The Epistles of John

Despite its age, Marshall remains remarkably fresh and useful. His great strength is exegetical judgment: he rarely pursues novelty for its own sake, but again and again identifies the theological and pastoral logic of the text with unusual clarity. Particularly important is his understanding of 1 John’s purpose as fundamentally reassuring believers that they possess eternal life rather than encouraging perpetual introspection over whether they are genuinely converted. His treatment of the difficult statements about Christians not sinning is similarly nuanced, resisting an overly simple appeal to Greek tense and interpreting John’s language in light of the eschatological reality of the believer’s new identity. Marshall also gives 2 and 3 John more serious attention than many commentators. Some discussions inevitably predate later Johannine scholarship, but the combination of careful exegesis, theological balance, clarity, and pastoral sensitivity has aged exceptionally well. This remains one of the safest and most rewarding commentaries to read straight through.

An older and solid commentary. Marshall carefully follows the wording of the biblical text and does a fine job of tracing the argument of the letters, naturally interweaving insightful reflection. However, TGC readers should note Marshall’s Arminian standpoint leads him to the conviction that a Christian can apostatize and forfeit salvation. [Full Review]

I. Howard Marshall is always someone you can count on to produce a top-notch commentary. This one on the Johannine Epistles is a fine example of commentary which is useful on all sorts of levels. The NICNT format allows for in depth scholarly research to be presented, but not in a way which bogs down the commentary for pastors and lay readers. Much of the technical data is moved to footnotes (unlike the WBC for example) making the body smooth, and effective. Though almost 40 years old now, this is still among the best available commentaries on the Johannine epistles.

A solid commentary that handles issues with grace and humility like few commentators do. Positing answers where they are needed, Marshall yet keeps his responses somewhat brief, which is something of a double-edged sword. He takes a backdoor approach to sequence in tackling 2 and 3 John first before diving into 1 John which is commendable. All in all a good commentary done in great style and approach.

One of evangelicalism's finest scholars, I.H. Marshall, writes good commentaries and has a rock-solid commonsens [Full Review]

[Full Review]