★ Block, Daniel. (NICOT) 2 vols., 1997 – 98. Like Oswalt on Isaiah in the same series, this is a massive 2-vol. work (over 1700pp.). Block’s commentary is painstakingly exegetical, includes some mild form criticism, rhetorical criticism, and is mainly concerned with the final form of the text (à la Greenberg). This is an outstanding work: comprehensive in scope, lucid, quick to discuss both biblical and extra-biblical parallels, structural patterns, grammar, and translation issues. The organization of the vols. is similar to BKAT or WBC, which some believe makes them easier to consult. After his 60-page introduction Block deals with each section of text in (a) translation; (b) nature and design; (c) verse by verse exegesis; and (d) theological implications. Though I would never want to be without my Zimmerli and Greenberg sets, this is the best pick for the studious evangelical pastor. The manuscript was submitted in early 1994. Full disclosure: Block was the external examiner for my dissertation. [CBQ 4/99, 10/99; Bib 80.1; Int 7/99; JETS 12/99; WTJ Spr 99; SwJT Fall 00, Sum 01; BSac 10/98, 7/99; BL 1998, 1999; JSOT 78; RelSRev 10/99]. Students are glad to see a convenient collection of Block’s many Ezekiel articles in two 2013 vols: By the River Chebar, and Beyond the River Chebar [BBR 24.3; JSOT 38.5; ExpTim 2/15; RelSRev 6/14].
★ Duguid, Iain M. (NIVAC) 1999. This 550-page exposition builds upon his doctoral research at Cambridge: Ezekiel and the Leaders of Israel (1994). He has taught at Westminster California, Grove City College, and now Westminster Philadelphia. I like this professor’s biblical-theological approach which is sensitive to redemptive history themes. Though he was a young scholar when he wrote this vol., there is mature reflection, as seen in the lengthy Authors Cited index which includes church fathers and Puritans alongside today’s OT scholars. This book easily beats Stuart for a place on the pastor’s shelf; Duguid knows the literature better, digs deeper, and is more recent. I warmly commend Duguid’s work — buy it prior to Stuart and Wright — which is aimed at meeting the inadequacy he perceives in Block and Greenberg (see his review of Block in WTJ Spr 99). Students will find savvy exegesis here. By the way, people ask me how to pronounce his name; it is “Do-good.”
★ Joyce, Paul. [ℳ], 2007. Ezekiel scholars expected a strong entry, considering the promise shown in his DPhil, Divine Initiative and Human Response in Ezekiel (1989) [CRBR 1990], and the leadership he has given to the SBL Ezekiel study group. Originally this commentary was scheduled for release in NCB, but that series is defunct. Joyce has taught at Oxford and now London, and has given us a stellar, compact (somewhat selective), theologically oriented exegesis in about 300pp. One no longer has to pay $140 for the hb; a pb edition has been released ($40 on sale). I am glad for this because Joyce deserves wide usage. [BL 2008; ExpTim 7/08; JHebS 2008 (Sweeney); RBL 11/08 (Tuell); JTS 4/10; BibInt 18.2; CBQ 7/09; HS 2009; JSS Aut 09 (Allen); JSOT 35.5; BibInt 18.2; RelSRev 6/11; SJT 64.2]. I am glad to pass on Joyce’s commendation of Duguid and Wright as well suited for “preachers seeking encouragement and help in relating Ezekiel to the present day” [BSB 12/06].
★ Stuart, Douglas. (WCC) 1989. A more substantial vol. than one normally finds in WCC and a good theological guide. Stuart is one of the few full-time biblical scholars who has written for the WCC; he has pastored a church besides being Professor of OT at Gordon-Conwell. This is an excellent commentary for pastors and teachers, though now dated and less informed by scholarship. I only wish he (and other commentators as well) had wrestled more with the constant refrain, “you/they shall know that I am Yahweh,” which Driver once called “the keynote of Ezek.’s prophecies.” (See Zimmerli below.) Stuart is widely and cheaply available s/h.
★ Wright, Christopher J. H. (BST) 2001. This is a fine pb for preachers which could spark many sermons. Wright has long loved the book of Ezekiel and Ezekiel’s theology (see his editor’s column in Them 5/94), and it shows in his exposition here (368pp.). As a BST work it contains a pleasing amount of exegesis; some others in the series do not. One quibble: I question his proposal that Ezekiel teaches the salvation of the nations, even while I love his passion for missions reflected in his best-known book, The Mission of God (2006), a most impressive piece of work. [JSOT 99 (2002); Chm Win 02; Them Sum 05; Anvil 19.4, 20.4 (Renz)]. Other commentaries from Wright’s pen are on Deuteronomy, Jeremiah, and Lamentations.
✓ Alexander, Ralph H. (EBCR) 2010. The author’s 1986 EBC saw a fair amount of use as a conservative work, in part because there was little out there at the time (Keil, Taylor, Feinberg). Today, even with the 2010 update, Alexander seems to lack depth compared to other publications; we’re grateful to have it though. He is premillennial in his interpretation of the latter chapters (280pp.). See Brown on Jeremiah.
☆ Allen, Leslie C. [ℳ], Ezekiel 20 – 48 (WBC) 1990; Ezekiel 1 – 19 (WBC) 1994. The initial vol. picked up where Brownlee left off and did a competent job. This is quite valuable as a reference tool because of its strong scholarship and close working with the Hebrew. He states on pp.xix-xx that he carves out a niche for himself between practitioners of traditional historical-critical methods, especially form-criticism (Zimmerli), and those using a synchronic approach on the final form of the text (Greenberg). Allen does not often relate Ezekiel’s message to the NT. Consistent evangelicals will especially disagree with his treatment of the prophecy’s (alleged) multiple layers of redaction material. Also, I personally have greater confidence in the MT over against the LXX than Allen. The 1994 vol. replaces Brownlee and completes a useful reference set. Prior to NICOT, when I recommended Zimmerli, I wrote, “the frugal may prefer Allen to Zimmerli (Allen’s two vols. together cost about the same as one Hermeneia vol).” [CRBR 1996; WTJ Fall 91; VT 1/93; CBQ 10/92; SwJT Spr 96; JTS 4/96; JSOT 74; OTA 2/96; BSac 1/96; HS 1993].
✓ Beckwith, Carl L. Ezekiel, Daniel (RCS) 2012. The first OT entry in the series, Beckwith makes for fascinating reading, though many will prefer to read the full comments of, say, Calvin, rather than mere excerpts. The vol. is richer on Daniel, chiefly because more Reformers wrote on it. [JSOT 37.5; RelSRev 6/13].
Blackwood, Andrew W. Ezekiel: Prophecy of Hope, 1965; The Other Son of Man: Ezekiel/ Jesus, 1966. The sermonic material in these books gives good direction to the preacher. Blackwood was the longtime conservative homiletics prof at Princeton Seminary (my father’s in fact).
✓ Blenkinsopp, Joseph. ‡ (I) 1990. A good expositional commentary which fulfills the aims of the series. Blenkinsopp is an expert on OT prophecy — see his AB set on Isaiah. This vol. is not as good as Stuart, though, in explaining the message of the book. One minus, relative to Stuart, is his historical-critical approach (closer to Zimmerli than to Greenberg). Another main drawback would be Blenkinsopp’s general failure to discuss views which differ from his own. [CBQ 1/93; Int 1/92; JETS 6/95; CTJ 4/91; HS 1991; CRBR 1992].
✓ Bowen, Nancy. ‡ (AbOTC) 2010. Sharply critical in its interpretation, especially where the oracles or theology seem offensive to feminist sensibilities. Other vols. in the series include more straightforward exegesis, and Bowen is an atypical contribution (328pp.). Smith-Christopher’s advance praise explains that she “is particularly interesting as she weaves contemporary culture, trauma studies, and even insights of traditional ‘Spirituals’ where Ezekiel was a favored subject.” [BSB 6/11].
Briscoe, D. Stuart. All Things Weird and Wonderful, 1977. A popular, somewhat dispensational exposition.
✓ Brownlee, William H. ‡ Ezekiel 1 – 19 (WBC) 1986. Called a memorial vol. This noted Claremont prof died before the commentary could be completed. Some good scholarship at points, but in the main a disappointment. Brownlee would fall into the more critically oriented wing of evangelicalism, and I mark his work as critical (‡) because he argues against a Babylonian locale for the prophecies and because of all the supposed redaction. Actually, one could argue that he is more eccentric than liberal. This WBC is basically a museum piece already; see Allen. [RTR 9/87; WTJ Fall 88; Them 4/90; EvQ 1/89; HS 1987].
☆ Calvin, John. 1564. Covers only the first 20 chs. and is less valuable for that reason. The lectures were halted by serious illness, and the preface for its first publication was written by Beza after Calvin’s death. Much fine theology here. There are two editions available: the Calvin Translation Society (1849 – 50) — free online — and the Rutherford House translation covering Ezekiel 1 – 12 (ET 1994). Strange but true: Ezekiel has been termed “the Calvin of the OT” (Peake, 1904).
☆ Clements, Ronald E. ‡ (WestBC) 1996. A moderately critical treatment of the message. Clements attends to expositional and theological concerns rather than textual issues. He seeks to understand Ezekiel with traditio-historical research. The vol. is less helpful to preachers, for he has concentrated almost wholly on what Ezekiel meant and not on what it means today. Clements certainly knows this book well. He undertook the translation of Zimmerli’s first vol. [Them 2/99; Int 1/98; CBQ 10/97; SwJT Sum 98; BSac 4/98; HBT 6/97].
F Cook, Stephen L. ‡ Ezekiel 38 – 48 (AYB). See Greenberg and Milgrom below.
✓ Cook, Stephen L., and Corrine L. Patton, eds. ‡ Ezekiel’s Hierarchical World, 2004. Collected essays from SBL symposia. [JSS Spr 08; VT 57.3].
✓ Cooke, G. A. ‡ (ICC) 1937. Fairly conservative as a commentator on Ezekiel in the 1930s; in some respects Cooke’s approach anticipated developments in Ezekiel studies 20 years later. “Cooke stands out for his particularly careful work on the text” (Zimmerli). The student will find this ICC easier to use than many others in the series.
✓ Cooper, Lamar E. (NAC) 1994. Well written from a dispensational perspective, but not a profound work (NAC usually does not aim to be). Useful for understanding the dispensational approach to this book. The Reformed pastor will find Duguid to be more helpful and a sounder theological guide. There are both scathing reviews [JSOT 12/95; VT 46.2] and fairer, kinder ones [HS 1995 (Boadt)].
☆ Craigie, Peter C. (DSB) 1983. Lots here for the pastor. Good scholarship underlies this devotional exposition. Provides more background information than most others in the series. Longman once suggested you start with this commentary. I used to recommend it for purchase. [JBL 104.4].
✓ Darr, Katheryn Pfisterer. ‡ (NIB) 2001. A pleasingly full interpretation (over 530pp.) which students should consult. Darr is more conservative (like Greenberg and Block) in the way she treats the text and questions of compositional history. I have few quarrels with her approach — only where a reader-oriented emphasis seems overdone. Count this as one of the top five or six commentaries on the book at present.
✓ Davidson, Andrew B. [ℳ], (CBSC) 1916. In my opinion, Davidson’s vols. were among the best in this old series. They are always lucid and reflect thorough scholarship. This particular book is still consulted. Davidson was partly responsible for the infusion of continental higher criticism into British scholarship.
✓ Davis, Ellen F. ‡ Swallowing the Scroll, 1989. Not a commentary, but a revised Yale PhD. Davis, together with Brevard Childs’s Introduction to the OT as Scripture, pointed Ezekiel scholarship in a new direction by critiquing Zimmerli’s approach of form-criticism. She argues that “the very thing for which we lack evidence is the fundamental stratum of orally conceived preaching” (p.17), and that students of the prophecy should recognize that Ezekiel was composed as a literary work and must be interpreted as such.
☆ Eichrodt, Walther. ‡ (OTL) ET 1970. A highly respected critical work. The vol. focuses on his forte, biblical theology, and is valuable for that theological discussion. The commentary is marred somewhat by textual emendations in deference to the shorter LXX (see his introduction, p.12). [JBL 86.3].
☆ Fairbairn, Patrick. 2nd ed. 1855. Reprinted by Klock & Klock (1989) and Wakeman (2000), this warm exposition has long been a useful tool for pastors. The approach is strongly theological with stresses on covenant and amillennial eschatology. Fairbairn was a pastor and seminary professor in the (Presbyterian) Free Church of Scotland. Today, pastors will view recent commentaries as more valuable, but if you are the type who loves Banner’s “Geneva Series,” consider this for purchase. It is also free online.
Feinberg, Charles L. 1969. From the dispensational camp. This is an exposition rather than an exegesis, written with the layman in mind. Better, from that same theological camp, is Cooper.
✓ Greenberg, Moshe. [ℳ], Ezekiel 1 – 20 (AB) 1983; Ezekiel 21 – 37 (AB) 1997. This scintillating commentary far extends our knowledge of the prophecy. An excellent resource for its philological work and its sensitive, patient literary reading of Ezekiel. (See his explanation of his “holistic interpretation” in Ezekiel 1 – 20, pp.18 – 27.) Greenberg teases out interesting links with other biblical texts. He has respect for the Hebrew text and takes a conservative approach toward text criticism. This commentary and Zimmerli’s are the most influential right now in academic circles — two of the very best critical commentaries written on any OT book. (Block writes, “No scholar has had a greater influence on my understanding of and approach to the book than Professor Greenberg.”) This work does not provide any Christian interpretation of this prophecy for Greenberg’s faith was Judaism; that is not to say there is no theology here. The publisher tells us to expect one more vol. to complete this set (see Cook above, and note Milgrom below). That will give us three AB 3-vol. sets on the Major Prophets. [JBL 105.1; Int 38, pp. 210 – 17; JETS 12/99; WTJ Spr 99; JSOT 79; JR 7/99].
☆ Greenhill, William. (GS) 1645 – 67, 1995 reprint. As is typical of Puritan works, Greenhill is very large (859pp.) and provides good food for thought, if one is willing to plow through a lot of pages. I was pleasantly surprised by Greenhill because I expected him to expound points of systematic theology suggested by the text (the typical Puritan approach) and provide less exegesis and interpretive comment than he does. He generally sticks with the text. [CTJ 11/95; RTR 9/95].
