What is Catalyst?
Four issues of Catalyst are mailed each academic year to some 5,000 UM theological students in more than 100 seminaries in the U.S.A.

AFTE
Catalyst is a project of A Foundation for Theological Education (AFTE).

What is the John Wesley Fellowship Program?
Each year AFTE awards up to five John Wesley Fellowships to assist gifted United Methodists in their doctoral studies at the finest universities.

Back Issues
Several back issues of Catalyst are now available on-line.

Subscriptions
Subscription is free for UM seminarians, and is available to all others for $5 per year.

BUILDING A NT LIBRARY: ROMANS—EPHESIANS

Commentaries are a strange genre, mostly uninteresting to read and useful primarily for reference purposes. My counsel to students is: Do not start your exegesis with or expect too much from commentaries. They are no substitute for a firsthand engagement with the text.

The audience for which they are written shapes most commentaries. On the one hand, W. Barclay’s widely read Daily Study Bible was initially written as a devotional column for a Church of Scotland weekly newsletter. The pieces were not intended to be substitutes for the exegetical struggles of the preacher nor for the purposes of academic research. On the other hand, J.B. Lightfoot in the nineteenth century produced several commentaries on the Greek text of the Pauline letters, citing widely the patristic writers’ interpretation of the NT text, but without much help for next Sunday’s sermon. The choice of the commentaries in this essay presupposes a readership made up of seminarians or seminar graduates, preferably, though not exclusively, with a knowledge of the Greek language, and who have a responsibility for or interest in preaching and in teaching the text in the church.

For Galatians, J.L Martyn’s volume in the Anchor Bible (AB; Doubleday, 1997]) is a model commentary. Martyn argues that agitators (he prefers the less prejudicial term “teachers”) have come into the Galatian communities to reach out to the non-Jews in an ecumenical venture, but through the law, and not as Paul had done, apart from the law. They make their case based on texts from the OT. Paul responds by dealing with many of the same texts, but interpreted in light of the reality of the faithfulness of Christ. He essentially preaches again to them the gospel of God’s invasion of the world in Christ as an earth-shaking event. “The well being of the world lies in its being regrasped from the power of evil by God’s deed in Jesus Christ” (88). It is easy to read the commentary and to miss two of its most distinctive features—Martyn’s unique translation of the letter (3-10) and the fifty-two “Comments” scattered throughout the text. To avoid either is to miss the lively theological engagement of the letter.
   
The second choice for a commentary on Galatians is also easy. Richard B. Hays, following the apocalyptic reading of Martyn, has produced a useful commentary in The New Interpreter’s Bible ([NIB; ed. Leander E. Keck et al; vol. 11; Abingdon, 2000] 183-348). An advantage of this series is the sets of “Reflections” at the conclusion of each section which are directed at the preaching and teaching of the text in the church. A third choice is F.J. Matera in the Sacra Pagina series (SP; Liturgical, 1992).
   
Romans is a dense letter with complicated argumentation. Commentaries that seek to solve all the big and little problems of the letter can wear the reader out (i.e., the two-volume kind). My choices, save one, tend to come from a lean list. The first would be E. Käsemann’s A Commentary on Romans (Wm.B. Eerdmans, 1980). Not an easy read by any means, Käsemann with his apocalyptic perspective confronts the reader with the primary agenda of the letter—the character of God’s righteousness.
   
Two brief treatments of Romans are more than worth the money. First is K. Barth’s A Shorter Commentary ([Westminster/John Knox, 1959] written much later than Der Römerbrief and offering more of a close reading of the text), which is unfortunately out-of-print, and P. Meyer in Harper Collins Bible Commentary, rev.ed. ([ed. J.L. Mays; HarperCollins, 2000] 1038-73). Meyer, a careful and precise interpreter of the text, stands as an opposite to Käsemann in regard to the function and character of the law. While Käsemann is more inclined to affirm a traditional Lutheran position regarding the gospel—law issue, Meyer acknowledges that the law is spiritual, holy, just, and good, whose weakness, however, lies in its vulnerability in dealing with sin. For a full-scaled and competent commentary with an evangelical slant, see D.J. Moo’s The Epistle to the Romans in the New International Commentary on the NT (NICNT; Wm.B. Eerdmans, 1996).
    
First Corinthians, like Galatians, is rich in commentary resources, all written within the last few years. For the purposes of preaching and teaching in the church, R.B. Hays (Interpretation; Westminster John Knox, 1997) has produced an excellent volume in which issues are framed theologically and ecclesiologically. Readers are regularly reminded that Paul is not writing to and for individuals, but for the church. And the church cannot change unless its mind, disposition, and imagination are changed. Paul confronts the scandalous disunity of Corinthian community, then, with the message of the cross, which in turn creates a subversive counterculture.
    
G.D. Fee’s The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT; Wm.B. Eerdmans, 1987) is close in theological perspective to that of Hays, though the format of the series in which Fee writes demands more attention to details and less to the practical use of the text in the church. For the Abingdon New Testament Commentary, R.A. Horsley (ANTC; Abingdon, 1998), known for his contribution to the social and political struggles facing the various early Christian communities in the Roman empire, brings a socio-political perspective to 1 Corinthians. Prominent terms like “gospel” and “cross/crucified” are borrowed from and stand over against Roman imperial ideology.

For 2 Corinthians, V.P. Furnish has produced one of the most thorough commentaries on any of the Pauline letters (AB; Doubleday, 1984). He operates under the supposition that the letter is a composite of two Pauline letters: (1) chapters 1-9, in which Paul’s response to Titus’ report on the community is “guardedly optimistic”; and (2) chapters 10-13, in which rival preachers (“false apostles”) have obviously had success and have made Paul himself the target of their attack. In defense he offers a so-called “fool’s speech” (11:1-12:13), employing parody and strong irony in an effort to win the Corinthians over. Whether Paul finally succeeded or not is unknown.

An excellent, older commentary, and one with which Furnish stays in dialogue is C.K. Barrett in Black’s NT Commentary (Hendrickson, 1973). A third helpful treatment of the Corinthian letter is by J.P. Sampley in the NIB (vol. 11; Abingdon, 1994).

Ephesians, whether written by Paul or not, defies specific rhetorical analysis. The first three chapters appear as an extended thanksgiving to God for the abundance of divine grace, whereas the last three chapters contain exhortations to unity in the church. A.T. Lincoln in the Word Biblical Commentary [Nelson, 1999]) rightly contends that the letter is written to Gentile Christians who need reminding of the status and privileges they enjoy as Christians (1:1-3:21). Furthermore, they are to help the church attain unity and maturity (4:1-16), to pay attention to their behavior in the areas of anger, honest speech, and worship (4:17-5:20), and to bring a distinctively Christian motivation to their conduct in the household (5:21-6:9). Other helpful commentaries on Ephesians are M. Barth’s two volumes in AB (Doubleday, 1974) and P.T. O’Brien’s Letter to the Ephesians in the Pillar NT Commentary (Wm.B. Eerdmans, 1999).

By Charles B. Cousar, Ph.D., and author of Reading Galatians, Philippians, and 1 Thessalonians: A Literary and Theological Commentary (Smyth & Helwys, 2001).