work is his failure to first utilize a sound Greek text. His commentary is based upon a text which has a number of errors in it (the UBS and or Nestle/Aland Greek New Testaments). One example: on page 462 in note number 3, he copies the Nestle/Aland apparatus showing, among others, manuscript number 945; however 945 does NOT omit the passage here!! Fee was known years ago as a capable textual critic of the Greek New Testament. Unfortunately, he failed to examine his Greek text here, and thus numerous errors exist in this commentary. Odd behavior for a former textual critic! However, he does show all bibliographic references, and poses many challenges to non-charismatic interpretations. Recommended for Christians who desire to examine the charismatic view of I Corinthians. But not very useful for Christians who need a dependable commentary on the Greek text and its English translation of I Corinthians..
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding commentary
Review: This is simply one of the best commentaries I have ever read. I do not agree with his pentecostal or evangelical feminists views, but the quality of writing, exegesis, and argumentation are clearly superior to what you will find in most commentaries. Fee does a particularly good job of tracing the flow of thought. He doesn't just interpret verses as isolated, unrelated units of thought. His treatments of chapters 7 and 8 and 11:17-34 really changed the way I viewed this passages.
<< 1 >>
|
