Birkdale Baptist Church

Life, Heart and Hope in Jesus

New Testament Commentary Recommendations (10)

Hebrews and Philemon

I feel genuinely inadequate to recommend much on the book of Hebrews, if only because it has been nearly twenty years since I preached through the book and I've not kept up with the literature as much as I have with other books of the New Testament. Still, though, I'll give it my best shot.

Two works served me well when I worked through Hebrews and I still believe they are worth obtaining today, even though more substantial exegetical treatments have appeared. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, in the New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Eerdmans, 1964, 447 pp.), is one of his better works. It is filled with excellent exegetical insights and is a must read for all pastors intent on preaching or teaching through the book.

I also have a fond affection for Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Eerdmans, 1977, 623 pp.). It is not as exegetically oriented as Bruce but is far more theologically substantive. I've read and re-read Hughes over the years and still profit immensely from his insights.

Although I've not read much in these next few works, they appear to be quite good. The first worthy of mention is the two volume set by William L. Lane in the Word Biblical Commentary Series (Word Books, 1991, 617 pp.). I can recommend Lane based solely on my very positive experience with his commentary on Mark. I've also heard good things about Paul Ellingworth's volume in the New International Greek Testament Commentary (Eerdmans, 1993, 764 pp.). This looks to be the most helpful treatment of the Greek text of Hebrews. Craig R. Koester in the Anchor Bible Series (Doubleday, 2001, 604 pp.) and George Guthrie in the NIV Application series are also worth obtaining.

Before I leave Hebrews, I should mention two works about which I was unaware until reading of them in Carson's commentary review. Peter T. O'Brien is writing on Hebrews for the Pillar series (which Carson edits). Given the superb nature of all his other commentaries, I venture to speculate that this will immediately become the evangelical standard upon its release. Carson also points out that R. T. France has written on Hebrews in the revised edition (2006) of the Expositor's Bible Commentary published by Zondervan. I've never been disappointed by France's commentaries and I trust that this too, although necessarily brief, will prove immensely helpful.

Studies on the short book of Philemon are usually bound up with commentaries on Colossians. My recommendation of the works by Moo, Harris, Dunn, Bruce (in the revised volume in NICNT), O'Brien, and Garland, will serve you well on Philemon. There is one rather unusual volume that is certainly worthy of a look. It is unusual because it devotes 561 pages to this tiny NT epistle, 240 of which constitute the Introduction alone! It is the collaborate effort of Markus Barth and Helmut Blanke in the Eerdmans Critical Commentary series (Eerdmans, 2000). It's hard for me to imagine anyone reading 561 pages to preach on twenty-five verses, but God bless you for your commitment and perseverance if you do!

New Testament Commentary Recommendations (9)

1-2 Thessalonians and the Pastoral Epistles

When I preached through First and Second Thessalonians in the late 70's and early 80's there was very little to draw from. That is no longer the case, as we've seen several excellent studies appear in the last fifteen to twenty years.

I was teaching at Wheaton during the time that two of my colleagues were both writing commentaries on the Thessalonian epistles and they top the list of my recommendations. Gene Green has written the longer and more technical of the two for the Pillar series (Eerdmans, 2002, 400 pp.), but I actually prefer G. K. Beale's contribution to The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (IVP, 2003, 279 pp.). Beale is especially good in dealing with texts on eschatological themes.

The most helpful treatment of the Greek text is by Charles A. Wanamaker, The Epistles to the Thessalonians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Eerdmans, 1990, 316 pp.), although I've only read him on selected passages. Always good and solid is the older work by F. F. Bruce in the Word Biblical Commentary series (Word Books, 1982, 228 pp.).

There are five good treatments for those not trained in Greek, three of which I used extensively when I preached through these epistles. Leon Morris has written for the New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans, 1973 [1959], 274 pp.). He's not exciting to read, but he's always a good conservative guide. Although Arminian in approach, I. Howard Marshall has written a helpful volume in The New Century Bible Commentary series (Eerdmans, 1983, 240 pp.). I also found quite helpful the work by D. Edmond Hiebert, The Thessalonian Epistles: A Call to Readiness (Moody Press, 1971, 383 pp.), although beware of his dispensational, pretribulational reading of the eschatological texts.

Two more recent works on the English text that I haven't looked at closely are John Stott, The Gospel & The End of Time: The Message of 1 & 2 Thessalonians (IVP, 1991, 220 pp.), and Michael W. Holmes in the NIV Application series (Zondervan, 1998, 302 pp.).

So, the bottom line is this: begin with Beale, Green, and Wanamaker, and look to Stott for helpful pastoral and practical insights.

The Pastoral Epistles (1-2 Timothy, Titus) were for a long time much neglected by scholars. I'm happy to say that is no longer the case. We now have several, quite substantive, commentaries that are worthy of recommendation.

First on my list is the technical but extremely readable work by William D. Mounce in the Word Biblical Commentary series (Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2000, 641 pp.). Mounce provides an excellent discussion of the controversial text on women in ministry and responds at length to egalitarian arguments. Running a close second to Mounce is George W. Knight, III, in the New International Greek Testament Commentary (Eerdmans, 1992, 514 pp.).

Equally committed to analysis of the Greek text and every bit as substantive are the commentaries by I. Howard Marshall in the ICC series (T & T Clark, 1999, 869 pp.) and Philip H. Towner in the New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Eerdmans, 2006, 886 pp.). Both Marshall and Towner explain (away) Paul's prohibition on women teaching and exercising authority over men by arguing that the problem was a local and limited issue of wealthy women assuming a dominant teaching role in which elements of both theological heresy and an over-realized eschatology were found. Be alerted that Marshall also denies Pauline authorship of the Pastorals. Another massive work on the pastorals that I've not yet examined is the combined work of Jerome D. Quinn and William C. Wacker in The Eerdmans Critical Commentary (Eerdmans, 2000, 918 pp.).

Three less technical but helpful treatments of the English text are John Stott, Guard the Truth: The Message of 1 Timothy & Titus (IVP, 1996, 232 pp.; this includes a helpful study guide for each epistle), J. N. D. Kelly, A Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles (A & C Black, 1963, 264 pp.), and Walter L. Liefeld in the NIV Application series (Zondervan, 1999, 378 pp.). Not a commentary, but still quite good, is the shorter work by George Knight, The Faithful Sayings in the Pastoral Epistles (Baker, 1979, 167 pp.).

For the ordinary pastor, the size of one's book budget comes into play in making choices about commentaries for the Pastorals. Mounce and Knight are necessities, and I'm inclined to put Marshall in that category. I may come to that conclusion concerning Towner once I've delved into it more deeply. Once again, get Stott for the obvious reasons.

Sam

New Testament Commentary Recommendations (8)

Philippians and Colossians

The good news is that both Philippians and Colossians have been blessed with excellent works in recent years. The bad news is that the average pastor on a limited budget will have to make some hard choices when browsing turns to buying. Let's start with Philippians.

