The One or Two Best Commentaries on Each Book of the Bible (in my opinion)

Discussion in 'Commentaries' started by greenbaggins, Jan 2, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    I have blogged my recommendations for each book of the Bible for the best one or two modern commentaries here. For a more complete listing of good commentaries, graded on a three-tier system, go here.
     
  2. Quickened

    Quickened Puritan Board Senior

    I have often thought about things like this. As i build my library and dive into scripture i find something of this nature very useful.

    I notice that you do say you do not agree with the viewpoint on all of the commentaries. I would be curious to see a small follow up of things that you remember that you dont necessarily agree with or like. Could be of further assistance to those interested in browsing any of these works.

    Thanks for the list brother! Hope to see a trend of people doing similar posts ;)
     
  3. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    Good to see Dale Ralph Davis in the Kings slot. :cheers:
     
  4. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    The only real problems that I have with some of them is that some do not come from a conservative approach to the text. Achtemeier on 1 Peter, for instance, does not believe that Peter wrote the letter. It is astounding to me that such a good commentary can be written from such a perspective. Some others come from a slightly liberal perspective (none are flaming liberals): Goldingay on Daniel, Bergant on S of S, Fitzmyer's commentaries, Towner on the Pastoral Epistles (an egalitarian approach), Bauckham on 2 Peter (doesn't believe that Peter wrote it). There's probably quite a few more areas where I might disagree with some of them, but that's all for now.
     
  5. Dieter Schneider

    Dieter Schneider Puritan Board Sophomore

    Bauckham on 2 Peter (doesn't believe that Peter wrote it).

    Calvin didn't either!
     
  6. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    Well, that depends on how you read him. Yes, he says that Peter didn't actually do the writing. But he might as well have said it, in my opinion, since he argues that Peter told someone what to write.
     
  7. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    I see Don Carson is in the John slot, does anyone else think it is worth reading that commentary? I am thinking of buying it and reading a portion on the Lord's Day (its too big for daily devotions). :graduate:
     
  8. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    In my opinion (and Richard Phillips's comment on my blog agrees), Carson's is the best modern commentary by far.
     
  9. Reformed Covenanter

    Reformed Covenanter Puritan Board Doctor

    I see, I also have R.J. Rushdoony and Bruce Milne (Bible Speaks Today series), but they could be read as part of daily devotions.

    Oh yes, John Stott's commentary on Galatians (also in the Bible Speaks Today series) is the best commentary ever written on that book. If I had to preach on Galatians I think I would just read that book (and add a few comments of my own concerning infant baptism and against holy days etc). :judge:
     
  10. AV1611

    AV1611 Puritan Board Senior

    Have you read [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Israel-Conquest-Exile-Commentary-Joshua/dp/0884692388]Amazon.com: Israel from Conquest to Exile: A Commentary on Joshua 2 Kings: Books: John J. Davis,John C. Whitcomb[/ame] I thought it was very good although it is not textual.

    As I do not understand Hebrew what are the best commentaries on Kings and Chronicles?
     
  11. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    No, I haven't read it, but it looks good. Can you give any bio on the two authors? I am not familiar with them.
     
  12. AV1611

    AV1611 Puritan Board Senior

    They are conservative regarding the history and dating. I seem to recall them being premill but not from this book.

    Peter Masters' review: "An outstanding work which blends a summary of events with up-to-date archaeological material and other background information. The authors make no concessions to liberal viewpoints on dating and archaeology. Problem passages are dealt with very well. Extremely readable. Very helpful for message preparation as well as in private devotional use."

    Biography — Dr John C. Whitcomb
     
  13. py3ak

    py3ak They're stalling and plotting against me Staff Member

    A quick suggestion, Lane. "Best" is a term that varies in meaning depending on who's using it. It might be helpful to add a paragraph to the post explaining what you're primarily looking for in a commentary, so people have a better idea of why these commentaries are the best.
     
  14. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    Thanks for the suggestion, Ruben. It's done.
     
  15. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    I have now added a post that details some commentaries to avoid.
     
  16. bookslover

    bookslover Puritan Board Doctor

    Lane, what do you think of R. H. Charles on Revelation? He may not be conservative, but D. A. Carson and others think that it's still, in some ways, a watershed commentary, even if it's 88 years old this year (1920).
     
  17. greenbaggins

    greenbaggins Administrator Staff Member

    I wouldn't teach on Revelation without Charles, expecially because he has such an amazing grasp of the extra-biblical literature concurrent with the times. So, yes, Charles is still important.
     
  18. etexas

    etexas Puritan Board Doctor

    Thank you for this Thread! I love advice on good commentary!:cool:
     
  19. timmopussycat

    timmopussycat Puritan Board Junior

    I would echo Greenbaggins comment that Longenecker is first rate (and not just because I went to school with his son). Longenecker touches on an essential issue that is not often addressed: were the Judaizers propounding an error in justification or an error in sanctification instead of or in addition to an error in justification? You may not agree with his conclusion but he will force you to really think the issue through.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page