Reading Matthew Henry

Status
Not open for further replies.

bookslover

Puritan Board Doctor
As part of my daily devotional time, I'm reading through the Book of Psalms (one psalm per day) using Matthew Henry's commentary to accompany me.

This is the first time I've read Henry extensively (even though I've owned the six-volume set since I got it for my 42nd birthday in 1994!).

I'm really impressed by his comments. They're thoughtful, pious (in the best sense), and easy to digest.

WHY DIDN'T SOMEONE TELL ME ABOUT THIS GUY? Heh.
 
I've often recommended to friends that every Christian at least read through some book of the Bible with Henry, say Genesis. It really helps you get in the mindset of profiting from everything God has given to us, even the genealogies. Henry is definitely a favorite.
 
As part of my daily devotional time, I'm reading through the Book of Psalms (one psalm per day) using Matthew Henry's commentary to accompany me.

This is the first time I've read Henry extensively (even though I've owned the six-volume set since I got it for my 42nd birthday in 1994!).

I'm really impressed by his comments. They're thoughtful, pious (in the best sense), and easy to digest.

WHY DIDN'T SOMEONE TELL ME ABOUT THIS GUY? Heh.
It's because he's been a complete nobody for the last three hundred years. You haven't heard of him, because no one else has, either. Apart from obscure theologians like C.H. Spurgeon, no one knows about Henry.
 
Sadly, too many Christians are probably intimidated by the length of Henry's commentary. I'm guilty sometimes, too. I've read him in small doses, but it sounds like I need to dive in deeper.
 
Sadly, too many Christians are probably intimidated by the length of Henry's commentary. I'm guilty sometimes, too. I've read him in small doses, but it sounds like I need to dive in deeper.
There is a concise version too if I'm not mistaken.
 
In Christian circles I’m in it seems like the only people interested in reading anything serious in Christian literature are pastors and people training for the ministry.
I struggle to even give away Puritan books to my Christian friends.
(Rant over)
 
It was said of Henry Bullinger that he was "the common pastor of the Reformation" because his Decades could be found on the shelf any Protestant home in Europe. I think the same could be said for Matthew Henry and his commentary in the centuries following his death. Sadly now, he is mostly neglected by protestant Christians and even despised by pastors for not being "technical" or "scholarly" enough. {SMH}
 
I purchased his single volume edition which is a hefty size in itself but is obviously a scaled-down version to the multi-volume. It’s very good
 
It was said of Henry Bullinger that he was "the common pastor of the Reformation" because his Decades could be found on the shelf any Protestant home in Europe. I think the same could be said for Matthew Henry and his commentary in the centuries following his death. Sadly now, he is mostly neglected by protestant Christians and even despised by pastors for not being "technical" or "scholarly" enough. {SMH}
Same with William Perkins. He was a household name in the years following his life. He outsold Calvin, Bullinger, and Beza in England. Now, his works are enjoyed by a minority in the church militant. Sad times for good literature.

Oh, we are reprinting Henry's works. Too bad no one knows who is.
 
Same with William Perkins. He was a household name in the years following his life. He outsold Calvin, Bullinger, and Beza in England. Now, his works are enjoyed by a minority in the church militant. Sad times for good literature.

Oh, we are reprinting Henry's works. Too bad no one knows who is.
When are Henry's works due?!?! Is this a reprint of the two volume set out out by baker a few decades ago?
 
That's right. Our edition will include some stuff previously not published in his collected works.

Probably early next year. We are in the early stages. Thomas Boston's works and John Trapp's commentaries are coming before Henry in the fall.
 
Sadly, too many Christians are probably intimidated by the length of Henry's commentary. I'm guilty sometimes, too. I've read him in small doses, but it sounds like I need to dive in deeper.
Henry vs. Poole,

Over the years, I've read quite a bit of Henry. But there's one thing about his format that I've never appreciated. And I think it's mostly because I'm lazy. But it is often hard to find his comment on the specific verse you are interested in at the time. He covered the number of verses in paragraph form; it's tricky to spot the comment you are looking for quickly. It's hard to admit to being that lazy. But that's been my take.

Poole has a different format from Henry. What I find most useful in Poole is that he usually gives two or three commonly held opinions or interpretations of a verse. He doesn't usually set them up as straw men either. Then he always gives you the interpretation he is in favor of and thinks most likely to be correct. He doesn't do this in a boring way either. So, while Poole covers the same material as Henry, his style is quite different and refreshing to me. At least this time around.
 
Me too. Except for this time I'm reading Matthew Poole's commentary. :)
Here is one I wish would get reprinted as well. I have been waiting for the whole set to become available on banner, but I fear I will be waiting a long time.
 
I'm figuring out Henry's format.

There's a paragraph in dinky type that comes before his exposition of the psalm containing an outline. In the main exposition, though, he doesn't seem to follow the outline he provides. There are also sentences, or several sentences, which are contained within quotation marks. I think, there, that Henry is paraphrasing the Bible text he's expositing.

We could use a lot more "pre-critical" commentaries like this today.
 
Here is one I wish would get reprinted as well. I have been waiting for the whole set to become available on banner, but I fear I will be waiting a long time.
I saw that it is listed on the BoT website but is out of stock..Has it been so for quite some time?
 
As a result of this thread, I decided to take a break from John Calvin's commentary on the Psalms and to read John Gill on Phillippians. I might actually get into a habit of alternating between Calvin, Gill, and Matthew Henry. The latter is definitely massively undervalued. Even those of us who normally ignore modern fads have been put off reading him owing to high-brow snobbery.
 
Me too. Except for this time I'm reading Matthew Poole's commentary. :)
Poole is usually the first place I check for questions on a verse. But Henry aught to be read too!

‘On the whole, if I must have only one commentary, and had read Matthew Henry, as I have, I do not know but what I should choose Poole.’ — C.H. SPURGEON
 
Did Henry write his commentary fresh, from scratch? Or does the commentary consist of thoughts and/or language taken from his sermons?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top