✓ Hals, R. M. ‡ (FOTL) 1989. One of the best vols. in this form-critical series and especially useful to specialists, few others. [CRBR 1991; HS 1991; JETS 9/92; VT 7/93; Them 10/91].
✓ Hengstenberg, E. W. ET 1869. Many pastors in past generations found this helpful and it remains valuable, but today it is hard to find a copy (o/p). You can find it online free. Hengstenberg and Keil were stalwart conservatives in German OT scholarship, fighting the incoming tide of what was termed “destructive criticism” during the mid – 19th century.
F Hilber, John W. (TTC).
✓ Hummel, Horace D. (Concord) 2 Vols., 2005 – 07. This is a massive conservative Lutheran treatment of Ezekiel by a longtime seminary professor. There is exegesis of the Hebrew, but the theological (quite christological) exposition of the prophet’s message is accessible to laypeople. The first vol. runs over 600pp., and the second is nearly 900. One of the better works in the series (see under “Commentary Series”). [EvQ 10/07; BSac 7/06; JETS 3/09].
☆ Jenson, Robert W. [ℳ], (Brazos) 2009. About 350pp. of theological reflections by a famous retired systematic theologian (Lutheran), who has become a more conservative voice in mainline circles over the last couple of decades at St. Olaf College and then at the Center of Theological Inquiry in Princeton. He has issued appeals for the church to return to a sturdy Nicene faith. Pannenberg has spoken of Jenson as “one of the most original and knowledgeable theologians of our time.” Thankfully, this commentary on Ezekiel is more closely tied to the text than some other entries in the Brazos series. It is stimulating, wide-ranging, brainy stuff, but students should expect minimal interaction with OT scholarship. [JTI Spr 10; BL 2010; CTJ 11/11; JETS 12/10].
✓ Joyce, Paul M., and Dalit Rom-Shiloni, eds. ‡ The God Ezekiel Creates, 2014. [JSOT 39.5].
✓ Keil, Carl F. (KD) ET 1882. I have found this commentary to be rich and full (860pp.). Excellent treatment of theological issues and careful (now very dated) work with the language.
Kelle, Brad E. ‡ (NBBC) 2013. An interesting mix of good scholarship, Wesleyan-oriented theological reflection, insights from trauma studies, and contemporary application. The author writes well and the book is accessible to non-specialists. [RelSRev 6/13].
F Konkel, Michael. ‡ (IECOT).
F Launderville, Dale. ‡ (Illum).
✓ Levenson, Jon D. ‡ Theology of the Restoration of Ezekiel 40 – 48, 1976. An important scholarly monograph, one with origins as a Harvard dissertation, with much to teach the student. Conservatively critical.
Lind, Millard. [ℳ], (BCBC) 1996. The author, as well as the series, comes out of the Anabaptist tradition, and the peace-movement affiliation is reflected in the exegesis and application. Lind detheologizes Gog and understands it as a reference, not to ungodly powers who fiercely oppose the people and purposes of God, but as a “metaphor for greedy, militaristic politics” (p.317). A proper reading of Ezekiel 38 – 39 then leads us to fight the Strategic Defense Initiative of the Republicans (321). That is all very interesting, but I count it one example among several in the book where Lind seems to father his own convictions onto the OT prophet and mutes “the authentic voice of the OT.” [OTA 10/97; RelSRev 1/98].
✓ Lust, J., ed. ‡ Ezekiel and his Book, 1986. A much-cited collection of essays.
✓ Lyons, Michael A. [ℳ], From Law to Prophecy: Ezekiel’s Use of the Holiness Code, 2009. One of the best PhD dissertations I’ve seen in a long time. Conservatively critical, Lyons argues that the prophet was an interpreter of the law. [BBR 21.1].
F Mackay, John L. (Mentor).
F Mein, Andrew. ‡ (BBC). Mein teaches at Westcott House in Cambridge, is a recognized Ezekiel scholar, and co-edits LHBOTS. See also Joyce and Mein, eds., After Ezekiel: Essays on the Reception of a Difficult Prophet (2011) [JSOT 38.5; BibInt 20.4].
☆ Milgrom, Jacob, and Daniel I. Block. [ℳ], Ezekiel’s Hope: A Commentary on Ezekiel 38 – 48, 2012. Complicated story here. Greenberg had a long illness and passed away in May 2010 without completing his AB set. The respected Jewish critic, Milgrom, agreed to author the final vol., but he died a month after Greenberg. Shortly before his death, he enlisted the help of Block to help him prepare his manuscript. The result is this conversation between the two, and we are grateful it has appeared (outside any series). There are a few odd features — e.g. Milgrom understood the temple of chs. 40 – 48 to have been patterned on Delphi. Block and Joel Duman (Milgrom’s assistant) have completed a successful rescue operation. Still, this is Milgrom’s book in the main, and he sometimes “was delighted to do battle with Block” (xvii). [BBR 23.4 (Martens); CBQ 10/13; JSOT 38.5; VT 64.2; Them 11/14].
Naylor, Peter. (EPSC) 2011. Regrettably this well-educated English pastor (†2007) did not live to see his full exposition published (800pp.). Naylor was a Reformed Baptist who trained at London, Hebrew U. in Jerusalem, and Potchefstroom. He offers a phrase-by-phrase interpretation of his own translation of the Hebrew, with Application sections at the close of each chapter. He believes Ezek 34 – 39 “refer to the spiritual renewal of Israel, Abraham’s natural children, at some time prior to the Second Coming of Christ,” and “chapters 40 – 48 have to do with the heavenly scene” (p.11). [RTR 8/13].
✓ Odell, Margaret S. ‡ (S&H) 2005. The author has been engaged in Ezekiel studies since the 1990s, including (often leading) participation in SBL’s Ezekiel Seminar. She knows the scholarship, has thought deeply about Ezekiel and its relevance, and writes well. This is a leading commentary. My trouble here is that Odell believes we must look outside the prophet’s Jewish heritage (see p.4) to find the main influences or models influencing Ezekiel as a cohesive, primarily literary prophecy. For example, she goes to 7th century Assyrian building inscriptions, when I want to go to Exodus and Leviticus. Darr’s more mainstream exposition, though without Odell’s visually engaging illustrations, is both more theological and more valuable among critical interpretations. [Int 4/07; ThTo 1/07; RBL; CJ 7/07].
✓ Odell, Margaret S., and John T. Strong, eds. ‡ The Book of Ezekiel: Theological and Anthropological Perspectives, 2000. This book of essays from SBL was followed by Cook/ Patton above. [VT 55.2; JAOS 123.4].
F Patton, Corrine. ‡ Ezekiel 25 – 48 (HCOT). See Herrie van Rooy below.
F Phinney, D. Nathan. (SGBC).
✓ Renz, Thomas. The Rhetorical Function of the Book of Ezekiel, 1999. An excellent PhD.
F Rooker, Mark F. (EEC). The author has both a dissertation and an expositional commentary (HolOT) on Ezekiel already published; the latter is perhaps the best in that weak series.
F Rooy, Herrie F. van. ‡ Ezekiel 1 – 24 (HCOT). See Corrine Patton above.
F Ruiz, Jean-Pierre. ‡ (BerO).
Schröder, F. W. J. (Lange) ET 1873. This remarkable but forgotten work examines all aspects of the prophecy. It is conservative in approach with full exegesis and many homiletical hints. In the 1960s Feinberg said that this was still “among the finest on Ezekiel.” Wipf & Stock reprinted Schröder in 2007. It is now free online.
Skinner, John. ‡ (EB) 1895.
✓ Stevenson, Kenneth, and Michael Glerup, eds. Ezekiel, Daniel (ACCS) 2008. Some of us find it regrettable that Ezekiel has far fewer pages in this vol. than Daniel.
Sweeney, Marvin A. ‡ Reading Ezekiel (ROT) 2013. [RelSRev 3/14].
Taylor, John. (TOTC) 1969. A competent exposition by an Anglican bishop. Helpful for the beginner, but Ezekiel studies have come a long way since 1969. Quite readable; I read it all the way through.
☆ Thomas, Derek. God Strengthens: Ezekiel Simply Explained (WCS) 1991.
Thompson, David L., and Eugene Carpenter. Ezekiel, Daniel (CorBC) 2010. Thompson, a writer and minister in the Wesleyan Church, contributed the Ezekiel commentary.
F Tiemeyer, Lena-Sofia. (Apollos). She told me this will not appear.
✓ Tooman, William A., and Michael A. Lyons, eds. ‡ Transforming Visions: Transformations of Text, Tradition, and Theology in Ezekiel, 2010. [CBQ 1/13; JSOT 35.5; VT 61.4; ExpTim 5/13; RelSRev 3/11].
☆ Tuell, Steven S. ‡ (NIBC) 2009. This vol. of 368pp. is written by a recognized Ezekiel scholar teaching at Pittsburgh Seminary (PCUSA). In light of Tuell’s past research and my reading here, I would class this inexpensive and well-written exegesis as moderately critical. Many pastors may find the discussion of compositional history a distraction, especially when he argues for a tension between redactional layers (i.e. between chs. 1 – 39 and 40 – 48). [JETS 9/09; Them 4/10; BTB 8/10; BBR 21.2; Int 7/12 (Allen); RTR 8/12; HS 2010].
✓ Vawter, Bruce, and Leslie J. Hoppe. ‡ (ITC) 1991. As a brief critical treatment with theological concerns, this has value. [HS 1993].
✓ Wevers, John W. ‡ (NCB) 1969. Gives a concise, useful treatment of the historical-critical issues confronting the interpreter 50 years ago, but the commentary is not very interesting and is hard of hearing when it comes to theology. See Joyce.
☆ Zimmerli, Walther. ‡ (Herm) 2 vols., ET 1979 – 82. “It is hard to believe that this exhaustive commentary will be superseded within the next few generations” (Childs). Relatively critical, this magisterial work reflects a lifetime of assiduous textual, form-critical, and tradition-history research. This commentary is not for everyone, but if you have a keen mind and are very serious about studying the Hebrew text and understanding Ezekiel in-depth, you ought to purchase these vols. The cost is substantial, so I counsel you not to invest your money if you’re not planning on investing hard hours of study. But if you buy it, this commentary will more than repay study. Prior to Block, I recommended purchasing Zimmerli, not only for the technical detail but also for the profound theological engagement with the text. [JBL 105.2; ThTo 37.1; CBQ 10/81; Int 4/84; HS 1984]. Note: students may want to consult Zimmerli’s important little book of essays entitled I Am Yahweh (ET 1982), which includes an important study of the “recognition formula” (see note below for more on the topic).
NOTES: (1) See the three review-essays now gathered in Alan J. Hauser, ed., Recent Research on the Major Prophets (Sheffield Phoenix, 2008). They are: K. Pfisterer Darr, “Ezekiel among the Critics,” CurBS 2 (1994): 9 – 24; Risa Levitt Kohn, “Ezekiel at the Turn of the Century,” CBR 2.1 (2003): 9 – 31; and idem, “Ezekiel Update.” (2) John Olley, “Trajectories of Ezekiel,” CBR 9.2 (2011): 137 – 70, and CBR 10.1 (2011): 53 – 80. (3) The keynote of Ezekiel is the recognition formula, “you/they shall know that I am Yahweh,” which occurs over 70 times. Those interested in the topic may hunt for my 2006 dissertation: “An Inner-Biblical Interpretation and Intertextual Reading of Ezekiel’s Recognition Formulae with the Book of Exodus.” I hope to see it published by 2017.
★ Baldwin, Joyce G. (TOTC) 1978. First-rate when it appeared, but now showing its age in a few areas (e.g. the handling of apocalyptic). Fine introduction, responsible exegesis, and solid theological comment. She packs a great deal of content into 210pp. The 75-page introduction alone is probably worth the price of the book. Years ago, this was Stuart’s first pick among the conservative works. The critical commentator Redditt, even in 2008, called this excellent. Was reset in a more readable type-face and reissued in 2009. [WTJ Fall 79; EvQ 4/79; JBL 99.3; JETS 12/80].
★ Calvin, John. (GS) 1561, ET 1852 – 53. About 800pp. of commentary from the Reformer, available free online. Calvin was being retranslated, and the first Eerdmans vol. (chs. 1 – 6) appeared in 1993 (“Rutherford House Translation”). I suppose the project died.
★ Duguid, Iain M. Daniel (REC) 2008. Exemplary expositions by an excellent OT scholar, one who spends time in the pulpit. They prompt the preacher to interpret Daniel along redemptive-historical lines and to develop the connections between the Testaments. Despite the series being termed a “commentary,” this is a book of sermonic material. Students will look elsewhere. [JETS 3/09]. See Duguid on Ezekiel and Ruth/Esther.
★ Ferguson, Sinclair B. (WCC) 1988. Anyone who has read Ferguson’s books will be interested in obtaining this. He was pastor at St. George’s Tron in Glasgow and First Presbyterian (ARP) in Columbia, SC, but most of his career was spent teaching systematics at Westminster Seminary. Along with Stuart on Ezekiel, perhaps the best in the WCC series in providing theological guidance. Ferguson tries to be suggestive rather than exhaustive. There are helpful anecdotes, pastoral insight, great theology, and sane exposition on a book that needs it. Compare with Longman, Davis, Greidanus, and Wallace; all four are superb.
★ Goldingay, John E. ‡ (WBC) 1989. Though he stands painfully loose on matters of date and historicity (assumes a late date and doubts the inspiring stories are grounded in historical events), Goldingay has given us a valuable commentary for close work with the Hebrew and Aramaic. He engages in what may be termed “double tracking,” often masterfully drawing out the theological message of the narrative (even from an evangelical perspective), while talking about folk-tales and legendary materials. He debases the coinage with which he trades. It all makes some conservatives nervous about the future of Anglo-American evangelical scholarship. Though WBC makes few concessions to our concerns as preachers and determinedly sticks to exegesis, this vol. includes some very thoughtful application. Advanced students and scholarly pastors will definitely want this; compare with Collins, which is also considered indispensable for scholars. [Them 1/92; CRBR 1990].
