Forum for ex-members of Revival Churches
Revival_Centres_Discussion_Forums > The Back Room - Come in for SUPPER > Modbox Go to subcategory:
Author Content
Ex_Member
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Date Posted:05/03/2009 10:58 PMCopy HTML

Attention Ian.

I am about to embark on some research for a paper due on 1st May and I was digging around and I came across a small booklet by Dr Gordon Fee that is titled "The Disease of the Health and Wealth Gospels" .

This Ian, if you are not aware of it, is very interesting reading. It only goes for 45 pages and it would be no trouble for me to scan with my new $300 job printer that I treated myself with for Christmas and convert into a PDF file for uploading somewhere for the folks on these discussion boards to have a good read of. If you can suggest how I could go about uploading it somehow, somewhere would be good. If you havn't read this then I am sure you will enjoy this - my can Dr Fee exegete !!!

while I have your attention this is the question I have to answer:

"Pentecostalism is characterized as having a "Triumphalist" theology; that is, Christians are the"head and not the tail," whatever they believe for they may achieve, faith can win in every situation, Christians can and should be "healthy, wealthy and wise," Critically examine this idea in the light of 2 Corinthians, especially the "triumphal procession" passage (2:14-17), the various "tribulation lists" (4:7-12, 6;3-10, 11:23-33) and chapters 10 -13.

(Helpful hint: In your answer 1) summarise the "word of faith movement" (ie triumphalist theology) and what they teach 2) summarise Paul's purpose in writing 2 Corinthians, including the identity of his "opponents" and their influence on the Corinthian church 3) exegete the selected passages 4) Critique triumphalism from your reading of  2 Corinthians....)

Can you suggest a good commentary to start on ??

blessings

Eric


Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #1
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:05/03/2009 11:15 PMCopy HTML

Eric,

First up I'm already aware of Dr Fee's book, and I'd suggest that you don't reproduce and post its contents as doing so would be to flagrantly breach copyright. As the thing only costs about $12.00, anyone interested could secure their own legit copy without going into debt!

Next and WRT the entire 'triumphalist' nonsense of Pentecostalism, you could do worse than accessing a copy of Murray Harris' NIGTC commentary on 2 Corinthians (it's my favourite given that it's exhaustive in its treatment of the epistle). You might also try to track down a copy of Brunner's theology on the Holy Spirit as well (it's been out of print for years, but your college's library shouldhave it). I'll have a ferret around my personal library tonight, and see what other titles may be of use to you.

Blessings,

Ian

email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #2
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:07/03/2009 10:26 PMCopy HTML

Reply to Didaktikon (05/03/2009 17:15:02)

Eric,

First up I'm already aware of Dr Fee's book, and I'd suggest that you don't reproduce and post its contents as doing so would be to flagrantly breach copyright. As the thing only costs about $12.00, anyone interested could secure their own legit copy without going into debt!

Next and WRT the entire 'triumphalist' nonsense of Pentecostalism, you could do worse than accessing a copy of Murray Harris' NIGTC commentary on 2 Corinthians (it's my favourite given that it's exhaustive in its treatment of the epistle). You might also try to track down a copy of Brunner's theology on the Holy Spirit as well (it's been out of print for years, but your college's library shouldhave it). I'll have a ferret around my personal library tonight, and see what other titles may be of use to you.

Blessings,

Ian


Ian I just had a peek in NIDNTT V1. page 649..

"Thriambeuo only appears twice in NT. Col 2:15 and 2 Cor 2:14  Col 2:15 presents God as the triumphant victor : Jesus' journey to the cross is God's triumphal procession  ....

So in 2 Cor 2:14 Paul is referring to the trouble he had in locating Titus in Troas... my my haven't the Kenneth Copelands got this completely out of context ??? Paul is talking about his ministry and service !! NOT ABOUT heaping riches and what the not in being the head and not the tail.

Thanks for your help Ian - you're awesome - ta brother

blessings

Eric
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #3
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:08/03/2009 7:26 AMCopy HTML

Hi All,

Let's open up this thread on the issue of the doctrine of "Positive Confession Theology" also known as the "faith formula theology" or "prosperity doctrine" that is espoused by the "Word of Faith" movement..

