Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?” Philip asked. “How can I,” he said, “unless someone explains it to me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.
Acts 8:30 – 31
Meagreness, leanness, and shallowness are too often the main features of modern sermons. . . . The churches must be reminded that there can be no really powerful preaching without deep thinking, and little deep thinking without hard reading.
J.C. Ryle, 18621
OVER YEARS OF MINISTRY twin convictions have grown in me. One is that the greatest longing the church has is for God himself — to know him, his glorious presence, his power, his loving voice. The other conviction is that the church longs for her ministers to be full of God and his Word.2 Building from this, I cannot see any pastoral ministry being effective long-term if not characterized by God’s love for his people, prayerfulness, brimming confidence in the power of God’s Word, and what Ryle termed “hard reading” in the study of Scripture.3 Thank God for quality Bible commentaries which help preachers and teachers in their study! The challenge comes in recognizing quality.
Seminary students often face confusing choices in researching exegetical papers or composing sermons. They stand in the library stacks and ask themselves, “Which of these commentaries or reference works should I consult? Obviously, I can’t skim even a tenth of these books on Romans; which ones are important and which ones may I safely pass by? Where should I spend my time?”
Prospective pastors or educators face a greater difficulty while searching for calls and preparing to leave for the fields of ministry to which Christ has called them. Knowing that commentaries are an important resource,4 new graduates wonder which vols. deserve a place on the shelf. After all, they may possibly be far from a good theological library and will need an adequate personal collection to spur on their own growth in understanding the Bible. They ask, “Where should I spend my money?”
Pastors with some experience in the ministry usually keep on the lookout for new reference works, scanning booksellers’ websites and catalogs a few times a year. They too wonder which commentaries would be a smart buy. This guide has been written to aid both in research and in making purchases for a personal library. It is not written for specialists — they have little need for such a guide as this — but for students and pastors, especially the evangelical and Reformed. For both students and pastors, the need for guides like this grows more acute with each passing year as the publications multiply.
To put it succinctly, we are being swamped with fine commentaries these days. The publishers have discovered that they sell well, and they are contracting for new vols. and new series all the time. None of us can keep up with the pace. But count your blessings — some top-pick commentaries just five years ago are now superseded by a couple of better ones.
It is necessary to warn the reader at the outset that commentaries should not be used as a crutch. Reading a commentary or two, or even ten, is no substitute for your own thorough initial study of the biblical text. The commentaries cannot do your work for you. They are meant to take you deeper than you have already gone and to help you check the conclusions of your own exegesis.5 Also, commentary resources are not an excuse for neglecting the Hebrew and Greek languages, which are the best, most direct avenue to understanding and expounding the Bible in a responsible way. Charles Spurgeon said that pastors “should be able to read the Bible in the original,” and he went on to explain his thinking:
Every minister should aim at a tolerable proficiency both in the Hebrew and the Greek. These two languages will give him a library at small expense, an inexhaustible thesaurus, a mine of spiritual wealth. Really the effort of acquiring a language is not so prodigious that brethren of moderate abilities should so frequently shrink from the attempt.6
With your seminary training, a willingness to dig, and prayer for the Spirit’s illuming grace, you can competently exegete and expound the text. (Frankly, you’re likely to do better than some of the commentators listed here.) Please don’t cheat yourself out of that exciting learning experience. The use of commentaries apart from a careful study of the text (in the original, if possible) is a misuse of them. They are not written to relieve you of the responsibility to interpret the Scriptures, on the way to fulfilling your calling to declare the word of the Lord (Deut 5:5).
As a second warning, there is an inevitable subjectivity in compiling a selective bibliography. One Bible student is stimulated most by rigorous critical scholarship, while another perhaps views the Reformers, Puritan writings, and other classics as most valuable. It is hoped that this guide may be of some aid to both students. This list betrays my appreciation for both the older works that have stood the test of time and the more recent studies which seriously wrestle with issues of literary criticism, history, and biblical-theological interpretation. Let me elaborate.
I make no apology for emphasizing up-to-date and highly respected scholarly works in this survey. I believe that they usually best meet the needs of the pastor and student. (But see, too, my notes on old commentaries below.) Many older works — frequently the Puritans — can be faulted for not paying close enough attention to the message of the text in front of them. It is disappointing to peruse an old vol. and discover that the commentator has been distracted from the text itself by some locus of systematic theology hinted at, perhaps obliquely, in the passage.7 Calvin’s magnificent commentaries are unlike some Puritan works in this regard. The Reformer consciously rejected the Aristotelian method of establishing the meaning of a document by searching out its loci (i.e. its definitive concepts), and kept strictly to the task of elucidating the line of thought in the text, saving the discussion of loci for his Institutes of the Christian Religion.
However, many modern commentaries have, from the pastor’s point of view, worse problems. Quite a few technical works reveal little or no interest in the message and theology of the text, and the reader may feel left in Ricoeur’s “desert of criticism.”8 Many commentaries have been written with “the assumption that the genetic origins of a text, often terribly hypothetical, are all one has to discover.”9 It is disappointing to spend time and money on a commentary in which the intricacies of such historical-critical debate take precedence over interpreting the text as we have it.10 Also, some vols. hardly do more than catalog the history of scholarly opinion on each crux of historical criticism. Sometimes the scholar leaves you hanging and fails even to draw a conclusion. At the other end of the spectrum, the student or pastor finds many breezy homiletical commentaries that pay no serious attention to the text at all; the author’s notions and observations about life in general supplant Scripture’s message. How can you avoid such books?
Hopefully this survey will be some help to you, but don’t depend entirely on one list. This guide is subjective and reflects my own proclivities (quirks?), which may be different from yours. You may be helped by a book I find dull and pedestrian, or, conversely, you may dislike a commentary I have suggested for purchase. I urge students to use the seminary library as much as possible. Too many students fail to make good use of the library, and upon leaving school they have little idea what commentaries are out there or what kinds of books they like.
An invaluable resource for the commentary buyer is book reviews. Several evangelical journals have been especially helpful to me on account of their frequent commentary reviews: Bulletin of Biblical Research, Calvin Theological Journal, Evangelical Quarterly, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Themelios (briefly dormant, now online free),11 and Westminster Theological Journal.12 I have cited over 8000 reviews, both evangelical and critical, throughout this guide so that you will be able to consult them quickly without poring over the indices. These citations are intended as a check to counter subjectivity in this guide and will be found in a smaller font and in [brackets]. I also hope to save you some eye-strain, which (I laugh) may be a contribution to scholarship. Full reviews can discuss exegetical fine points and complicated interpretive issues — e.g., how to assess Elihu’s discourse in Job — which my brief summaries cannot. Besides the book reviews, students are helped enormously by two publications of the Catholic Biblical Association which summarize the latest of both periodical articles and books: Old Testament Abstracts and New Testament Abstracts.
The pastor or student who desires to build a fine personal library will learn much from consulting other bibliographies. Spurgeon’s famous book dates from 1876 and remains quite valuable for its judicious reviews of old commentaries on both Testaments. Barber’s 3-vol. survey had a wealth of bibliographical data, but often poor judgment in its recommendations. (Anything dispensational is typically given high marks, regardless of quality.) Now it is quite dated. Barber’s pb vol. of 2000 is more of a supplement and does not include the huge catalog of commentaries found in the earlier set. Rosscup is now the better dispensationally-oriented survey. He is similar to Barber in placing a higher value on older works and in consistently recommending a narrower range of commentaries, i.e., those sharing his theology. Kiehl once offered a lot of information, but few will now depend on such an old guide (current through 1986). It was evangelically oriented, and some would say gave too much weight to Lutheran works. For a more recent, conservative Lutheran guide to commentaries, see Brug below. Unfortunately, Stuart’s 1990 guide had limited usefulness from the beginning because he made few value judgments.
Two more recent bibliographies merit special attention. The first is Bauer’s large guide (2014), which covers a huge amount of ground and, therefore, is more selective. The reviews and recommendations are very intelligent, from a Wesleyan and mildly critical stance, but one wonders at points if it was selectivity or an oversight when he omitted entirely the Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the NT, and individual vols. in the NIV Application Commentary and the New American Commentary.13 Excluding his commentary recommendations, this is about the fullest and best bibliographic guide into the whole range of tools available for exegetical research.
Secondly, I am happy to recommend the late John Glynn’s work in its 10th ed. (2007) [BL 2009].14 Glynn’s perspective is unabashedly conservative, yet he covers every significant commentary series, evangelical or liberal. He is well-read and informed in his recommendations. Three drawbacks are its date, the brevity of his descriptions or reviews, and a strict focus upon recent works. His wide-ranging survey of reference works and theological resources — atlases, dictionaries, hermeneutics textbooks, lexicons and grammars for the languages, introductions, systematics, and church history works — fills a real need. The commentary section is Glynn’s best. Among more recent guides, only Bauer treats a similarly broad range of resources for exegesis. Note, too, that Bauer does not discuss the literature in the fields of systematic theology and church history, as does Glynn.