★ Longman, Tremper, III. (NIVAC) 1999. Like Ferguson, his former colleague at Westminster in Philadelphia, Longman is a great expositional and theological help. Of course they also share a Reformed orientation. Where they differ is in their areas of expertise: Longman is an OT scholar and Ferguson a systematic theologian who is nonetheless alert to redemptive historical themes. I would not want to pick between them. Be assured they both will inspire you to do a sermon series on Daniel. (Aside: It wouldn’t hurt Longman to express a bit more confidence in his conservative views on the dating issue.)
★ Lucas, Ernest C. [ℳ], (Apollos) 2002. With regard to both critical dating and main lines of interpretation, this well-researched vol. can be likened to Goldingay. (Lucas believes “it is possible to make a reasoned, and reasonable, defence of a late sixth-century or early fifth-century date for the book,” but doesn’t.) Perhaps one might say it is like an updated, less technical Goldingay. Some conservatives were hoping this series would offer an updated, more technical Baldwin instead. Most pastors would be well content with the exegetical guidance offered in the trio of Baldwin, Longman, and Lucas; they would not feel a lack without Goldingay and Collins on their shelf. Students are likely to learn more from Goldingay than Lucas. [Them Sum 04; JETS 6/03; Int 4/04; JSOT 27.5; Chm Sum 04; EvQ 1/05; Evangel Sum 04; Anvil 20.3].
☆ Alter, Robert. ‡ Strong as Death Is Love: The Song of Songs, Ruth, Esther, Jonah, and Daniel, 2015. See under Ruth.
✓ Anderson, Robert. Daniel in the Critics Den, 1902. An old apology for the traditional view of Daniel as 6th century prophecy. Don’t confuse this work with Josh McDowell’s popular book of the same title.
Anderson, Robert A. ‡ Signs and Wonders (ITC) 1984.
✓ Archer, Gleason L. (EBC) 1985. A premillennial, but not dispensational, work. Archer was a stalwart opponent of higher criticism and offered more of a historical exegesis, defending a 6th century date. (One can also find those arguments in his OT introduction.) Theological interpretation was not his strong point — he was brilliant in other ways. See Hill below. [JBL 3/87].
F Boadt, Lawrence E. ‡ (BerO). There will be a reassignment after his death.
☆ Boice, James M. An Expositional Commentary, 1989.
✓ Buchanan, George Wesley. ‡ (Mellen Biblical Commentaries) 1999. I have yet to see this large (500pp.) and expensive ($120) vol. It reportedly is especially concerned with intertextuality. [OTA 10/00; JSOT 94].
Carpenter, Eugene. (CorBC) 2010. Carpenter has done the work on Daniel in vol. #9: Ezekiel, Daniel. David L. Thompson is responsible for the Ezekiel portion. I have not seen this book (448pp.).
☆ Chapell, Bryan. Standing Your Ground, 1990. Like Boice, this series of sermons served preachers well as a model for preaching Christ from this OT book and was attractive because of its reasonable price. In 2014, The Gospel According to Daniel was released, also by Baker. I’ve not seen the new issue, but the author tells me “the opening chapters are an expansion, but the second half of the book is all new material.”
✓ Charles, R. H. ‡ 1929. Charles is best known for editing the massive Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the OT and his two vols. on Revelation in the ICC. Here he takes up an OT apocalyptic book. This work on Daniel was published by Oxford’s Clarendon Press and is very technical.
✓ Collins, John J. ‡ Daniel. With an Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature (FOTL) 1984. A slim, useful handbook which fulfills the aims of the series. The author built on his earlier monograph, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (1977). FOTL is superseded by Hermeneia below. [EvQ 4/87; JBL 106.2; JETS 12/85; Evangel Spr 86; Them 1/86].
✓ Collins, John J. ‡ (Herm) 1993. This comprehensive historical-critical commentary (528pp.) follows on the heels of the above FOTL and is now the leader in its category. Though Montgomery will continue to be consulted for decades to come, Collins is now to be considered the most important reference for specialists doing philological work and detailed exegesis. Note, however, that he largely confines himself to the older historical and literary-critical methods, which is in keeping with the overall aims of the series (excluding Shalom Paul on Amos). Collins is also a world-leading expert on apocalyptic. Compare with the WBC by Goldingay, which has much more to say theologically. Pastors will prefer WBC. [Bib 77.4; JSOT 6/95; CBQ 10/95; JTS 4/95; Int 1/96; Them 10/95; JETS 3/98; JSS Spr 99; VT 46.4; SJT 49.3; JR 7/96].
✓ Collins, John J., and Peter W. Flint, eds. ‡ The Book of Daniel, Composition and Reception, 2 vols., 2001. A huge project (over 700pp.) in a Brill series. [JTS 4/03; JBL Fall 02; JSOT 99; RelSRev 10/02; BBR 14.2].
Culver, R. D. Daniel and the Latter Days, 1954. Strongly dispensational. See Miller for the best current presentation of that more literalistic, prophetic approach to Daniel.
✓ Davies, Philip R. ‡ (OT Guides) 1985. Quick survey of critical scholarship and its conclusions done by a brilliant and quite critical Sheffield professor.
☆ Davis, Dale Ralph. (replacement BST) 2013. A veteran commentator (see Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings), Davis offers a strong, concise biblical-theological exposition from a Reformed viewpoint (170pp.). Can be recommended without hesitation to preachers or a Bible study group. I predict many pastors would prefer Davis to a couple of my recommendations above. As with his other books, I bought it. [Chm Sum 14; Them 11/14; Anvil 3/14].
F Dimant, Devorah. ‡ (IECOT).
✓ DiTommaso, Lorenzo. ‡ The Book of Daniel and the Apocryphal Daniel Literature, 2005. Huge Brill study mainly focused on the Apocryphal literature.
✓ Driver, Samuel R. ‡ (CBSC) 1900. This is a classic statement of the liberal position. The old Robert Anderson published his response two years later (1902).
Edlin, Jim. [ℳ], (NBBC) 2009. [RelSRev 3/11].
✓ Fewell, Danna Nolan. ‡ Circle of Sovereignty, 1988, 2nd ed. 1991. Provides a “close reading” of chs. 1 – 6, using the new literary criticism. This work is often cited in the literature and deserves attention as one of the first examples of narrative criticism in Daniel studies. The conclusion drawn, that the stories develop the theme of conflict between human and divine sovereignty (the kingdom of God), is convincing and also helps readers integrate the stories with the visions. Conservatives will probably ignore the reader-response elements here. [CRBR 1991].
F Finley, Thomas J. Will this be in a series?
Fyall, Robert. (Focus on the Bible) 1998. A warm, devout exposition from a conservative, very capable Reformed OT scholar in Scotland.
✓ Gowan, Donald E. ‡ (AbOTC) 2001. Another accessible, mainline critical exegesis from this newer series. Those who are intimidated by Goldingay and Collins might turn here. Gowan’s theological interpretation emphasizes the sovereign rule of God as the hope of the faithful in trying situations. Lucas knows Daniel scholarship better than Gowan and is a better, more conservative guide for exegesis and theology. [CBQ 7/03; JETS 6/03; ExpTim 3/03; JSOT 99; ThTo 7/02].
☆ Greidanus, Sidney. Preaching Christ from Daniel, 2012. Following up his books on Genesis and Ecclesiastes, the retired Calvin Seminary professor of homiletics gives superb guidance on this subject (both interpreting the message of Daniel and approaching the preaching task). He is solidly conservative in approach and will be a help to any evangelical expositor (450pp.). Three model sermons are in an appendix. For a taste see “Applying Daniel’s Messages to the Church Today,” CTJ 47 (2012): 257 – 74, which includes a clever Berkouwer illustration of a Christian perspective on “the last days”: “[w]e are now traveling along the edge of time, like walking a trail winding along the edge of a cliff.” [CTJ 11/14; JSOT 38.5; JETS 9/13; SBET Aut 14; RTR 8/13].
☆ Hamilton, James M., Jr. With the Clouds of Heaven: The Book of Daniel in Biblical Theology, 2014. A very fine entry in IVP’s NSBT, offering a canonical reading with real insight (about 230pp.). The NT use of Daniel materials is covered, but Hamilton gives somewhat less attention to the deadly serious stories in chs. 3 – 6. Pastors planning a sermon series on Daniel would be enriched by this study of all the connections with other Bible books. [JETS 12/14].
☆ Harman, Allan. (EPSC) 2007. A full (333pp.), fresh, conservative interpretation which will aid preachers especially. Harman can teach the student too, but this does not contain the detailed and deep scholarship one finds in technical works. He places emphasis, rightly in my view, on the kingdom theology in the book. [RTR 4/08].
✓ Hartman, L. F., and A. A. DiLella. ‡ (AB) 1978. Though not one of the stronger AB vols., in places it contributes to the scholarly discussion. The authors are Catholic critics who well present the critical arguments that the stories and visions of Daniel address the situation of the Maccabean revolt and its aftermath. [JBL 12/79].
Heaton, E. ‡ (Torch Bible Commentary) 1956.
Hebbard, Aaron B. ‡ Reading Daniel as a Text in Theological Hermeneutics, 2009. [JETS6/10].
Helm, David. Daniel for You, 2015. Sermonic material. I have not seen it, but I know Helm to be a most thoughtful preacher. See Keller on Judges, and Helm on 1 – 2 Peter, Jude.
☆ Hill, Andrew. (EBCR) 2008. This is a fine piece of work (190pp.) and an improvement upon Archer in terms of usefulness to the expository preacher (more literary and theological insight). While solidly conservative, the tone of Hill’s commentary is less polemical than Archer on historical-critical matters. As with the old EBC, a vol. on Daniel to Malachi completes the OT section. Worth buying. [BL 2010].
✓ Holm, Tawny L. ‡ Of Courtiers and Kings: The Biblical Daniel Narratives and Ancient Story-Collections, 2013. A Johns Hopkins dissertation.
St. Jerome. Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel, ET 1977. The translation was done by Archer.
Jordan, James B. The Handwriting on the Wall, 2007. A theological exposition (over 700pp.) that is best avoided. The defects of his Judges work are present here (e.g. p.115).
✓ Keil, Carl F. (KD) ET 1872.
✓ Lacocque, André. ‡ ET 1979. John Knox Press thought this French work important enough to put into translation. Accessible to non-specialists, but includes notes on the Hebrew. Davies opines that the work can be “erratic, but often brilliant, especially on the literary qualities of Daniel” (p.9). Note: the author, long at Chicago Theological Seminary, prefers the spelling LaCocque. He followed up his quite critical commentary with Daniel in His Time (1988). [EvQ 4/79; JBL 100.2; RTR 1/80].
Lang, George H. The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel. 1950. This work expounds the book within a historic premillennial framework.
Lederach, Paul. [ℳ], (BCBC) 1994. Wants to take a mediating position, that the stories are early but the book is 2nd century BC. Lederach is an educator rather than OT specialist. This is not designed for students.
Leupold, H. C. 1969. Another fairly thorough exposition from this old evangelical Lutheran scholar. [WTJ 13.1].
F Mastin, Brian. ‡ (ICC – new series).
✓ Miller, Stephen R. (NAC) 1994. Though I’ve made less use of this sizeable exegesis (352pp.), I know to consult Miller to get the best dispensationalism has to offer in interpreting Daniel. It is well described as a more moderate dispensationalism — more cognizant of, and in tune with, developments in broader evangelicalism than that school used to be. The conclusions are “vintage dispensationalism” (Schibler), except for his interpretation of chs. 10 – 11. Compare with Wood and Walvoord. I regard Miller as much more valuable, both in terms of OT studies and theology. [Them 10/95; CBQ 1/97].
✓ Montgomery, James A. ‡ (ICC) 1927. This is definitely a classic with its full treatment of textual and philological matters, but little theology. Prior to Goldingay and Collins’s Hermeneia — to consider only works in English — Montgomery’s technical commentary was the starting point in scholarly discussion. It still is a key starting point. Young constantly interacts with the ICC.
✓ Nelson, William. [ℳ], (UBC) 2012. Certainly a well-informed exegetical commentary, written by an evangelical scholar at Westmont College. Nelson has a Harvard PhD and adopts a more critical stance on many issues. E.g. traditions about Daniel originally circulated independently of traditions about the three heroes, Hananiah, Azariah, and Mishael; we know this, he says, because there is no Daniel in ch. 3 and no three friends in ch. 6 (p.53 – 54). He concludes that here and there we find “a somewhat fictionalized account told for theological purposes” (p.146). He says, “there are good reasons for questioning whether the prayer [ch. 9] belongs to the earliest stratum of the book” (p.222) and believes it is a later interpolation. Students will find Nelson a useful reference, but many pastors will be disappointed by the critical spirit and how the historical cast of the commentary leaves less space for theological engagement with the text (320pp.).
✓ Newsom, Carol A. ‡ (OTL replacement) 2014. Not a routine commentary. Scholars are glad to see a more up-to-date critical commentary appear (400pp.); that has been a need. Regrettably, the only evangelical writers mentioned by Newsom are the old dispensationalists, C. I. Scofield and Clarence Larkin (charts included). The strengths here are discussion of current scholarship (e.g. postcolonial interpretation of chs. 1 – 6), a close narrative reading, harvesting the insights of research on apocalyptic (that field has grown immensely since Porteous’s day), careful exegetical work, and a fresh theological approach. Here is a taste: “While one can certainly read these narratives in light of the challenges posed to the Jewish characters . . . a good case can be made that the true focus is on the figure of the Gentile king. The drama of the stories can be grasped in terms of whether or how the Gentile king will recognize the true nature of eternal divine sovereignty and the actual source of his own, delegated sovereignty” (p.33). Note that the focus is not at all on linguistic details. The author was assisted by Brennan W. Breed, who wrote supplementary sections on reception history (art images included). See Porteous. [JETS 6/15; BBR 25.2].
Olyott, Stuart. Dare to Stand Alone (WCS) 1982. Provides expositional help.
