“The reason for this is as simple as it is shocking: the Greek word for slave has been covered up by being mistranslated in almost every English version” going back to both the King James Version and the Geneva Bible that predated it. Though the word slave (doulos in Greek) appears 124 times in the original text, it is correctly translated only once in the King James. Most of our modern translations do only slightly better. It almost seems like a conspiracy.” (page 16)

Great care has to be given when words like “covered up” and “conspiracy” are thrown around regarding translations. While not explicitly stating such, these words give off the idea that translators are intentionally not translating words in the Bible correctly. I used to speak similarly when I came across renderings of various translations that I thought were poor. The problem is that we communicate to the weaker Christians and to the unbelievers that the English translation they are holding in their hands is not accurate. There are only a few versions I would be willing to make such a bold claim of inaccuracy or mistranslation (like the New World Translation and The Message). We can so easily shatter the confidence we should have in our English translations when statements are made like MacArthur makes that “almost every English translation” has “covered up” this word by being “mistranslated.” We do not want people to stop reading the scriptures because we have given them the idea that it cannot be trusted or, worse, the translators are choosing to cover up a meaning of a passage or word.

Further, to paint the motives of the translators of a particular version as evil or with the intention to deceive is to assume we know their hearts. We must recognize that the scholars who go about the task of translation have far more knowledge and experience in Greek and Hebrew, as well as more skill in translation, than we do. Is it possible that translators made mistakes? Of course. But to think because I looked up a word in a lexicon that I am a “scholar” who can then tell others how the translators “mistranslated” a word is at best foolish and at worst the height of arrogance. Do we think the translators did not have the same tools we are using to bring forth that translation? Rather than condemning a translation as false or inaccurate, we must ask the question, “Why did the translation go with that particular rendering?” Undoubtedly there is a reason why the translation chose the rendering in question. We must do the heavy lifting to figure out why.

Interestingly, MacArthur explains the primary reason for rendering doulos as slave. MacArthur states, “Translators have understandably wanted to avoid any association between biblical teaching and the slave trade of the British Empire and the American Colonial era.” (page 17) This was my first thought as well as I read his book. The meaning of slave in the Greco-Roman society is not the same as what the word “slave” conjures in American minds today. If English translations did what MacArthur seems to be advocating” consistently translating doulos as slave” then the translators would actually be MISTRANSLATING the word because it would communicate to the reader the WRONG image. Now if someone would like to say that he does not like the reasoning behind a particular translation, then he has the right to that opinion. But do not suggest a cover up, mistranslation, or other kind of deception in the hearts of the translators. We may not like the reason, but let’s not suggest evil motives. The reason behind the KJV and other English translations using the translation “servant” for doulos has good reasoning and logic. Sometimes a literal translation can actually miscommunicate the meaning of a given word. I learned this quickly in my third year of high school Spanish. You cannot take an English-Spanish dictionary, literally translate each word, and think you have accurately translated. Believe me, I tried repeatedly to failing grades. How much more with an ancient language!

One of the blessings of having multiple English translations today is the ability to see a number of different ways a verse can be translated properly without knowing any Greek or Hebrew. What a benefit for us today! When airing our disappointment or disagreement with a particular rendering in a translation, let’s keep our statement to, “I like how this translation rendering this verse instead of this other translation.” Don’t say that there has been a mistranslation or coverup. Don’t charge the translators with evil motives or distortion of God’s holy word. Translation is not as simple as using a lexicon. Don’t forget that we never want to suggest to people that our translations are not trustworthy. They are very accurate as they communicate faithfully the meaning of God’s word.

1. Baker Exegetical Commentary by Thomas Schreiner.

This has been the most beneficial commentary I have used in my study of Romans. Schreiner does an excellent job explaining his own position, but also explaining the position of others. Schreiner interacts with opposing positions, giving reasons why he does not go along with other interpretations. I found this very valuable since I did not purchase the Greek commentaries, since I am not a Greek scholar and cannot read Greek. But Schreiner repeatedly tells his readers what those commentaries say (like Cranfield) so that the reader has a good feel for the various views of a given text. This is the primary reason why if you are going to own only one commentary on Romans, Schreiner is a must own. Most of the Greek words are translated so readers who do not know Greek are not missing out of the depth Schreiner teaches. Schreiner also interacts with the New Perspective, which is very important today and where older commentaries fail. It seems to me that Schreiner takes a hybrid position, taking the good points of the traditional view of Romans and the good points of the New Perspective to draw some very insightful conclusions from the letter. In my opinion, Schreiner’s work has become the new standard reference for ministers and teachers.