It's been over twenty years since I preached through Philippians. Among the works available at that time, none compared with Gerald F. Hawthorne in the Word Biblical Commentary series (Word Books, 1983, 232 pp.). Although I deeply disagree with his interpretation of Philippians 2:12-13 (he believes the exhortation is corporate and not intended for the individual believer), this is an excellent treatment of the letter that every pastor should own.

Hawthorne has in a number of ways been surpassed by the appearance of commentaries by Peter O'Brien and Gordon Fee. O'Brien has written for the New International Greek Testament Commentary (Eerdmans, 1991, 597 pp.) and has provided us with what is arguably the very best commentary on this letter (very similar in style and substance to his work on Ephesians in the Pillar series). Fee's contribution in the New International Commentary on the New Testament series is superb as well (Eerdmans, 1995, 497 pp.). If the combined effect of these three fails to satisfy your exegetical hunger, you can find more help in Moises Silva, Philippians, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Baker, 2005, 248 pp.). Be sure you get the Second Edition of Silva's work.

There are three, shorter, works on the English text. I found especially helpful The Message of Philippians by Alec Motyer in The Bible Speaks Today series (IVP, 1984, 234 pp.). Also useful is the NIV Application commentary by Frank Thielman (Zondervan, 1995, 256 pp.). Finally, although very brief (124 pp.), Basics for Believers: An Exposition of Philippians (Baker, 1996), by D. A. Carson is quite good for illustrative help and contemporary application.

If you obtain O'Brien, Hawthorne, and Fee, you will be well set for study of this Pauline epistle.

I'm a bit more familiar with recent literature on Colossians, having published only a year ago The Hope of Glory: 100 Daily Meditations on Colossians (Crossway, 2007, 362 pp.). Although not technically a commentary, I think you'll find it helpful for theological and practical insights into Paul's argument.

It seems as if I keep coming back to Peter O'Brien when talking about the Pauline literature. He has again written one of the better commentaries on Colossians in the Word Biblical Commentary series (Word Books, 1982, 328 pp.). Unfortunately, the new commentary by Douglas J. Moo came out too late for me to use in my book, but from everything I've read in it this definitely has become the new gold standard in Colossians studies (Eerdmans, 2008, 471 pp.). Moo has written on Colossians and Philemon for the Pillar series.

This next recommendation is solely for those pastors who are serious about grappling with the Greek text of Colossians. Murray J. Harris wrote the inaugural (and as far as I can tell, the only) volume in the Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament (Eerdmans, 1991, 310 pp.; can anyone tell me if subsequent volumes in this series have been released?). This is not a commentary per se, but focuses on virtually every grammatical issue and important interpretive option in Colossians and Philemon. I can't recommend it too highly, especially for the pastor who has lost his facility in the original text and is committed to regaining it.

James D. G. Dunn has done a good job on Colossians and Philemon for the New International Greek Testament Commentary (Eerdmans, 1996, 388 pp.), but if you have O'Brien, Moo, and Harris, I don't think you'll find it necessary. The NIV Application volume (Zondervan, 1998, 389 pp.) by David Garland is very helpful on the English text.

I'm probably somewhat alone in this final evaluation, but I did not enjoy or profit from Colossians Remixed: Subverting the Empire (IVP, 2004, 256 pp.), by Brian J. Walsh and Sylvia C. Keesmaat. In fact, I was consistently annoyed by it. I couldn't help but get the impression that they had a previously formulated political agenda and turned to Colossians to find (unsuccessfully, in my opinion) biblical support for it. If you are persuaded, as they are, that western capitalism and American foreign policy are largely responsible for the ills of our society and those of the world at large, you will probably enjoy this book. But don't buy it. I'll be happy to sell you mine (pressure me, and I might even give it away!).

Sam

New Testament Commentary Recommendations (7)

Galatians and Ephesians

Like 1 Corinthians, I've never preached all the way through Galatians. My familiarity with the literature, therefore, is limited. Typically I've delved into a variety of commentaries while studying particular verses in Galatians and found the following to be most helpful.

I've always found Richard N. Longenecker in the Word Biblical Commentary series to be very good (Word Books, 1990, 323 pp.). Likewise with F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Eerdmans, 1982, 305 pp.).

For those who have a working knowledge of Greek, I highly recommend Moises Silva, Explorations in Exegetical Method: Galatians as a Test Case (Baker 1996 236 pp.). While not technically a commentary, this is an absolutely essential tool for analysis of the Greek text. Silva provides an extremely helpful analysis of the grammar and syntax of Paul in Galatians, as well the literary forms and structure of the epistle, the history of interpretation of the book, its relation to Acts, the controversy over the dating of Galatians, and other important themes, including a section on Pauline theology.

Quite new to Galatian studies is the commentary by Gordon D. Fee, Galatians, in the Pentecostal Commentary Series (deo publishing, 2007, 262pp). Again, I've only dipped my toe in the water, but it felt refreshing! Fee has an especially helpful section addressing the controversial issue of whether pistis Christou is a subjective genitive ("[the] faith[fullness] of Christ"] or an objective genitive ("faith in Christ"). He has persuasive arguments, both exegetical and theological, in favor of the latter (the commentary by Longenecker above views it as subjective).

There are several helpful commentaries on the English text of Galatians. Scot McKnight has written for the NIV Application series (Zondervan, 1995, 320 pp.), but beware of his tendency to interpret the "law" in a way that inclines toward the New Perspective on Paul.

The contribution to the NICNT series is by Ronald Y. K. Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians (Eerdmans, 1988 342 pp.) and is a good resource to keep handy. So too is Ben Witherington's, Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on St. Paul's Letter to the Galatians (Eerdmans, 1998, 477 pp.).

Two more pastoral volumes are by Philip Graham Ryken, Galatians (P & R, 2005, 290pp), in the Reformed Expository Commentary series, and Leon Morris, Galatians: Paul's Charter of Christian Freedom (IVP 1996 191 pp.).

My study of Ephesians has been far more extensive, as I've preached through the book twice in past years and taught it several times in a classroom setting.

Before you even think of purchasing anything else on Ephesians, you simply must obtain the commentaries by Peter T. O'Brien and Andrew T. Lincoln. O'Brien's work is in the Pillar series, The Letter to the Ephesians (Eerdmans, 1999, 536 pp.). Although he interacts extensively with the Greek text, the commentary is extremely helpful to all readers. It is solid theologically and O'Brien argues convincingly for Pauline authorship. Lincoln wrote for the Word Biblical Commentary series (Word Books, 1990, 494 pp.). As with O'Brien, it is technical but still accessible to the English reader. Lincoln denies Pauline authorship, but takes a generally conservative and evangelical approach to the book. Without in any way diminishing the greatness of O'Brien's work, I actually prefer Lincoln when it comes to detailed exegesis.

