David Turner and Darrell Bock

[Jaymin Allen]

These two, progressive dispensationalist, are coming out with two new commentaries in the "Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament" series. I can not wait to get my hands on Turner's commentary on Matthew (Feb 1, 2008), I want to see Turner's views on controversial passages such as: Matthew 5:17, 10:23, 11:12, 12:26-29, 16:28, 24:4-34, 26:64. Progressive dispensationalist are a step higher than the hard nose "literal" classical dispensationalist, and reading their works one may even be forced to utter, "thou almost persuadest me to become a [progressive dispensationalist]..." (Acts 26:28 [mine]). I eagerly look forward to this commentary; it should be a lot of fun.

Bock is writing the commentary on Acts. Which, I will get, but I am not anticipating this work like I am Turner's.

 

[DMcFadden]

I took a class from David Turner and found him to be a very capable exegete. However, he teaches classes and keeps himself busy with seminary stuff. Bock is a research professor and has the time to do little more than study and write. I have found him to have a nearly encyclopedic knowledge of everything. Besides, after that massive two volume commentary on Luke, Bock has proven his mastery of the Lucan literature, a real advantage in tackling Acts.

 

[Jaymin Allen]

I took a class from David Turner and found him to be a very capable exegete. However, he teaches classes and keeps himself busy with seminary stuff. Bock is a research professor and has the time to do little more than study and write. I have found him to have a nearly encyclopedic knowledge of everything. Besides, after that massive two volume commentary on Luke, Bock has proven his mastery of the Lucan literature, a real advantage in tackling Acts.

DMcFadden,
Bock is an excellent exegete and has an extensive handle on theological issues. Reading Bock's massive 2-volume commentary on Luke, one would be forced to concede it’s probably the best out there. However, I found Bock very unconvincing and sometimes (in my opinion) even frantic on Luke 21 issues. R.T. France treatment, in France's Matthew commentary, is not only more honest (with respect to each position) but simply a more "fuller" exposition on the Olivet discourse. That’s why I am looking forward to Turner’s commentary. Coming from the same theological background as Bock, I wonder if we will be treated to a more healthy presentation of Matthew 24… ?