Pace, Sharon. ‡ (S&H) 2008. The author, who teaches at Marquette, aims to offer a theological exposition (350pp.), building on the base of historical-critical conclusions regarding compositional history. I judge that this vol. will be of less use to students than many others in the series. Perhaps Pace is of limited use for (evangelical) pastors too, since the reflections on contemporary relevance (“Connections”) tend not to focus on the text as God’s word or as containing any gospel. E.g., see pp.183 – 92, where the story of Belshazzar’s feast is a springboard to talk about inter-religious respect and dialogue. Is that what ch. 5 is about? [JETS 3/10; Int 7/09 (Towner)].
✓ Péter-Contesse, René, and John Ellington. (UBS) 1994. One of the later issues in the series, full (352pp.), and reasonably priced. [CBQ 7/95; JSOT 90].
☆ Pierce, Ronald W. (TTC) 2015. A succinct (200pp.), attractive, and well-balanced evangelical interpretation for pastors, by a prof at Talbot Seminary (dispensational). He states that he pursues a “canonical theology approach” (p.9) and, wisely in my view, sees the central theme of the book as “God’s sovereign control [as King] over humanity, from exiles to kings to kingdoms.”
✓ Porteous, Norman W. ‡ (retired OTL) 1965, rev. 1979. Once it could be said that Porteous “often penetrates to the heart of the theological issue and sets the critical questions in a fresh light” (Childs). He interpreted Daniel as 2nd century history rather than revelatory prophecy, constantly pointing to the clash between Hellenism and Judaism. Porteous was more expositional than exegetical, and built on Montgomery. This work became less important with the passage of time; it has now been replaced by Newsom.
Pusey, E. B. 1869. Reprinted years ago by Klock & Klock. Larsen (JTS 60.2 [2009]: 490) termed it “an extremely thorough and formidable piece of scholarship” in defense of the integrity and historicity of the book. Now free online.
✓ Redditt, Paul L. ‡ (NCB) 1999. The last OT vol. to appear in the defunct series; Redditt’s work on Haggai to Malachi in 1995 was the next to last. This commentary is based on the NRSV and is of reasonable size for NCB’s format: xxvi + 211pp. Students may want to refer to Redditt’s bibliography; the exegesis seems pedestrian. [JSOT 89; ExpTim 4/00; RelSRev 1/01; CBQ 10/00; Them Spr 01; JTS 4/01].
✓ Russell, D. S. ‡ (DSB) 1981. Russell has published important books and journal articles on apocalyptic literature, so this more lengthy work for the devotional DSB (244pp.) interests us. Takes the standard critical line on date. There is further work in his Daniel, An Active Volcano: Reflections on the Book of Daniel (1989).
Seow, Choon-Leong. ‡ (WestBC) 2003. This same author produced the well-received Ecclesiastes in AB. Here Seow provides a liberal exposition, accessible even to a lay readership. [CBQ 7/04; Int 10/03; JSOT 28.5; HS 2004; JAOS 124.4].
F Seow, Choon-Leong. ‡ (Illum). I assume this would follow the completion of his Job set.
✓ Smith-Christopher, David L. ‡ (NIB) 1996. Found in Vol. 7 (pp.17 – 152), covering Daniel and the Minor Prophets. [CurTM 6/97]. Also to be noted is his vol., A Biblical Theology of Exile (2002) [VT 54.4; BibInt 13.3], which is worthwhile for students of Lamentations and Ezekiel.
☆ Steinmann, Andrew E. (Concord) 2008. This Lutheran series continues to build a tradition of issuing large-scale theological commentaries. The mold is an older-style grammatico-historical exegesis with much attention to philology, grammar, etc. Steinmann is over 650pp. and emphasizes both the historicity of the stories and a christological approach to the book. The author is learned and clear, in writing for both students and pastors. Specialists will not judge this to be a new (and conservative) Montgomery, but pastors of conservative congregations will find Steinmann quite useful. [RBL 6/10; CBQ 10/10].
✓ Stevenson, Kenneth, and Michael Glerup, eds. Ezekiel, Daniel (ACCS) 2008. See Ezekiel.
Stortz, Rodney. (PTW) 2004. Born out of the sermons of an able Presbyterian pastor in St. Louis (PCA), this exposition had to be published posthumously.
Sumner, George. [ℳ], (Brazos) 2013. In Esther & Daniel, coauthored by Wells. F Tanner, J. Paul. (EEC).
✓ Towner, W. S. ‡ (I) 1984. Proportional to the length of the text, this entry is more in-depth than others in the series, but probably not one of the best. Theological, practical, with a liberal viewpoint. The author is explicit about his critical, anti-supernaturalist assumptions: there is no such thing as predictive prophecy. The “inspired writers” were “limited in the same way all other human beings are, namely, by an inability to foresee the future” (p.178). You might term this Porteous’s replacement for the shelves of liberal pastors: Towner also has less exegesis and is expositional. Widely used and quoted. [JBL 105.2].
Veldkamp, Herman. Dreams and Dictators, ET 1978. A very perceptive theological commentary written in sermonic style by a conservative, Reformed minister in the Netherlands. The pastor with this on hand will be helped in preaching Christ from Daniel’s prophecy, but Veldkamp is difficult to obtain.
☆ Wallace, R. S. (retired BST) 1979. Originally published as The Lord is King. Evangelicals have found this worth consulting or buying for its excellent theological exposition, and because Wallace still maintains the early date on Daniel — which probably irked a few of his colleagues at Columbia Seminary, where he taught Biblical Theology. I agree with Wallace that the kingdom of God may be the main theme of the book. This is well worth the price. See Davis. [EvQ 4/80].
Walvoord, John F. Daniel, The Key to Prophetic Revelation, 1971. By the sometime president of Dallas Seminary. Strongly dispensational and more oriented toward dogmatics than OT interpretation — not recommended. See Miller above.
F Wesselius, Jan-Willem. ‡ (HCOT).
F Widder, Wendy L. (SGBC) 2016.
✓ Wilson, Robert Dick. Studies in the Book of Daniel, 1917; Studies in the Book of Daniel: Second Series, 1938. These present a thorough, dated apology for the traditional position. From the pen of one of old Princeton’s greatest OT scholars. Young followed in his train. More recent conservative work is well represented in Thomas Gaston, Historical Issues in the Book of Daniel (2009) [JSOT 36.5; VT 61.4 (Millard)].
✓ Wiseman, D. J., ed. Notes on Some Problems in the Book of Daniel, 1965. Not a commentary but provides well-informed answers to some issues raised by the critics; the issues haven’t changed as much as some think.
Wood, Leon J. 1973. A comprehensive commentary from the dispensational camp, and prior to Miller the best presentation of that position by a long shot.
F Wooden, R. Glenn. (NICOT). Previously T. C. Mitchell was listed as under contract.
✓ Woude, A. S. van der, ed. ‡ The Book of Daniel, in the Light of New Findings, 1993. At the time, cutting-edge essays from many of the world’s leading scholars on Daniel.
☆ Young, E. J. (GS) 1949. Though it is now getting quite old, this is still a valuable exegetical work from an evangelical amillennial perspective. Young and Baldwin have been viewed as a conservative corrective to critical works like Montgomery, Porteous, and Goldingay. One drawback is that Young, like the ICC work he builds upon, did not have access to the Qumran literature or to the important Babylonian Chronicles, published in 1956. [EvQ 10/49]. Over the years both Eerdmans and Banner have kept this commentary in print. See also Young’s Messianic Prophecies of Daniel (1954).
NOTE: David Valeta, “The Book of Daniel in Recent Research (Part 1),” CBR 6.3 (2008): 330 – 54.
Preliminary Notes: Back in 1989 I recommended the purchase of Hanson, The Dawn of Apocalyptic (1979), which dealt primarily with the OT, and Morris’s Apocalyptic (1972), which was both a conservative counterbalance and more focused on the NT. Both works are quite dated. Now I offer a single purchase recommendation: Murphy. It is regrettable that evangelicals have written no major introductions that can be recommended; I look for Taylor. To get a quick initial grasp of both the OT genre and recent scholarly work, I recommend a perusal of (1) Longman-Dillard, An Introduction to the OT, pp.384 – 89; (2) Hanson’s “Appendix: An Overview of Early Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism,” pp.427 – 44 in The Dawn of Apocalyptic (1979); and (3) Oswalt’s essay listed below. For discussions of apocalyptic in the NT more up-to-date than Morris, see especially the articles below by Aune-Geddert-Evans, Helyer, and Kreitzer, and What Are They Saying about New Testament Apocalyptic? by Lewis — see Lewis’s annotated bibliography (pp.108 – 15).
★ Murphy, Frederick J. ‡ Apocalypticism in the Bible and Its World: A Comprehensive Introduction, 2012. Despite the Baker imprint, this is a critical treatment (429pp.). The book won awards and contains much instructive material, though reviewers rightly complain about Murphy conflating apocalypticism and eschatology. The author had a Harvard PhD and was a former Jesuit, who taught at Holy Cross (†2011). Though a NT scholar, Murphy knew OT scholarship well, as shown in his earlier “Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature” in NIB, Vol. 7 (1996). A specialist in OT might prefer to purchase Collins’s The Apocalyptic Imagination (1998) instead. Other good general introductions covering OT and NT are Cook’s The Apocalyptic Literature (2003) and the more popularly-written Carey (2005). [BBR 24.1; Int 1/14; TJ Spr 15].
✓ Aune, D. E., T. J. Geddert, and C. A. Evans. “Apocalypticism” (pp.45 – 58), in Dictionary of NT Background, 2000. One does well to start here for an introduction to the topic as it concerns the NT.
✓ Aune, David E. Apocalypticism, Prophecy, and Magic in Early Christianity: Collected Essays, 2006 (Baker, 2008). Of “unquestionable utility for scholars of Revelation” (DiTommaso), but helpful well beyond that.
Barr, James. ‡ “Jewish Apocalyptic in Recent Scholarly Study,” BJRL 58 (1975): 9 – 35.
✓ Bauckham, Richard. The Fate of the Dead: Studies on the Jewish and Christian Apocalypses, 1998.
Block, Daniel I. “Preaching OT Apocalyptic to a NT Church,” CTJ 41.1 (2006): 17 – 52. Normally I don’t list articles, but this is a gem on the book of Daniel, with wise guidance for handling other texts. There are other fine essays in CTJ 41.1 on the theme of “Preaching Apocalyptic Texts.” Monographs addressing the theme include Larry Paul Jones and Jerry L. Sumney, Preaching Apocalyptic Texts (1999); and Dorothy Jonaitis, Unmasking Apocalyptic Texts: A Guide to Preaching and Teaching (2005).
☆ Carey, Greg. ‡ Ultimate Things: An Introduction to Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic Literature, 2005.
✓ Charlesworth, James H., ed. The OT Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 1: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments, 1983. The standard reference for Jewish apocalyptic texts, superseding the 1913 R. H. Charles set. See also the St. Andrews project, OT Pseudepigrapha: More Noncanonical Scriptures, vol.1 (2013) [ExpTim 11/14], and the Online Critical Pseudepigrapha (http://www.purl.org/net/ocp).
✓ Cohn, Norman. ‡ Cosmos, Chaos, and the World to Come: The Ancient Roots of Apocalyptic Faith, 2nd ed. 2001. A Yale issue. Readers can dampen the Zoroastrian stress.
☆ Collins, John J. ‡ The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature, 2nd ed. 1998. This is the premier scholarly introduction to Apocalyptic as “the Jewish Matrix of Christianity” (the 1984 subtitle). The slight drawback for readers wanting a general introduction to the genre/literature is that Collins only deals with the NT in one concluding chapter (pp.256 – 79). Collins’s own views feature strongly here, as one would expect. See too the 1984 FOTL vol. on Daniel, and his collected essays since 2000: Apocalypse, Prophecy, and Pseudepigraphy (2015).
✓ Collins, John J., ed. ‡ The Oxford Handbook of Apocalyptic Literature, 2014. Of great value. [ExpTim 11/14].
✓ Collins, J. J., and J. H. Charlesworth, eds. ‡ Mysteries and Revelations: Apocalyptic Studies since the Uppsala Convention, 1991.
✓ Collins, John J., Bernard McGinn, and Stephen J. Stein, eds. ‡ The Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism, 3 vols., 1998. The broadest available treatment of the genre, thought forms, and historical development (both ancient and modern) of the tradition. This massive work (1520pp.) on ANE, Jewish, and Christian apocalyticism contains careful distinctions among, and definitions of, apocalypse (genre), apocalypticism (ideology), and apocalyptic eschatology. Authoritative as a survey of the whole history. Do note that the set is composed of long essays and is not in a typical encyclopedia format. Only Volume 1 deals directly with biblical materials. [RelSRev 7/00; JR 10/00; WTJ Fall 02].
☆ Cook, Stephen L. ‡ The Apocalyptic Literature, 2003. A fine vol. in the IBT series, well worth purchasing. Do note that his speciality is OT. [JETS 3/05]. Earlier Cook gave us Prophecy and Apocalypticism: The Postexilic Social Setting (1995). There, using a social-scientific method and focusing on Ezek 38 – 39, Zech 1 – 8, and Joel, he challenges the usual interpretation of apocalyptic as always originating among the alienated, powerless, and deprived.
✓ Davis, Joshua B., and Douglas Harink, eds. ‡ Apocalyptic and the Future of Theology: With and Beyond J. Louis Martyn, 2012. For NT and Theology. [RelSRev 12/13].
✓ DiTommaso, Lorenzo. “Apocalypses and Apocalypticism in Antiquity (Part I),” CBR 5.2 (2007): 235 – 86. The second review-essay appeared in CBR 5.3 (2007): 367 – 432.
✓ Elliott, John K., ed. The Apocryphal NT: A Collection of Apocryphal Christian Literature in an English Translation, 1993. Standard Oxford resource.
Frost, S. B. ‡ Old Testament Apocalyptic, 1952.
✓ Grabbe, L. L., and R. D. Haak, eds. ‡ Knowing the End from the Beginning: The Prophetic, the Apocalyptic, and Their Relationship, 2003.
