A Popular Commentary on the New Testament (4 vols.)

I downloaded a completely free version of this commentary from another Bible program, so I could make an informed review. There are a couple measures I use to evaluate commentaries. One, is whether they promote the true gospel of justification through faith in Christ alone (Galatians). The other is whether they fear God more than men when dividing His word, especially as it pertains to issues of political correctness and cultural trends that seek to remove distinctions between the roles of men and women. This commentary promotes the true gospel of justification through faith in Christ alone. This is evident in their treatment of 1 Peter 3:21, where they correctly note that it is the resurrection of Jesus Christ that saves us, and that water baptism is an outward confession of our faith in Christ's atonement. While some commentaries today seem to have more fear of being deemed politically incorrect, than they do of rightly dividing God's word, this commentary remains true to the Scriptures. This is clear from how they interpret 1 Timothy 2:11-15, and 1 Peter 3:1-7, where they note not only the distinct role God has designed for men and women, but that this distinction is anchored in God's design at creation and woman's role in the fall, not simply some culture of Paul's day. They also maintain a correct understanding of Galatians 3:28, which is that spiritual equality does not remove the distinct roles of men and women that God designed for life on earth. A couple other favorable notes for this commentary, is that it is both readable and scholarly. Although it was written in the 1800s, the language is not so archaic as to be difficult to understand. I was also pleased with how scholarly this was. The writers clearly speak from a deep grasp of the original languages, and they document a well-studied research into how other scholars they consulted dealt with the text. I feel confident that the writers were not simply theorizing, speculating, or offering a superficial interpretation, but that they had carefully weighed the meaning of the Bible text. Disclaimer: I did not consult Revelation, or the apocryphal books of this set, because 1800s theology seldom has a firm grasp on eschatology, and I don't believe the apocryphal books are part of inspired Scripture.