2. New Interpreter’s Bible by N.T. Wright (volume X, includes Acts and 1 Corinthians by other authors)

When teaching Romans, it is important to learn about the New Perspective “from the horse’s mouth” rather than relying on authors telling you about the New Perspective, but do not accept it. Wright does an excellent job explaining the letter from the New Perspective and also explains where he sees deficiencies in the traditional view. Wright is very thought-provoking and I hope people will not dismiss his observations outright, without considering his arguments. While I do not agree with many points Wright makes, there are many points where Wright hits the mark and helps make the most sense of some of the letter’s difficulties. This is an expensive volume, but do not neglect it.

3. Pillar New Testament Commentary by Leon Morris.

This is a hard decision between Morris and Moo (see below #4). But I went with Morris at number three for a few reasons. Morris is very concise, which is nice after reading Schreiner and Wright. Morris does a great job at simply getting to the point. He does not interact much with other views. He simply tells you what the text means, and this is very helpful when you already have Schreiner revealing other positions. Further, Morris often says something that none of my other commentaries said about the verse. Because this commentary was written in 1988, there is not interaction with the New Perspective. This keeps Morris from going higher in the rankings. But if you have the above two books, you will not be lacking in knowledge on the New Perspective and Morris will give you some great insights that others do not catch.

4. New International Commentary on the New Testament by Douglas Moo.

Moo’s commentary is also excellent. Just because I ranked Moo at number four should not all cause anyone to think that Moo has not published a quality, useful work. Moo’s fourth position is simply a testimony to the strength of the other commentaries. Schreiner refers to Moo regularly and offers similar interpretations to Moo. This is the only reason why I placed Moo at number four rather than at number three. This commentary is worth the purchase. The footnotes are very extensive, often taking up more than half of the page. With over 1000 pages, Moo extensively covers Romans and does a good job interacting with other interpretations and positions. If you have about $160, please purchase all four commentaries and you will be set to go in your studies.

Here are some of the other commentaries I also consulted, but found to not be as useful as these top four works.

5. Expositor’s Bible Commentary by Everett Harris

Harris does a good job bringing in some new observations in an easy to read way. After other commentaries have spent pages and pages on a particular verse, Harris often comes up with a brilliant sentence to summarize what everyone else has been teaching.

6. Word Biblical Commentary by James D.G. Dunn

Many insightful thoughts and also takes a New Perspective view that is somewhat different that Wright’s analysis. But I have always found the format of the Word Biblical Commentary series to be prohibiting. I was able to get both volumes used for under $20. If you can get a good deal, pick up Dunn’s work.

7. Cornerstone Biblical Commentary by Roger Mohrlang

I really like the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary series. The series gets straight to the point and to the meaning of the text. There were many places where I felt Mohrlang did not deal with the difficulties of the text, opting to simply summarize the paragraph. In other places the work is very insightful.

8. Truth Commentary by Clinton Hamilton

Overall, a very nice work and deals with many opposing viewpoints. Hamilton spends far too much time giving Greek words and defining those words rather than expounding on the text, in my opinion. I wish Hamilton would have written more about the meaning of the text than defining the individual words in the text. But it is still a useful reference work.

9. New Testament Commentary by William Hendrikson

I enjoy the New Testament Commentary series by Hendrikson and Kistemaker. I do feel somewhat let down by the Romans commentary, however. It is just not a good and not as useful as the top four commentaries listed above.

10. New International Commentary on the New Testament by John Murray (1959)

I picked up this copy used online for under $5. For that price no student can go wrong. Moo’s work does a great job in replacing this work in the NICNT series. But Murray is worth having in the library and worth consulting if the price is right.

I hope this review is helpful for those who are studying Romans. I strongly recommend saving your money and buying the first four commentaries for your study. With those four, I think you will be able to have enough information of varying views to make an educated and informed interpretation of Paul’s letter to the Romans. This summer I am going to preach through James and I plan to give my review of those commentaries this fall.

Max Lucado has undertaken the task to help us fight the fears that consciously and subconsciously reside within us. In Fearless, Max Lucado moves through the New Testament showing the frequency of Jesus’ words to not fear and be courageous. The author does an excellent job revealing the fear of various people in the first century and how Jesus was able to combat those fears. He even addresses fears that we may not have recognized within us, like the fear of not mattering to others and the fear of disappointing God. Max Lucado continues in the style of his most recent works, examining the scriptures in relation to the topic he is discussing. Each chapter contains practical thoughts about why each fear is not rational for the Christian.