More than just in passing, I call attention to a fine set of quick internet guides to commentaries on both Testaments. See the Grove “Biblical Studies Bulletin” edited (mostly) by Michael Thompson, Principal of Ridley Hall in Cambridge, England. He engaged leading conservative Anglican scholars — with some exceptions — to make recommendations for pastors. Would you like to know which commentaries Wenham thinks are best on Genesis? He tells you in about two minutes. Hugh Williamson does the write-up for books on Chronicles and on Ezra – Nehemiah. In the area of NT, Peter Head among others has sage advice on the commentaries most serviceable for pastors. Occasionally I select quotes from contributors and mark them BSB with a date. Regrettably, it ceased publication in 2012.
Certainly one of the most useful internet guides to consulting and purchasing commentaries is www.bestcommentaries.com. John Dyer has developed the site over many years, and he includes nearly exhaustive lists of the Bible commentaries currently in-print, links to booksellers, and purchase recommendations (Building a Commentary Library) which reflect his evangelical convictions. More precisely, Dyer “combines reviews and ratings from journals, books, and users to create an aggregate ranking for . . . commentaries.”
Among OT annotated bibliographies, Childs’s 1977 book, Old Testament Books, is excellent but out of print (o/p). He is usually fair and well worth reading cover to cover, but do note that his choices are informed by critical presuppositions. He may discount a work of quality if it is at odds with dominant critical theory, but the discounting is not egregious or severe. Of course Childs misses the flood of works published over the last forty years. The aging Goldingay-Hubbard list is quite good as well (1975, 1981); I have not seen the later Goldingay revision. Tremper Longman’s Survey is clearly the best current bibliography here in the US, though all five editions occasionally overlook important works.15 The 2nd edition (1995) is not to be discarded, for it had features not included in the subsequent editions: (a) reviews of reference works like OT introductions, Hebrew grammars, etc.; (b) an appendix listing best buys; and (c) an appendix suggesting which works might be included in an ultimate reference library. Moving on to an internet resource, I can heartily recommend the Denver Seminary bibliography done by Carroll R., Dallaire, and Hess.
Among NT bibliographies, Don Carson’s must head the list. In the past we used to read Carson side by side Ralph Martin’s 1984 book.16 Both were full, wide-ranging, and well done indeed. (Martin’s guide was meant to serve as a companion to Brevard Childs’s.) Carson, in contrast to Martin, has been repeatedly updated. The most recent edition was released in 2013. Years ago many regarded Carson as offering a more consistently evangelical perspective, as well as more discerning recommendations, than Martin. It would be a mistake, however, to think that Carson’s conservative stance narrows the purview of his survey; he reviews the works of Bultmann alongside the Puritans. As he says, “this survey is a guide to commentaries, not orthodoxy.”17 This means he does not slight works coming out of the critical camp if they are worthy contributions (e.g., he rightly gives high marks to the Anchor Bible vols. on Luke by Fitzmyer). Carson is an excellent guide and worth buying along with Longman. The Denver Seminary NT list on the internet is updated every year and provides good guidance. These and other notable bibliographies are listed below. Bold print below indicates the more informative or instructive lists.
Allen, David L. Preaching Tools: An Annotated Survey of Commentaries and Preaching Resources for Every Book of the Bible. Fort Worth, TX: Seminary Hill Press, 2014.
Allison, Joe. Swords and Whetstones: A Guide to Christian Bible Study Resources. 3rd ed. Nappannee, IN: Jordan/Evangel, 1999.
Aune, David E. Jesus and the Synoptic Gospels. Theological Students Fellowship — Bibliographic Study Guides. Madison, WI: IVP, 1980.
Barber, Cyril J. Best Books for Your Bible Study Library. Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux, 2000.
Barber, Cyril J. The Minister’s Library. 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1974 – 89.
Barber, Cyril J., and Robert M. Knauss Jr. An Introduction to Theological Research: A Guide for College and Seminary Students. 2nd ed. New York: University Press of America, 2000. [JETS 12/01]
Barker, Kenneth L., Bruce K. Waltke and Roy B. Zuck. Bibliography for Old Testament Exegesis and Exposition. Dallas: Dallas Theological Seminary, 1979.
Bauer, David R. Essential Bible Study Tools for Ministry. Nashville: Abingdon, 2014. Note the 2003 ed. with Hendrickson: An Annotated Guide to Biblical Resources for Ministry.
Bazylinski, Stanislaw. A Guide to Biblical Research. 2nd enlarged ed. Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Institute Press, 2009.
Biblical Studies Bulletin (BSB): http://grovebooks.co.uk/pages/biblical-studies-bulletin. Long edited by Michael B. Thompson of Ridley Hall, Cambridge. Ceased publication in 2012.
Brug, John F. (Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary), “Old Testament Commentaries for the Pastor’s Study”: www.wlsessays.net/files/BrugCommentariesOT2014.pdf. 9th ed. 2014.
Carson, D. A. New Testament Commentary Survey. 7th ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013. [4th ed. 1993; 5th ed. 2001; 6th ed. 2007]
Childs, Brevard S. Old Testament Books for Pastor and Teacher. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1977.
Childs, Brevard S. The New Testament as Canon: An Introduction. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985. [See “Excursus IV”]
Danker, Frederick W. Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study. Revised & exp. ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993, 2003 (with CD).
Dennison, James T., Jr. (Northwest Theological Seminary). “Preaching Resources.” Revised June 2015. http://www.nwts.edu/commentaries.pdf.
Denver Journal Bibliographies: www.denverseminary.edu/resources/news-and-articles/annotated-old-testament-bibliography – 2015/ (M. Daniel Carroll R., Hélène Dallaire, and Richard Hess for OT); www.denverseminary.edu/resources/news-and-articles/new-testament-exegesis-bibliography – 2015/ (William Klein, Craig Blomberg, and David Mathewson for NT).
Duvall, J. Scott, and J. Daniel Hays. Grasping God's Word. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012 [See “Building a Personal Library,” pp. 459 – 91]
Dyer, John. www.bestcommentaries.com.
Evans, Craig A. “New Testament Commentaries.” www.craigaevans.com/teaching_materials/NT_Commentaries.doc
Eves, Terry, and Steven Schlei. “A Guide to Old Testament Commentaries and Reference Works.” Rev. ed. 1982. Published by Westminster Seminary Bookstore. Philadelphia, PA.
Fee, Gordon D. New Testament Exegesis. 4th ed. Louisville: WJK, 2010. [See “Aids and Resources for the Steps in Exegesis”]
Finley, Thomas J. (Talbot Seminary). www.people.biola.edu/faculty/tomf/OT_Expositional_Tools.pdf. Accessed 2005. [No longer available]
Fitzmyer, Joseph A. An Introductory Bibliography for the Study of Scripture. 3rd ed. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1990.
France, R. T. A Bibliographical Guide to New Testament Research. Cambridge: Tyndale Fellowship for Biblical Research, 1974.
Glynn, John. Commentary & Reference Survey: A Comprehensive Guide to Biblical and Theological Resources. 10th ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2007.
Goldingay, John. Old Testament Commentary Survey. Rev. ed. Leicester: Theological Students Fellowship, 1991, 1994. An earlier revision contained Robert L. Hubbard’s “1981 Supplement” to the 1975 1st ed.
Goodacre, Mark. http://ntgateway.com/resource/biblio.htm.
Gorman, G. E., and Lyn Gorman. Theological and Religious Reference Materials: General Resources and Biblical Studies. Westport, CT; London: Greenwood Press, 1984.
Harrington, Daniel. The New Testament: A Bibliography. Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1985.
Holladay, Carl R. A Critical Introduction to the New Testament. Nashville: Abingdon, 2005. The exp. CD-ROM version includes longer annotated bibliographies.
Johnston, William M. Recent Reference Books in Religion. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1996.
Kepple, Robert J., and John R. Muether. Reference Works for Theological Research. 3rd ed. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1992.
Kiehl, Erich H. Building Your Biblical Studies Library. St. Louis: Concordia, 1988.
Klein, Ralph W. http://fontes.lstc.edu/~rklein/Documents/prophets.htm (2015).
Knight, George W., III. “New Testament Commentaries for a Minister’s Library.” Rev. 1993. Privately Produced. (Available from the author.)
Longman, Tremper, III. Old Testament Commentary Survey. 5th ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013 (1st ed. 1991; 2nd ed. 1995; 3rd ed. 2003; 4th ed. 2007).
Martin, Ralph. New Testament Books for Pastor and Teacher. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1984. On Google Books there are pages of a revised ed. (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2002).
Meredith, Don (Harding School of Theology). http://hst.edu/library-resources/research-tools/. See esp. his “Commentary Recommendations” document.
Mills, Watson E. Critical Tools for the Study of the New Testament. Lewiston, NY: Mellen, 1995.
Moo, Douglas, ed. An Annotated Bibliography on the Bible and the Church. Compiled for the Alumni Association of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1986.
Moore Theological College, Sydney. “List of Recommended Commentaries and Reference Works” at www.moorebooks.com.au).
Oak Hill College, London (Faculty Recommendations): www.oakhill.ac.uk/resources/old_testament.html and www.oakhill.ac.uk/resources/new_testament.html. Accessed 2005. [No longer available]
Pakala, James C. “A Librarian’s Comments on Commentaries,” Presb 21.2 – (1995 – ).
