<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Great tool for getting the most out of Mark
Review: Dr. Lane's commentary on Mark strikes an excellent balance between historical, theological, and practical issues. He also covers textual variants in the manuscript tradition. I found his brief appendix on the issue of Mark 16:9-20 to be very informative.Lane also does well with sticking to the gospel of Mark while not diverting his attention to parallel passages in Matthew and Luke. He makes a compelling case for the dating and place of authorship of this gospel. His attention to the "difficult" areas of Mark is probably the highlight of this commentary. His concise and forceful arguments are not overly wordy while still being clearly expressed.
Rating:
Summary: Great tool for getting the most out of Mark
Review: Dr. Lane's commentary on Mark strikes an excellent balance between historical, theological, and practical issues. He also covers textual variants in the manuscript tradition. I found his brief appendix on the issue of Mark 16:9-20 to be very informative. Lane also does well with sticking to the gospel of Mark while not diverting his attention to parallel passages in Matthew and Luke. He makes a compelling case for the dating and place of authorship of this gospel. His attention to the "difficult" areas of Mark is probably the highlight of this commentary. His concise and forceful arguments are not overly wordy while still being clearly expressed.
Rating: 
Summary: Good!
Review: Good commentary, there is much you will learn from Lane's work. If you're studying Mark, this is a great book for you.
Rating:
Summary: Good!
Review: Good commentary, there is much you will learn from Lane's work. If you're studying Mark, this is a great book for you.
Rating:
Summary: The Best Commentary on "Mark" Available Today!
Review: William Lane's commentary on "Mark" is very scholarly and balanced. He employs redaction criticism as his primary method to extract the most out of the "present form" of Mark's gospel and shows us how rewarding it is to do it this way. At the same time, Lane pays attention to many theological issues (such as "the Wilderness motif in Mark", "the Messianic secret", etc.) and historical/textual issues (e.g.- "Mark 16", Dead Sea Scrolls discoveries, comparisons between Peter's sermons in "Acts" and the literary/compositional style of Mark). The overall result is a commentary that is at the same time a great reference work, a great instruction manual and a great devotional tool. Personally, I became interested in many Gospel issues such as Form/Source/Redaction Criticism, the Synoptic Problem, the revelation/hidden Christ, the centrality of the Passion, etc. after reading this work. Highly recommended!
Rating:
Summary: The Best Commentary on "Mark" Available Today!
Review: William Lane's commentary on "Mark" is very scholarly and balanced. He employs redaction criticism as his primary method to extract the most out of the "present form" of Mark's gospel and shows us how rewarding it is to do it this way. At the same time, Lane pays attention to many theological issues (such as "the Wilderness motif in Mark", "the Messianic secret", etc.) and historical/textual issues (e.g.- "Mark 16", Dead Sea Scrolls discoveries, comparisons between Peter's sermons in "Acts" and the literary/compositional style of Mark). The overall result is a commentary that is at the same time a great reference work, a great instruction manual and a great devotional tool. Personally, I became interested in many Gospel issues such as Form/Source/Redaction Criticism, the Synoptic Problem, the revelation/hidden Christ, the centrality of the Passion, etc. after reading this work. Highly recommended!
Rating:
Summary: Highly scholarly and readable
Review: William Lane, professor of Biblical Studies as Seattle Pacific University, has written a highly readable yet very scholarly commentary on Mark's gospel for the New International Commentary on the New Testament Series. Lane does an excellent job analyzing the structure and themes within Mark, explaning parables from different angles (as well as understanding one parable through the other parables), and commenting on other aspects of ancient Roman and Jewish life.
This reader also appreciates the conservative approach to Lane's commentary. With so many authors attempting scholarly acrobatics to learn about the "Markan community" or practice source criticism, it is refreshing to read a scholarly commentary that holds a traditional view--Mark from the book of Acts wrote this Gospel based almost exclusively on the teachings of Peter. While many reviewers herald this "new and exciting" method of interpreting Mark, there is actually little "new" about it--the traditional conservative view of Mark that the church has always held is the view proposed by Lane.
Although an excellent work, this author does have one criticism concerning the ending of Mark. While Lane is with the majority of scholars in looking down their noses at Mark 16:9ff, Lane dismisses these verses as "unoriginal" without much of a discussion. Without even reprinting the text, he criticizes those who hold to the originality of these verses as unscholarly and speculative. A fuller argument for his premature ending, a more detailed explanation of the function of this abrupt "literary device" and a short commentary on Mark 16:9ff would have been greatly appreciated by this reader, especially in the light that Lane seemingl treats the ridiculous Freer Logion as sacred writing.
In all, this book is a great, mentally provocative treatment of Mark's Gospel that simply fell apart at the end. Highly recommended!
<< 1 >>
| 