☆ Hanson, Paul D. ‡ The Dawn of Apocalyptic: The Historical and Sociological Roots of Jewish Apocalyptic Eschatology, 1975, rev. 1979; and Old Testament Apocalyptic, 1987. The former is his major work (still in print), and the latter is a shorter, popular work in Abingdon’s IBT series. Hanson and Collins have been leading American OT critics dealing with the genre. Hanson in particular is noted for stressing the relationship between apocalyptic and prophecy, whereas others like von Rad urge that apocalyptic has little to do with prophecy and should be linked instead with wisdom traditions. See also his summary of past work on the topic in SBL’s The Hebrew Bible and Its Modern Interpreters (1985), and in ABD. For a more accessible and up-to-date introduction, see Carey. [JSOT 14 (Carroll)].
✓ Hanson, Paul D., ed. ‡ Visionaries and Their Apocalypses, 1983. A collection of key early essays in the field. Also quite valuable from the same era is J. J. Collins, ed., Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre (Semeia 14 [1979]), which built well upon Hanson’s Dawn and is constantly cited.
✓ Hellholm, David, ed. ‡ Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East, 1983. A giant leap forward in the study of the genre for its time, this product of the 1979 International Colloquium on Apocalypticism (Uppsala) remains important today. See Collins-Charlesworth for a follow-up.
✓ Helyer, Larry R. Exploring Jewish Literature of the Second Temple Period: A Guide for NT Students, 2002. A leading textbook (nearly 500pp.), which covers Apocalyptic and so much more. More recent from Helyer is “Apocalypticism” (pp.252 – 63) in Green-McDonald, eds, The World of the NT (2013).
✓ Horsley, Richard A. ‡ Revolt of the Scribes: Resistance and Apocalyptic Origins, 2010. [JJS 64.1].
✓ Koch, Klaus. ‡ The Rediscovery of Apocalyptic, ET 1972.
✓ Kreitzer, Larry J. “Apocalyptic, Apocalypticism” (pp.55 – 68), in Dictionary of the Later NT and Its Developments, edited by Martin and Davids (1997).
Ladd, George E. “Why Not Prophetic-Apocalyptic?” JBL 76 (1957): 192 – 200. For study of the book of Revelation. The author’s article on “Apocalyptic Literature” in ISBE, Revised (I:151 – 61) is a more conservative take on the topic, well worth reading alongside Collins, Hanson, and Murphy.
☆ Lewis, Scott M. ‡ What Are They Saying about NT Apocalyptic? 2004. A basic, concise discussion. [CBQ 10/04].
✓ Marcus, Joel, and Marion L. Soards, eds. ‡ Apocalyptic and the New Testament, 1989.
✓ Minear, Paul S. ‡ New Testament Apocalyptic (IBT) 1981. Important early book.
☆ Morris, Leon. Apocalyptic, 1972. For pastors at least, this is still a useful brief introduction to the topic from the conservative standpoint (Morris’s expertise was in NT). Because this book is quite old, students would be wise to start elsewhere. [EvQ 1/75].
✓ Nickelsburg, George W. E. ‡ Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah: An Historical and Literary Introduction, 2nd ed. 2005. From a renowned authority on Second Temple Judaism, critical of attempts to link the rise of apocalyptic with the OT wisdom literature.
✓ Portier-Young, Anathea E. ‡ Apocalypse against Empire: Theologies of Resistance in Early Judaism, 2011. A superb in-depth discussion of the social setting of early Jewish apocalpses, using trauma studies and other social scientific approaches. [Them 7/12; HS 2012; TJ Fall 13].
✓ Reddish, Mitchell G., ed. ‡ Apocalyptic Literature: A Reader, 1990. Those who want to move beyond this, see Charlesworth, ed., The OT Pseudepigrapha, Vol 1: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments, 1983. Another route is to use Online Critical Pseudepigrapha (see Charlesworth above). For NT-era materials, see Elliott.
✓ Rowland, Christopher. ‡ The Open Heaven, 1982. More useful for NT students.
✓ Rowley, H. H. ‡ The Relevance of Apocalyptic, 3rd ed. 1963.
✓ Russell, D. S. ‡ The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic: 200 B.C. – A.D. 100 (OTL) 1964. See also his later scholarly work, Divine Disclosure: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic (1992). On a more basic level are Apocalyptic: Ancient and Modern (1978), and Prophecy and the Apocalyptic Dream (1994).
✓ Sacchi, Paolo. ‡ Jewish Apocalyptic and Its History, ET 1996.
☆ Sandy, D. Brent, and Daniel M. O’Hare. Prophecy and Apocalyptic: An Annotated Bibliography, 2007. See under Prophets. Students doing more extensive work in these areas may wish to make the purchase. Note also that Sandy’s Plowshares & Pruning Hooks (2002) contains a sensible brief conservative discussion of apocalyptic (pp.203 – 27).
✓ Schmithals, W. ‡ The Apocalyptic Movement: Introduction and Interpretation, ET 1975.
✓ Stone, Michael E. ‡ “Apocalyptic Literature” (pp.383 – 441), in Stone, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, 1984.
F Taylor, Richard A. Interpreting Apocalyptic Literature: An Exegetical Handbook (Kregel).
✓ VanderKam, James C. ‡ An Introduction to Early Judaism (Eerdmans), 2001. From a world authority on the DSS. His article on “Apocalyptic Literature” (pp.305 – 22) in the Cambridge Companion to Biblical Interpretation (1998) holds value.
✓ VanderKam, James C., and William Adler, eds. ‡ The Jewish Apocalyptic Heritage in Early Christianity, 1996.
✓ Watson, Duane F., ed. ‡ The Intertexture of Apocalyptic Discourse in the NT, 2002.
✓ Wright, Benjamin G., III, and Lawrence M. Wills, eds. ‡ Conflicted Boundaries in Wisdom and Apocalypticism (SBL) 2005.
NOTE: For reviews of the status quaestionis in apocalyptic studies, see the very thorough DiTommaso above; Frederick J. Murphy, “Apocalypses and Apocalypticism: The State of the Question,” CurBS 2 (1994): 147 – 79; and John N. Oswalt, “Recent Studies in Old Testament Apocalyptic” (pp.369 – 90), in The Face of OT Studies, eds. Baker and Arnold (1999).
★ Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Twelve Minor Prophets (GS) 5 vols., 1559. A most helpful and full guide to theological exposition, which can put to good use alongside the modern exegeses. Extends to 500pp. on Hosea, which gives one a sense for the fullness of the treatment. Both GS and Baker have reprinted the 19th century translation — now free online. See Calvin under Commentary Series.
★ McComiskey, Thomas E., ed. The Minor Prophets: An Exegetical and Expository Commentary, 1992 – 98. A Baker set, originally published in three vols. and available in a single vol. (nearly 1500pp.) at a cheaper price. It is beautifully presented, a delight to use, and “should be a first resource to look at when asking what the Hebrew text of the Minor Prophets says” (Oswalt). Perhaps the most valuable book treatments are Hosea, Zechariah (McComiskey), Joel (Dillard), Micah (Waltke), and Nahum (Longman). The series includes the RSV and the scholar’s own translation; then it treats the Hebrew in an exegesis section and concludes each pericope with a theological exposition. Contributors are listed below. My recommendation is to buy the single vol., but years have passed since this first appeared, and it is not necessarily the first-stop recourse it was. [BL 1993, 1995, 1999; EvQ 1/94; Them 10/93; VT 47.1; BSac 10/94; HS 1994, 1997, 2000; RelSRev 7/99].
Achtemeier, Elizabeth. ‡ Preaching from the Minor Prophets, 1998. Highly regarded.
✓ Albertz, Rainer, James Nogalski, Jakob Wöhrle, eds. ‡ Perspectives on the Formation of the Book of the Twelve, 2012. [BBR 25.1; CBQ 7/14; JSOT 38.5].
✓ Boda, Mark J., Michael H. Floyd, and Colin M. Toffelmire, eds. ‡ The Book of the Twelve and the New Form Criticism, 2015.
☆ Boice, James Montgomery. 2 vols., 1986. An expositional commentary of great help to pastors. I used Boice on Jonah and found him suggestive. The scholarship could be updated at points; use only with a thorough exegetical commentary. Premillennial. [JETS 9/91].
☆ Craigie, Peter C. (DSB) 2 vols., 1985. In the main, this is an inspiring devotional commentary. Some may be disappointed with his reading of Jonah as a parable. For preachers one of the very best sets covering the Twelve. The Craigie and McConville commentaries are the best in the DSB OT section. [EvQ 7/86].
Driver, S. R. ‡ (Century Bible) 2 vols., 1906. This is still consulted by some.
Feinberg, Charles L. 1947 – 52. A capable work for the evangelical church long ago, still in print. Formerly published as Major Messages of the Minor Prophets.
F Ferguson, Sinclair. (PTW). I don’t know if this is still planned.
✓ Ferreiro, Alberto, ed. The Twelve Prophets (ACCS) 2003. [BSac 7/05; BL 2007].
Hailey, Homer. 1972. Includes a paraphrase and brief exposition.
✓ House, Paul R. The Unity of the Twelve, 1990. Helped to spur research with its thesis that the Minor Prophets are organized along the lines of thematic/theological progression, from sin to judgment to restoration. See also Barry Alan Jones, The Formation of the Book of the Twelve: A Study in Text and Canon (1995).
Hutcheson, G. 1657. A reprinted Puritan work I’ve never seen.
✓ Keil, Carl F. (KD) ET 1871. The careful, conservative exegesis here — this vol. is among Keil’s best — has long been appreciated. Conservatives do not use this as much now, with the multiplicity of newer works. Now free online.
Laetsch, Theodore. 1956. Shares the same qualities as his devotional exposition of Jeremiah-Lamentations, and was valued more when resources were scarcer.
Lange’s Commentary. ET 1874. The commentaries by Paul Kleinert on Obadiah through Zephaniah are especially deserving of mention. Free online.
☆ Longman, Tremper, III, and David E. Garland, eds. Daniel – Malachi (EBCR) 2008. As with the corresponding 1985 EBC vol., this is worth owning, especially for those just beginning to build a library, since it offers quick, wide coverage of these Bible books. There is also similarity in that most of the authors have premillennial convictions. The EBCR is more even in quality and much improved over the old EBC [JETS 3/87], which felt dated even in the 1990s.
Morgan, G. Campbell. Voices of Twelve Hebrew Prophets, n.d.; The Minor Prophets, 1960. The former is a series of expositions, and the latter book prints the KJV together with outlines and brief analyses of the Twelve, their message, and the relevance of that message for today.
✓ Nogalski, James D., and Marvin A. Sweeney, eds. ‡ Reading and Hearing the Book of the Twelve, 2000. This presentation of scholarly discussions within SBL is important reading for advanced students. As with Psalms, scholarship is wanting to interpret the collection more as a cohesive and coherent whole, rather than as strictly independent and individual writings. [CBQ 1/03; HS 2002; VT 53.1; JSS Spr 04]. See Paul Redditt, “The Formation of the Book of the Twelve: A Review of Research,” in SBL 2001 Seminar Papers (pp.58 – 80). For a protest against this shift in scholarship, read Ehud Ben Zvi, “Twelve Prophetic Books or ‘The Twelve’: A Few Preliminary Considerations,” in Forming Prophetic Literature: Essays on Isaiah and the Twelve in Honor of John D. W. Watts (1996), pp.125 – 56. The debate continues in Ben Zvi-Nogalski, eds., Two Sides of a Coin (2009) [VT 61.1; RBL 2011].
✓ Nogalski, James D. ‡ The Book of the Twelve (S&H) 2 vols., 2011. The author is a leading American scholar on this literature, preferring mainly a historical-critical approach (form criticism, redactional processes, etc). Because of his close familiarity with scholarship — including reading the Twelve as a “single collection” and some rhetorical criticism — his set should be more serviceable to students than most other S&H vols. The theologically oriented “Connections” sections are rather less useful than the exegesis. [Int 7/13; RelSRev 9/13].
Orelli, Conrad von. 1893. Studies by an old moderately conservative German theologian. These have been reprinted.
Pusey, Edward B. 2 vols., 1860. The same commentary as in the classic set, “Barnes’ Notes.” You will find it a mature exposition with some attention given to the interpretations of churchmen down through the centuries. Not as strong as some of Pusey’s other biblical studies.
✓ Redditt, Paul L., and Aaron Schart, eds. ‡ Thematic Threads in the Book of the Twelve, 2003. These collected SBL essays are a follow-up to Nogalski-Sweeney above. [JBL Fall 04; RelSRev 4/07; CJ 4/05; BL 2007]. Advanced students will appreciate the Nogalski-Schart online bibliography (www.uni-due.de/Ev-Theologie/twelve/12b_bib.htm).
Smith, George A. ‡ (EB) 1901. The liberal standard of a former generation of preachers. Today’s evangelical pastor won’t get much of anything out of it.
F Stovell, Beth M. (SGBC) 2 vols.
F Stuart, Douglas. (TTC).
✓ Sweeney, Marvin A. ‡ The Twelve Prophets (BerO) 2 vols., 2000. About 750pp. of careful, fresh literary analysis. Though Sweeney is one of the leading American scholars on OT prophecy, this set does not have the same research behind it that, say, McComiskey above has. It will be of special interest to students because Sweeney, more than most, explores the literary and theological links among the Twelve. Note that Sweeney has more in the way of diachronic interests than some others in the series, and his faith is Judaism. [ScrB 1/01; CBQ 10/01; ExpTim 7/01; HS 2002; VT 53.1; JSOT 99; RelSRev 7/03].
NOTES: (1) Added to the discussion of Nogalski-Sweeney above is Paul Redditt, “Recent Research on the Book of the Twelve as One Book,” CurBS 9 (2001): 47 – 80. (2) The journal Interpretation devoted the Spring 2007 issue to the Twelve, and the discussion is most stimulating.
★ Dearman, J. Andrew. [ℳ], (NICOT) 2010. With this single vol. on Hosea, Dearman has provided the church with the best evangelical exegesis available. It is full (400pp.), conversant with all the important scholarship, sensitive to literary features, extremely well informed on socio-historical and archaeological background issues, and provides good (mildly critical) theological exposition. I am delighted with the astute discussion of the Hebrew text and the treatment of “Hosea’s Theology” (pp.29 – 59). Other high-points are the discussion of Baalism in the 8th cent., early covenant theology in the writing prophets, and the controversial topics of sexual infidelity and metaphor in this prophetic book. My only unfulfilled wish was for exegetical sections to draw more theological conclusions. Dearman is a PCUSA minister who wrote the NIVAC on Jeremiah-Lamentations, and now teaches at Fuller Seminary, Houston. This is the studious pastor’s first-pick. [BBR 21.4; Int 4/12; JSOT 36.5; VT 61.4; RTR 4/11; JETS 12/11 (Smith); ExpTim 6/11; Them 11/11; RelSRev 6/12; TJ Spr 14; BSB 9/11].