Pierce, Jeremy. http://parablemania.ektopos.com/archives/2006/05/forthcombook.html.
Porter, Stanley E., and Eckhard J. Schnabel, eds. On the Writing of Commentaries (Osborne FS). Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2013. Many commentaries on NT books are surveyed.
Princeton Theological Seminary. https://www.ptsem.edu/uploadedFiles/Academic_Affairs/Academic_Departments/Biblical_Studies/CommontariesMasterList.pdf. Accessed July 2015.
Rosscup, Jim. Commentaries for Biblical Expositors. Revised ed. The Woodlands, TX: Kress, 2006.
Scholer, David M. A Basic Bibliographic Guide for New Testament Exegesis. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973.
Schreiner, Thomas R. “Select Commentaries on the Pauline Epistles.” In Interpreting the Pauline Epistles. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2011. Material shared at http://andynaselli.com/schreiners-top-three.
Silva, Moisés. “The Silva Mind-Control Method for Buying NT Commentaries.” Revised Jan. 1993. Published by Westminster Seminary Bookstore, Philadelphia, PA.
Singleton, Steve. “Online Commentaries in Canonical Order” (links to scores of older commentaries now in public domain): http://deeperstudy.com/link/commentaries.html.
Smick, Elmer B. “A Pastor’s Bibliographical Guide to the Old Testament.” Rev. 1985. Privately Produced at Gordon-Conwell Seminary, South Hamilton, MA.
Spurgeon, C. H. Commenting & Commentaries. London: Banner of Truth, 1969 repr. (1876 ed.).
Stewart, David R. The Literature of Theology: A Guide for Students and Pastors. Rev. ed. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003.
Stitzinger, James F. (The Master’s Seminary, Santa Clarita, CA). “Books for Bible Expositors”: http://masters.libguides.com/booksforbibleexpositors.
Stuart, Douglas. A Guide to Selecting and Using Bible Commentaries. Waco, TX: Word, 1990.
Stuart, Douglas. Old Testament Exegesis. 4th ed. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2009. [See “Exegesis Aids & Resources”]
Sugg, Martha Aycock, and John Boone Trotti. Building a Pastor’s Library. Richmond, VA: Union Theological Seminary, 1991.
Thomas, Derek. The Essential Commentaries for a Preacher’s Library. Greenville, SC: Reformed Academic Press, 1996.
Thompson, John L. “English Language Resources for Studying the History of Exegesis.” http://documents.fuller.edu/sot/faculty/thompson_john/HistExeg/homepage.htm. (Extensive list of Jewish and Christian commentary resources prior to 1700.)
Thorsen, Donald A. D. Theological Resources for Ministry: A Bibliography of Works in Theological Studies. Nappanee, IN: Evangel Publishing House, 1996.
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (Rolfing Library): http://library.tiu.edu/friendly.php?s=commentaries (OT), http://library.tiu.edu/commentaries/nt (NT).
Turner, John. “Bible Commentary Reviews”: www.disciples.org/biblea.htm#Biog. [No longer available]
United Bible Societies. “Bible Commentaries” >> “List All” or “Search”: http://www.ubs-translations.org/bibliographies/#c521.
Williams, Tyler F. (The King’s University College, Edmonton). “Old Testament Commentary Survey”: http://biblical-studies.ca/ot-commentaries.html.
Worth, Roland H., Jr. Biblical Studies on the Internet: A Resource Guide. 2nd ed. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2008.
Zannoni, Arthur E. The Old Testament: A Bibliography. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1992.
Here are two final notes: (1) A few commentary series (e.g. New Interpreter’s Bible, Abingdon NT Commentaries, and NIV Application Commentary) include annotated bibliographies worth consulting. (2) Baker’s “IBR Bibliographies” have value but most do not cover commentaries; two notable exceptions are Porter-McDonald on NT Introduction and McKnight-Williams on the Synoptic Gospels.18
In this guide I made no changes to the format of previous editions because that layout has been well received and seems well suited to helping readers quickly survey the books available. I have usually starred (★) about five or six works for each Bible book as suggestions for purchase, allowing myself an extra selection or two for those books a preacher will often turn to (e.g. Genesis, Psalms, John, Romans). The majority of these recommended works emphasize scholarly exegesis and full theological commentary rather than devotional and sermonic helps, but I have kept in mind the need for a mix. As readers will notice, the mix I prefer includes commentaries which exegete the text in the original languages (e.g. NIGTC, BECNT, ICC); more accessible commentaries using English translations (NICOT, NICNT, NAC); and expositions which are practical in aim, relating the Bible’s message to today’s world (BST and NIVAC). Series such as NIGTC and BST will be helpful in different ways at different points in sermon preparation.19 In making recommendations for purchases, I have mainly had pastors in mind. Preachers want reliable and accessible tools, focused more on the message of the text, which avoid being overly technical. More specifically, I have been thinking of studious pastors, who take seriously the life of the mind and the academic study of Scripture, even if academia is not their calling. (The pastorate is a higher calling in my book.) While making recommendations for purchases, I have not forgotten seminarians’ interest in philology, grammar, sophisticated hermeneutical methods, cutting-edge literary analysis, bibliographies, etc. To benefit those students using this guide in their research, I have placed in bold type the authors of the weightier, more influential scholarly commentaries, i.e. those works an evangelical seminary professor would probably like to see consulted in exegetical papers.
The star-outline symbol (☆) designates a valuable commentary or reference work which would be worth buying, but would, in my judgment, be a second priority. The checkmark (British “tick”) symbol (✓) designates an important scholarly work that could profitably be consulted for seminary papers, but is either difficult/expensive to obtain or of debatable value for a pastor’s library. The symbol (F) indicates a forthcoming vol. It must be said that some of these promised vols. will never be published.
As a rule of thumb, it is unwise to purchase an entire series of commentaries, despite the lure of deep discounts. Some exceptions to this rule come to mind: Calvin’s NT Commentaries, Keil & Delitzsch (OT), perhaps the two Tyndale series and the New International Commentary series (NICOT and NICNT). The basis for this rule is the fact that series are always uneven, some more than others, even when they are the work of only one commentator. Because of different price structures for series in electronic format (e.g. Word Biblical Commentary), this rule will not be followed as regularly as it once was. Please note: in this guide I have not included Keil & Delitzsch or Calvin’s NT Commentaries among the purchase suggestions under individual books. Rather I have assumed that many students and pastors will eventually either obtain these for their personal collections or gain free access to these classics via the internet.
For the student just beginning to build a library, I pass along my late father’s excellent advice: as you’re able, buy one solid exegetical vol. and one suggestive expositional-devotional commentary for each book. I might add that it would be wise to garner the exegetical tools first and to begin with the major books of the Bible, i.e. those on which you will be preaching with some regularity. (See my appendix, An Ideal Basic Library for the Pastor.) Another, more long-term system for developing a library collection, used by probably thousands of ministers, is to purchase four to five helpful works for preaching through a book. I did this for my very first sermon series. Planning to do a full exposition of 1 Peter, I purchased Selwyn, Davids, Michaels, Grudem, and Clowney. My father encouraged me further by giving me Stuart Briscoe’s book of sermons entitled When the Going Gets Tough. The main point is to have a smart plan in mind and keep at it.
STANDARDS FOR EVALUATING COMMENTARIES
A few words are in order about the kinds of commentaries I have recommended.20 What was I looking for? First, I examined a commentary for exegetical help with the text, especially at the cruxes where help is most needed. Is the commentator learned and sensitive when it comes to language and grammar questions? Is there any analysis of structure, literary art, and rhetoric? Does the author employ traditional diachronic or recent synchronic methods (or attempt an integration of the two)? Does the commentary help me understand the flow of the story or argument (perhaps with discourse analysis)? Does it give evidence of the scholar’s patient, hard work with the text, including a good awareness of past research. I count two strikes against scholars who have not kept up with reading in their field. Of course, some scholars give perhaps too much evidence that they read widely. From them, Andrie du Toit humorously says, “one can learn a lot about the art of compilation.”21
My second concern was for an understanding of the historical and cultural background of the literature. Who was the author? When was it written? To whom and for what reason? What social, cultural, economic, and religious factors, in the milieu of the intended audience or readership, are key for understanding how the message was first received? What may have been the use of the text in the life of the faith community, if we know little or nothing of its author and the circumstances of composition (as with many of the psalms)? Do these facts (or guesses) throw any light on how I ought to interpret the text?
Third, does the commentator provide mature theological reflection (preferably from both the biblical theology22 and the systematic theology angles) after making well-based exegetical decisions? The commentator ought to be alert to theological questions such as: How are themes contained in this passage anticipated earlier in Scripture? How are they developed or fulfilled later in Scripture? Does the text express truths or themes which are emphasized in the theology of the Bible book being studied: say, the new exodus theme in Ezekiel or glory in John’s Gospel? How is this passage similar to others and how is it different? What is the passage’s unique message? What doctrines are taught here? Does the passage shed light on doctrinal controversies? Are there tensions between the teachings in this pericope and others in Scripture which need to be appreciated, addressed, and perhaps resolved?
