Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary

The best commentary on Ephesians because of its extensive explanation of the text. Hoehner's arguments are well laid out to get the reader to think through each issue. The only reason this is not rated the best is because of its length, which actually is a major strength and why you should be reading this commentary first and used as a reference for Ephesians.

In terms of sheer size and scope (960 pages), Harold Hoehner's commentary on Ephesians is the place to turn for those seeking a comprehensive conservative evangelical treatment of this epistle. Hoehner has long been a professor of New Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary, so his dispensationalism shines through at certain points. This is not a reason, however, to ignore, this masterful work. There are more than a few very helpful insights in this massive volume. His section on the authorship of the epistle is invaluable. [Full Review]

Hoehner offers more detail than O'Brien, though it's tougher going for those without good Greek skills. His focus is more on the words Paul uses, and O'Brien is stronger in overall grammatical issues of how the words fit together. O'Brien seems to me to be a little more theologically acute than Hoehner, and Hoehner focuses a little more on individual words and less on grammatical considerations, but both books are excellent guides to Paul's thought in this epistle. Hoehner's dispensationalism occasionally colors his remarks, as you might expect from anyone coming from a particular interpretive framework, but most of his commentary steers away from trying to be an apologetic for dispensationalism and simply examines the text. I should say the same about O'Brien's Reformed Anglican perspective. He doesn't see his commentary as a way to find Reformed thought behind every nuance the way some Calvinists have. When these issues arise, I think O'Brien is more often correct than Hoehner, but these issues aren't in the forefront most of the time, even in a theologically crucial book like Ephesians. That's a testament to the carefulness of both commentators, who each had access to the other's manuscript. Both cite each other frequently, most of the time favorably. Hoehner is more familiar with pre-modern commentaries than most Ephesians commentators, but his use of them is more for linguistic issues than for theology, which is unfortunate. One reason for my slight preference for O'Brien is that his approach seems a little more comprehensive. Hoehner is much more focused on the meanings of words with less attention to other matters, even if he acknowledges the dangers of word studies without issues of context. See the discussion below in the comments for more on this issue. [Full Review]

This is not only the best Ephesians commentary available - it is model of what an epistolary commentary should be. Hoehner addresses every major exegetical and theological issue presented by the text and offers pros and cons for each view. The section on authorship is also worth the price of the work.

[Full Review]

[Full Review]

The author of this commentary is Distinguished Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. This volume represents his research and meditation on Pauls Letter to the Ephesians over the last thirty or so years and brings together in a more complete and substantial form a number of materials that were previously published elsewhere. The book opens with an impressive bibliography devoted to commentaries on Ephesians, both ancient and modern. Hoehner includes a useful although not exhaustive selection of Patristic literature (for example, the absence of Marius Victorinuss Commentary on Ephesians stands out). Convinced of the Pauline authorship of Ephesians, Hoehner emphasizes its internal coherence, overall theological unity, and stylistic similarity with those letters of Paul that are universally recognized as authentic. If I may be allowed to express my own view on this issue, before reading this commentary I would have readily accepted the deutero-Pauline character of Ephesians primarily on the basis of the modern consensus. I must admit that Hoehners discussion on the topics proves almost convincing. His book is well documented and presents and discusses fairly the multiple facets of the question. [Full Review]