Overall, I recommend Fearless, giving it four stars out of five. It is a “page turner,” capturing my attention and propelling through the book with the author’s engaging, conversational style. I would have liked to have seen a little more discussion about each Bible story rather than Lucado emphasizing his own personal stories or stories of those he knows. I was also disappointed to see the author place the sinner’s prayer at the end of chapter 3, considering the scriptures never teach to pray to become a Christian (see Acts 2:37-38). Outside of these flaws, I was encouraged and strengthened by Lucado’s observations and I believe you will profit from reading this book. It is possible to live a life full of hope rather than full of fear.

I was given a pre-publication copy of Fearless as a member of Thomas Nelson’s Book Review Blogger program: http://brb.thomasnelson.com/

New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary – N.T. Wright

Word Biblical Commentary – James B.G. Dunn

New International Commentary on the New Testament – John Murray

Cornerstone Biblical Commentary – Roger Mohrlang

New Testament Commentary – William Hendriksen

Baker Exegetical Commentary – Thomas R. Schreiner

Romans – James Montgomery Boice

I hope this will give me a balanced view of the New Perspective and the Reformed Perspective of Romans. Too many are being far too dogmatic about Romans. Some are rejecting everything from the Reformed Perspective. Some refuse to listen to anything from the New Perspective. The truth has nothing to fear from investigation. Such dogmatism and “closed-mindedness” comes from a fear that our beliefs are wrong and we will be found needing to change.

If I can find the Pillar New Testament Commentary for an affordable price, I will grab it too.

Now, I wonder how many preachers read this much stuff before starting a lesson series. I think I have a disease.

So I am doing my prep work for my upcoming sermon series on Romans and I begin to look over the Word Biblical Commentary. What a strange layout! Here is how each paragraph is treated: Translation, Notes, Form & Structure, Comment, Explanation. To me, this is simply confusing and odd. Why do this? It is especially curious to separate “Comment” from “Explanation.” Even the commentary itself does not seem to know the reason for this distinction.

“For a clear exposition of the passage’s meaning and its relevance to the ongoing biblical revelation, the Comment and concluding Explanation are designed expressly to meet that need” (Editorial Preface).

It seems that the Word Biblical Commentary decided to go out of their way to make it more complicated to find the answers desired concerning a passage. I think there is a reason that no other commentary series has gone with this format. I am not the only one who has found this layout to get in the way of finding answers. The Best Commentaries website agrees with me. I thought this is worth sharing with other preachers and teachers so that they will know if they purchase a commentary from this series, they will have to do a little extra work.

From Joel Osteen’s book, Your Best Life Now:

What you keep before your eyes will affect you. You will produce what you’re continually seeing in your mind. If you foster an image of defeat and failure, then you’re going to live that kind of life. But if you develop an image of victory, success, health, abundance, joy, peace, and happiness, nothing on earth will be able to hold those things from you. (pg. 5)

God has so much more in store for you, too. Start making room for it in your thinking. Conceive it on the inside. Start seeing yourself rising to a new level, doing something of significance, living in that home of your dreams. (pg. 8)

Please, allow me to make some points just from logic. If Joel Osteen is correct, then why did the apostles FAIL in having victory, success, health, abundance, and so forth while on the earth? All of the apostles but John were killed for the gospel. Perhaps they did not do a very good job visualizing success and health? Would anyone dare say that their faith is greater than the faith of the apostles?

What should we say to Christians in difficult places, like China and the Philippines? Are they being persecuted and killed simply because they have not enlarged their vision? What about Christians in America who have lost their jobs in the recent economic slowdown? Will you really condemn their faith in God as being weak simply because they do not have riches?

Where do the scriptures ever teach that God will move us into “that home of our dreams” if we simply “conceive it on the inside” and visualize ourselves attaining it?

Now, I will agree that if you always think of yourself failing, you will likely fail. No doubt that negative thinking prevents us from doing the things we could and should be doing (which is what chapter 1 seems to be pointing out). But this has nothing to do with godliness. The scriptures never teach a “think it and it will happen” concept. It is great that you visualize success and you work for that success. But that has nothing to do with faith and spirituality. The scriptures repeatedly condemn the love of money. Jesus pointedly reminded us that we cannot serve God and wealth/possessions. Doing what Joel Osteen is telling Christians to do is to violate Jesus’ teaching.

