Commentary Philosophy

[ArminianOnceWas]

Hello Community,

I'm not looking for advice but rather taking inventory of the approach of fellow members when it comes to collecting and using commentaries for study and teaching/preaching.

1. Curious to know how you weigh certain factors, such as modern vs classical commentaries? In other words, do you try to balance out modern commentaries with those of Calvin etc.
2. Do you only use Reformed authors? Does anyone find worth in liberal authors?
3. How do you weigh technical, exegetical and language academic-based commentaries vs pastoral and devotional types?
4. How many commentaries do you use? Try to find an all in one (pastoral, technical etc) or do you use several?
5. What is your top 3 or 5 criteria when deciding upon a commentary purchase?

Of course, I make the assumption that the readership will not consider a single-volume commentary on the whole Bible or either Testament to the genre that I am referring to but rather those who use more focused commentaries specializing in specific books.

 

[RamistThomist]

at this point I just go for exegetical depth around the languages. Technical commentaries that work with the syntax. To be fair, I am not a preacher but a lay man of letters, so some might get value out of pastoral or devotional commentaries.

I do consult Calvin, Chrysostom and all of those guys because they, with varying degrees of success, knew the problems of how syntax functioned, word meanings, etc. There is a tendency among some to just block quote Calvin and call it an argument. This we should avoid

 

[Tom Hart]

There is a tendency among some to just block quote Calvin and call it an argument. This we should avoid

He's usually right, though.

 

[Taylor]

In my view, a good commentary should move from the technical to the practical, and thus should contain a reasonable mixture of technical, exegetical, and practical work. Exclusively technical commentaries make me snore (and I'm a former seminarian!), while purely devotional works leave me wanting something more.

But, in the end, if a commentary doesn't tell me, at least to some degree, what the text means for faith and life, I value it very, very little. In fact, over the past few years I have come more and more to view commentaries that obviously and consistently avoid application as, for all practical purposes, wicked. Such an approach to Scripture is, in my view, practically atheistic. I know that's a little strong, and some might disagree (and are quite free to), but I have a problem with works on the Bible that end up avoiding doing the very thing the Bible was given to us to do: show us "what man is to believe concerning God, and what duty God requires of man."

 

[py3ak]

It depends on what use is being made of the commentaries, and the circumstances.

1. Is there a particularly thorny text or is there a special interest in the history of interpretation? Then heaping up many commentaries and deliberately hunting out ones from different schools of thought and points in history is very likely. Older commentaries are often more fruitful than newer works. There are many worthy works on 1 Peter, for instance, but Robert Leighton has a depth of insight, manner of treatment, and eloquence of style that are not likely to be equaled, let alone surpassed.

2. A lot of the plethora of largely Reformedish commentaries coming out today seem to duplicate one another to no inconsiderable degree. There can be considerable value in works from quite different backgrounds, like the OTL/NTL series or the notes of Robert Alter in his translation.

3. For preaching and teaching, the number of commentaries can vary depending on the quality of those available, but the ones likely to be most useful are the ones that speak most clearly to points where one is relatively weak. So that might be historical background; literary technique; technical matters of grammar and syntax; structural issues, or other matters just depending on the book and one's own familiarity with those different areas in reference to it. It's always good to consult Matthew Henry when other preparations are done.

4. I have yet to encounter one commentary that addressed everything sufficiently.

5. A commentary needs to justify its purchase price with the promise of extensive knowledge, deep reflection, and clear explanation.