Two other commentaries are also devoted to an analysis of the original text. Harold Hoehner, one of my former professors at Dallas Seminary, has written a massive book Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Baker, 2002, 930 pp.[!]). I can't read Hoehner without hearing his voice in the classroom, lecturing on Ephesians, back in the mihttp://www.enjoyinggodministries.com/Media/father-factor.jpg's. His grammatical analysis is a bit over-bearing at times and it is occasionally weak on theological insight, but this is still worthy of your consideration.

Ernest Best has written the replacement volume for the ICC series, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Ephesians (T & T Clark, 1998, 686 pp.). As with Lincoln, Best denies Pauline authorship. Another in-depth analysis of Ephesians is Marcus Barth's two-volume work in The Anchor Bible Series (Doubleday & Company, 1974, 849 pp.). Barth is the son of the famous Swiss theologian Karl Barth. Although not always conservative in his interpretations, he is frequently helpful and occasionally offers brilliant insights. Surprisingly (?), Barth affirms Pauline authorship.

As you can see, when it comes to Ephesians, there is no shortage on technical works. O'Brien, Lincoln, and Best should come first in building your library. But keep your eye out for the release of Max Turner's contribution to the New International Greek Testament Commentary (Eerdmans). I don't know the publication date, but get it!

There are two very good works that focus primarily on the English text. Klyne Snodgrass has written for the NIV Application series (Zondervan, 1996, 384 pp.). Snodgrass is a Baptist and an Arminian and has written one of the better volumes in this spotty series. He devotes as much space to application and the contemporary significance of Paul's letter as to exegetical and theological interpretation. Snodgrass favors Pauline authorship.

John R. W. Stott has once again done a great job on The Message of Ephesians: God's New Society (InterVarsity Press, 1979, 311 pp.). As always, Stott is exegetically sound and has excellent illustrations and applications for today's audience.

When I first preached through Ephesians I thoroughly enjoyed John Calvin's, Sermons on the Epistle to the Ephesians (Banner of Truth Trust, 1973 [1562], 705 pp.). His prose isn't the smoothest, but his theological and practical insights are incomparable. Another great resource for the preacher is Martyn Lloyd-Jones's, Exposition of Ephesians, in eight volumes (Baker Book House, n.d.). Lloyd-Jones is verbose but worth the effort it takes to read him. Non-technical but deeply theological.

Two final commentaries on the English text are Leon Morris, Expository Reflections on the Letter to the Ephesians (Baker Book House, 1994). Similar to his reflections on John's gospel, this is a solid work by a solid and spiritual NT scholar. Designed for the English reader, it is less a verse-by-verse commentary and more a collection of theological and sermonic observations. Walter Liefeld has written for the IVP New Testament Commentary Series (IVP, 1997, 178 pp.). Like most of the volumes in this series, comments on the Greek text are kept to the footnotes. The commentary itself is only @ 140 pages in length. It has occasional good insights, but if you purchase only one commentary on the English text, let it be Stott's.

Although not commentaries, two works by Clinton Arnold are worthy of note (and purchase). Powers of Darkness: Principalities and Powers in Paul's Letters (Downers Grove: IVP, 1992) is an easy-to-read treatment of the role of the demonic in Paul's letters. It contains numerous insightful comments on the nature of spiritual warfare, then and now. A somewhat more technical work that focuses on the nature of power and spiritual warfare in Ephesians alone is his Power and Magic: The Concept of Power in Ephesians (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989, 1992).

Under no circumstances waste your money on E. K. Simpson's volume in the New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Eerdmans, 1973 [1957]). The only reason you might be tempted to purchase it is because it is bound in one volume with F. F. Bruce's commentary on Colossians. Simpson's prose is elaborate, flowery (is that a word?!), and illustrative (and at times downright annoying), while his exegetical analysis is largely non-existent.

New Testament Commentary Recommendations (11)

James, 1-2 Peter, and Jude

James is again one of those books that I preached through twice early in my pastoral ministry but have not spent time studying in recent years.

The commentaries that helped me most my first time through were James B. Adamson, The Epistle of James in the New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans, 1976, 227), Sophie Laws, A Commentary on the Epistle of James in Harper's New Testament Commentaries (Harper & Row, 1980, 273 pp.), D. Edmond Hiebert, The Epistle of James: Tests of a Living Faith (Moody Press, 1979, 354 pp.), and Peter H. Davids, The Epistle of James NIGTC (Eerdmans, 1982, 226 pp.). One other very helpful treatment, now out of print, was the slender volume by Leslie Mitton. If you can find it used, get it.

Two more recent commentaries are probably the first you should purchase. Ralph P. Martin has written for the Word Biblical Commentary series (Word Books, 1988, 240 pp.), and Douglas J. Moo for the Pillar series (Eerdmans, 2000, 271 pp.). Moo, as always, is the best, but unfortunately only 204 pages of the 271 total are devoted to commentary.

If I were to preach through James again today I'd start with Moo, Martin, and Davids, and devote time also to reading through Mitton.

I'm happy to say that there is certainly no shortage of excellent works on 1 Peter. My joy is due to the fact that beginning January 4, 2009, I will be preaching through 1 Peter at Bridgeway Church here in Oklahoma City (all sermons, by the way, will be available via Podcast on our church website, www.bridgewaychurch.com).

Thus far I can say with some measure of confidence that the best evangelical treatment of 1 Peter is Thomas R. Schreiner, 1, 2 Peter, Jude in The New American Commentary (Broadman & Holman, 2003, 512 pp.). My only regret is that of the 512 pages only 203 are devoted to actual commentary on 1 Peter. But Tom is so good that even when he speaks briefly he speaks with profound insight.

Close behind Schreiner is J. Ramsey Michaels in the Word Biblical Commentary series (Word Books, 1988, 337 pp.), although he is inclined to date the epistle toward the close of the first century. I had very high hopes for Karen H. Jobes in the Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Baker, 2005, 364 pp.) when it was first released. But when I discovered that she devoted less than a page of study to 1 Peter 1:8 (one of the most profoundly influential texts in my life), my anticipation turned to disappointment. I hope my feelings about her contribution will change in the weeks and months ahead.

Another very helpful, moderately technical, treatment is Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter NICNT (Eerdmans, 1990, 266 pp.). I have to point out, yet again, that only 161 pages are devoted to actual commentary (in case you hadn't noticed the trend, often times scholars spend more space on introductory matters, seemingly endless bibliographies, together with lengthy appendices of all sorts than they do interacting with the text itself).

Scot McKnight has written an excellent treatment of 1 Peter in the NIV Application series (Zondervan, 1996, 295 pp.). However, he largely embraces John Elliott's thesis that "aliens and strangers" or "sojourners and exiles" is not so much a metaphorical reference to the audience's earthly existence as they await the true home of heaven as it is a literal description of their social status as marginalized, disenfranchised workers who lived without rights in a land where they lacked the benefits of citizenship. This thesis is developed at considerable length in the massive work by Elliott in the Anchor Bible series (Doubleday, 2000, 956 pp.). Nearly 275 pages of Elliott's volume are something other than commentary, but that still leaves him with over 675 pages of insightful treatment of the text.