Just to put you in the picture, I shared an article privately with Didaktikon and this was his succinct reply:

  "
Eric,

The article presents a balanced evaluation of the entire "Word-Faith"
nonsense, and quite rightly dismisses it as being gnostic, carnal and
thoroughly misguided. Effectively, this is the sort of Pentecostalism
that has been largely rejected by mainstream American AoG, but largely
embraced within the hierarchy of the Australian AoG/ACC. To be honest,
one simply cannot support such an approach and lay claim to the
adjective "biblical". It is due to errors of this sort that I actively
distance myself from all forms of Australian Pentecostalism.

Blessings,

Ian

This sort of theology would have found its way into the "revivalist" groups in some form or another so this thread is open to all for open discussion and questions..

blessings

Eric

Talmid Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #4
  • Rank:Regular Rookier
  • Score:5980
  • Posts:293
  • From:Australia
  • Register:21/04/2008 10:04 PM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:08/03/2009 11:22 PMCopy HTML

Hi Eric

I have to agree that the "word-faith", "name it, claim it" theology is clearly a product of (at best) poor hermeneutics (using the "broad" view of the term) if not "directly from the pit". Proponents can be easily challenged with the existential question, "Why are you preaching it here in the affluent West, instead of the dirt poor Third World?" (!!!)

As far as moving into RF, though, the blatant ACC approach is actually used by the hierarchy as one of the reasons for separating from Chistendom. I do know of individuals in RF who embrace the "word-faith"  approach and have been in low-key dialogue with them for a while looking to disabuse them of this travesty. Those individuals, however, are in conflict with their leaders regarding their espousal of it. At the end of the day, though, I believe the false "salvation message" remains the issue of primary concern.

That said, the more subtle (somewhat erroneous) foundation of "marketing Jesus" rather than preaching the gospel was part of RCI (RCA) evangelism going back to at least the mid-1970's, when I first became a member. The "head vs tail" thing was there too, of course.

Cheers

PS I'm still interested in understanding what specifics you had in mind when you averred in another thread that RF had moved "further" into unorthodoxy than RCI
The evidence for Mann-made global warming is unequivocal.
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #5
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:14/03/2009 9:14 AMCopy HTML

Reply to Talmid (08/03/2009 17:22:35)



PS I'm still interested in understanding what specifics you had in mind when you averred in another thread that RF had moved "further" into unorthodoxy than RCI

Hi Talmid,

It was a consensual statement among RCI Leaders that if a person left the RCI for another church, they were regarded as "backsliding to another church".. So for example if Brother Ian left the RCI for the Baptists then in their limited worldview the RCI statement would be if an ordinary member asked the question "What happen to Brother Ian" then the official answer would be " Brother Ian backslid into the Baptists."  So you see using the same RCI logic, John Kulman has backslidden into the Revival Fellowship and I am reminded of a Pastor who once said to me that Brother Kxxxx xxxxxxxx and his whole family backslid into the AOG because he couldn't take the admonition from the oversight of having his daughter to be told not to court and get engaged to a boy from the AOG.. That RCI pastor is now an RF pastor.

Pure Legalism you see and as I see it, using RCI logic in a form of sarcasm, the RF have backslid from the RCI. But Talmid l have to rely on reports as I have heard over the last few years and it is very evident that the RF are now more entenched in legalism than the RCI they "backslid out of"..

.. And legalism is what results when Grace is no longer present. And truly Talmid look closer at the RF and it is all about obeying un - Biblical rules imposed by the self appointed leaders who are credentialled by a sinlge self appointed leader. And an ordinary member has to obey these un - biblical rules to maintain their worthiness to remain a member of their un - Biblical club - or its out the door - backsliders. And if they choose to fellowship at another church, they have backslidden into that "other" church

The Revival Fellowship have zero theological understanding. They have no concept that sanctification is a process born of the Holy Spirit in the believers life.

I suppose you could say or extropolate that if Grace is absent, then Jesus is absent too - corporately speaking that is - I am not talking on an individual person level.

blessings

Eric
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #6
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:14/03/2009 9:20 AMCopy HTML

Reply to Talmid (08/03/2009 17:22:35)



PS I'm still interested in understanding what specifics you had in mind when you averred in another thread that RF had moved "further" into unorthodoxy than RCI

Hi Talmid,

It was a consensual statement among RCI Leaders that if a person left the RCI for another church, they were regarded as "backsliding to another church".. So for example if Brother Ian left the RCI for the Baptists then in their limited worldview the RCI statement would be if an ordinary member asked the question "What happen to Brother Ian" then the official answer would be " Brother Ian backslid into the Baptists."  So you see using the same RCI logic, John Kulman has backslidden into the Revival Fellowship and I am reminded of a Pastor who once said to me that Brother Kxxxx xxxxxxxx and his whole family backslid into the AOG because he couldn't take the admonition from the oversight of having his daughter to be told not to court and get engaged to a boy from the AOG.. That RCI pastor is now an RF pastor.