★ Garrett, Duane. Hosea, Joel (NAC) 1997. Surely one of the better OT commentaries in the series. It can’t compete with AB, WBC and ICC in detail of scholarship, but it presents the fruits of much commentary work over the preceding 30 years. This solidly conservative treatment is a good choice for most pastors. Garrett also did the NAC on Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs; this is a better piece of work.
★ Kidner, Derek. Love to the Loveless (BST) 1981. A boon for the preacher. Full of pastoral and theological insight into the message of the prophecy and backed up with competent scholarship. [EvQ 1/84].
★ McComiskey, Thomas E. 1992. See McComiskey under The Twelve Minor Prophets. This is already a suggested purchase.
★ Smith, Gary V. Hosea/Amos/Micah (NIVAC) 2001. Pastors will appreciate the guidance of this OT professor in learning how to apply the message of these three lengthier Minor Prophets. About 180pp. are devoted to Hosea. Amos is treated to 215pp. of commentary, and Micah to nearly 170pp. Do note that, while this is more of a homiletical commentary, Smith has a good measure of dependable exegesis as well.
★ Stuart, Douglas. Hosea – Jonah (WBC) 1987. First-rate, original work by a Gordon-Conwell prof and one of the best in the OT series. Some evangelicals find Stuart readier to emend the MT tradition than they are. Also, he does not always set forth opposing viewpoints (e.g. at Hosea 6:7). Yet there is so much good to say about this vol. Stuart is especially valuable because he views the prophetic office much as Calvin did: the prophets’ foremost calling was to be interpreters of the Torah, demanding a loving loyalty and trust in the God of the covenant. Longman says this should be a top priority; I agree. There are reports of a forthcoming revision by Stuart. [JETS 9/92].
☆ Andersen, Francis I., and David Noel Freedman. [ℳ], (AB) 1980. The most thorough work on this prophet (699pp.) with nearly exhaustive textual analysis. There is an excellent conservative commentary by Andersen (he contributed the Job in TOTC). Freedman’s syllable counting can be discounted. I fear, though, that pastors don’t have the time to work through a tome like this or Macintosh’s. Hubbard, McComiskey, and Garrett are excellent in shorter compass. [JBL 101.2; ThTo 38.1; JSS Aut 88].
✓ Achtemeier, Elizabeth. [ℳ], Minor Prophets I (NIBC) 1995. Covers Hosea through Micah. The author is conservatively critical and a respected scholar. Ten years previously, Achtemeier published Nahum – Malachi in the Interpretation series, so this NIBC work marks her completion of the Twelve. [Them 10/97; WTJ Spr 99; JSOT 79; Int 7/98; Chm 113.1; RelSRev 10/97; RTR 4/01].
Barrett, Michael V. P. Love Divine and Unfailing: The Gospel According to Hosea (GAOT) 2008. I regret I have not seen it.
✓ Beeby, H. D. ‡ (ITC) 1989. I like this conservatively critical interpretation better than any other works in this series, excepting the commentaries on Genesis 12 – 50 and Jeremiah. Some good theological reflection (189pp.). The author was a missionary professor in Taiwan and had a role, with others like Lesslie Newbigin, in the “Gospel and our Culture” movement. [CBQ 10/91; HS 1991].
✓ Ben Zvi, Ehud. ‡ Hosea (FOTL) 2005. This rigorous contribution to the series gives ample evidence that the whole form critical enterprise is reforming and has moved with the rest of scholarship toward synchronic readings (e.g. Ben Zvi speaks of Sitz im Buch, not Sitz im Leben). This “is a significant work not only on the book of Hosea, but also on the theory of literary study of the Bible” (Hutton). [RTR 8/07; CBQ 10/06; JETS 6/07; Int 4/07; JSS Aut 08; BL 2006; VT 57.4; ExpTim 11/06; JAOS 126.4 (Hutton); RBL; CJ 7/07].
☆ Birch, Bruce C. [ℳ], Hosea, Joel, Amos (WestBC) 1997. For the series, this is a more evangelically oriented interpretation. Birch’s commentary especially focuses upon the social critique offered by these prophets. This is a well written book and it speaks to the heart of the human problem: the problem of the human heart. E.g. see his poignant comments on p.91. [Them 2/00; JSOT 79; CBQ 7/98; RelSRev 7/98].
F Bons, Eberhard. ‡ (IECOT).
Brown, Sydney L. ‡ (Westminster Commentaries) 1932.
✓ Brueggemann, Walter. ‡ Tradition for Crisis, 1968. Pays good attention to the book’s so-called complexes of tradition (Patriarchs, Exodus, Sinai covenant, etc.) and to theological issues. This has been a seminal work over the years. [JBL 91.1].
Burroughs, Jeremiah. An Exposition of the Prophecy of Hosea, 1643. One of the greatest Puritan OT commentaries (699pp.), completed posthumously.
☆ Carroll R., M. Daniel. (EBCR) 2008. This Denver Seminary prof is incisive and does consistently high-quality, carefully researched work. I am very pleased with this contribution. One wishes for more than these 90pp., and there had been word of a much fuller exegesis coming down the pike (Apollos). [BL 2010].
✓ Davies, G. I. ‡ (NCB) 1992. A very thorough work (315pp.) by a leading OT scholar (Cambridge), to be consulted by students. Many years of research went into this. Yes, chs. 1 and 3 can be difficult to bring together, but Davies strangely argues that Gomer the prostitute bore Hosea’s children but was never his wife (p.108). Only this late in the decline of Western morals could the notion of Hosea as “john” be countenanced! [SwJT Spr 94; VT 46.3; RTR 1/97; CRBR 1994]. Davies also has a good vol. in the “OT Guides” series (1993).
F Dewrell, Heath, and Brian Rainey. ‡ (Illum).
Doorly, William. ‡ Prophet of Love: Understanding the Book of Hosea, 1991.
✓ Emmerson, G. I. ‡ Hosea: A Northern Prophet in Southern Perspective, 1984. A valuable JSOT monograph, notable for its more cautious approach to the redaction issue. [Them 9/85].
☆ Fretheim, Terence E. [ℳ], Reading Hosea – Micah (ROT) 2013. The author is always a stimulating theological read, and he writes enough here (225pp.) to benefit pastors who are looking for help in preaching on the Twelve. [Them 4/14].
☆ Guenther, Allen R. Hosea, Amos (BCBC) 1998. A fine, devout treatment of these two more significant Minor Prophets. The commentary is geared for the pastor or studious lay reader, employs both diachronic and synchronic approaches, and has many insights. Quite full at over 400pp. [CBQ 4/00].
Harper, W. R. ‡ (retired ICC) 1905. Some technical information can be gleaned from the three older ICC vols. on the Minor Prophets, but it is usually buried deep in a lot of outdated scholarship. Other vols. (AB, Herm, OTL, WBC, new ICC, NICOT) will be more helpful in this regard. Macintosh replaces Harper in the series.
☆ Hubbard, David A. [ℳ], (TOTC) 1989. Perhaps the most scholarly entry thus far in the series. Seems to have been allowed a good deal more space than other commentators. This is a careful exegetical work which pays close attention to theology. Hubbard was in the critically oriented wing of evangelical scholarship, and exerted one of the strongest influences on evangelicalism as editor for WBC and President of Fuller Seminary — now with the Lord. A favorite of Longman.
✓ King, Philip. ‡ Amos, Hosea and Micah: An Archaeological Commentary, 1988. Excellent. See Jeremiah also.
Knight, G. A. F. ‡ (Torch) 1960. Mildly critical and filled with insightful comments.
✓ Landy, Francis. ‡ (Read) 1995.
✓ Lim, Bo H., and Daniel Castelo. [ℳ], (THC) 2015. A well-studied exegesis of Hosea and interdisciplinary theological discussion from two faculty colleagues at Seattle Pacific. Lim, the OT prof, provides a valuable commentary of 143pp.; he seeks to read individual oracles “dialogically, in light of the literary context of the whole book” (p.134). Castelo teaches systematics, and he contributes 100pp. of essays on theological interpretation, covenant and “God-knowledge,” “marriage, sexuality, and covenant faithfulness,” and “Readers of Terror.” There is quite a mix here: historical-critical research, rhetorical study, rabbinics, biblical theology, metaphor theory, discussion of gender issues, counseling insights from EFT (emotionally focused couple therapy). Hermeneutically, the authors are inclined to pursue a reader-centered approach (see p.10). The vol. will likely be of greater use to academics than pastors.
✓ Limburg, James. ‡ Hosea – Micah (I) 1988. A solid entry in the series, though somewhat brief in covering these six prophets (201pp.). [CRBR 1990].
☆ Mackay, John L. (Mentor) 2012. A learned theological exposition from a prof at Free Church College, Edinburgh (375pp.). It possesses the same qualities as his large Jeremiah and Lamentations expositions, though perhaps with less interaction with other scholars. Mackay does spell out the exegetical options (e.g. at 6:7), but sometimes without citations of those advancing those opinions. He is judicious and writes lucidly for pastors.
✓ Macintosh, A. A. ‡ (ICC – new series) 1997. This replaces Harper. “An important landmark in the study of Hosea” (Davies), with the philological strengths we normally associate with ICC. There is more focus upon the text and less on the text’s alleged pre-history (esp. redaction) than we find in McKane’s Jeremiah set for ICC. Also distinctive for the series is the author’s effort “to mediate the insights of the medieval Jewish writers” (R. P. Gordon). Evangelicals will find his approach more conservative than most in the ICC — I’m almost inclined to mark it [ℳ]. [Chm 113.4; JETS 9/99; JSOT 79; CBQ 7/98; OTA 10/97; RelSRev 7/98; EvQ 4/01; VT 51.1; DenvJ].
McKeating, H. ‡ Amos, Hosea, Micah (CBC) 1971. Longman once gave this four stars; why I don’t know. McKeating covers these larger Minor Prophets in about 200pp., and is a good, interesting work from the critical perspective.
☆ Mays, James L. ‡ (OTL) 1969. One of the strongest vols. in OTL, one which I have valued highly. Many studious pastors might like to add Mays to their library. Seems to have been written with the pastor in mind, but this is not shallow stuff at all. He concentrates on Hosea’s message. Stuart once said this is the best liberal work on Hosea. Students must reckon with a flood of scholarship on this prophet since Mays was published. [WTJ 34.1].
☆ Morgan, G. Campbell. Hosea: The Heart and Holiness of God, 1934. A very helpful exposition by Lloyd-Jones’s famous predecessor at Westminster Chapel, London. Penetrates to the core of Hosea’s message. This has been repeatedly reprinted and sits on many a veteran pastor’s shelf.
Ogilvie, Lloyd J. Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah (WCC) 1992.
☆ Patterson, Richard. (CorBC) 2008. This 672-page book is the joint effort of Patterson and Andrew Hill, covering all the Minor Prophets in the New Living Translation. It is competent and handy. Not for students.
F Roberts, J. J. M. ‡ (NCBC).
✓ Simundson, Daniel. ‡ Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah (AbOTC) 2005. This exegetical work is not as dense as many others in the series and is thought by some reviewers to be a weaker AbOTC. Others like Ralph Klein praise it (but they share critical and Lutheran commitments). I was not impressed. It is clearly written and accessible. [CBQ 4/06; JETS 9/06; Int 1/06; BL 2006; CurTM 6/05; RBL; ExpTim 4/06; HBT 29.2].
F Van Ruiten, Jacques. ‡ (HCOT).
Vawter, Bruce. ‡ Amos, Hosea, Micah (OTM) 1981. The author is a respected critic, but other works, from both the liberal and conservative camps, are much more thorough.
Ward, James M. ‡ Hosea: A Theological Commentary, 1966. Critically oriented and widely used decades ago.
✓ Wolff, Hans Walter. ‡ (Herm) ET 1974. This exhaustive work became the standard critical exegesis along with AB. Liberal and very technical. The advanced student will find a mine of information here, especially with regard to textual criticism, form-critical analysis, tradition-history research, and theological commentary. Wolff was assigned the monumental task of treating all 12 Minor Prophets for BKAT. Each of his works is a standout commentary: Hosea; Joel – Amos; Obadiah – Jonah; Micah; and Haggai. The fledgling student would do well to steer clear of Wolff until capable of handling these with some discernment and understanding of Wolff’s methodology.
Wood, Leon J. (EBC) 1985. Quite brief. See Carroll R. for Wood’s replacement.
F Yates, Gary. Hosea, Joel, Obadiah (EEC).
✓ Yee, Gale A. ‡ (NIB) 1996. Students might find reason to consult this commentary, which builds upon her earlier study, Composition and Tradition in the Book of Hosea (1987).
NOTES: (1) Harry Mowvley’s “Which Is the Best Commentary? XVI. Amos and Hosea,” ExpTim, 9/92. (2) Brad Kelle, “Hosea 1 – 3 in Twentieth-Century Scholarship,” CBR 7.2 (2009): 179 – 216; and “Hosea 4 – 14 in Twentieth-Century Scholarship,” CBR 8.3 (2010): 314 – 75. (3) Also consult the list of works in the above section, “Twelve Minor Prophets.”
★ Baker, David W. Joel, Obadiah, Malachi (NIVAC) 2006. Considering the brevity of these three Bible books, this 352-page homiletical commentary seems pleasingly full. In relation to other vols. in the series as a whole, generally speaking, I find Baker provides better exegetical guidance but fewer wise thoughts on application. [Anvil 24.4].
★ Dillard, Raymond. 1992. See McComiskey under “Twelve Minor Prophets.” This has been my favorite on Joel. Dillard of Westminster Seminary was able to build on Stuart’s and Allen’s excellent work. It is an interesting study to compare Dillard and Stuart on the question of whether to take the locust invasion of ch. 1 as literal or metaphorical. Great theology here for the preacher. Students working on Joel will also make ready use of Allen, Assis, Barton, Coggins, Crenshaw, Finley, and Wolff.