The most recent work on Peter is Ben Witherington III, Letters and Homilies for Hellenized Christians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1-2 Peter (IVP, 2007, 432 pp.). I've only read the Introduction in which Witherington breaks rank from modern scholarly consensus and argues at length for the Jewish identity of Peter's audience. Most believe Peter was writing to converted Gentiles.

The best mid-level commentary is Wayne A. Grudem, The First Epistle of Peter: Introduction and Commentary in the Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series (IVP, 1988, 239 pp.). This series is short by design, so that aside from the 36 page appendix on Christ's proclamation to the "spirits in prison" (1 Peter 3:18-22) there are only 155 of commentary. Still, Grudem is extremely helpful in terms of theological synthesis. I don't own it, but I've read good things about I. Howard Marshall's short commentary in the IVP New Testament Commentary series (IVP, 1990). Carson describes it as "superb".

It ought to be fairly clear where I think most pastors should begin. If you have Schreiner, Michaels, Davids, McKnight, and Grudem, you are well on your way to gaining a good grasp of this important NT epistle.

As for 2 Peter and Jude, Schreiner is the place to start, although it's hard to put him above Richard Bauckham who wrote for the Word Biblical Commentary series (Word Books, 1983, 357 pp.). You should be forewarned that Bauckham denies that Peter wrote the second epistle that bears his name. His commentary on Jude in this volume is the best! Doug Moo in the NIV Application commentary series (Zondervan, 1996, 316 pp.) will be the work of choice for those who struggle with Greek.

Subsequent to the release of Carson's commentary survey, two technical and very good commentaries on 2 Peter - Jude have become available, both of which incline toward affirming Petrine authorship of the epistle. Peter H. Davids has written for the Pillar series (Eerdmans, 2006, 348 pp.) and Gene Green, of Wheaton College, has written for the Baker Exegetical series (Baker, 2008, 420 pp.). And if you are preaching through Jude, don't forget to get hold of Thomas Manton, in any one of several reprinted editions.

Sam

New Testament Commentary Recommendations (12)

The Johannine Epistles

There is no shortage of excellent commentaries on the Johannine epistles, both more technical studies on the Greek text and those designed for readers of English only. So let's begin. I'll start with the more substantive works, move to mid-level treatments, and then mention a few that are more collections of sermons on John's letters than commentaries.

The best commentary on these three letters has yet to appear. D. A. Carson is writing on the Johannine epistles for the New International Greek Testament Commentary (Eerdmans). I haven't heard when it will be released, but it will undoubtedly prove to be the best available treatment. Keep an eye open for it and get it!

In the meantime, there are several other extremely helpful treatments of the Greek text that are within the range of the average pastor who reads only English. Just a few months ago Robert W. Yarbrough's, 1-3 John, in the Baker Exegetical Commentary series was released (Baker, 2008, 434 pp.). I've not had the opportunity to look at it in detail, but this will probably prove to be the best treatment of the original text until Carson is published.

Two more, very good and substantial volumes are those by Colin G. Kruse, The Letters of John, in the Pillar series (Eerdmans, 2000, 255 pp.), and Stephen S. Smalley in the Word Biblical Commentary (Word Books, 1984, 386 pp.). On occasion I found Kruse to be too brief. Smalley, in my opinion, is the better of the two. Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles of John, The Anchor Bible (Doubleday, 1982, 812 pp.) is a massive work that often has profound insights. He doesn't believe the author of the Johannine epistles is the author of the fourth gospel, but there's simply too much good material in this volume to neglect it. Donald W. Burdick, The Letters of John the Apostle: An In-Depth Commentary (Moody Press, 1985, 488 pp.), interacts extensively with the Greek text, but if you've got Yarbrough, Smalley, and eventually Carson you may want to bypass it.

There are three mid-level works that every pastor should have in his library. John R. W. Stott, The Epistles of John in The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Eerdmans, 1976 [1964], 230 pp.) is my favorite. Be sure you get the Revised edition that was released in 1988 and reprinted in 1996 (234 pp.). Of all the commentaries on the NT that Stott has written, this is his best. Don't even think about teaching through 1 John without reading it carefully.

I. Howard Marshall, The Epistles of John in the New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans, 1978, 274 pp.) is also very good. As you probably know, Marshall believes a born-again believer can apostatize from the faith and suffer the loss of salvation, and occasionally this negatively affects his exegesis. But it is still worthy of your time. The best treatment of the English text is by Gary M. Burge in the NIV Application series (Zondervan, 1996, 264 pp.). When I taught 1 John I used Burge as the required text. It is theologically insightful and great on contemporary application.

Although they are rather dated, two other treatments are worth consulting. F. F. Bruce, The Epistles of John (Eerdmans, 1970), was one of the first commentaries on John's letters that I read and I always found him helpful. Robert Law, The Tests of Life: A Study of the First Epistle of St. John (T & T Clark, 1914; reprinted by Baker Book House in 1968), reflects the understanding that John is setting forth three "tests" by which one may know if he/she is saved and was highly influential in Stott's approach to the epistles.

There are two collections of sermons on the epistles that will prove helpful to the pastor: James Montgomery Boice, The Epistles of John (Zondervan, 1979), and Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Life in God: Studies in 1 John (Crossway, 1995; five volumes).

If I were planning on preaching through John's letters for the first time, I'd obtain, in order of preference, Carson (when it becomes available), Stott, Yarbrough, Marshall, Smalley, Burge, and perhaps Kruse.

We're almost done. Only Revelation remains.

New Testament Commentary Recommendations (6)

1 and 2 Corinthians

Regrettably, I've never preached all the way through 1 Corinthians. I've preached and taught several courses on chapters 12-14, but never the whole book. Still, I've spent some time examining the available literature and can make some recommendations.

The best overall commentary on 1 Corinthians is still Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT (Eerdmans, 1987, 880 pp.). Fee's work replaces the volume in this series by F. W. Frosheide (1953, 415 pp.), and not a day too soon! Don't bother purchasing Grosheide. Fee is excellent, although he writes with an agenda to promote his egalitarian views on women in ministry (his treatment of 1 Corinthians 14:33-35 is especially abysmal). Aside from this, his commentary is the first you should purchase.

Running a close second is the very technical work by Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text in the New International Greek Testament Commentary (Eerdmans, 2000, 1446 pp.). Yes, it is very technical and will be a bit too much for those who cannot read Greek. But he is extremely thorough and insightful throughout.

I've only skimmed David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Baker, 2003, 870 pp.), but his work is always worth the price. Ben Witherington, III. Conflict and Community in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians (Eerdmans, 1995, 492 pp.) is good, especially on 2 Corinthians.

There are three mid-level commentaries that are accessible to all students, the best of which is by Craig Blomberg in the NIV Application series (Zondervan, 1994, 352 pp.). Craig S. Keener has written 1-2 Corinthians in The New Cambridge Bible Commentary (Cambridge, 2005, 299 pp.), but it is terribly short. This is regrettable, as Keener is always helpful and typically provides a wealth of information for the expositor. In this volume only 122 pages are devoted to commentary on 1 Corinthians and a mere 104 on 2 Corinthians. I'm sure Craig would have preferred it to be otherwise, but the limitations placed on him by the editors of the series left him no choice.