Fourth among the concerns was to look for clarity of expression and economy of words. Books that were full in their discussion, but somewhat unfocused or prolix were sometimes excluded from the list of suggested works — many homiletical commentaries fall into this category. According to Calvin, perspicua brevitas is the chief virtue of a commentator. Along the same lines, professor I. Howard Marshall warned of “a real danger that pastors are going to stop reading modern commentaries simply because they haven’t the time to cope with the vast mass of material in them and produce their expository sermons. Students and pastors need something more succinct!”23 I agree with this but also wish to leave room for big reference works which are more likely to take up technical questions. Hengstenberg once wrote, “There are two kinds of commentaries on Holy Scripture — those that are more adapted for perusal, and those that are more suitable for reference. Both are necessary, and it would not be desirable that either should exclude the other.”24
Fifth, I look at the price tag. It is astonishing what some publishers ask for a book. Some superb commentaries, like the Davies – Allison ICC vols. on Matthew, have been far beyond the reach of the pastor; that 3-vol. hb set with 2400pp. listed in 2010 for $156 per vol.! Do the math and it’s $468.00 for a commentary on a single Bible book. Thankfully ICC is now being released in pb at a substantially reduced price.
Sixth, is the work readily available for library use or purchase? It is nonsensical for me to urge readers to purchase books that are long out-of-print.
My seventh concern related to the genre of commentary. If the author set out to write a warm-hearted, devotional exposition with lots of anecdotes and application, I will naturally apply different standards to evaluate it than, say, a vol. in the technical series NIGTC. I asked, what kind of commentary did the person set out to write, for what kind of audience, and how well did the author accomplish his or her aim?
Eighth, the pastor asks whether the commentator can suggest ways the text may speak to contemporary issues facing the church. These days, some fine practical series, such as the NIV Application Commentary, understand the distinction between homiletical commentaries and published sermons. They seek to lay a reasonably solid exegetical foundation for understanding the meaning of the text in its ancient context before moving on to matters of contemporary application. For application, these commentaries aim to be suggestive, to present sermon seed thoughts for preachers to mull over and develop on their own. They provide guidance rather than pre-fabricated sermons in the guise of commentary. The better series may suggest multiple possibilities for proper application of the text’s message to the people of God. Other series now in print do not seem to understand this distinction between homiletical commentaries and ready-made sermons. We all should look askance when poor quality, edited sermons which offer no serious, sustained engagement of the text are today dressed up as “commentary.” What sort of book are preachers looking for? What will help them? The preface to the New Interpreter’s Bible, in describing the aim of its practically oriented Reflections section, expresses the felt need of most ministers I know: “Preachers and teachers want some specificity about the implications of the text, but not so much specificity that the work is done for them. The ideas in the Reflections are meant to stimulate the thought of preachers and teachers, not to replace it.”25
My comments above on homiletical commentaries may be open to misunderstanding. Books of sermons have done me a world of good; I do not denigrate them. I relish reading in vols. of sermons by the great expositors, including John Calvin, Charles Spurgeon, Campbell Morgan, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, and Kent Hughes. In this guide I recommend a few of these vols. for purchase, not so much for their application, which often cannot easily or properly be carried over to the present day, but for their penetrating exposition which drives to the theological heart of the text.
It is appropriate to make three additional comments regarding the exegeses and expositions I recommend here. First, I consider almost all the reader-response type works to be of diminished value for students and working pastors. (One of the rare exceptions is Clines on Job.) Too often they seem contrived and even self-indulgent, offering more insight into that particular reader’s ideology than into the message of the ancient text. Don’t people buy commentaries to understand the text better? In the extreme, such reader-response works betray a postmodern abandonment of the search for any determinate meaning in the text. Second, we are seeing a wave of interest in so-called reception history of the biblical text,26 and more commentaries are reflecting this (e.g. BBC, S&H, HCOT, Luz on Matthew). I have often been fascinated by such materials, but I have assumed that most pastors and seminarians do not place a premium on reception history when they want to consult a commentary. Third, it is in my recommendations of expositions that my Reformed theological commitments are most obvious.
Another type of commentary, one which I rarely mention in this guide, is the single vol. Bible commentary. The pastor or student can sometimes get a wonderful overview of a Bible book using these hefty tools. I give as an example Derek Kidner’s 38pp. on Isaiah in The New Bible Commentary: Revised (Eerdmans, 1970), later retitled Eerdmans Bible Commentary after the publication of the New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition (IVP, 1994). Other quality single vols. in this category are the New International Bible Commentary (Zondervan); Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible (2003) [CBQ 10/04]; The HarperCollins Bible Commentary, produced by members of SBL (1988, rev. 2000); The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (Prentice Hall, 1990); The Jewish Study Bible (OUP, 2004, 2nd ed. 2014) [CBQ 10/04]; The Oxford Bible Commentary (2001); The New Interpreter’s Study Bible (2003); and the Africa Bible Commentary (Zondervan, 2006); and South Asia Bible Commentary (Zondervan, 2015). I have not used Robert Gundry’s one-vol. Commentary on the New Testament (Hendrickson, 2010), but I suspect it deserves the plaudits regarding its learning, wise selectivity in what it treats, and fullness (1100pp.) [BBR 21.4; CBQ 1/12; RTR 8/12; Them 8/11; RelSRev 6/11]. Also, I have hardly consulted those publications that proffer postmodern, ideologically-oriented readings, such as the Schottroff-Wacker Feminist Biblical Interpretation commentary (Eerdmans, ET 2012) [CBQ 1/14], and the Newsom-Ringe Women’s Bible Commentary (exp. ed., 1998).
David A. Dorsey’s single vol. on the OT, The Literary Structure of the Old Testament: A Commentary on Genesis – Malachi (Baker, 1999), is sui generis and worth recommending here. Not everyone can believe that palindromes or chiasms are as common as Dorsey argues, but his 330-page book is fascinating and helpful for pastors and students [JETS 9/01]. At times his hermeneutical moves are brilliant (e.g., see my comment on Longman’s Job).
THE RANGE OF THIS GUIDE — CONSERVATIVES & CRITICS
I have included a full complement of neo-orthodox and liberal books in this guide. I might have focused more on evangelical works that are respectful of Scripture’s authority. However, I have chosen to include (and recommend on occasion) critical materials of note alongside important evangelical contributions. I have done so for several reasons. (1) The inclusion of non-conservative works will best serve the evangelical seminary student who is expected to show some familiarity with critical scholarship. I trust I am correct in assuming a certain level of theological training, sophistication, and especially spiritual discernment. (2) A few Bible books do not have a technical, recent, in-depth evangelical commentary. (3) Also, frequently many of the strongest commentaries on a given book (using the points of evaluation above) have been written by critics. Wide reading will soon convince you that “good and bad exegesis cuts across doctrinal lines and is represented at both ends of the theological spectrum.”27 (4) You will learn a great deal from the critics as you discipline yourself to read with discernment, measuring their presuppositions, methodology, and conclusions by the standard of Holy Scripture. The late F. F. Bruce once wrote, “I have sometimes learned most from scholars with whom I have agreed the least: they compel one to think and rethink.”28
I have taken care to specify critical works listed in this guide (‡, or [ℳ] if mildly critical or mediating). I hope this will enable “the fledgling student”29 to read and make purchases with discernment. Recognizing scholars’ faith commitments (in regard to the inspiration and authority of the Bible) can be helpful for knowing how to approach and digest their work. (This is especially true where those scholars [naïvely?] deny any personal faith commitment.)30 So-called higher critical scholarship is often anti-supernaturalist31 and hostile to the evangelical faith. I can illustrate by quoting the liberal OT scholar, John J. Collins, who argues: “Historical criticism . . . is not compatible with a confessional theology that is committed to specific doctrines on the basis of faith.” It is only “compatible with theology understood as an open-ended and critical inquiry into the meaning and function of God-language.”32 Some critical treatments are more, some less, objectionable to an evangelical pastor or student.
We must realize that everyone has to deal with the liberal-conservative divide. If some conservatives are often — more than wary — broadly dismissive of all critical scholarship, it is also true that liberals can be rudely dismissive of diligent, erudite evangelical scholars just because they belong to “the gaggle of conservatives.” So much depends upon one’s outlook on the church and the academy, and their relationship.33 One caveat is for all of us: “The branding as ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’ has too often been mistaken for engagement with the arguments put forward, and has hobbled those from across the theological spectrum who take such an exclusionary position.”34 Even as we recognize theological differences and their ramifications, we want to avoid “theological profiling” which excludes.
Dictionaries of Biblical Interpretation
Students will find several major reference works invaluable, beginning with the 6-vol. Anchor Bible Dictionary (1992). Rival works are the New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible in 5 vols. (2006 – 09), and de Gruyer’s developing Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception (2009 – ). Concentrating on historical and contemporary hermeneutical questions are the Coggins-Houlden Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation (1990); the 2-vol. Dictionary of Biblical Interpretation (1999), ed. John Hayes; and the Stanley Porter, ed., Dictionary of Biblical Criticism and Interpretation (2007) [RBL 2011; BTB 11/10]. I regret that I have not yet used the 2-vol. Oxford Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation (2013) [BBR 25.2].