★ Garrett, Duane. Hosea, Joel (NAC) 1997. See Hosea. One of the fullest (over 400pp., 120pp. on Joel) and best in the OT series. We lack a major, fully up-to-date evangelical commentary on Joel, so Garrett and Patterson are valuable for bibliography (see also Assis, Barker, and Barton).
★ Robertson, O. Palmer. Prophet of the Coming Day of the Lord (WCS) 1995. Normally I do not recommend these popularly styled paperbacks, but the theological exposition here is rich. Students will look elsewhere. Pastors may supplement this with Robertson’s theological introduction, The Christ of the Prophets (2004).
★ Stuart, Douglas. (WBC) 1987. See Hosea above.
✓ Achtemeier, Elizabeth. [ℳ], Minor Prophets I (NIBC) 1995. See Hosea above. This same scholar has also contributed the Joel commentary for the NIB (1996).
☆ Allen, Leslie C. [ℳ], The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah and Micah (NICOT) 1976. A good commentary, but I’m bothered by some of his critical conclusions. Despite the volume’s age, this is still one of the top evangelical works on Joel and “[o]ffers a very valuable survey of earlier scholarship” (Mason, 10). [JBL 3/78].
✓ Assis, Elie. ‡ The Book of Joel: A Prophet between Calamity and Hope, 2013. A LHBOTS issue of good length (275pp.), Assis’s commentary treats the Hebrew text but is fairly accessible to those without the language (if not confused by the Hebrew versification). He is interested in rhetoric and structure, has respect for the Scriptures, and seeks to draw out the book’s theological message. Though he is an Israeli, most of his dialogue partners here are European and North American Christian scholars. Assis dates the prophecy to the exilic period, which is earlier than many, including Allen. It is of interest that Calvin thought the dating issue of little importance. [EvQ 4/14; CBQ 10/14; JTS 10/13; JSOT 39.5; JJS 66.1].
✓ Barker, Joel. From the Depths of Despair to the Promise of Presence: A Rhetorical Reading of the Book of Joel, 2014. A McMaster Divinity College dissertation by an evangelical on a worthwhile topic. [BBR 24.4; JSOT 39.5; JESOT 4.1].
✓ Barton, John. ‡ Joel and Obadiah (OTL) 2001. One expects a highly competent commentary from this well-read Oxford scholar, and Barton delivers. The price (about $40) for this slim vol. (170pp.) will cause pastors to look elsewhere for reference works on these short prophets. Students will want to make ready use of Barton in the library. The exegesis is mainly pursued with older historical-critical methods, and there is a good measure of theological reflection. [CBQ 10/02; Them Aut 02; JTS 4/03; Int 10/02; ExpTim 1/03; Bib 84.3; VT 54.2; JSOT 27.5; RelSRev 7/02; Chm Sum 05; BSac 4/03; RBL; Anvil 19.4].
✓ Bewer, J. A. ‡ (ICC) 1911.
☆ Birch, Bruce C. ‡ Hosea, Joel, Amos (WestBC) 1997. See Hosea.
Busenitz, Irvin Albert. Joel and Obadiah (Mentor) 2003. I have not used this commentary but it is said to be a clear, fairly full theological exposition at 288pp. The conservative author has taught for many years at Talbot and at The Master’s Seminary. [Chm Spr 05; RTR 4/05].
✓ Coggins, Richard J. ‡ Joel and Amos (NCB) 2000. Marked the brief continuation of the series with a new British publisher (Sheffield). I have not seen this work in North America, but when I consulted it abroad I found it to be succinct (170pp.), well reasoned, and helpful in discussing inner-biblical allusions and interpretation. Preachers are helped less in discerning the prophetic message in the text. [ExpTim 5/01; CBQ 10/01; JSOT 94; RelSRev 1/03; Anvil 18.3 (Renz)].
✓ Crenshaw, James. ‡ (AB) 1995. This vol. is about 240pp. long and adds luster to the series. Crenshaw is known as a trenchant critic, long at Vanderbilt and then at Duke. In my opinion this is the most valuable liberal work on Joel. Crenshaw reads the prophecy purely in its OT situation, with scarcely a reference to the NT. The scholarly pastor who intends to do some preaching on Joel should definitely consider buying this. See Wolff below. [JETS 3/99; BSac 4/97].
✓ Driver, Samuel R. ‡ Joel and Amos (CBSC) 1897. Classic liberal work by one of the greatest British scholars around the turn of the century. There was a later revision (1915) with additions by H. C. O. Lanchester.
☆ Finley, Thomas J. Joel, Amos, Obadiah (WEC) 1990. This careful, balanced work is similar to Stuart’s in that both are thoroughly evangelical, exegetical, and treat the Hebrew. Finley is worth buying, if you desire to build a first-class reference library. Moody allowed this to go o/p, but it was reissued in 2003 by Biblical Studies Press, with some revisions related to the use of the NET Bible. Longman has high regard for the work. [JETS 9/93].
☆ Fretheim, Terence E. [ℳ], Reading Hosea-Micah (ROT) 2013. See Hosea.
F Hagedorn, Anselm. ‡ Joel, Obadiah (IECOT).
F Hiebert, Ted. ‡ (Herm). To be added alongside Wolff; the publisher did the same thing with Shalom Paul on Amos.
☆ Hubbard, David A. [ℳ], Joel and Amos (TOTC) 1989. Very useful and full treatment for the series (245pp.). An excellent companion to the suggested works above. See also under Hosea. [EvQ 7/92; Evangel Win 89; BSac 10/92].
F Kwakkel, Gert. ‡ (HCOT).
✓ Limburg, James. ‡ Hosea – Micah (I) 1988. See under Hosea.
✓ Mason, Rex. ‡ Zephaniah, Habakkuk, Joel (OT Guides) 1994.
F Naylor, Peter. (Apollos). Expect a reassignment after Naylor’s death (†2007).
Ogden, G. S., and R. R. Deutsch. ‡ Joel and Malachi (ITC) 1987.
Ogilvie, Lloyd J. Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah (WCC) 1992.
☆ Patterson, Richard D. (EBCR) 2008. The earlier EBC (1985) was a solid work from this well-respected scholar, now retired from Liberty. It received an update in these 38pp., and it is a worthwhile commentary for pastors. Students will look for more, however. [BL 2010].
Prinsloo, Willem S. ‡ The Theology of the Book of Joel, 1985.
☆ Prior, David. Joel, Micah, Habakkuk (BST) 1998. Fairly full at over 250pp. I am not sure why these three prophets were grouped together for this exposition. Well done in the main, with many insights into the texts and their applicability in the world today. This can be recommended to all preachers. [Chm 113.4; CTJ 4/01].
F Roberts, J. J. M. ‡ (NCBC).
F Ruiz, Jean-Pierre. ‡ Joel & Obadiah (Illum).
✓ Simundson, Daniel. ‡ Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah (AbOTC) 2005. See under Hosea.
✓ Strazicich, John. Joel’s Use of Scripture and the Scripture’s Use of Joel, 2007. A Brill issue, very valuable not only on its topic but also for bibliographical purposes. It provides enough commentary to be placed in bold.
✓ Thompson, John A. “The Book of Joel, Exegesis” (IB) 1956. Said by Mason to be an “excellent commentary by one who studied the book in great depth over a long period” (p.10).
✓ Wolff, Hans Walter. ‡ Joel and Amos (Herm) ET 1977. Another exhaustive, rigorous critical resource from BKAT. See comments above under Hosea. Wolff’s treatment of Joel is not quite as thorough as that of Amos, but, then again, a little less thoroughness in excavating redactional layers in Amos (six!) might actually have improved the commentary. For purposes of grasping up-to-date scholarship (especially in the North American context) the student will need to depend more upon Crenshaw’s and Barton’s bibliography. Wolff’s theological interests are always close to the surface, and he argues for the unity of Joel.
F Yates, Gary. Hosea, Joel, Obadiah (EEC).
NOTES: (1) Consult the list of works in the above section, The Twelve Minor Prophets. (2) See the review of research in Richard Coggins, “Joel,” CBR 2.1 (2003): 85 – 103, and Ronald Troxel, “The Fate of Joel in the Redaction of the Twelve,” CBR 13.2 (2015): 152 – 74.
★ Motyer, J. A. The Day of the Lion (BST) 1975. Typical of the series in general. An OT specialist, Motyer also contributed the Philippians and James vols. to BST; he has always proved to be insightful and edifying in his expositions. See his books on Isaiah and Exodus. [EvQ 10/75; JETS 12/75].
★ Niehaus, Jeffery. 1992. See McComiskey under Twelve Minor Prophets. This is already a suggested purchase. The author’s strengths in the area of ANE studies well complement the other recommended works on this prophecy.
★ Smith, Gary V. 1989, rev. 1998. A thorough exegetical commentary initially published by Zondervan. Smith is the best conservative work on Amos (fuller than Stuart and Niehaus) — “a magisterial treatment” per Longman — and should be your first choice. There is a 400-page Mentor commentary, which is a slight revision. Though these four selections for purchase are probably the most useful to the pastor, students will give prominence to the critical works by Paul, Andersen-Freedman, Wolff, Jeremias, and Mays — probably in that order. For pastoral reflection and application, Smith’s work for NIVAC, Hosea/Amos/Micah, is quite good but not stellar. The Smith commentaries put me in a quandary: which to recommend? The earlier exegetical book has much more to teach, and the later NIVAC has more practical help for preachers moving from ancient text to application. The author taught at Midwestern Baptist Seminary, Union University, and Bethel Seminary. [CRBR 1990; Them 2/00].
★ Stuart, Douglas. (WBC) 1987. See Hosea above.
✓ Achtemeier, Elizabeth. [ℳ], Minor Prophets I (NIBC) 1995. See Hosea above.
✓ Andersen, Francis I., and David Noel Freedman. [ℳ], (AB) 1989. Their superlative Hosea commentary was 650pp. This exhaustive work on a shorter prophecy is 1050pp! We would certainly have been better served by a rigorous pruning of material. I guess it is tough to edit your own work — Freedman was General Editor for the series. This is among the best, most complete commentaries on Amos, but I won’t recommend you purchase it unless you are an advanced student or scholarly pastor. (I am trying to be a realist; unless you are an OT specialist, you will be lost in all the detail.) This vol. and those on Hosea and Micah are generally mild in their criticism, compared with most others in the AB. I do not recommend following their speculative proposal for a multiphase development of the prophet’s career. [SJT 93.2; JBL Fall 91; Int 4/91; CBQ 7/91; JNES 4/95; HS 1991].
✓ Auld, A. Graeme. ‡ (OT Guides) 1986.
✓ Barton, John. ‡ The Theology of the Book of Amos, 2012. [JTS 4/14; Int 4/13; JESOT 3.2; DenvJ 16; RelSRev 9/13].
Beeley, Ray. 1970. This is a fine 120-page commentary by a godly English schoolmaster, published by Banner. He draws from Calvin, the Puritans, and the older classics, and includes searching questions for applying the message.
☆ Birch, Bruce C. ‡ Hosea, Joel, Amos (WestBC) 1997. See Hosea.
F Cardiff, Peter. (Apollos). Naylor was once listed as under contract.
F Carroll R., M. Daniel. (NICOT). This could be sterling (a single vol. on the prophet). Amos is receiving much scholarly attention these days, and Carroll R. has contributed well to that scholarship: Contexts for Amos (1992); and Amos, The Prophet and His Oracles (2002) [CBQ 7/03; SwJT Fall 04; Int 4/04; JSOT 28.5; JAOS 123.3].
✓ Coggins, Richard J. ‡ Joel and Amos (NCB) 2000. See Joel above.
✓ Cripps, Richard S. ‡ 1955. An older commentary by a Cambridge don (first edition was published in 1929).
F Dijkstra, Meindert. ‡ (HCOT).
✓ Driver, Samuel R. ‡ Joel and Amos (CBSC) 1897. More valuable than Cripps and Harper, says Childs. See under Joel.
☆ Finley, Thomas J. Joel, Amos, Obadiah (WEC) 1990. See under Joel. Fretheim, Terence E. [ℳ], Reading Hosea-Micah (ROT) 2013. See Hosea.
☆ Garrett, Duane. Amos: A Handbook on the Hebrew Text (BHHB) 2008. See under Commentary Series. The author here is a much-published, conservative Southern Baptist, and his work is full (304pp.) and helpful to students, as well as to pastors wanting to stay in the Hebrew. [RelSRev 9/09; JHebS 2010; CBQ 4/10; VT 60.3; ExpTim 7/11].
F Gordon, Robert P. [ℳ], (ICC – new series). This will be a treat indeed. Gordon retired as Regius Professor of Hebrew in Cambridge and has more conservative sensibilities. It must be a long way off.
✓ Gowan, Donald E. ‡ (NIB) 1996.
☆ Guenther, Allen R. (BCBC) 1998. See under Hosea.
✓ Hagedorn, Anselm C., and Andrew Mein, eds. ‡ Aspects of Amos: Exegesis and Interpretation, 2011. [CBQ 1/13; JTS 4/12; JSOT 35.5; VT 62.4; BibInt 22.1].
✓ Hammershaimb, E. ‡ ET 1970. Deals with technical matters, but is still fairly accessible. This has been one of the standard commentaries but has steadily lost value over recent decades with all the new publications. [JBL 91.2].
✓ Harper, W. R. ‡ (ICC) 1905.
✓ Hasel, Gerhard F. Understanding the Book of Amos, 1991. Excellent analysis of the book, especially for its time, treating all the basic introductory questions and issues of interpretation. [BSac 4/93; CRBR 1992]. Books of this kind are multiplying: see Auld and Carroll R. above, and Watts below. I call Carroll R. the best of the lot.
✓ Hayes, John H. ‡ Amos: The Eighth Century Prophet, 1988. [CRBR 1990].
☆ Hill, Andrew. (CorBC) 2008. See under Hosea.
F Hoyt, JoAnna M. Amos, Jonah, Micah (EEC).
☆ Hubbard, David A. [ℳ], Joel and Amos (TOTC) 1989. See under Joel.