One final work worth a look is by Richard B. Hays, First Corinthians in the Interpretation series (John Knox Press, 1997, 299 pp.). Hays is an incredibly brilliant NT scholar whose works I've enjoyed in other areas of study. I've looked briefly at his commentary and found it helpful. But if you are looking for only one on the English text, get Blomberg.

So, in sum, get Fee, Thiselton, Garland, and Blomberg.

Having just finished writing a book of 100 meditations on 2 Corinthians, I'm obviously much more familiar with resources on this letter.

Standing all alone, in my opinion, in terms of exegetical insights and the exhaustive way in which he handles the text, is Murray J. Harris, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Eerdmans, 2005, 989 pp.). Don't be put off by the fact that he interacts extensively with the Greek text. Everyone can profit from this magisterial work. Get it!

Running neck and neck for second place in my library (and heart) are the two volumes in the New International Commentary on the New Testament series. The original contribution was written by Philip E. Hughes, Paul's Second Epistle to the Corinthians (Eerdmans, 1973 [1962], 508 pp.). Some don't appreciate Hughes as much as I do, but when I first preached through 2 Corinthians this was my primary source. The replacement volume, by Paul Barnett, is just as good and in many ways better and more comprehensive: The Second Epistle to the Corinthians (Eerdmans, 1997, 662 pp.). Both of these are deserving of your attention and purchase.

Also very helpful, and somewhat technical, is the Word Biblical Commentary written by Ralph Martin (Word Publishers, 1986, 527 pp.). I frequently found his insights helpful. Although considerably less technical, David Garland has done a great job for the English reader in his contribution to the New American Commentary (Broadman & Holman, 1999, 587 pp.).

Margaret E. Thrall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, two volumes in the ICC series (T & T Clark, 1994/2000, 977 pp.), is a massive work, but far more critical and less conservative than the others available. If you get Harris, Barnett, and Martin, Thrall can be skipped (and you'll save a lot of money too!).

As for commentaries that were written for those without a knowledge of Greek, there are several good ones. The best by far is Scott J. Hafemann in the NIV Application series (Zondervan, 2000, 536 pp.). Scott has probably written the best commentary in this entire series (slightly edging out Moo on Romans and Burge on the Johannine Epistles). His treatment throughout of Paul's perspective on suffering is simply brilliant (and convicting!). Unlike others in this series, his contemporary application is very helpful (those familiar with the structure of the NIV Application commentaries will know what I mean).

I can't recommend Linda Belleville 2 Corinthians, the IVP New Testament Commentary Series (IVP, 1996, 357 pp.), as enthusiastically as Carson does, but it is still worth reading if you have the time. Colin Kruse, The Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentary (Eerdmans, 1997), is a good replacement for the occasionally helpful original volume on 2 Corinthians by R. V. G. Tasker (1977).

Finally, no one should preach or teach through 2 Corinthians 10-13 without consulting D. A. Carson's, From Triumphalism to Maturity: An Exposition of 2 Corinthians 10-13 (Baker, 1984, 186 pp.). Yes, it is short, but it is rich and powerful. It has recently been reprinted (2007) under the title, A Model of Christian Maturity.

So again, get Harris, Barnett, Hughes, Hafemann, and Carson.

Blessings!

New Testament Commentary Recommendations (5)

Romans

My first attempt to preach through Romans came in 1974 when I assumed the position of interim pastor at a small Presbyterian church in Dallas. By the time I left that church in 1977 I had only made it through chapter six! I did preach through the entire book during my time at Believers Chapel in Dallas, and have subsequently taught Romans in a classroom setting on several occasions.

If one has any lingering doubts about the attention given to Romans, I encourage you to check out the bibliography in the commentary by Joseph Fitzmyer. He lists more than 500 entries which focus on Pauline themes found in Romans and more than 800 commentaries and monographs from the first century of the church to the present. This does not include what must amount to several thousand periodical (journal) articles on virtually every verse in Romans. And remember: Fitzmyer compiled this list in 1993! In the fifteen years since his commentary was published, one can only guess at the number of works that have appeared.

All this to say that I will try to limit my comments to works with which I'm personally familiar. In the end, I suspect that most pastors' libraries will be filled with more works on Romans than any other biblical book, and rightly so.

My approach will be to mention, first, the most helpful technical treatments of Romans, whether because of their interaction with the Greek text or because of their theological depth. I'll then move on to the best available works written for a popular and English-reading audience.

The first commentary everyone should purchase was written by my former colleague at Wheaton College, Douglas Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (Eerdmans, 1996, 1,012 pp.). This is simply the best exegetical, evangelical commentary available. Most of the more technical material involving comment on the Greek text is restricted to the footnotes. By all means, get it (no matter how much the cost).

Running a close second to Moo is the commentary by John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, in the New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968, 694 pp.). D. A. Carson says that "Murray will guide you stolidly with the heavy tread of the proverbial village policemen (although with more theology; and note especially the useful appendices and notes)." Granted, Murray is sometimes wordy and his style is annoying. But I cut my theological teeth on Murray and his commentary on Romans holds a special place in my heart and head. This is Reformed, theological exegesis at its best, superseding the works of Hodge and Hendriksen. My advice: get it now, before it goes out of print. Moo's commentary has taken the place of Murray in the New International Commentary series.

Thomas Schreiner, Romans, the Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Baker, 1998, 919 pp.), is similar in thrust, theologically speaking, to Moo's commentary, although with a slightly more Calvinistic emphasis (the volume is dedicated to John Piper). Schreiner interacts extensively with the Greek text but not in a way that makes it inaccessible to the English reader. Although not as extensive as Fitzmyer's, Schreiner provides the most up-to-date bibliography on Romans available. Highly recommended!

When I preached my way through Romans for the first time, after Murray I turned most frequently to C. E. B. Cranfield's, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Epistle to the Romans, 2 vols, ICC series (T. & T. Clark, 1975, 900 pp.). There is nothing quite like Cranfield when it comes to interacting with the Greek text and expounding the interpretive options of a particular verse. No serious student of Romans should be without it. It is expensive (as are all the volumes in the ICC series) but worth the price. Although it is written for the student who knows Greek, anyone can profit from its insights. A revised, one-volume paperback edition (Romans: A Shorter Commentary [Eerdmans, 1985, 388 pp.]) has been issued for those who do not wish to work through the original two-volume work.

I only mention James D. G. Dunn because of his high profile as an advocate of the New Perspective on Paul. His commentary on Romans, 2 volumes in the Word Biblical Commentary series (Word Books, 1988, 976 pp.) is certainly helpful in places. Dunn is up-to-date with all recent literature on Romans and is exhaustive in treating the Greek text. His perspective is not quite as conservative as I would prefer but he is always challenging. As noted, his view of Romans is shaped by the influence of E. P. Sanders' position on the question of Paul and the law.