Development of Higher Criticism
Those who feel uninformed and even mystified by the complexities of scholarship and desire some orientation to the climate of critical opinion will find several books helpful. Some OT and NT Introductions include surveys of the 200-year debate over higher criticism. A book by the critic R. E. Clements, One Hundred Years of OT Interpretation (1976), may be useful to you. Introducing the key scholars is Mark Gignilliat, A Brief History of OT Criticism (2012) [Int 7/13; JSOT 37.5; VT 63.1; Presb Spr 13; CTJ 11/13; DenvJ 16; BTB 8/14; JETS 6/13]. Werner Kümmel’s vol., The New Testament: The History of the Investigation of Its Problems (ET 1973), helps us understand theological developments in Germany. Stephen Neill’s fascinating work, The Interpretation of the NT 1861 – 1961, was revised by N. T. Wright and covers the period 1861 – 1986. It gives an especially fine account of developments in Britain. John Riches’ A Century of NT Study (1993) is selective in its coverage, but what it does is quite well done [CRBR 1995]. No one remotely conservative rates a mention in Riches. The best book surveying the history of evangelical scholarship in the United States and its response to higher criticism is Mark Noll, Between Faith and Criticism: Evangelicals, Scholarship, and the Bible in America (Harper & Row, 1986; 2nd ed. Baker, 1991). None of these books, however, discusses the newer holistic literary approaches to the text.
History of Biblical Interpretation
To dig back further into the history of OT and NT scholarship, students will turn to other works. For the whole history of biblical interpretation, pride of place now goes to the New Cambridge History of the Bible (4 vols., 2012 – 16) [ExpTim 3/14; Them 11/14]. Note that the 3-vol. Cambridge History of the Bible (1963 – 70) is still worth consulting. I believe the ambitious project edited by Hauser and Watson, A History of Biblical Interpretation, complements the older Cambridge set in updating the discussion. Two of four vols. have appeared: “Vol. 1: The Ancient Period” (Eerdmans, 2003), and “Vol. 2: The Medieval through the Reformation Periods” (2009) [JTS 10/10; JSOT 35.5; Chm Aut 11 (Bray)]. The first is strong on Jewish interpretation but weak on the canon and too brief on the Fathers [2003: Chm Sum 08; VT 55.1; 2009: EvQ 1/13]. Reventlow’s full treatment of the History of Biblical Interpretation is in English translation (4 vols., 2009 – 10) [CBQ 4/11; JSS Spr 12; JSOT 35.5; ExpTim 1/11, 3/12].
There are two stunningly comprehensive projects focused on but one Testament. Magne Saebø edits the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament: The History of Its Interpretation, with vols. on I/1: Antiquity (1996), I/2: The Middle Ages (2000), II: From Renaissance to the Enlightenment (2008), and III/1 – 2: From Modernism to Postmodernism (2013 – 15) [JTS 4/15; JSOT 39.5; VT 63.3; ETL 89.4]. The complete set boasts over 4000 pages. An enthusiastic welcome is being extended to William Baird’s Fortress series, History of NT Research. Volumes slowly appeared: Vol. 1: From Deism to Tübingen (1992); Vol. 2: From Jonathan Edwards to Rudolf Bultmann (2002) [JETS 6/03; CTJ 11/04; EuroJTh 15.1]; and Vol. 3: From C. H. Dodd to Hans Dieter Betz (2013) [JETS 3/14; CBQ 7/15]. One telling criticism is that it focuses upon historical-critical scholarship, neglecting literary trends.
Because these reference works are daunting for beginners, I recommend three quick overviews: the basic sketch Yarchin provides in the “Introduction” (pp.xi-xxx) to his History of Biblical Interpretation: A Reader (Hendrickson, 2004) [VT 57.2]; A Short History of the Interpretation of the Bible by Grant and Tracy (Fortress, 1984); and Richard Soulen’s Sacred Scripture: A Short History of Interpretation (WJK, 2009) [Int 10/10; JSOT 35.5]. For a wise, well-balanced evangelical survey, see Gerald Bray’s Biblical Interpretation, Past & Present (IVP, 1996), particularly for its treatment of theological currents. Because of the publisher, I had high hopes for John Court, ed., Biblical Interpretation (Continuum, 2004), but you can safely ignore it [Anvil 22.1 (Moberly)].
The Shape of Current Scholarship
Those wanting a useful summary of the current status quaestionis in various areas of critical scholarship may consult the two vols. of essays produced by SBL: The Hebrew Bible and Its Modern Interpreters (1985) and The New Testament and Its Modern Interpreters (1989). More recent are the following books of note, on both Testaments: Methods of Biblical Interpretation (Abingdon, 2004); To Each Its Own Meaning (WJK, 1999); the large Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies (2006) [NovT 49.2; ExpTim 11/08; BL 2007; EuroJTh 18.1]; the Barton FS, Biblical Interpretation and Method (2013), eds. Dell and Joyce [JSOT 38.5]; and Dean Deppe’s All Roads Lead to the Text (2011). Two books devoted to postmodern approaches are Eryl Davies’s Biblical Criticism: A Guide for the Perplexed (2013) [JSNT 36.5]; and New Meanings for Ancient Texts: Recent Approaches to Biblical Criticisms and Their Applications (2013), eds. McKenzie and Kaltner [RevExp 8/14; BBR 25.2].
On the OT you can consult the Abingdon Press issue, Old Testament Interpretation: Past, Present and Future (Tucker FS, 1995); the WJK vol., The Hebrew Bible Today: An Introduction to Critical Issues (1998); Oxford University Press’s Text in Context (2000); and the excellent Petersen FS, Method Matters (SBL, 2009) [JSS Spr 12; JSOT 35.5; ETL 89.1]. Moving over to the NT, you will find helpful the collection of essays published in Porter, ed., Handbook to Exegesis of the NT (Brill, 1997); in Powell, ed., The New Testament Today (WJK, 1999); in Approaches to NT Studies (Sheffield, 1995), eds. Porter and Tombs; in Method and Meaning (Attridge FS; SBL, 2011); and in Carter-Levine, eds., The New Testament: Methods and Meanings (2013) [JSNT 37.5]. Finally, students should be reminded of the treasures in the Anchor Bible Dictionary (e.g. the articles on Form Criticism by Barton and Robbins) and the New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. All the aforementioned works come out of the critical camp.
One asks, what has been produced by conservatives? Readers should note the Zondervan series, Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation, now published in a one-vol. collection [Evangel Spr 02 (Marshall)]. For those interested in OT studies more particularly, there are two vols. to recommend: the Baker title, The Face of OT Studies (1999) [EvQ 10/02; DenvJ]; and the collection of essays in vol.1 of the New International Dictionary of OT Theology & Exegesis. For students of the NT, we first have Dockery and Black, eds., Interpreting the New Testament (Broadman & Holman, 2001) [Them Spr 03]. Secondly, there is Hearing the New Testament (Eerdmans, 1995, 2nd ed. 2010) [JSNT 33.5; ExpTim 2/11; BTB 11/11], ed. J. B. Green. Lastly, the survey, The Face of NT Studies (2004), is a magnificent addition to the literature [Chm Spr 06; BBR 15.1; Them 10/06; TJ Fall 05; RelSRev 4/07; Anvil 22.4; DenvJ 11/04].
For discussion of individual interpreters, see the McKim edited Dictionary of Major Biblical Interpreters (IVP, 2007), which replaced the 1998 Historical Handbook; and the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (3rd ed. 2005). For entries on those conservative scholars missed or ignored in other dictionaries, look up Elwell and Weaver, eds., Bible Interpreters of the 20th Century: A Selection of Evangelical Voices (Baker, 1999), and Larsen, ed., Biographical Dictionary of Evangelicals (IVP, 2003).
Terminology
Some of the terminology used in biblical scholarship and in this guide to describe various hermeneutical approaches may be unfamiliar to neophyte seminarians. “What is this ‘tradition-history’ you mention? And what does ‘diachronic’ mean?” Students will find quick help in the Soulen Handbook of Biblical Criticism (4th ed. 2011) [JSOT 37.5; ExpTim 6/14], Randolph Tate’s Handbook for Biblical Interpretation (2nd ed. 2012) [JSOT 37.5; RevExp 8/14], and the Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms (1996). For yet more help, see the major dictionaries of biblical interpretation referenced above and the textbooks of exegesis.35
Philosophical sophistication is also becoming more and more necessary for high level work in theological fields. It is understandable why an information technology major or physical education major might struggle in a competitive MDiv program. A propaedeutic or quick reference is the slim dictionary, 101 Key Terms in Philosophy and Their Importance for Theology (2004), written by Kelly James Clark, Richard Lints, and James K. A. Smith. Much more in-depth are Anthony Thiselton’s superlative New Horizons in Hermeneutics (1992), and Thiselton on Hermeneutics (Eerdmans, 2006) [ExpTim 6/07; JTS 4/09] which discuss the most significant philosophical currents affecting biblical studies.36 The best counsel I can give at present, though, is to buy and digest well Thiselton’s 409-page Hermeneutics: An Introduction (2009) [RBL 6/10]. He is a master teacher, a teacher of teachers, and this is the best introduction to biblical and theological hermeneutics I’ve found for the bright beginner. For individual hot-topics in hermeneutics, e.g. history, philosophy of language, biblical-theological interpretation, see also the Paternoster/Zondervan “Scripture and Hermeneutics Series” (2001 – ) [EuroJTh 17.1].
