"Turn off Matthew Henry" Oh my.

Status
Not open for further replies.

toddpedlar

Iron Dramatist
I was poking around to see if I could get an updated Matthew Henry Commentary for my Bibleworks installation... and happened on this pathetic advice from the Luther Seminary wiki page:

Turning off Matthew Henry

One of the resources set to show up when you are reading certain translations in BibleWorks is Matthew Henry's commentary. Matthew Henry lived in the 17th and early 18th centuries. As Wikipedia puts it, his work is "a commentary of a practical and devotional rather than of a critical kind." It is not an appropriate source for seminary study and it really irritates your professors to read quotes from it, as if the Rev. Henry were a famous scholar (or so I'm told).To make the Matthew Henry commentary disappear:
  1. In the Resource Summary Window choose Resource Summary tab.
  2. Then choose the References tab.
  3. Then remove the checkmark from Matthew Henry Commentary.

The link for this fear-driven and otherwise ridiculous commentary on Matthew Henry's magnum opus is found here:

MatthewHenry < BibleWorks < LutherWiki

It's good to see how Henry is regarded by a mainline seminary so plain and simple. What pathetic pap. Got to make sure those impressionable mainline Lutheran pastor and pastorette candidates aren't influenced by the unfortunate Mr. Henry.
 

kvanlaan

Puritan Board Doctor
I am surprised that was not written by a WHI fellow.

Could you expand on that? I know there's a Lutheran on there, but do they give MH short shrift in the program?
 

jogri17

Puritan Board Junior
It is legtimate to say that quoting Henry for exegeis is not appropiate. Though when it comes to Sermon application, you cannot beat him.

Explain your WHI comment please for those of us who don't get it . I think it has something to day with the extreme indicative v. imperative perspective. Not sure.
 

MarieP

Puritan Board Senior
It is not an appropriate source for seminary study and it really irritates your professors to read quotes from it, as if the Rev. Henry were a famous scholar (or so I'm told).

I once heard a Reformed scholar say the same thing (I think it may have been James White). Sad indeed! He's one of my favorite commentators!
 

SolaScriptura

Puritanboard Brimstone
I share the guy's opinion. As I've said multiple times on the PB before, I have very little use for Henry's Commentary.
 

a mere housewife

Not your cup of tea
Now to balance out the thread I must say that I just love Matthew Henry. He is one of those people I would take to a desert island. But of course, I'm not a seminary student, just a Christian in need of strength and grace for daily perseverance.
 

SolaScriptura

Puritanboard Brimstone
I share the guy's opinion. As I've said multiple times on the PB before, I have very little use for Henry's Commentary.


Good for you.

But I do thank you for showing me how to turn it off. If only they'd replace Matthew Henry with Calvin. Now THAT would be helpful.

---------- Post added at 02:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:13 PM ----------

Now to balance out the thread I must say that I just love Matthew Henry.

Balance out the thread? :rofl: Almost to the man folks on this thread love Matthew Henry's Commentary and are aghast at criticism of it. One (maybe two) folks say they don't like it and in response you feel the need to "balance out the thread" by showing support? :rofl:
Please understand that I'm not laughing at you liking Henry's Commentary... What I find humorous is the perceived need to "balance out the thread" when only one (maybe two) PB member comments are in dissent from the majority opinion.
Maybe I underestimated the weight of my opinion!
 

jw

Administrator
Balance out the thread? :rofl: Almost to the man folks on this thread love Matthew Henry's Commentary and are aghast at criticism of it. One (maybe two) folks say they don't like it and in response you feel the need to "balance out the thread" by showing support? :rofl:
Please understand that I'm not laughing at you liking Henry's Commentary... What I find humorous is the perceived need to "balance out the thread" when only one (maybe two) PB member comments are in dissent from the majority opinion.
Maybe I underestimated the weight of my opinion!
Dear Chaplain, if I may speak on behalf of my sister, I think her "balancing of the thread" comment was not directed at your post, but to the generally negative responses of those of us who are poo poo-ing the subject matter behind the thread, with a positive affirmation of Mr. Henry (as opposed to just another complaint about Lutherans not promoting him). Of course, if I'm wrong, Heidi is free to correct my interpretation.
 

SolaScriptura

Puritanboard Brimstone
Balance out the thread? :rofl: Almost to the man folks on this thread love Matthew Henry's Commentary and are aghast at criticism of it. One (maybe two) folks say they don't like it and in response you feel the need to "balance out the thread" by showing support? :rofl:
Please understand that I'm not laughing at you liking Henry's Commentary... What I find humorous is the perceived need to "balance out the thread" when only one (maybe two) PB member comments are in dissent from the majority opinion.
Maybe I underestimated the weight of my opinion!
Dear Chaplain, if I may speak on behalf of my sister, I think her "balancing of the thread" comment was not directed at your post, but to the generally negative responses of those of us who are poo poo-ing the subject matter behind the thread, with a positive affirmation of Mr. Henry (as opposed to just another complaint about Lutherans not promoting him). Of course, if I'm wrong, Heidi is free to correct my interpretation.

I'd prefer to think that the weight of my opinion is so enormous that it takes the combined opinions of many others just to achieve balance. :p But regardless of what I'd prefer to be true... you are probably correct.

Also, would you kindly make note that the word is spelled "chaplain," not "chaplin."
 

a mere housewife

Not your cup of tea
Ben that was actually a half ironic statement: I was wondering what you would say in reply to it. The point being that I think the thread is properly balanced only when the scales are tipped heavily in favor of Matthew Henry. :) It was a smiling comment. I haven't meant to rebuke anyone.

---------- Post added at 03:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:00 PM ----------

PS. Joshua thanks for sticking up for me. You're a pal. :)
 

Augusta

Puritan Board Doctor
I remember hearing a certain Lutheran on the WHI saying that MHC was "positively medieval."
 

FenderPriest

Puritan Board Junior
I remember hearing a certain Lutheran on the WHI saying that MHC was "positively medieval."
Which wouldn't be all that bad. For all the slack people give the Medieval Scholastics, they were first and foremost exegetes... Somehow, I feel Carl Trueman would have something to say here...
 

bookslover

Puritan Board Doctor
In his New Testament Commentary Survey, D. A. Carson notes that John Calvin is the better exegete of Scripture, but Matthew Henry is better at practical application. Different commentators stress different things.
 

py3ak

Unshaven and anonymous
Staff member
Practical observations are more necessary than critical expositions.
On Romans 15:4.
 

SRoper

Puritan Board Graduate
I remember hearing a certain Lutheran on the WHI saying that MHC was "positively medieval."
Which wouldn't be all that bad. For all the slack people give the Medieval Scholastics, they were first and foremost exegetes... Somehow, I feel Carl Trueman would have something to say here...

You mean "flak." Giving someone "slack" is quite the opposite of your intended meaning.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top