THE NEW AMERICAN COMMENTARY is for the minister or Bible student who wants to understand and expound the Scriptures. Notable features commentary based on THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION;* the NIV text printed in the body of the commentary;* sound scholarly methodology that reflects capable research in the original languages;* interpretation that emphasizes the theological unity of each book and of Scripture as a whole;* readable and applicable exposition.
If you’re looking for a good mixture of being pastor friendly and economical, you should look up this volume in the highly-regarded New American Commentary (NAC) series. John Polhill is comfortable in this territory as he has also given us the helpful “Paul and his Letters” with the same publisher. He’s had two decades of teaching and preaching on Acts and it shows in this book. In the first paragraph of his preface, he tells us that he aims this commentary at pastors first. He has succeeded in his objective.
After reading how he aimed first at pastors, I was surprised at the depth in the Introduction. I’ve reviewed a few major exegetical commentaries on Acts, and Polhill addressed every issue they did. He covered it well too.
He begins by showing where Acts can be found in early tradition. He surveyed all the information about authorship and date and reaches conservative conclusions. He covers sources and genre. He explains the importance of speeches in Acts. He discusses Luke as both a historian and a theologian. He provides some maps of Paul’s journeys and has a detailed outline. All told, the Introduction runs through page 76.
The commentary is truly helpful. I suspect that pastors will agree that’s its value is good. That’s my opinion for sure.
I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.
"The word of God in Christ--not Peter, not Paul--is the real hero of Acts" (Polhill). Great way to end the commentary. Out of all the commentaries, I used this one I found to be consistently concise but thorough. Peterson and especially Schnabel are thorough but concise they are not. The further I worked through the book of Acts the more I valued this excellent contribution.
11 Commentaries I used cover to cover through an expositional series through the book of Acts. Of course, this ranking doesn't take into account that some that are lower were higher in specific ways, but all of these "made the cut" for me to spend the time each week to read. 1. Peterson, Schnabel, Polhill 2. Bock 3. Bruce 4. Kistemaker 5. Marshall, Stott 6. MacArthur 7. Custer, Kent
Thorough, well thought out, and it provides many insightful comments on this amazing book. Polhill combines a great amount of exegetical insight without getting too technical thus making his commentary accessible for pastors and students alike. This was one of my main sources I used for my series on the Book of Acts, and it was one of the most helpful ones that I consulted. As with all commentaries he doesn't address everything that the reader may expect him to address, it's not a technical commentary so don't expect too much grammatical, exegetical work, but it's a solid commentary to consult. The NAC series is a good addition in most of its volumes for studying to preach a book series, and the book on Acts is no different. Polhill gives a solid addition to the series with this one.
The last of my commentaries going through the book of Acts, and my favorite. Polhill gives very sound scholarship in a readable style. When other commentaries brought up debates over various points, I found Polhill time and again offering reasonable and satisfying conclusions.
While not my favorite commentary series, the NAC has well-studied authors share pertinent information, which can be useful for any pastor or teacher sharing a message from Acts. There was plenty that expanded my knowledge and helped me prepare to teach through Luke's history of the Holy Spirit's movement in the early church.
This commentary has some good insights, but I definitely won't be using it as a main resource. I'm eager to read David G. Peterson's commentary on Acts.