Pure Legalism you see and as I see it, using RCI logic in a form of sarcasm, the RF have backslid from the RCI. But Talmid l have to rely on reports as I have heard over the last few years and it is very evident that the RF are now more entenched in legalism than the RCI they "backslid out of"..

.. And legalism is what results when Grace is no longer present. And truly Talmid look closer at the RF and it is all about obeying un - Biblical rules imposed by the self appointed leaders who are credentialled by a sinlge self appointed leader. And an ordinary member has to obey these un - biblical rules to maintain their worthiness to remain a member of their un - Biblical club - or its out the door - backsliders. And if they choose to fellowship at another church, they have backslidden into that "other" church

The Revival Fellowship have zero theological understanding. They have no concept that sanctification is a process born of the Holy Spirit in the believers life.

I suppose you could say or extropolate that if Grace is absent, then Jesus is absent too - corporately speaking that is - I am not talking on an individual person level.

blessings

Eric
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #7
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:14/03/2009 9:19 PMCopy HTML

Reply to Talmid (08/03/2009 17:22:35)



P.S.  Legalism = enslavement = The Revival Fellowship !!

smiley35
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #8
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:14/03/2009 10:20 PMCopy HTML

 Hi Eric and Talmid,

Things can be quite contradictory depending on the situation.  In 1995 the soon to be RF certainly didn't obey the oversight, putting paid to what they advocated the flock adhere to, which was :-  "To obey the oversight, even if he is wrong"  and "you'll get the blessing"

Epi
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #9
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:15/03/2009 2:53 AMCopy HTML

Hi, Epi.

Contradictory/hypocritical advice indeed! "Different rules for different fools" as I once quipped. The issue was apparently the notion that the (then) schismatic RCI pastors who decided to disobey their 'oversight' (i.e. Lloyd), were somehow capable of 'deep' theological thought and insight, but the average person sitting in the 'pews' wasn't. Therefore it was apparently okay for the former to rebel by thinking independently, but such is not okay for the latter to ever do! And these are the very same men who ignorantly lambaste the Roman Catholic Church for supposedly engaging in 'priestcraft' of this sort!

Blessings,

Ian

email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #10
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:15/03/2009 3:25 AMCopy HTML

Hi Ian,

Contradictory/hypocritical advice indeed! "Different rules for different fools" as I once quipped.


Nepotism runs rife in all the Revival assemblies I attended. If one is not of the "breed" you are treated  as a "mongrel'.

Ralph
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #11
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:15/03/2009 4:19 AMCopy HTML

(And these are the very same men who ignorantly lambaste the Roman Catholic Church for supposedly engaging in "priestcraft" of this sort)

Hi Ian,

Where guile is concerned, there would be few who would compare with the old guard RF leadership.

Epi

Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #12
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:15/03/2009 9:34 AMCopy HTML

 A quick question Ian:  A "Yes" or "No" or "I don't know" answer will be fine...

The question is: " Was Paul when he was known by the former "Saul" a member of the Sanhedrin ??? "

Certainly we know from scripture Saul acted on the authority of the Sanhedrin. Our THD lecturer on New Testament Studies is highly convinced that this was the case but I will need better reference sources before I am convinced and if you are not convinced then I will go back to my lecturer and engage him on it..

blessings

Eric 
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #13
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:15/03/2009 10:58 AMCopy HTML

Eric,

No-one can really say for certain (Scripture is silent on the matter, so too are the Talmudim), but it's long been theorised that Paul was either a member of the Sanhedrin (although this is not too likely given his young age at the time of Christ's crucifixion, he was about 30), or if not a member then certainly a very highly regarded and well-placed representative of the Sanhedrin (which is the more likely option). I doubt that he was a member given the Sanhedrin was not prone to leaving Jerusalem/Judea in order to go traipsing around the Levant chasing 'heretics'. They much preferred to stay put in Jerusalem and had said 'heretics' brought to them for judging (better in keeping with their 'dignity' and such forth). My own belief is that Saul/Paul, being as he was highly regarded disciple of the Sanhedrist Gamaliel, was probably being groomed for eventual inclusion into this 'august' body. Personally, I reckon your lecturer has gotten things wrong.