In past years, friends have asked me to expand this survey to include a full review of OT and NT reference works, such as atlases, introductions, lexicons, grammars, histories of Israel, etc. I have rejected that idea for a number of reasons I won’t list here. At the end of this guide I have provided a brief list of those works which, to my thinking, could form the nucleus of a preacher’s reference library; see An Ideal Basic Library for the Pastor. For a more complete listing of OT and NT research tools, consult Longman’s37 and Carson’s surveys; Danker’s Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study (rev. 1993, 2003); the section “Exegesis Aids and Resources” in both Douglas Stuart’s Old Testament Exegesis (4th ed. 2009) and Gordon Fee’s New Testament Exegesis (4th ed. 2010); the Denver Journal bibliographies; David R. Bauer’s Essential Bible Study Tools; and John Glynn’s Commentary and Reference Survey, all of which are cited above.
OLD COMMENTARIES AND FOREIGN LANGUAGE WORKS
Old Commentaries
I have not mentioned the two famous Puritan commentaries by Matthew Henry and Matthew Poole in the section on individual books. Please don’t think of them as relics. Henry, particularly, is still quite useful, and I’m glad to say freely available online. Childs counsels:
I would strongly recommend that pastors secure one of the great English pastors who wrote commentaries on the whole Bible. . . . These old books can work as a trap and deception if the pastor is simply looking for a retreat into the past, but if they are correctly used, innumerable riches can be tapped.38
Much the same thing can be said for the mountain of rich exposition in the best old sets of sermons; see, for example, the church father Chrysostom, Luther, Calvin, the Puritans, Maclaren, Spurgeon, and Campbell Morgan.
For the OT, many pastors once used the Jamieson-Fausset-Brown commentary alongside Keil & Delitzsch (KD). I would not counsel the purchase of J-F-B, which covers the NT too, because it is free online (ccel.org). Though the point can be overstressed (see below), it remains true that, for many of these older commentaries, the best insights were mined out long ago and incorporated in newer works. But if you have inherited J-F-B and have few resources, don’t discard it. For comments on the KD and Lange sets, see Commentary Series below.
Bengel’s New Testament Commentary is a great classic (1742), about 2000pp. long. John Bengel was a pioneer exegete for the modern era. I can’t say I’d counsel you to buy it, however. Several other older sets on the NT should also be mentioned briefly. Alford’s Greek Testament (6th ed. 1873) and the Expositor’s Greek Testament (1897) both served past generations well and still have some use. I would not recommend you purchase them because they are coming available online. A. T. Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament (1933), though a different sort of work, would fall into the same class.
Two sets of devotional commentaries are of similar age (late 19th century) and usefulness. J. C. Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospels is suggestive in seven pb vols. (some editions are without the more detailed notes, which include excellent quotes from the church fathers, the Reformers and Puritans). Part of the set has been included in Crossway’s Classic Commentary series. The comments are clear, edifying, and vigorously Calvinistic. H. C. G. Moule’s expositions of the epistles are full of the love of Christ. Usually they have titles like Colossians Studies. Moule was a fine scholar as well as preacher. He produced several vols. in The Cambridge Bible for Schools & Colleges and The Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools & Colleges. Both Ryle and Moule were godly Anglican bishops.
I offer two final notes on older commentaries. First, advertisers have spent trillions to convince us that newer always means improved, and older always means inferior and obsolete. One should believe them when it comes to computers. Wiser seminarians, however, should not buy into such categorizing, when it comes to theological literature and the genre of commentaries in particular. Students should also be apprised that there is a growing movement within biblical studies that takes the history of interpretation more seriously — older books teach us much — and humility should incline us to join that movement.39 My second note is a recommendation of a late Cambridge friend’s work on “Pre – 20th Century Commentaries on the Old Testament in Cambridge University Library.” Dr. Leslie McFall spent years of work using and assessing old commentaries (17th to 19th centuries). The fruit of that labor is a list of recommended works, free at https://lmf12.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/pre-20th_century_commentaries.pdf. While you may not have access to all the Cambridge resources, you may discover some work of interest on the list which you can hunt down closer to home.
Foreign Language Commentaries
There isn’t room in this guide to note important, individual foreign language works. Those who are doing fuller research and can handle the languages may consult those works. Strong vols. are available in French, especially in such series as Etudes Bibliques (e.g. Spicq on the Pastorals and Hebrews), Commentaire de l’Ancien Testament, Commentaire du Nouveau Testament (e.g. Bonnard on Matthew), Sources Bibliques, and Lectio Divina (e.g. Vesco on Psalms). For those with some proficiency in German there are the important series, Herders Theologischer Kommentar and Regensburger Neues Testament from Roman Catholic scholars. Catholics and Protestants collaborated to produce the Evangelisch-katholischer Kommentar (EKK). Largely Protestant series include Kommentar zum Alten Testament (KAT), Das Alte Testament Deutsch, Das Neue Testament Deutsch, Theologischer Handkommentar, Zürcher Bibelkommentare, and, most importantly, Biblischer Kommentar (BKAT) for the Old Testament and the constantly revised Meyer Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar (KEK) on the New Testament. There is an abundance of good commentaries in Dutch too (e.g. Aalders on Ezekiel, Beuken on Isaiah); see HCOT below under Commentary Series. And we cannot forget Modern Hebrew. For reviews of continental European works, peruse RB, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, Biblica, Etudes Théologiques & Religieuses, ZAW (but not Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft), VT, NovT, and Theologische Literaturzeitung.
The world of biblical scholarship is undergoing revolutionary changes due to developments in computer technology. It is likely that the day will come when the serious Bible student will be able to access via the internet the contents of the world’s great theological libraries. One gets excited dreaming about what the future holds. But in all your dreaming about tomorrow, you can’t afford to miss today’s opportunities.
Up through the 8th edition of this guide, I made recommendations of Bible study software. Because of my last two decades of missionary service in Africa, I have lost my grasp of developments in the area of software. I won’t take the chance of misleading you or embarrassing myself by continuing to make recommendations, except to urge more advanced students to consider Hermeneutika BibleWorks 10 [Version 10: DenvJ 18; Version 9: ExpTim 9/13; Them 7/12; JESOT 2.1; DenvJ 15; BTB 8/12] or Libronix Logos Bible Software 6 [Version 6: Chm Sum 15; Version 5: JSNT 35.5; Them 4/14; JESOT 2.1; DenvJ 16]. Mac-users have long had something just as good, arguably better, in the Accordance 11 program [Version 11: BBR 25.2; Version 10: Them 11/13]; I hasten to add that Accordance now runs on Windows perfectly well. (Once upon a time it did not run natively in the PC environment and one needed an emulator; on the flip side BibleWorks once did not run on a Mac without an emulator.) Many top scholars once chose to use Macs because they enjoyed Accordance (plus Mac stability) so much for work in the Greek and Hebrew: how it’s attractive, fast (seamless), intuitive, and easy-to-use. Logos-users tell me they love the ability to build a large digital library, the interconnectivity, and some of the powerful search features of the program. Logos offers tons more resources for, say, sermon-work; it seems they buy the rights to everything they can. (Accordance is more selective.) The downside of Logos could be that it seems slower, is more difficult to customize, and there is a long learning-curve with its more complex interface. BibleWorks sees a lot of use too, and I have heard that the newer versions 9 and 10 were a big step up. My friend, David Instone-Brewer (Research Fellow and Tech Officer at Tyndale House), puts a broad smile on my face when he talks about “power under the hood for specialist searches” in BibleWorks: “I’m a Bible geek so I tend to go first to BibleWorks. If I were a Bible hipster, I’d be using Accordance all the time.” Like Accordance, it is especially valuable for studying in the original languages.
One bit of advice I picked up from a blog — thank you, Dustin Battles at rootedthinking.com — is that it’s wise to buy hard copies of books you plan to read cover-to-cover, while reference materials are best purchased for electronic use. That works for me; I have HALOT in hard-copy and on Accordance, and the latter gets used much more often. The expense can be wildly different too; the 8 vols. of DCH would cost me $260 through an Accordance discount, but nearly $1500 in hb.
There is a real need for up-to-date guides to both internet resources and computer-assisted theological research. Ages ago, we had Patrick Durusau, High Places in Cyberspace: A Guide to Biblical and Religious Studies, Classics, and Archaeological Resources on the Internet, 2nd ed. (Scholars Press, 1998). More recently we were helped by Roland Worth’s Biblical Studies on the Internet, 2nd ed. (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2008). At this point in time, however, we don’t need print editions of such guides, only online versions. For leads to discover more that is available in these areas, I suggest the following for a start:
Catholic University of America — Libraries. “A Guide to Semitic and Christian Oriental Resources” libraries.cua.edu/instruct/semweb.cfm.
Goodacre, Mark. “New Testament Gateway” ntgateway.com.
Grams, Rollin G., and Mark B. Poe. “Internet Resources for Biblical and Early Church Studies” (May 2010) gordonconwell.edu/resources/documents/internet-resources-second-edition.pdf.
