What do you think?
Rate this book
Treasures of Wisdom: Studies in Colossians and Philemon
This commentary speaks to concerns of high interest in society today – the spirit world, angels, the occult, human rights, and social discrimination. The commentary is based on the author’s own translation from the Greek.
208 pages, Paperback
First published July 1, 2006
1 person is currently reading
7 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
February 22, 2011
Homer Kent's Treasures of Wisdom: Studies in Colossians and Philemon is driven by what the author refers to as the "relevance to current thought" in the subject matter presented in the two epistles. The author moves rapidly (only 2 pages of preface material) to tackle in a devotional, yet thorough manner, the incredible terrain found in the two books. Of the 208 pages, 170 pages are devoted to the epistle to the Colossian church (16 pages of introduction). The next 34 pages are spent discussing the epistle to Philemon, and the final 4 pages comprise the bibliography. The text is highly readable. I completed the entire book at a slow pace in about a week's time. Each chapter concludes with thought-provoking questions that will prove valuable to the teacher of any small group class. The author's intention appears to be to use the book as an intense study guide on Colossians and Philemon. This intention by the author overflows into the helpfulness of the commentary to pastors. The flow of thought in each chapter allows the chapters to be easily adapted into lessons or sermons without slavishly following an outline or direct structure of the author.
The introductions to the books are excellent. Kent covers the author, recipients, provenance, date, features, and outline of the book in a thorough, yet succinct, manner. Regarding the two books, the writer defends the traditional view that the Apostle Paul wrote the books during his imprisonment in Rome sometime between AD 59-61. One of the challenges which every commentator must deal with is the content and nature of the heresy being attacked by Paul throughout the book of Colossians. Kent does an excellent job of simply presenting the apparent facets of their doctrine (Jewish angel worship with an ascetic emphasis) without attempting to label it. Kent avoids the trap of many commentators (e.g. Lightfoot) by simply describing and not labeling it.
As Kent moves throughout the text, he meekly demonstrates his prowess with the Greek language in his explanation of terms, declensions of words, and uses of nouns and verbs. For example, Kent carefully wades through the difficulties of Colossians 1:24 by helpfully explaining the use of the term for suffering in the passage. Another strength of the writer's commentary on the text is the method in which he deals with interpretational difficulties. Kent moves quickly to list diverse opinions of writers regarding the passage at hand and, at times, provides the reader with his analysis of the opinions. This approach would not be possible if it were not for Kent's overall tactic of dealing with the text in an exegetical fashion. Each verse is examined in detail with no discernable tangents. If cross references are used, they are often from the book itself, occasionally from other Pauline epistles, and even less frequently from other passages of scripture. In this manner, the author keeps the commentary focused primarily on the text at hand and the meaning of the particular words in the current context. The line of argument in the text is followed closely and explained to the reader. The text is not full of lengthy quotations, but is footnoted thoroughly. The footnotes are, as I prefer them, contained at the bottom of the page they are cited on and not at the end of the chapter or the book. The text also contains sporadic photographs of the city of Colossae, similar Roman cities, surrounding Roman cities, and other significant archaeological items. These serve only to drive the reader deeper into the context of the book.
The theology of the book is free from apparent biases (aside from his conservative approach to the text). No denominational teachings appear to effect the writer's presentation of the explanation of the text at hand. My only complaint is that the author slavishly follows the textual variants of the Nestle-Aland or United Bible Societies Greek Testaments. On one occasion, Kent indicates a verdict on a variant reading and simply states in a footnote "This is the reading adopted by the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament" (166). Such an approach seems somewhat unfair to the reader because it fails to explain why such a reading is necessary to be accepted. The point regarding the textual variants is but a small one and the writer's overall quality, practicality, depth, and approach far outweigh any negative aspects in the book. Truly Dr. Kent has taken an epistle, already relevant, and has re-presented it in all of its intended depth in a most relevant manner.
The introductions to the books are excellent. Kent covers the author, recipients, provenance, date, features, and outline of the book in a thorough, yet succinct, manner. Regarding the two books, the writer defends the traditional view that the Apostle Paul wrote the books during his imprisonment in Rome sometime between AD 59-61. One of the challenges which every commentator must deal with is the content and nature of the heresy being attacked by Paul throughout the book of Colossians. Kent does an excellent job of simply presenting the apparent facets of their doctrine (Jewish angel worship with an ascetic emphasis) without attempting to label it. Kent avoids the trap of many commentators (e.g. Lightfoot) by simply describing and not labeling it.
As Kent moves throughout the text, he meekly demonstrates his prowess with the Greek language in his explanation of terms, declensions of words, and uses of nouns and verbs. For example, Kent carefully wades through the difficulties of Colossians 1:24 by helpfully explaining the use of the term for suffering in the passage. Another strength of the writer's commentary on the text is the method in which he deals with interpretational difficulties. Kent moves quickly to list diverse opinions of writers regarding the passage at hand and, at times, provides the reader with his analysis of the opinions. This approach would not be possible if it were not for Kent's overall tactic of dealing with the text in an exegetical fashion. Each verse is examined in detail with no discernable tangents. If cross references are used, they are often from the book itself, occasionally from other Pauline epistles, and even less frequently from other passages of scripture. In this manner, the author keeps the commentary focused primarily on the text at hand and the meaning of the particular words in the current context. The line of argument in the text is followed closely and explained to the reader. The text is not full of lengthy quotations, but is footnoted thoroughly. The footnotes are, as I prefer them, contained at the bottom of the page they are cited on and not at the end of the chapter or the book. The text also contains sporadic photographs of the city of Colossae, similar Roman cities, surrounding Roman cities, and other significant archaeological items. These serve only to drive the reader deeper into the context of the book.
The theology of the book is free from apparent biases (aside from his conservative approach to the text). No denominational teachings appear to effect the writer's presentation of the explanation of the text at hand. My only complaint is that the author slavishly follows the textual variants of the Nestle-Aland or United Bible Societies Greek Testaments. On one occasion, Kent indicates a verdict on a variant reading and simply states in a footnote "This is the reading adopted by the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament" (166). Such an approach seems somewhat unfair to the reader because it fails to explain why such a reading is necessary to be accepted. The point regarding the textual variants is but a small one and the writer's overall quality, practicality, depth, and approach far outweigh any negative aspects in the book. Truly Dr. Kent has taken an epistle, already relevant, and has re-presented it in all of its intended depth in a most relevant manner.
January 30, 2011
Kent is my favorite Bible commentator. He is good at explaining difficult passages and very practical.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews