Dr. Qurollo has written Bible commentaries on the New Testament for the purpose of assisting readers in their understanding of the Scriptures. His books, which are written from the King James Bible and the Textus Receptus Greek text, are practical for both laymen and Christian workers. He has sought to provide books written from a fundamentalist and Baptist theological perspective that will thoroughly explain the text of the Bible in non-technical language for the benefit of all believers in the local churches.
There are some difficulties with commentaries already in print that are obvious even to the most casual observer. Although there appear to be many commentaries available, one soon realizes that some do not even seek to explain the text. They may be collections of sermons or just devotional thoughts, often having very little to do with the content of the passage. Other commentaries are very brief and manage to omit most of the difficult passages. It seems that they only comment on things that are perfectly obvious to everyone. On the other hand, some are scholarly exegetical commentaries on the Greek text, but they are so scholarly that only the scholars can understand them. Now these may be a valuable addition to the library of any scholarly pastor or teacher, but only the most serious student will find them helpful. They are beyond the abilities of most laymen in our churches. One seldom finds a commentary that is not either too difficult or too brief and simple for the ordinary believer. Still others are old and out of print.
There are also some difficulties with commentaries that are not quite as obvious to the average reader. Commentators write from varying theological persuasions. The reader needs to know what the writer believes. A discerning reader will readily detect the theological position of the writer, but some readers are not yet as discerning as they need to become. Some commentators are very liberal and do not believe in the fundamentals of the faith. Others believe in a limited inerrancy and believe that the Bible may contain error. Although they may call themselves evangelicals, their works are untrustworthy. Still others write from Lutheran, Reformed, Presbyterian, or interdenominational backgrounds; and the untrained reader has no idea what the background of an individual writer may be. The ordinary layman with no theological training may also not be equipped to discern the difference, and this can only lead to confusion on his part.
Perhaps the most subtle difficulty is that most present-day commentators believe that the Greek manuscripts underlying the Authorized (King James) Version of the Bible are hopelessly corrupt. Consequently, they have chosen to follow a different textual tradition. They frequently refer to the oldest and best manuscripts, by which they usually mean some such as Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. Of course, the oldest and best manuscripts are the originals, which we no longer have. The reader must realize that corruption of the text took place very early and that the oldest existing manuscripts are not necessarily the best. Error did not necessarily creep in gradually. Much of it was introduced intentionally. The age of the vellum or parchment does not guarantee the accuracy of the text written on it. Perhaps one reason that some very ancient manuscripts were preserved is that they were not used by believers because those believers viewed them as corrupt. By contrast those manuscripts which were viewed as accurate were literally worn out with use and replaced. The best Greek texts are those which most accurately represent the originals, whatever their age. Therefore, a manuscript might be faithful to the original writing even though it had been copied ten or twenty times and even though it is only 800 - 1,000 years old. By contrast a text might be corrupt even though it had been copied only two or three times and even though it may be as much as 1,400 - 1,500 years old. It all depends on the accuracy of the work of the scribe(s).
Occasionally, one may find a commentary on the Bible written by a fundamentalist, but almost never will he find one written by a fundamentalist with Baptist convictions who also believes that the Greek texts from the Textus Receptus tradition are the ones which are the best to use because they have been providentially preserved by God.
Dr. Qurollo is both a fundamentalist and a Baptist. He also believes that, of all the Greek manuscripts in existence today, those from the Textus Receptus tradition, or the Majority Text, are the best that we have and are closest to the original writings. He further believes that the critical texts of the Westcott and Hort tradition are corrupt. He is convinced there is a need for Biblical commentaries written from this perspective which deal thoroughly with the text in language the average adult can understand. His commentaries represent his attempts to produce works of this sort.
He believes that the Authorized (King James) Version of the Bible is an excellent and accurate translation of the Bible. The reader should understand that he makes no attempt to correct the text or to criticize the translation in any way. He is seeking only to explain or clarify its meaning to the English reader living in the Twenty-first Century. By God's grace he trusts he has accomplished his purpose.
His commentaries are written on a verse-by-verse basis with all chapter and verse divisions corresponding to the Authorized (King James) Version of the Bible. Bold print has been used in order to aid the reader in locating a particular word or phrase commented upon. The writer has made a thorough study of the Greek text and has sought to explain it in non-technical language. He has used The Greek New Testament: The Greek Text Underlying the English Authorised Version of 1611 produced by the Trinitarian Bible Society.