There are two more semi-technical works that are worthy of mention, the first of which by Joseph A. Fitzmyer, the Jesuit scholar who also wrote the commentary on Luke for the Anchor Bible series (Doubleday, 1993, 793 pp.). I've only read selected portions of Fitzmyer but found him to be extremely good. I agree with Carson that on occasion he sounds more Reformed than Catholic on the doctrine of justification. Leon Morris has written the commentary on Romans in the Pillar series (Eerdmans, 1988, 578 pp.). Again, I've read about as much in Morris as I have in Fitzmyer. He's always solidly conservative, even if not exciting or innovative in his interpretations (not to suggest that the latter is necessarily a virtue!).

The best treatment of the most difficult chapter in Romans is found in John Piper's The Justification of God: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Romans 9:1-23 (Baker, 1983, 316 pp.). This is an extremely detailed exegetical treatment of this controversial chapter. Those without a working knowledge of Greek will find it hard-going at times, but perseverance pays a rich dividend.

So, when it comes to these more technical works, I would purchase, in order of preference, Moo, Murray, Schreiner, and Cranfield (and, of course, Piper on Romans 9). Now on to several works that are more popular in nature.

Moo has also written on Romans for the NIV Application series (Zondervan, 2000, 532 pp.). If one can endure the structure of this series, this is probably the best treatment of the English text on Romans.

Although less Calvinistic than Moo, I highly recommend John Stott, Romans: God's Good News for the World (IVP, 1994, 432 pp.). Stott is simply brilliant when it comes to relating the text to life. He has also written a popular treatment of Romans 5-8, Men Made New (IVP, 1966, 108 pp.). This isn't deep, but Stott always seems to find a way of expressing basic ideas in a fresh and inspiring way.

Robert Mounce, well-known for his commentary on Revelation in the NICNT series, has written on Romans for The New American Commentary series (Broadman Press, 1995, 301 pp.). This volume on Romans is less technical but successfully traces the flow of Paul's argument. It is good, but at times fails to address in depth some of the more important theological issues.

William Hendriksen, a Dutch Reformed scholar, has written a solid commentary for the English reader, Exposition of Paul's Epistle to the Romans (Baker, 1982, 533 pp.). Although the newer commentaries are more detailed and technical, I often find myself going back to see what Hendricksen said. He is conservative, reliable, and exalts the sovereignty of God's grace in salvation.

Few people these days read or refer to Charles Hodge, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Eerdmans, 1974 [1886], 458 pp.), but I really like him. Hodge is representative of the old Princeton school of Reformed theologians. Although more a theologian than an exegete, Hodge will still interact with the text. Although it is over 100 years old, Hodge's work is worth consulting when studying some of the sticky theological issues in Romans.

Of these more popular works, Moo and Stott are definitely worth getting. The others are nice to have, if you can afford them.

There are also two multi-volume sets on Romans that don't technically qualify as commentaries but more as sermon series. They are both extremely helpful to the preacher or anyone who is teaching through Romans in a Bible study or home group setting.

The first is by D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones. His Romans series comes in ten volumes (yes ten!) (Zondervan). Lloyd-Jones, who died in 1981, stands in the theological tradition of Hodge and Hendriksen but, unlike them, was not a cessationist. It's not unusual for him to devote two or three chapters to only two or three verses! Few people will read all ten volumes, but for passion and pastoral insight "the Doctor" is unparalleled.

I also highly recommend the four volume sermon series by James Montgomery Boice, Romans (Baker, 1993-94; Volume 1 - chps. 1-4; Volume 2 - chps. 5-8; Volume 3 - chps. 9-11; Volume 4 - chps. 12-16). Boice, long-time Senior Pastor of Tenth Presbyterian Church in downtown Philadelphia (now deceased), writes from a Reformed (Calvinistic) perspective. Boice does not always develop the flow of argument in Romans but no theological issue is left unaddressed. His illustrations are helpful for preaching. As with Lloyd-Jones, knowledge of NT Greek is not a prerequisite for profiting from Boice's work.

I'm not recommending that the typical pastor purchase these next three volumes, but I should mention them in case you have a special interest in the areas on which they touch.

Karl Barth's, The Epistle to the Romans, transl. by Edwyn C. Hoskyns (Oxford University Press, 1972 [1919; completely re-written for a 2nd edition in 1922], should be noted more for its historical influence than its exegetical or theological insights. Barth (1886-1968) was motivated by several factors, chief of which was the obvious failure of theological liberalism in the face of the outbreak of World War I. He was especially upset when 93 German intellectuals, many of whom were his teachers or colleagues, signed a document endorsing the war policy of Kaiser Wilhelm II. He suddenly realized that "their exegetical and dogmatic presuppositions could not be in order. . . . A whole world of exegesis, ethics, dogmatics and preaching, which I had hitherto held to be essentially trustworthy, was shaken to the foundations, and with it, all the other writings of the German theologians" (Karl Barth, biography by Eberhard Busch, 81). Barth and his commentary brought to the European scene a renewed emphasis on the transcendence of God, the "absolute qualitative difference between God and man," the vertical dimension of revelation (a theology "from above," i.e., from God to us in the Bible, rather than "from below"), and an emphasis on sin and atonement.

Gerald Bray is the editor of Romans in the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (IVP, 1998). This volume collects the best and most representative of patristic commentary and homily on Romans. Among those whose comments are cited include Augustine, Ambrosiaster, Origen, Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and others. The great value of this work is that it provides a glimpse into how the early church understood and applied the book of Romans.

Finally, if you are looking for a competent treatment of Romans from a decidedly Arminian perspective, you can do no better than Jack Cottrell, Romans, The College Press NIV Commentary, 2 volumes (College Press Publishing Company, 1996/1998, 1024 pp.). Cottrell, professor of theology at Cincinnati Theological Seminary, is unafraid to take on Calvinist interpreters point for point. Although he is more a theologian than an exegete, his work is worthy of close study.

On to Corinth!

New Testament Commentary Recommendations (4)

Acts

I preached through the book of Acts in the early 90's while at Christ Community Church in Ardmore, Oklahoma, and hope to do so again. At the time, I struggled to find good commentaries. Since then, however, several excellent resources have become available. I'll begin with works that I used in sermon preparation and then move on to those that have been published within the last decade or so.

If you are looking for a commentary on the English text, you can do no better than John Stott, The Spirit, the Church, and the World: The Message of Acts (IVP, 1990, 405pp.). Stott is superb when it comes to tracing the argument of the book and making relevant application to church life today. I didn't always agree with Stott on passages dealing with spiritual gifts, but he is excellent and should be in every pastor's library.

Also quite helpful for those who don't read Greek is the commentary by I. Howard Marshall in The Tyndale New Testament Commentary series (IVP/Eerdmans, 1980, 427pp.). Most of the volumes in this series are painfully brief, but Marshall's is an exception. Get it.