Jones, Charles E., ed. “ETANA: Electronic Tools and Ancient Near East Archives” etana. org/home. Especially useful for comparative Semitics.
Mayo, David. “Internet Resources for Theology Students” upsem.libguides.com/content.php?pid=394924&sid=3234223.
McGrath, Alister. “Alister McGrath at Wiley: List of Useful Websites” http://www.alistermcgrathwiley.com/sites.asp
Michigan State University. “Bible Resources: Internet Sites” libguides.lib.msu.edu/c.php?g=96734&p=626911.
Montaner, Luis Vegas, et al., eds., Computer Assisted Research on the Bible in the 21st Century. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias, 2010.
Nicholson, Roy. “Old Testament Gateway” otgateway.com.
Online Critical Pseudepigrapha (SBL). http://www.purl.org/net/ocp.
Oxford Biblical Studies Online (OUP). “Internet Resources” oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/resource/InternetResources.xhtml.
Patrick, Meriel. “Disentangling the Web: A Guide to Online Resources for Theology,” ExpTim 121.5 (2010): 213 – 17.
Seland, Torrey. “Resource Pages for Biblical Studies” torreys.org/bible/.
Stuart, Douglas. Old Testament Exegesis. 4th ed. Louisville: WJK, 2009. [pp. 152 – 63]
Thesaurus Linguae Graecae. “Abridged Online TLG” http://stephanus.tlg.uci.edu/abridged.php.
Treat, Jay C. “Internet Resources for the Study of Judaism and Christianity” https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~jtreat/rs/resources.html.
Tufts University. “Perseus Digital Library” www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/. Excellent resource for the classics.
United Theological Seminary (MN). “Biblical Studies Internet Resources” unitedseminary.edu/library/resources/religion-theology-resources/biblical-studies-internet-resources/.
Wabash Center, For Teaching and Learning in Theology and Religion. “Religion on the Web” http://www.wabashcenter.wabash.edu/resources/guide_headings.aspx.
Western Seminary. “Library Internet Resources” westernseminary.edu/students/portland/library/internet-resources.
Yale Divinity School. “EIKON: Image Database for Biblical Studies” divdl.library.yale.edu/dl/index.aspx?qc=Eikon.
If they don’t know already, those who love classic works need to learn about the major project called Christian Classics Ethereal Library (www.ccel.org), which is now based at Calvin College. Previously Wheaton College had it. If you look up the free site, you can find an amazing assortment of materials: the writings of the church fathers, Calvin’s commentaries (19th century edition), Matthew Henry, ancient Greek texts, the Hebrew OT, etc. The index is already pages long, and new materials are being added on a regular basis. Another free site is Internet Archive (archive.org), which has digitized materials from many theological libraries, including Princeton Seminary and Harvard University. Basically, if a useful old book is not-in-copyright, it likely has been, or soon will be, made available online.
1. J. C. Ryle, “Memoir of Samuel Ward, BD,” in Samuel Ward, Sermons and Treatises (Edinburgh: James Nichol, 1862), xvi.
2. See the first item in Sinclair Ferguson, “A Preacher’s Decalogue,” Them 36.2 (2011): 261 – 68.
3. In pressing the point I add a clarification. The expression “hard reading” does not mean general book learning, but the minister’s discipline of work so as to become learned and powerful (or well versed) in the Scriptures (Acts 18:24). One could properly adapt Paul’s warning in 1 Cor 4:20 to read, “the kingdom of God does not consist in [book-smarts] but in power.”
4. Among so many excellent contributions in the Grant Osborne FS which discuss the usefulness of commentaries, see especially Robert W. Yarbrough, “The Pastoral Relevance of Commentaries” (pp. 215 – 34), and Walter L. Liefeld, “The Preaching Relevance of Commentaries” (235 – 52), in On the Writing of New Testament Commentaries, eds. Stanley E. Porter and Eckhard J. Schnabel (Leiden: Brill, 2013). I can highly recommend, too, the John Hartley FS: The Genre of Biblical Commentary, eds. Timothy D. Finlay and William Yarchin (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2015).
5. For further reflection on the art and purpose of commentary writing, see John Nolland, “The Purpose and Value of Commentaries,” JSNT 29.3 (2007): 305 – 11, and the six other commentators with similar essays in that issue; Richard N. Longenecker, “On the Writing of Biblical Commentaries,” in From Biblical Criticism to Biblical Faith (McDonald FS), eds. William Brackney and Craig Evans (Macon, GA: Mercer U. Press, 2007), 74 – 92; Brevard S. Childs, “The Genre of the Biblical Commentary as Problem and Challenge,” in Tehillah le-Moshe (Greenberg FS), eds. Mordechai Cogan, Barry Eichler, and Jeffrey Tigay (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1997), 185 – 92; Frederick W. Danker, “Commentaries and Their Uses,” in Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study, revised and exp. ed. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 282 – 307; Frank H. Gorman, “Commenting on Commentary: Reflections on a Genre,” in Relating to the Text, eds. J. Sandoval and C. Mandolfo, 100 – 119 (London: T&T Clark, 2003); and Walter C. Kaiser Jr., “Appendix B: The Usefulness of Biblical Commentaries for Preaching and Bible Study,” in Malachi: God’s Unchanging Love (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984).
6. C. H. Spurgeon, Commenting & Commentaries (London: Banner of Truth, 1969 reprint), 47. See also John Piper’s essay, “Brothers, Bitzer Was a Banker” (pp.81 – 88), in Brothers, We Are Not Professionals (Nashville: B&H, 2002); Heinrich Bitzer, ed, Light on the Path (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982 reprint); and Jason DeRouchie, “The Profit of Employing the Biblical Languages,” Them 37.1 (2012): 32 – 50.
7. Having said that, I might add that such Puritans’ digressions on systematic loci are usually worth reading.
8. Paul Ricoeur, The Symbolism of Evil, trans. by Emerson Buchanan (Boston: Beacon Press, 1969), 349.
9. Roland E. Murphy, review of Craig G. Bartholomew, Reading Ecclesiastes: Old Testament Exegesis and Hermeneutical Theory (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1998), in CBQ 61.4 (1999): 735.
10. For long years biblical scholarship was fixated on historical questions, and there were indefatigable efforts both to trace the compositional history (“the text’s becoming”) and to “get behind the text” so as to reconstruct the religio-historical context of the writing. Often enough those reconstructions contradicted the story presented in the text. From the 1960s onward scholars have become increasingly impatient with this focus, and they have shifted from historical to literary concerns (“the text’s being”). They want to study the art, the shape/structure, the rhetoric in the final-form. As one might expect, commentaries reflect this shift. Recommended reading: Craig Bartholomew, et al., eds., “Behind” the Text: History and Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003); David Firth and James Grant, eds., Words and the Word: Explorations in Biblical Interpretation and Literary Theory (Nottingham: Apollos, 2008); and Thomas Olbricht, “Rhetorical Criticism in Biblical Commentaries,” CBR 7.1 (2008): 11 – 36.
11. See the digital journal at http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/publications/?/themelios.
12. In addition to these, some of the best critical journals with reviews are: Catholic Biblical Quarterly; Expository Times (often the first review to appear); Interpretation; Journal of Biblical Literature (now in the auxiliary annual print publication Review of Biblical Literature and at http://www.bookreviews.org/); Hebrew Studies; Biblica; Vetus Testamentum; Novum Testamentum; Journal of Hebrew Scriptures (e-journal at http://jhsonline.org/); Journal of Theological Studies; and Biblical Interpretation (more monographs than commentaries). Other recommended evangelical periodicals are Denver Journal (http://www.denverseminary.edu/resources/denver-journal/); Reformed Theological Review; and Trinity Journal.
13. A pastor who wants to preach on Gideon or Samson is misled if Bauer does not recommend Block’s NAC work on Judges/Ruth. In Zondervan’s NIVAC, the pastor is helped immensely by Enns on Exodus, Jobes on Esther, and Duguid on Ezekiel. I could list many additional jewels in other series that he misses: Milgrom on Numbers; Christopher Wright on Deuteronomy; Provan on Kings; Murphy on Proverbs (WBC). On James he omits three top evangelical commentaries: McKnight (NICNT), Moo (Pillar), and Blomberg-Kamell (ZECNT). Once in a while, his “highly recommended” lists make no sense, as when he includes the Sanday-Headlam ICC on Romans but not Cranfield. We had better stop here: a survey of a survey of Bible commentaries can become silly.
14. There are reports that Dallas Seminary faculty will continue Glynn’s project and publish future editions.
15. In the 2003, 2007, and 2013 editions, we lacked reviews of Nelson on Deuteronomy; Hawk on Joshua; Schneider on Judges; Davidson on Psalms; the NCB volume on Hosea; Westermann on Lamentations; Macintosh’s ICC on Hosea; Wolff on Micah; and all the Abingdon OT Commentaries.
16. In Google Books I’ve seen pages of the revision: New Testament Books for Pastor and Teacher, Rev. ed. (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2002).
