Comments on: Book Review – The First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians (Gordon Fee) http://www.wordandspirit.co.uk/blog/2010/01/05/book-review-the-first-and-second-letters-to-the-thessalonians-gordon-fee/ pursuing faithfulness to the Word of God and fullness of the Spirit of God Sat, 21 Jan 2012 12:08:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Mark Heath http://www.wordandspirit.co.uk/blog/2010/01/05/book-review-the-first-and-second-letters-to-the-thessalonians-gordon-fee/comment-page-1/#comment-11598 Mark Heath Tue, 12 Jan 2010 22:32:19 +0000 http://www.wordandspirit.co.uk/blog/2010/01/05/book-review-the-first-and-second-letters-to-the-thessalonians-gordon-fee/#comment-11598 Hmmm, thin introductions are fine by me. To be honest, it has been a few years since I read Green, which makes it hard for me to objectively compare them. I'd probably recommend people go with Fee, because I he has a bit more of a lively writing style (e.g. swipes at the Left Behind series!). As for whether the "patron-client" background ought to play a part in interpreting the letter, I am not qualified to say, but I seem to remember it making a lot of sense as I read through Green's commentary. Hmmm, thin introductions are fine by me. To be honest, it has been a few years since I read Green, which makes it hard for me to objectively compare them. I’d probably recommend people go with Fee, because I he has a bit more of a lively writing style (e.g. swipes at the Left Behind series!).

As for whether the “patron-client” background ought to play a part in interpreting the letter, I am not qualified to say, but I seem to remember it making a lot of sense as I read through Green’s commentary.

]]> By: Jeremy Pierce http://www.wordandspirit.co.uk/blog/2010/01/05/book-review-the-first-and-second-letters-to-the-thessalonians-gordon-fee/comment-page-1/#comment-11594 Jeremy Pierce Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:12:36 +0000 http://www.wordandspirit.co.uk/blog/2010/01/05/book-review-the-first-and-second-letters-to-the-thessalonians-gordon-fee/#comment-11594 I consider it high praise for Green that Fee's commentary merely equals his, especially given Fee's reputation and the fact that Green's was earlier and therefore Fee had access to it. I'm guessing one reason you don't think Fee is superior is because he ignored the patron-client background, and another is because his introduction was thinner. I consider it high praise for Green that Fee’s commentary merely equals his, especially given Fee’s reputation and the fact that Green’s was earlier and therefore Fee had access to it.

I’m guessing one reason you don’t think Fee is superior is because he ignored the patron-client background, and another is because his introduction was thinner.

]]>