Another extremely helpful treatment of the English text is by F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts, revised edition, in The New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Eerdmans, 1988, 541pp.). Don't confuse this one with Bruce's commentary on the Greek text. There are better alternatives to the latter, as noted below.

One more good resource is the commentary by Richard N. Longenecker, The Acts of the Apostles, in The Expositor's Bible Commentary (Zondervan, 1981, 366pp.). Another popular treatment on the English text is the volume by Ajith Fernando in the NIV Application commentary series (Zondervan, 1998, 656 pp.). It's probably worth a look, but I haven't had the opportunity to read any of it as yet.

More recently several excellent treatments of the Greek text have become available.

Perhaps the most technical and exhaustive is the two volume work by C. K. Barrett, The Acts of the Apostles, in The International Critical Commentary series (T & T Clark, 1994/1998, 1272 pp.). In all honesty, it is almost too technical for the average pastor. I appreciated the depth of analysis he provides, but I was often frustrated by the lack of an equal commitment to addressing the theological and practical issues that arise in the book.

I would recommend that instead of Barrett (by the way, the two volumes are very expensive) one purchase the new commentary by Darrell Bock, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Baker, 2007, 848 pp.). Bock will provide all the exegetical information you need together with insightful treatment of the theology of Acts. If you are going to invest in his two-volume treatment of Luke (and you should), this is an excellent companion volume.

A couple of years ago I came across an interesting new series that is devoted solely to grammatical analysis of New Testament books. The first one I saw was Martin M. Culy and Mikeal C. Parsons, Acts: A Handbook on the Greek Text (Baylor University Press, 2003, 558pp.). There is virtually nothing said about structure, argument, or theology, as the authors simply provide parsing and grammatical observations on the Greek text. I found it quite helpful.

Although I haven't used it much, the contribution of Joseph A. Fitzmyer (a Jesuit priest) to the Anchor Bible series, The Acts of the Apostles (Doubleday, 1998, 830 pp.) is certainly worth a look.

There is one commentary that I highly recommend but find hard to classify: Ben Witherington, III. The Acts of the Apostles: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Eerdmans, 1998, 874 pp.). This is a massive work that provides a wealth of material for the student and preacher of Acts. You don't have to know Greek to profit from it, but that doesn't mean Witherington ignores essential exegetical details.

Finally, although not a commentary, I highly recommend the collection of essays on Acts found in Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts, edited by I. Howard Marshall and David Peterson (Eerdmans, 1998, 610 pp.). Some twenty-four contributors have provided a wide range of essays on virtually every important topic in Acts. They aren't all of equal value, but this is a great resource to have ready at hand.

In conclusion, if you are getting ready to preach or teach (or simply study) through Acts, I would recommend, in order of preference, Stott, Bock, Witherington, Marshall, and Bruce.

Romans is next!

New Testament Commentary Recommendations (3)

John

Next to Romans, I suspect that more commentaries have been written on the gospel of John than on any other NT book. Once again, of course, my list of recommended resources will be quite selective and in no way representative of the plethora of volumes written on this portion of God's Word.

I was preaching through John when I resigned from my pastorate in Ardmore, Oklahoma, in 1993. I had just begun chapter thirteen and, sadly, had to terminate the series. But in working through the first twelve chapters and doing some additional study in the Upper Room Discourse, I've become acquainted with a good bit of the literature available.

As with his volume on Matthew's gospel, the commentary by D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John, in the Pillar series is probably the best (Eerdmans, 1991, 715pp.). Although Carson is written primarily for those with a working knowledge of Greek, everyone can profit greatly from it. This is where pastors and Bible study teachers should begin. Make it first among commentaries on John that you purchase.

Running a close second to Carson is the commentary by Leon Morris in the New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Eerdmans, 1971, 936pp.). Morris has written numerous commentaries on a variety of books, but this, in my opinion, is his magnum opus. He keeps most technical discussions in the footnotes (but read them; they are a wealth of information), which makes his commentary entirely accessible to readers of all sorts. There is yet another resource on John's gospel from Morris that I highly recommend. In 1988, Baker Book House combined four separate volumes written by Morris into a one-volume Expository Reflections on the Gospel of John (1988, 750 pp.). This is considerably less technical and is a tremendous help for pastors in sermon preparation. It is very practical, applicable, and theologically rich.

As I've said before, I'm not a huge fan of the NIV Application Commentary, but certainly one of the better contributions to this series is by Gary M. Burge on John's gospel (Zondervan, 2000, 618pp.). Burge does a great job of combining scholarly insights on John's gospel with contemporary application, which, I suppose, is the point of this series! I don't always agree with Gary's theological conclusions, but he is always challenging.

By far and away the most extensive treatment of John when it comes to background, cultural setting, and socio-historical context is the two-volume work by Craig S. Keener, The Gospel of John (Hendrickson 2003). It is simply stunning to witness the wealth of information provided by Keener. However, I should point out that of the 1636 total pages in the two volumes, 330 pages are devoted to the Introduction and 393 pages to Bibliography and a variety of Indices! Still, the 913 pages of commentary are a great resource to have close at hand.

Several other more technical works should be cited, such as the two-volume work by Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John, in The Anchor Bible series (Doubleday, 1966/1970, 1208 pp.). I always found Brown helpful, although with Carson and Keener providing so much exegetical data, it has dropped down the list a bit. Andreas Kostenberger has written two books on John that appear to be quite good, although I've only had a chance to peruse them. His commentary on John in the Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Baker, 2004, 700pp.) and the earlier volume, Encountering John: The Gospel in Historical, Literary, and Theological Perspective, (Baker 1999, 277 pp.) are both worth the investment.

C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John (SPCK 1975, 531pp.) can always be counted on for helpful insights and F. F. Bruce, The Gospel of John (Pickering & Inglis, 1983, 425 pp.) is one of the better, shorter commentaries on the English text.

In addition to the volume noted above, Carson has also written a popular and more pastoral exposition of the Upper Room discourse, The Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus: an Exposition of John 14-17 (Baker, 1980, 207pp.). This is an excellent book that not only provides a careful treatment of the text but also devotional, ethical, and practical insights that are eminently preachable.

In my comments on Mark and Luke I mentioned a few works that are less than helpful. When it comes to John's gospel, there is only one. George R. Beasley-Murray wrote the volume on John for the Word Biblical Commentary series (Word Books, 1987, 441pp.). I distinctly recall my excitement at the release of this book and began working through it when I started my sermon series on John. My disappointment was as deep as my initial excitement. I don't know how to put it, but every time I wanted Beasley-Murray to go deeper theologically, I was left empty and frustrated. I've long appreciated his work in other areas, but this commentary simply didn't live up to what we've come to expect from him.

Now, having said that, I should also point out that in 1999 a Second Edition of this commentary, at an expanded 592 pages, was released. I haven't read it, but I can only hope that the editors recognized the shortcomings of the first edition and greatly improved it. However, Carson's quick comparison of the two "disclosed no change in substance in the actual commentary" (71). In any case, if you are wanting to purchase the entire Word series, be sure you get the second and expanded edition.