“Don’t store up treasures here on earth, where moths eat them and rust destroys them, and where thieves break in and steal. Store your treasures in heaven, where moths and rust cannot destroy, and thieves do not break in and steal. Wherever your treasure is, there the desires of your heart will also be. Your eye is a lamp that provides light for your body. When your eye is good, your whole body is filled with light. But when your eye is bad, your whole body is filled with darkness. And if the light you think you have is actually darkness, how deep that darkness is! No one can serve two masters. For you will hate one and love the other; you will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.” (Matthew 6:19-24; NLT)

Jesus taught not to put your heart, mind, and treasure in material things. Our goal in life is not to have our dream house. Our goal in life is not to have abundance, wealth, success, victory, or health. The scriptures never teach that any of these things are God’s concern or that we should desire them. If these things are our goal, then we are materialistic and worldly, not godly. We are to seek God’s kingdom and God’s righteousness. Our goal is a relationship with God and living in God’s purposes. But God’s purposes are spiritual, not material.

Please read the book of 1 Peter. The apostle repeatedly teaches that we will suffer for God, not experience success. In fact, Peter says that we should not be surprised when we suffer for doing good (1 Peter 4:12-19).

Defend Joel Osteen all that you like and go crazy on the comment board. But your defense of him, despite the clear teaching of scripture, says that your heart is ensnared in materialism also.

I have been preaching through 1 Peter. Below is my rating of which commentaries I think are the best on the book of 1 Peter. I am giving these ratings from an evangelist’s perspective. That is, the commentary does not merely explain the text, but gives insights into the text and useful information that will help in sermon preparation and class teaching. I do not have all the commentaries that exist on 1 Peter, obviously. I am only making these ratings based upon the commentaries I am using.

1. Baker Exegetical Commentary – 1 Peter; by Karen Jobes. If there is only one commentary to purchase on 1 Peter, this one is definitely the one to purchase. It is a technical commentary to a certain degree, but all the Greek words are transliterated and translated, so the reader is not lost by the use of Greek words. Jobes gives a tremendous amount of depth to the study and is fantastic with her background information. This is also a commentary that is actually enjoyable to read. Most commentaries are a fight of the senses to keep awake as the commentator drones on and on about some point of minutia. Jobes does not do this. Jobes discusses the words and issues that needs to be discussed and presents information that will help, not numb, the mind.

2. Expositor’s Bible Commentary – 1 Peter; by Edwin Blum. This is an underrated commentary series and I have found much useful information from EBC while doing my preaching through 1 Peter. You can purchase this commentary series on the whole Bible for $130 or less. A great deal and it is always useful.

3. New International Commentary on the New Testament (NICNT) – 1 Peter; by Peter Davids. Very useful, very helpful, and very solid.

4. New Testament Commentary – 1 Peter; by Simon Kistemaker. Also very useful in its own right, but the above commentaries are better.

I will do these reviews as I collect commentaries and I hope it will help others who are looking for good resources for preachers and teachers.

I am currently reading Exegetical Fallacies by D.A. Carson, so Justification will have to wait a couple weeks.

_________________________

“The field is small,” Kohler said, “but it’s bringing fresh answers to some old questions – questions about the origin of the universe and the forces that bind us all. Leonardo believed his research had the potential to convert millions to a more spiritual life. Last year he categorically proved the existence of an energy force that unites us all. He actually demonstrated that we are all physically connected…that the molecules in your body are intertwined with the molecules in mine… that there is a single force moving within all of us.” (p. 56)

_________________________

“Matter,” Vittoria repeated. “Blossoming out of nothing. An incredible display of subatomic fireworks. A miniature universe springing to life. he proved not only that matter can be created from nothing, but that the Big Bang and Genesis can be explained simply by accepting the presence of an enormous source of energy.”

“You mean God?” Kohler demanded.

“God, Buddha, The Force, Yahweh, the singularity, the unicity point – call it whatever you like – the result is the same. Science and religion support the same truth – pure energy is the father of creation.” (pp. 89-90)

_________________________

Vittoria was silent for a long time. “Science tells me God must exist. My mind tells me I will never understand God. And my heart tells me I am not meant to.

How’s that for concise, he thought. “So you believe God is fact, but we will never understand Him.”

“Her,” she said with a smile. “Your Native Americans had it right.”

Langdon chuckled. “Mother Earth.”

“Gaea. The planet is an organism. All of us are cells with different purposes. And yet we are intertwined. Serving each other. Serving the whole.” (pp. 138-139)

_________________________

These teachings are contrary to the scriptures, even though many try to suggest that this is exactly what the scriptures teach.