New Testament Commentary List

[Rdr. Arsenios]

Some are some are not.
While I appreciate the work of the fathers, many of them are
just published sermons and not real commentaries.
Origin, though, wrote some fine commentaries.
Chrysostom has some commentaries, yes,
but mostly they are just sermons.

Just sermons?!?!?

Origin the heretic?

Chrysostom the Saint?

Chrysostom did indeed have an homilitic approach,
Within which is a textual commentary par excellance...
He was a great pastor and martyr of the Faith...

I have not yet read Origin...
He was not anathematized until after his death...
He wrote some good things, I am told...
But is not regarded as a Father of the Church...

Chrysostom's focus was primarily pastoral...
Hence it was unto salvation...
The intellectuality of Origin was not...

I do not regard this as problematic...

Arsenios

[Jaltus]

Yes, but what I look for in a commentary is not the application of the text but the meaning of the text so that I can turn help apply it to my congregation. I want the full understanding of the text instead of the application of the text. Therefore, I look for commentaries that explain the text and not sermons about the text. While I find the latter personally helpful, I only find the former helpful for making my own sermons.

[Rdr. Arsenios]

Yes, but what I look for in a commentary is not the application of the text but the meaning of the text so that I can turn help apply it to my congregation. I want the full understanding of the text instead of the application of the text. Therefore, I look for commentaries that explain the text and not sermons about the text. While I find the latter personally helpful, I only find the former helpful for making my own sermons.

Well, if you want the "full understand" of a Biblical text, you need repentance as the first pre-requisite... You need to have found the straited, hard and narrow way that leads to the Kingdom of Heaven... And THEN, once you have not only found that way but have entered it wholly and genuinely, you will find that the text is speaking of God... It will THEN occur to you, that in this there is no "full understanding" that is human... And only THEN will you look back and be able to see the vanity of demanding a "full understanding" so that then, in your God-wisdom, you can sprinkle a few crumbs out upon your congregation who, it seems, do not have your erudition, so that they cannot possibly have your knowledge, and can only take wisdom in small dosages from you...

I mean, it is nice to want an overall grasp of a text, but the slippery slope begins with the vanity of requiring "full understanding"... THAT dog don't hunt...

Now the application of a text, by one who has indeed found the narrow way, is a wonderful way to receive a part of the meaning of a text... And by entering into the thought process of that person, who HAS the narrow way, one can get a small feel for their vision of that text, and thereby be not only encouraged, but somewhat illumined through them... The Bible itself works this way for us, because its writers are all both illumined and deified holy ones of God, and in our reading of them, we receive some "spill-over" of the Grace in which it was composed... Indeed, it is this that makes the Bible what it is... And accounts for its singularity among holy books...

Now when you are reading the Epistles, these letters are themselves APPLICATIONS of the Gospel of Christ to particular issues, and thereby illumine the WAY that holy men of God govern His Household, for this Household is indeed a household, a family, and is the Family of Jesus Christ, being His very Body, the Body of Christ Who is the Head, as we all know, of His Own Body...

So that the implication here, which your comment engenders, wherein you seek avoidance of applications and instead seek 'full understanding', is profound, and this because there is one Gospel, in four canonical Gospels, and following the last of these, we are given the Acts of the Apostles... And these acts are themselves, in holy men of God, the APPLICATION of the Gospel to their lives... And following them, we find the Apostolic Epistles, wherein the Apostle(s) are applying the Gospel to the Churches, as issues arise, as they will... So that IF you seek to gain a "full understanding" of, say, Romans [or another epistle] which IS an application BY an Apostle, while avoiding Application in the name of Full Understanding, then the pursuit becomes oxymoronic, you see...

The danger with sermons is their great capacity for engendering vainglory... Maintaining a profound humility in them is nigh unto impossible for most of us fallen slobs... And ONE cure for this can be found in Orthodoxy at least through Homilies recorded by Saints for every Sunday of the Liturgical year, so that a pastor of the flock can READ a homily, rather than COMPOSE one... At any rate, the homilies run from 5 to 15 minutes maximum, and are intended to locally explain [apply] the Gospel and Epistle readings assigned for that particular day in terms of actions needed in that particular parish... It is normally not some big long exposition ending in rabbit trails chasing squirrels...

This, however, is not an option for you, I fear... But gathering from your remarks, I am wondering how much of Chrysostom's Pauline commentary you have read... I have not read a ton of it myself, but I have found in every case in which I looked up a passage in Paul that he addresses first the text from Paul's perspective, and queries it closely in the Greek, giving often two or more possible meanings, and then either combining or excluding to come up with the intended meaning [application]... And yes, there are some that do seem to address pressing local Church needs at the expense of Paul's purpose in writing, but that is normally not done, and almost never is it done at the expense of the exegetical grammar of the text... I mean, you ALWAYS get a thorough look at the text, read in Greek, and composed in Greek by a Saint who spoke and thought and taught in Greek, of the Greek meaning of the text itself... [Yes, there are some rabbit trails in the Greek, but NOTHING like those in the various translations that become virtual VERSIONS of the text...]

I mean, the point of talking [whether sermon or homily] is praxis, the doing of actions according to the words given - It is not to illumine new theories, but to establish in the flesh the commandments of Christ, yes? And this because we become what we do, yes? So that to become virtuous as a Christian, we must practice Christian Virtue in our DEEDS... Yes?

Well, at any rate, I'll get off this particular rabbit trail and sign off!

Arsenios