In sum, if you get Carson, Morris, Burge, and Keener, you should be well set.

Acts is next . . .

New Testament Commentary Recommendations (2)

Mark

The number of helpful commentaries on Mark (as well as Luke) is significantly less than what we find with regard to Matthew. Still, there are a few that are worthy of note and should be made a priority in the building of one's library.

Once again, I highly recommend the work of R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark, in The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Eerdmans, 2002, 719 pp.). This is simply the best available commentary and should be the first one obtained by anyone intending to teach or preach through this gospel. A working knowledge of Greek is needed to make best use of this volume. As I noted with France's work on Matthew, his treatment of the Olivet Discourse (Mark 13) will not be embraced by all, but I find it convincing.

Although it is now somewhat dated, I highly recommend William L. Lane, The Gospel According to Mark, in The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans, 1974, 652 pp.). When I first studied Mark's gospel, I relied heavily on Lane and found him to be extremely insightful. Virtually all comments on the Greek text are restricted to the footnotes.

James R. Edwards has written the commentary on Mark in The Pillar New Testament Commentary series (Eerdmans, 2002, 552 pp.). I've only read small portions of Edwards but he seems to be quite good. The same may be said of David Garland's contribution to the NIV Application Commentary (Zondervan, 1996, 653 pp.). Although I'm not a huge fan of the format of this series, Garland is always good and worthy of study.

Two weeks ago (November, 2008) I purchased Robert H. Stein, Mark, in the Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Baker, 2008, 823 pp.). I anticipate that this will soon become one of the standard works on Mark.

If one were restricted to purchasing only a few commentaries on Mark, I would obtain, in order of preference, first France and then Lane. If a third is needed, either Stein or Edwards would be good.

Luke

There was a time when finding a good commentary on Luke was a difficult task. No longer!

The best and most evangelical of commentaries is the two volume work by Darrell L. Bock in the Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Baker, 1994/1996, 2148 pp.). Yes, you read that correctly: 2148 pages! If one would also like a more popular treatment of Luke, designed for those who do not know Greek, Bock has written the volume on Luke in the NIV Application series (Zondervan, 1996, 640 pp.). This is one of the better treatments in this series.

The Anchor Bible commentary series is a mixed bag, but I have found the two volume work by Joseph A. Fitzmyer on Luke to be quite good (Doubleday, 1981/1985, 1642 pp.). Fitzmyer is Roman Catholic, but don't let that prevent you from gleaning incredibly helpful insights from his work.

John Nolland has written on Luke for the Word Biblical Commentary series in three volumes. Unfortunately, I haven't had the opportunity to read much of it. If one is looking for a solid work that doesn't require a knowledge of Greek, once again Robert Stein has come through in his treatment of Luke in The New American Commentary (Broadman Press, 1992, 642 pp.).

If my recommendations are going to be helpful, I suppose that on occasion I need to mention works that are not worthy of your investment. In the New International Commentary on the New Testament published by Eerdmans, there are numerous excellent volumes (such as the one by Lane, noted above). But the treatment of Luke by Norval Geldenhuys, I'm sad to say, isn't one of them (Eerdmans, 1951, 685 pp.). I rarely found much of help in this book, and now with Bock and others having written on Luke, it simply doesn't measure up to what a pastor needs in his preparation.

Eerdmans commissioned a replacement volume for Geldenhuys, written by Joel B. Green (1997, 928 pp.). I would like to be able to recommend this commentary, but I can't. Aside from the fact that Green rejects penal substitutionary atonement (and has likened it to "cosmic child abuse" in his horrid book, Recovering the Scandal of the Cross [IVP]), there is little theological help to be found here.

I was also disappointed with I. Howard Marshall's contribution on Luke to The New International Greek Testament Commentary series (Eerdmans, 1978, 928 pp.). If I'm not mistaken, this was the first in this otherwise excellent series. My objection to Marshall is not that it has bad theology but that it has so little theological reflection at all. The book is more concerned with text critical matters and issues related to structure and form than it is with providing insight into the meaning and application of Luke's narrative. Marshall's commentaries on Acts, the Pastoral Epistles, and especially the Johannine Epistles are quite good, but this one just doesn't provide what I'm looking for in a commentary.

And now on to the Gospel of John . . .

New Testament Commentary Recommendations

Over the years, and especially in recent days, I've been asked by people to make available my recommendations on New Testament commentaries. I yield at last, but with significant reservations. I can't imagine that my observations will add anything important to what has already been said in near exhaustive detail by D. A. Carson in his New Testament Commentary Survey (now in its 5th edition, Baker, 2001). In fact, I've always used Carson's survey as the excuse for not writing on this myself. But perhaps the perspective of a local church pastor will provide a bit of guidance for those who are just beginning to build their theological libraries and want recommendations for what is most helpful in sermon preparation. So here goes.

Matthew

It has been over fifteen years since I last preached through Matthew, so I'm not as personally acquainted with some of the more recent commentaries as I am with those I read back in the late eighties.

Two commentaries are, in my opinion, head and shoulders above the rest. The first is the one by D. A. Carson in The Expositor's Bible Commentary (Zondervan, 1984, 599 pp.). I think Carson's treatment of Matthew has been reprinted separately from the original volume that also included short commentaries on Mark and Luke. Even if not, don't even think about preaching through Matthew without Carson's work. I'm not persuaded by his interpretation of the Olivet Discourse, but aside from this it is indispensable.

Running a close second to Carson is the recent commentary by R. T. France in The New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Eerdmans, 2007, 1169 pp.). I've only briefly skimmed through France but it gives every appearance of being superb. Although Carson wrote that "not many will follow him in his interpretation of the eschatological discourse" (43), I'm thoroughly persuaded by it! For those not familiar with this issue, France contends (convincingly, in my opinion) that Jesus was talking about the Destruction of Jerusalem all the way through 24:35.

Although I've read only selected portions of Craig Keener's A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Eerdmans, 1999, 1040 pp.), it looks to be vintage Keener with massive information on Jewish backgrounds and the cultural setting of the gospel. Most pastors will only have time to read two or three technical commentaries on the book they are preaching, and when it comes to Matthew's gospel Carson, France, and Keener should provide most of the help they need.

I should also mention three extremely helpful treatments of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) that are written at a popular level but are theologically rich. They are Studies in the Sermon on the Mount by Martyn Lloyd-Jones (Eerdmans, 1974, 337 pp.), Christian Counter-Culture: The Message of the Sermon on the Mount by John Stott (IVP, 1978, 222 pp.), and The Sermon on the Mount: An Evangelical Exposition of Matthew 5-7 by D. A. Carson (Baker, 1978, 157 pp.).

In more recent days several quite technical commentaries on Matthew have come out, none of which I've read: John Nolland (The New International Greek Testament Commentary), David Turner (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament), Donald Hagner (Word Biblical Commentary), and the three-volume treatment in the ICC series by W. D. Davies and Dale Allison.

On to Mark and Luke . . .