17. D. A. Carson, New Testament Commentary Survey, 7th ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013), viii.
18. Private correspondence with Rev. Doug Stelzig, a former missionary in South Africa.
19. Fred Craddock, the Bandy Distinguished Professor of Preaching and New Testament, Emeritus, at Candler School of Theology, has an interesting system of describing the books on a pastor’s bookshelf. He writes of classifying “resources for preaching according to the days of the week, Monday being farthest from the pulpit, Saturday being closest. The technically and critically heavy books . . . are called Monday books; those less so, Tuesday books. Wednesday books refer to those which are biblically and theologically substantive but which have preachers in mind. Thursday books make suggestions about how to preach their contents, Friday books contain sermon outlines, and Saturday books are collections of full sermons.” Luke, Interpretation (Louisville: John Knox Press, 1990), vii.
20. Some of these concerns and questions were culled from the 1982 commentary guide produced by Steven Schlei and Terry Eves for Westminster Seminary students.
21. Andrie B. du Toit, Review of Abraham J. Malherbe, The Letters to the Thessalonians, AB 32B (New York: Doubleday, 2000), in RelSRev 29.1 (2003): 46. The reviewer adds, “I once heard the late Willem van Unnik warn against writers who draw on nine other publications to produce a tenth.”
22. I am among those who believe that a neglect of the biblical theological (or redemptive historical) approach mutes true gospel proclamation in many pulpits today. Moralizing preaching is tiresome — see “A Paper Doll King David” in CT 6/16/97. But it is also dangerous theologically. I implore young seminarians to get well acquainted with IVP’s New Dictionary of Biblical Theology (2000) and to read and digest books like Sidney Greidanus’ Preaching Christ from the Old Testament (1999); Graeme Goldsworthy’s Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture (2000); and Edmund Clowney’s Preaching and Biblical Theology (1961), which on p.78 boldly says,
“Preaching which ignores the historia revelationis, which ‘again and again equates Abraham and us, Moses’s struggle and ours, Peter’s denial and our unfaithfulness; which proceeds only illustratively, does not bring the Word of God and does not permit the church to see the glory of the work of God; it only preaches man, the sinful, the sought, the redeemed, the pious man, but not Jesus Christ’ ” (Karl Dijk, De Dienst der Prediking [Kampen: KOK, 1955], 109).
23. I. Howard Marshall, Review of Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Epistle to the Ephesians (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991), in EvQ 68.1 (1996): 70. From the OT side, Richard Coggins has spoken of commentaries having suffered “a kind of elephantiasis” (Joel and Amos, NCB [Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000], vii).
24. E. W. Hengstenberg, The Prophecies of the Prophet Ezekiel Elucidated, trans. by A. C. Murphy and J. G. Murphy (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1869), v.
25. “Features of the New Interpreter’s Bible,” The New Interpreter’s Bible, 12 vols. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1994 – 2002), xviii.
26. See the vast project, Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception, eds. Dale C. Allison, Christine Helmer, Volker Leppin, Choon-Leong Seow, Hermann Spieckermann, Barry Dov Walfish, and Eric Ziolkowski (Berlin/ Boston: de Gruyter, 2009 – ); as well as The Journal of the Bible and Its Reception (JBRec); the online journal Relegere, based in New Zealand; The Oxford Handbook of the Reception History of the Bible, eds. Michael Lieb, Emma Mason, and Jonathan Roberts (Oxford: OUP, 2011); and the inauguration of a new monograph series with Emma England and William John Lyons, eds., Reception History and Biblical Studies: Theory and Practice, LHBOTS (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015). I also recommend the multiple essays in JSNT 33.2 (2010).
27. Brevard S. Childs, Old Testament Books for Pastor & Teacher (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1977), 11 – 12.
28. F. F. Bruce, The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon and to the Ephesians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), xii. Beginning students can feel distress when they encounter attacks upon the Bible and contradictions of their beliefs. Here we may listen to the counsel of I. Howard Marshall: “people who disagree with you may be wrong, even if you can’t immediately know how to refute them” (53). See Carl Trueman, “Interview with Professor Howard Marshall,” Them 26.1 (2000): 48 – 53.
29. This is a phrase from the “Editorial Preface” of the Word Biblical Commentary series.
30. In one of his defenses against Robert Carroll’s attacks on his Jeremiah scholarship, Walter Brueggemann (“Sometimes Wave, Sometimes Particle,” CBR 8.3 [2010]: 384) protested that Carroll imagines he has no theological commitments himself. “He seems not to realize that in all our interpretation, we are, willy-nilly, exhibiting our own views of God, try as we will for critical objectivity.”
31. Bultmann famously asserted, “it’s impossible to use the electric light and the radio . . . and at the same time believe in the New Testament world of spirits and miracles” (“Neues Testament und Mythologie” [1941], in Kerygma und Mythos: Ein theologisches Gespräch, I. Band, ed. Hans Werner Bartsch, 2nd ed. [Hamburg: Herbert Reich-Evangelischer Verlag, 1951], 18).
32. “Is a Critical Biblical Theology Possible?” The Hebrew Bible and Its Interpreters (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990), 14. Higher criticism commonly presents two challenges to evangelical, believing scholarship. The first is a “hermeneutic of suspicion” regarding the truth-claims and accuracy of the Scriptures. Michael Fox says, for example, “the willingness not to take a text at face value is the essence of critical scholarship” (Character and Ideology in the Book of Esther, 2nd ed. [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001], 148 – 49). The second challenge is the tendency of the more radical critics to reject the supernatural. Sheffield professor Philip R. Davies could not be clearer about his presuppositions, which amount to methodological atheism: “I don’t allow divine activity or any unqualifiable or undemonstrable cause as an arguable factor in historical reconstruction, and, even if I were to accept privately the possibility of such factors, I do not see how I could integrate such explanations into anything recognizable as a historical method” (“Method and Madness: Some Remarks on Doing History with the Bible,” JBL 114 [1995]: 703). Cf. R. Bultmann, “Is Exegesis Without Presuppositions Possible?” Existence and Faith (NY: Meridian, 1960), 291 – 92. Thankfully, Davies’s is still a minority view, and many moderately critical scholars would strenuously disagree. Such presuppositions make a huge difference in biblical studies, and my point here is that critical (or conservative) methodological assumptions can be noted as relevant in a guide to commentaries.
33. “If you regard biblical scholarship as a critical, academic task distant to the churches but of vital importance for public discourse, you will evaluate it differently than if you see the integration of work in academic contexts with constructive theological work in church contexts as giving biblical scholarship its raison d’être.” Hanna Stenström, Review of David deSilva, Seeing Things John’s Way (Louisville: WJK, 2009), in CBQ 74.2 (2012): 368.
34. David W. Baker and Bill T. Arnold, eds, “Preface” in The Face of Old Testament Studies: A Survey of Contemporary Approaches (Grand Rapids: Baker; Leicester: Apollos, 1999), 11.
35. Students have long repaired to such textbooks as Barton’s Reading the OT: Method in Biblical Study (rev. 1996); McKenzie and Haynes, eds., To Each Its Own Meaning: An Introduction to Biblical Criticisms and Their Application (rev. 1999); Soulen’s Handbook of Biblical Criticism (4th ed. 2011); Hayes and Holladay, Biblical Exegesis: A Beginner’s Handbook (3rd ed. 2007); or Barton, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Biblical Interpretation (1998). More in depth would be the many OT and NT volumes in the Fortress “Guides to Biblical Scholarship.” For a good overview of the aims of, and an apology for, historical criticism, see Barton, The Nature of Biblical Criticism (2007) [VT 59.1]. More conservative overviews are available in Armerding’s The OT and Criticism (1983) and the Klein – Blomberg – Hubbard Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (1993, rev. 2004) [Them 1/95].
36. I regret that I cannot be as enthusiastic about another Thiselton issue: A Concise Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Religion (2005), which is poorly edited [SwJT Fall 04]. A stimulating and sagacious study of the interface of hermeneutics and theology is Thiselton, The Hermeneutics of Doctrine (2007) [RelSRev 34.2; ExpTim 10/09].
37. Do note that Longman’s 3rd and succeeding editions do not contain the thirty or so pages of reference works reviews found in the earlier editions. To read his evaluation of OT introductions, OT theologies, OT histories, Bible atlases, Hebrew lexicons, etc., look up the 2nd ed. But as you consult that 1995 edition, keep in mind the important tools published in the intervening years. Here are examples: the 2-vol. “study edition” of The Hebrew & Aramaic Lexicon of the OT (HALOT); the Provan-Long-Longman A Biblical History of Israel; the 5-vol. New International Dictionary of OT Theology & Exegesis.
38. Childs, Old Testament Books for Pastor and Teacher, 30.
39. Excellent arguments for doing so are made in Dale C. Allison, “Matthew and the History of Interpretation,” ExpTim 120.1 (2008): 1 – 7. None of us wants to fall into the category of those Christian moderns chided by Mark Noll as full of “self-confidence, bordering on hubris, manifested by an extreme antitraditionalism that casually discounted the possibility of wisdom from earlier generations” (The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994], 127). See, too, C. S. Lewis’s warnings against “chronological snobbery” in his essay “On the Reading of Old Books” (God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics, ed. Walter Hooper [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970], 200 – 207).