Blessings,

Ian

email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Talmid Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #14
  • Rank:Regular Rookier
  • Score:5980
  • Posts:293
  • From:Australia
  • Register:21/04/2008 10:04 PM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:15/03/2009 11:18 AMCopy HTML

 Eric

Thanks for the reply. So just to check I understand what you're saying ... you say that RF is "more backslidden in unorthodoxy" since:

1) "they" backslid from RCI (by RCI standards) - sure I pointed out the same hypocrisy even when I was a member, and of course RCI/RCA etc backslid from the Commonwealth Revival Crusade or whoever they were;

2) RF is more entrenched in legalism than RCI - ok, could be, I have very little contact with RCI these days, and my involvement with RF was/is with the more  "liberal" wing.

BTW I left RF last year (after 30-odd years of involvement with RCI then RF) on the grounds of repenting from the heretical doctrine, rather than escaping social dysfunction. I do have some idea of what you're getting at ;)
The evidence for Mann-made global warming is unequivocal.
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #15
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:15/03/2009 11:30 AMCopy HTML

Reply to Disciple (15/03/2009 19:34:24)
 A quick question Ian:  A "Yes" or "No" or "I don't know" answer will be fine...

The question is: " Was Paul when he was known by the former "Saul" a member of the Sanhedrin ??? "

Certainly we know from scripture Saul acted on the authority of the Sanhedrin. Our THD lecturer on New Testament Studies is highly convinced that this was the case but I will need better reference sources before I am convinced and if you are not convinced then I will go back to my lecturer and engage him on it..

blessings

Eric 

Eric

 

I was in the middle of doing a quick study on this to see what I would come up with, when Ian responded first (no surprise of course, lol).

Fww, I had come to the same conclusion as he, but if I may add this also;

In Acts 22:5 Paul (Saul)claims that the high priest and the whole council had given him the ‘authority’ to arrest Jewish followers of Jesus in Damascus.

Eerdmans dictionary gives quite an explanation of what the term ‘Sanhedrin’ represents as it consisted of high priests and elders and I cannot cite Paul (Saul) being an actual member as he was physically engaged in persecuting the church.

 

Ralph




Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #16
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:15/03/2009 9:58 PMCopy HTML

Reply to Didaktikon (15/03/2009 04:58:04)



Thanks Ian and Brolga... The point is. For Paul to have been a member of the Sanhedrin would require 1) that Paul would have been married and 2) He would usually have been the father of a son.. all this as a pretext that Paul had at one time been married hence Paul's rhetoric in 1 Cor 7..

I shall engage the lecturer

blessings

Eric
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #17
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:15/03/2009 10:14 PMCopy HTML

Reply to Talmid (15/03/2009 05:18:38)
 Eric

Thanks for the reply. So just to check I understand what you're saying ... you say that RF is "more backslidden in unorthodoxy" since:

1) "they" backslid from RCI (by RCI standards) - sure I pointed out the same hypocrisy even when I was a member, and of course RCI/RCA etc backslid from the Commonwealth Revival Crusade or whoever they were;

2) RF is more entrenched in legalism than RCI - ok, could be, I have very little contact with RCI these days, and my involvement with RF was/is with the more  "liberal" wing.

BTW I left RF last year (after 30-odd years of involvement with RCI then RF) on the grounds of repenting from the heretical doctrine, rather than escaping social dysfunction. I do have some idea of what you're getting at ;)


(Message edited by Talmid On 15/03/2009 07:07:45)

Yes well I have left now for 16 years and have had a complete paradigm shift and in the course of time have undergone Bible College and and am now within reach of a BTh...  ( 2 months of a semester to complete on my last subject ) .

