The Gospel According to John

Such a deep understanding and study of the book of John. This is amazing

Very useful, one of the best commentaries

Bien sustentado, bien escrito, estudio serio y profundo.

An excellent and thorough commentary with extensive background information and careful interpretation of the original Greek text.

Too many commentaries doubt the authenticity of John's gospel. This is not one of them. Don Carson was a signatory to the Chicago Declaration, so he regards the Bible as inerrant. So do I. If the Bible says there were two cleansings of the Temple, there were two cleansings of the Temple. If it says that Jesus turned the water into wine, He turned water into wine. He takes issue with Barclay, who thought walking on the sea was the same as walking by the sea. He decisively proves that the meal at which Jesus washed the disciples' feet was a Passover meal, 15 Nisan.He also proves that the author is John. The work is scholarly, which means Carson must use terms that laymen like me do not understand, and which are not found in ordinary dictionaries. Very kindly, a explains them the first time he uses them! One can understand the Gospel better through reading this book. The author explains the language, context, background and spiritual meaning of everything Jesus does or says. (some commentaries explain the Bible, others explain it away. this one explains it.) He explains 3;3, about the New Birth, convincingly, as one who knows what he is talking about. One of the reviews says "everyone will disagree with the author's interpretion at one point or another. " I have complied! I do not agree with Don that Jesus was now the true Israel. The true Israel is, if you will forgive me, Israel! To finish the quotation on the back cover, "No one will read this book without gaining new insights into John's Gospel" That also is true. Also, unusually in a commentary, Dr Carson displays warmth and humour. My one cavil is that there is an index to modern authors, and an index to Biblical references, but no topical index. Perhaps at the next impression?

Il libro è un ottimo testo che consiglio a cui può interessare ed è arrivato in ottimo stato, ovvero nuovo, tale quale era.

A few months ago I was looking for a good commentary on John, the gospel that I felt I had studied least to this point in my life. As usual, I downloaded the free samples from Kindle for a number of the top rated commentaries on John. Carson’s commentary was the one that most engaged my interest. The commentary begins with a brilliant 100 page summary of the early (first 3 centuries) and late (Last two centuries) scholarship on the gospel of John. This alone is worth the price of the book. The publishers have generously put 70 pages of this essay in the free Kindle download. I recommend reading this before you choose a commentary, even if you don’t end up with Carson, it will help you get a big picture of the scholarship on John, and might help you choose an author that is best suited to your interests. I am now on page 524, right in the middle of the Upper Room Discourse, so I feel I have read enough to give a good review of the verse-by-verse commentary. On average, a verse will be covered by a paragraph or so in Carson, except for those topics where there is wide disagreement in the literature, or a popular misunderstanding or controversy of some sort, which are discussed over several pages. Textual issues are not treated in depth in the running commentary, but each section ends with “Additional Notes,” which are mostly about technical textual or linguistic issues. Carson is very fair in his summaries of the various hermaneutical positions on issues of interpretation and application. He usually states two or three interpretive positions on a text as clearly as he can, then follows with a lucid explanation of the option he feels best represents the text and context. Almost always is explanation is logical and well-argued. He interacts with scholars from a wide range of traditions in the church. Really the only downside to this commentary is that it was published in 1992, so it lacks the last 30 years or so of recent research in John. I think a more recent commentary would be a great companion to Carson, but Carson lays a great foundation for any study of the Fourth Gospel.