MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Galatians
(Hardcover)
by John MacArthur
Language: English
SKU: 316497
Publisher:Moody Publishers
ISBN-13: 9780802407627
Retail Price $24.99
Mardel Price $19.99
You Save 20%
This item is Out of Stock
Choose an option:
Choose your Mardel store
Enter your name:
This item is Out of Stock
|
The selected Mardel store has been notified.
You will be contacted by the selected store about the availability of this item.
|
This item is Out of Stock
|
Your email address has been added!
You will be notified via email when this item becomes available!
|
This item is Out of Stock
|
You have already requested a reminder for this product.
If you wish to remove your email address from this list, please click here |
This item is Out of Stock
|
Your email address has been removed.
You will no longer receive notification when this product becomes available for purchase.
|
| |
Alternate Videos |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Description of MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Galatians by John MacArthur
The book of 'Galations' has been conferred with such titles as the Magna Carta of spiritual liberty, the battle cry of the Reformation, and the Christian's declaration of independence. It is clearly the Holy Spirit's charter of spiritual freedom for those who have received Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.
| Product: | MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Galatians |
| Author: | John MacArthur |
| Series: | MacArthur New Testament Commentary |
| Binding Type: | Hardcover |
| Media Type: | Book |
| Number of Pages: | 226 |
| Weight: | 1.08 pounds |
| Length: | 9.42 inches |
| Width: | 6.26 inches |
| Height: | 0.83 inches |
| Publisher: | Moody Publishers |
| Publication Date: | November 1987 |
MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Galatians
« Previous | Page 1
of 1 | Next »
Solid Modern Commentary
This is a very good commentary, not too technical while still staying true to the text (that is, he doesn't go off on tangents like, say, Luther's commentary). I guess my complaint would be that for Galatians 4:21-31, MacArthur does very little actual commenting on the passage and just spends his whole time talking about how "allegory" doesn't mean "allegory". But I guess this makes sense since this passage is completely at odds with MacArthur's premillennialism. By the way, I agree with the way he interpret's Paul's use of the word "allegory", but I'm just saying that this was a case where he focused on something little rather than tackling the passages that (for him, in my opinion) would be troublesome.
Published 56 months ago by Stephen Thomas
« Previous | Page 1
of 1 | Next »