But as Ian as demonstrated, it can take a good deal of time to really come away from the RCI/RF and shed all the nonsense and the RCI/RF Non Biblical worldview and yes get really loose of all that legalistic entanglements to discover who you really are in Christ..

blessings Talmid

Eric

Talmid Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #18
  • Rank:Regular Rookier
  • Score:5980
  • Posts:293
  • From:Australia
  • Register:21/04/2008 10:04 PM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:15/03/2009 11:25 PMCopy HTML

Eric

I've taken my reponse to your last post offlne and PM'd it to as I should have in the first place. Reply not needed.
The evidence for Mann-made global warming is unequivocal.
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #19
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:08/04/2009 9:52 AMCopy HTML

 Ian, a question to bother you with... How big or what is the size of the parchment sheets that Paul wote his letters on ?? Given the idea that a sheet of parchment was worth around a weeks wages and roughly there are 350 odd sheets that contain all of the Pauline epistles then what we are looking at is something of considerable expense that the Apostle carried on his own in most cases eg the letters 1 and 2 to Corinth and now Dr Barnett tells me that there were two other letters to Corinth that have been lost.. I am just fascinated and curious about Paul's lot - that's all - well as I dig I am finding that the story of Paul as a fascinating intrigue..

blessings

Eric
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #20
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:08/04/2009 11:09 PMCopy HTML

Good morning, Eric.

How big or what is the size of the parchment sheets that Paul wote his letters on ??

To begin with, Paul didn't write his letters on 'parchment', but on papyrus. The average size of a sheet of the latter was about 6" x 10", which were then either glued or sewn together into rolls. 'Parchment', as such, was the specially prepared skins of sheep and goats, and as such was very costly to produce. Consequently, Christians didn't make use of such material for copying the Scriptures until well into the 4th century, once the faith had the official backing of the Roman State.

Given the idea that a sheet of parchment was worth around a weeks wages and roughly there are 350 odd sheets that contain all of the Pauline epistles then what we are looking at is something of considerable expense that the Apostle carried on his own in most cases.

See my previous comments.

Dr Barnett tells me that there were two other letters to Corinth that have been lost.

That is one theory. Another is known as the 'Partition Theory', which understands 2 Corinthians to be a composite production, one containing at least two separate/distinct communications from the apostle to the church. One thing we can be certain of, however, is this: Paul was clearly a prolific writer, so it beggars belief to accept that he limited his writing to simply the handful of letters that have been preserved within the New Testament.

Blessings,

Ian

email: didaktikon@gmail.com
Ex_Member Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #21
  • Rank:
  • Score:0
  • Posts:0
  • From:Unknown
  • Register:21/09/2018 12:36 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:16/04/2009 2:10 AMCopy HTML

Reply to Didaktikon (08/04/2009 17:09:20)



Morning Ian,

The internet can be a useful tool.. I decided to get hold of the NIGTC Commentary for 1 Corinthians (New International Greek Testament Commentary) by Anthony Thiselton. As you know I already have 2 Corinthians NIGTC)... but anyway I searched out both Koorong and Word and bro they want several weeks on order to obtain. Not to be beaten I called up Google and just typed in the search pane "NIGTC 1 Corinthians" and limiting the search to just Australian Web sites only and bingo I came up with "More Books" at More Theological College in Sydney (An Anglican TC) at the very top of the search list and I should have the order within 3 days.. So much for Koorong and Word !!

Am going to do an exegetical essay on "1 Corinthians 13 - Love" in 3500 words but I wanted another commentary to weigh against Dr. Fees commentary published in the New International Commentary on the New Testament...

should be fun

blessings again

Eric
 
Didaktikon Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #22
  • Rank:Forum Oracle
  • Score:62130
  • Posts:2958
  • From:Australia
  • Register:29/08/2007 7:54 AM

Re:For Didaktikon

Date Posted:18/04/2009 6:49 AMCopy HTML

Hi, Eric.

Well, I happen to know all about the NIGTC series (I own all of the currently available volumes), and I'm the one who recommended the series to you, remember? In any case, the reason that Koorong doesn't stock Thiselton's volume is quite simple: it's so academic, exhaustive and dense a read that very few people outside of biblical scholars ever have much call to use it. Pastors certainly won't. So according to this reasoning, why stock multiple copies of a work that costs about $130 when you'll only sell (perhaps) a handful in any given year?

Fee's volume is still good, albeit he's now quite dated in many of his views and approaches. For the sake of completeness you might care to read C.K. Barrett's commentary in the Black's series (it's older still, but yet not quite as dated as is Fee's work), and you should definitely get your hands on Dave Garland's volume in the BECNT series. It's by far and away the best general purpose commentary on 1 Corinthians currently in print.

There are others, of course, but I find I refer most regularly to the above four.

Blessings,

Ian

P.S. It's Moore Books and Theological College.

email: didaktikon@gmail.com
RCI prophesies
Copyright © 2000-2019 Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.