The Gospel of Mark

Truly a classic. I rarely came away from reading Lane without some additional insight, even if it meant his discussion provoking further thoughts. In that sense, his train of thought is easy to follow and never shied away from the main things in the text, that being what is 'actually' in the text, more than momentarily. Such sustained attention to the actual words of God was very valuable to me as one seeking to meditate on the text in order to distill God's word to his people. This commentary will soon be replaced by another. Having listened through the lectures given by its successor on Mark, it is sure to be a different commentary altogether, though it may be difficult to prove an 'improvement'. All that to say 'get it while you can'. This commentary is going to prove useful for a long time still. Rich and doctrinally healthy, you never get the sense that Lane had a self driven agenda of some manner in writing this commentary, which is so often the case among commentators today. (.5 a star only for its date. Makes most of the scholarly discussion/footnotes of little help)

Beautifully written and very accessible. His chapter on Gethsemane is profound and moving - worth the price for this wonderful commentary.

A bit dated, but solid. It was an excellent primary source of information, and I feel that France’s commentary strengthened it in some sections that it wasn’t quite as detailed. The commentary on the Last supper was a definite highlight; there were quite a few insights garnered from the stages of the meal that gave it much more significance to me.

Reliable, and well-known. However, I found it a bit lacking in detail, and also, no 40 years old, it's dated. Worth having since it is so widely used, but personally, I would commend RT France's NIGTC ahead of this.

Lane’s commentary is slightly older than the previous two and may be in some danger of being phased out as Eerdmans slowly replaces some of the older volumes in NICNT series. For that reason, it may be worth buying sooner rather than later. This is the one commentary on Mark that John Piper recommends. [Full Review]

William Lane's commentary on Mark in the NICNT series lived up to its reputation. I picked it up for teaching through Mark in a small group study. Lane's study was in depth and scholarly while still useful for teaching in the local church. Lane bases a fair amount of his commentary on conservative redaction criticism. While I personally am skeptical of how much can be discerned through this discipline, Lane uses good common sense and is rarely speculative. There is an awareness of the relevance of Mark's Gospel for a life of following Jesus. He defends the veracity of the Gospel's account and offers excellent historical background information. I also used Garland, Brooks and France, but Lane was my first stop. Though it may be getting dated for the academic community, it remains useful for solid, well-written exegesis. This is highly recommended for studies on Mark. [Full Review]

We can lighten up here with a theologically sound commentary, and an old one that I still get lots from: William Lane [Full Review]

Published in 1974, William Lane's commentary on the Gospel of Mark remains a model of clarity. Eerdmans has replaced several of the older NICOT and NICNT commentaries. There is little need for them to do so with this outstanding volume, but since they might, grab a copy while it is still in print. [Full Review]

[Full Review]