Tom Wright (1) (1948–)

A decent commentary, though it sometimes feels a little simplistic and doesn't always focus on the aspects I would either expect it to or want it to. It also would have been nice for Wright to spend more time on the curiosity of Mark's alt endings, added later. Something like that raises a lot of questions, but Wright spends about a third the time on that passage than he does on all the others.

Maybe I would find "N. T. Wright" more compelling, but from what I've seen of "Tom Wright" so far, he seems overrated.… (meer)

This is a part of Tom Wright's "For Everyone" series of New Testament commentaries (there is an accompanying series of Old Testament commentaries "For Everyone" written by John Goldingay). Specifically it is part of the "Paul For Everyone" subset.

Here, Wright pulls together the apostle Paul's letter to the Galatians and links it to the two letters to the Thessalonians. The rational for this (since they don't sit next to each other in the New Testament) is that they are the three earliest of Paul's letters and so, presumably are coming from a similar theological place. The commentaries on Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians, which sit between Galatians & Thessalonians in the New Testament, appear in a separate volume of "Prison Letters".

The "For Everyone" tag line, as well as the informal author name (Tom Wright rather than N T Wright), tells you who this is aimed at. Although he is a respected theologian who has contributed much to New Testament thought, here Tom Wright is writing for the ordinary reader, for those who don't have a theology qualification.

The style is friendly and informal includes a complete translation of the letters (written in a similarly friendly and informal style). After each section, Wright then comments and looks at the issues raised, usually beginning with a sermon illustration-type story.

For me, the style is almost too informal and slangy. Not that I think it should be overly ponderous and respectful, but just that it would probably sound better being read out loud than written down. The overall impression is of a friendly vicar paraphrasing the reading before launching into a short homily on it. But that, I suppose, is the point.… (meer)

The Hebrews letter edition of Wright's commentary series.

Consistent with the formula, each section is translated by Wright, who then generally has some little vignette to introduce a contextual interpretation of the text and concludes with some relevant applications.

I find it interesting that for someone who has otherwise done a lot of re-thinking about the New Testament, Wright remains very traditional about Hebrews as written to Jewish Christians in Jerusalem. I think he grounds this on his understanding of some verses in Hebrews 13, the interpretation of which is not sufficiently strongly grounded to maintain that level of confidence.

As might be expected he does well at showing where the resurrection is presumed by the author even if not explicitly mentioned. On the whole the commentary accomplishes its purpose, providing a great basic framework for the letter to the Hebrews. The major downside is that those who read it ought to be aware that the nature of the audience is not as firmly fixed as Wright would suggest.… (meer)