✓ Jeremias, Jörg. ‡ (OTL) 1995, ET 1998. As is typical of much German OT scholarship, “Jeremias’s leading concern is the history of the growth and composition of the book” (Tucker). That critical approach wearies many of us today. Still, this is an important commentary for students to consult. [JBL Fall 97; JTS 10/96; BL 1996; Int 7/00; CBQ 7/97; PSB 21.1; RelSRev 10/98; RBL; DenvJ].
F Joyce, Paul. ‡ (Illum).
✓ Kapelrud, A. S. ‡ Central Ideas in Amos, 1961.
Keddie, Gordon. The Lord Is His Name (WCS) 1986.
F Kessler, Rainer. ‡ (IECOT).
✓ King, Philip. ‡ Amos, Hosea and Micah: An Archaeological Commentary, 1988.
F Lee, Won. ‡ Amos (FOTL).
☆ Lessing, R. Reed. (Concord) 2009. An enormous work that nearly rivals AB (691pp.). Smith calls it “an excellent work” [BBR 22.2], but one that depends heavily on three commentaries (Paul, Niehaus, and Andersen-Freedman). Its strengths are thoroughness (no surprise) and a patient exegetical treatment of the Hebrew. Those from the Lutheran tradition, and many outside it, will value its theological exposition and christological approach.
✓ Limburg, James. ‡ Hosea-Micah (I) 1988. See under Hosea.
☆ McComiskey, Thomas E., and Tremper Longman III. (EBCR) 2008. The 1985 EBC by McComiskey was a solid work (possibly the leading evangelical commentary when it appeared), and Longman has made it better. (But a bibliography of six items?) These 70pp. are valuable for both exegesis and theological exposition. [BL 2010].
McKeating, H. ‡ (CBC) 1971. See under Hosea.
✓ Martin-Achard, R. ‡ (ITC) 1984. See under Lamentations. Hubbard uses Martin-Achard a good bit.
☆ Mays, James L. ‡ (OTL) 1969. Years ago the pastor looking for a supplement to Stuart and Smith would have been wise to pick up this commentary, but now Mays seems dated and newer works have greater appeal to the evangelical pastor. Mays is moderately critical in his approach and one of the most thoughtful liberal commentators on the OT I have read. See Jeremias above for a newer Amos vol. in the OTL. The publisher is keeping Mays in print. [WTJ 34.1].
F Möller, Karl. (THC). Preparing the way is his dissertation, A Prophet in Debate: The Rhetoric of Persuasion in the Book of Amos (2003) [BibInt 12.4].
Ogilvie, Lloyd J. Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah (WCC) 1992.
☆ Paul, Shalom. ‡ (Herm) 1991. An impressive work (409pp.) by a Jewish exegete, hailed by many as pointing in a new, more productive scholarly direction. This is not a replacement for Wolff, but a complementary study which takes a holistic, more conservative approach to the text. Along with Andersen-Freedman and Wolff, this is a leading technical commentary. The pastor with the money and desire to build a first-class reference library will consider buying this. I bought Paul and find the commentary to be the most stimulating and satisfying technical work available on Amos for examining literary features, but I realize most pastors do not share my academic interests. There is little theology here. [CBQ 1/93; JBL Sum 93; Int 4/93; VT 4/95; Them 10/94; JSOT 57; BSac 10/92].
F Roberts, J. J. M. ‡ (NCBC).
✓ Simundson, Daniel. ‡ Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah (AbOTC) 2005. See under Hosea.
☆ Smith, Gary V. Hosea/Amos/Micah (NIVAC) 2001. This vol. has been recommended for purchase under Hosea. Many pastors will want NIVAC for Amos. See Smith’s earlier Amos listed above.
☆ Smith, Billy K., and Frank S. Page. Amos, Obadiah, Jonah (NAC) 1995. This work of over 300pp. fulfills the aims of the series. The section on Amos is the best here; the Obadiah and Jonah sections are among the poorer contributions to NAC. [JETS 3/98; VT 47.1; JSOT 76; SwJT Spr 98; HS 1997].
✓ Soggin, J. Alberto. ‡ ET 1987. This critical exegesis was published by Fortress and, for students at least, is worth consulting. Regrettably, the approach is strictly historical-critical. See Soggin under Joshua and Judges. [Them 1/89; JBL Sum 89].
Thorogood, Bernard. ‡ A Guide to the Book of Amos, 1971.
Vawter, Bruce. ‡ Amos, Hosea, Micah (OTM) 1981. See under Hosea.
Veldkamp, Herman. The Farmer from Tekoa, ET 1977. Rich sermonic material from a master preacher in the Dutch Reformed Church.
Waard, Jan de, and William Allen Smalley. (UBS) 1994.
✓ Watts, John D. W. [ℳ], Vision and Prophecy in Amos, 1958, 2nd ed. 1997. [DenvJ].
✓ Wolff, H. W. ‡ (Herm) ET 1977. See Joel above. [JBL 90.4].
NOTE: Consult the list of works in the above section, “The Twelve Minor Prophets.”
★ Baker, David W. Joel, Obadiah, Malachi (NIVAC) 2006. See under Joel. This meets a real need, since we have lacked a good selection of strong expositions which offer guidance in applying Obadiah today.
★ Block, Daniel I. (HMS), 2014. Every publication from Block is a happy event. Subtitled “The Kingship Belongs to YHWH,” this full (100pp.) theological commentary employs discourse analysis and rhetorical criticism and has real value for both students and bookish pastors. It’s my first pick. The author, who also serves as editor of this new OT series, offers a fine translation and an insightful treatment of the Hebrew text. See Ezekiel, Judges, and Deuteronomy for other works by this enormously productive Wheaton scholar. This hb lists for only $19.99. For reference purposes I now reach for Block and Raabe, then Stuart. [JSOT 39.5; JETS 9/14; JESOT 3.2; DenvJ 18].
★ Niehaus, Jeffrey. The Minor Prophets: An Exegetical and Expository Commentary, Vol. 2, Ed. Thomas E. McComiskey, 1993. Already recommended for purchase; see the section above on the Twelve Minor Prophets. This second vol. in the set is every bit as strong as the first. On Obadiah specifically, Niehaus and Stuart were the best works, prior to Raabe. The number of good exegetical commentaries on this long-neglected prophet is nothing short of astonishing. Finding expositional help, however, has long been more difficult with Obadiah; see Baker, Bridger, Brown, Busenitz, Calvin, Marbury, and Ogilvie.
★ Raabe, Paul R. (AB) 1996. This is a very substantial single vol. on Obadiah (273pp.). Few have the money to buy a book like this on such a short prophecy, but this has been the best (partly because fullest) scholarly commentary — it is rivaled in size only by Ben Zvi and Renkema. Raabe teaches at conservative Concordia Seminary in St. Louis and shows great ability in ANE background studies, philology, close textual work, and weighing other scholars’ work. [JBL Fall 00; JSOT 79; CBQ 1/99; RelSRev 7/97; RBL].
★ Stuart, Douglas. (WBC) 1987. See Hosea above.
✓ Achtemeier, Elizabeth. [ℳ], Minor Prophets I (NIBC) 1995. See Hosea above.
☆ Allen, Leslie C. [ℳ], (NICOT) 1976. See Joel above.
☆ Armerding, Carl E. (EBCR) 2008. The old EBC (1985) contained dependable, brief scholarship, and here Armerding updates his work. A lot of pastors would probably be content to have only these 27pp. on this prophecy, which is so often ignored or regarded as unattractive. [BL 2010].
☆ Baker, David, T. D. Alexander, and Bruce Waltke. Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah (TOTC) 1988. This book is a 207-page gem, mainly because of Waltke’s work on Micah and Alexander’s 45-page, thoughtful introduction to Jonah (which defends the traditional position). Baker’s commentary on Obadiah is well reasoned, balanced and valuable — no throw-away. Even if this is all you have on Obadiah, you may think you’re still in good shape. [JETS 6/92]. Note Baker’s more recent homiletical commentary above.
✓ Barton, John. ‡ Joel and Obadiah (OTL) 2001. See Joel above.
✓ Ben Zvi, Ehud. ‡ A Historical-Critical Study of the Book of Obadiah, 1996. See also his form-critical work on Hosea and Micah in FOTL. Students will consult this commentary for the rare exegetical paper on this Minor Prophet. Much attention is paid here to the putative readers. Ben Zvi is notable for its rigor, depth, and thoroughness (286pp.). [CBQ 7/98; HS 1999; RelSRev 7/97].
✓ Bewer, J. A. ‡ (ICC) 1911.
☆ Bridger, Gordon. The Message of Obadiah, Nahum & Zephaniah (BST) 2010. The author is an evangelical Anglican parish priest and former Principal of Oak Hill College, now retired. Preachers will find his exposition of these neglected prophets satisfyingly full (307pp.), thought provoking, and readable. There is a basis, though, for criticism that Bridger is less engaged with the text than other BST entries. [JSOT 35.5; JETS 9/11; RelSRev 6/13].
☆ Brown, William P. ‡ Obadiah through Malachi (WestBC) 1996. One of the few and most helpful pastoral expositions of Obadiah. Brown has also written a well-received exposition of Ecclesiastes. There are few remarks here to suggest higher criticism. [JSOT 79; CBQ 10/98; RelSRev 1/98; Int 7/98].
Busenitz, Irvin Albert. Joel and Obadiah (Mentor) 2003. See under Joel.
Clark, David J., Norm Mundhenk et al. A Handbook on the Books of Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah (UBS) 1993.
✓ Coggins, R. J., and S. P. Re’emi. ‡ Nahum, Obadiah, Esther (ITC) 1985. See under Esther. Mason once called Coggins’s work on Nahum here “[t]he best of recent commentaries, emphasizing the function and cultic setting of such prophecy” (p.56). Obadiah is similarly well-done from the historical-critical angle (38pp.).
Eaton, J. H. ‡ Obadiah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah (Torch) 1961. At one time it was considered very useful because there were few commentators.
✓ Edelman, D. V., ed. ‡ You Shall Not Abhor an Edomite for He Is Your Brother: Edom and Seir in History and Tradition, 1995. See also John R. Bartlett, Edom and the Edomites (1989).
☆ Finley, Thomas J. Joel, Amos, Obadiah (WEC) 1990. See under Joel.
Fretheim, Terence E. [ℳ], Reading Hosea-Micah (ROT) 2013. See Hosea.
F Hagedorn, Anselm. ‡ Joel, Obadiah (IECOT).
✓ Jenson, Philip Peter. [ℳ], Obadiah, Jonah, Micah: A Theological Commentary, 2008. Like Joyce’s choice vol. on Ezekiel, this was to have been published in NCB, but that series is defunct. It is a compact exegesis of 227pp. with indices, aimed at explaining the theological message in its original context, with a few Christian reflections. The book divides as follows: Obadiah, pp.3 – 27; Jonah, 29 – 93; Micah, 95 – 189. Jenson is reluctant to say much about compositional history since it is so speculative; he prefers to take a canonical, synchronic approach. With regard to Jonah, he sees serious problems with reading it as a historical account and with discerning a fitting genre categorization. “Most recent commentators wisely leave the genre as general as possible” (p.34) and speak of “story.” In coming to the exegetical treatment of the text, one finds Jenson astute, careful, and responsible. He has taught at the evangelical Trinity College, Bristol, and at Ridley Hall, Cambridge. For reasons of price ($150), this will regrettably have to be consulted in the library. I have yet to see a pb. [CBQ 10/09; BL 2010; VT 60.2 (Williamson); JHebS 2009; JSS Spr 12; RBL 2011; RelSRev 3/11].
Kleinert, Paul. (Lange) ET 1874.
✓ Limburg, James. ‡ Hosea – Micah (I) 1988. See under Hosea.
Marbury, Edward. Obadiah and Habakkuk, 1649 (1865 ed. repr.). This Puritan work offers a lengthy, profound Reformed exposition of these books. I’ve not used it much but know it was warmly commended by Spurgeon. Available free online.
✓ Mason, Rex. ‡ Micah, Nahum, Obadiah (OT Guides) 1991.
F Möller, Karl. (Apollos).
Ogilvie, Lloyd J. Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah (WCC) 1992.
✓ Pagan, Samuel. ‡ (NIB) 1996.
Perowne, T. T. Obadiah and Jonah (CBSC) 1889.
✓ Renkema, John. ‡ (HCOT) ET 2003. This well-done and large-scale (224pp.) study is more focused upon the old historical-critical concerns. Students will certainly consult this commentary, which is now a leading reference work. Compare with Raabe and Block, who are more conservative. [JSOT 28.5; VT 57.2; RelSRev 10/04 (Sweeney)].
F Ruiz, Jean-Pierre. ‡ Joel & Obadiah (Illum).
✓ Simundson, Daniel. ‡ Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah (AbOTC) 2005. See under Hosea.
Smith, Billy K., and Frank S. Page. Amos, Obadiah, Jonah (NAC) 1995. See under Amos.
✓ Thompson, John A. “The Book of Obadiah, Exegesis” (IB) 1956. Few works in vol.6 are worthwhile, but this and Thomas’s “Haggai” and “Zechariah 1 – 8” have been.
✓ Watts, John D. W. ‡ Obadiah: A Critical, Exegetical Commentary, 1969. Important since it was long the most in-depth commentary on this tiny book, Watts was occasionally reprinted. “His cultic interpretation can be safely ignored” (Childs). If you are planning to do a lot of study in Obadiah, you will want to look this up. Watts was usually spoken of as the authority to consult, at least prior to the publication of Raabe. [JBL 90.2]. He also has a later commentary on this book in CBC (1975).
✓ Wolff, H. W. ‡ Obadiah and Jonah (ContC) ET 1986. Another translation from the BKAT series, but this time the publisher for Wolff’s work was Augsburg rather than Fortress. (Those two publishing houses merged.) This vol. meets the same standards established in the earlier Hermeneia commentaries. The student must consult Wolff on technical issues. Wolff’s strengths were form criticism, tradition-history, and theological interpretation. See Hosea. [JBL 99.2; CRBR 1988].
F Yates, Gary. Hosea, Joel, Obadiah (EEC).
NOTE: Consult the list of works in the above section, The Twelve Minor Prophets.
★ Alexander, T. D. (TOTC) 1988. See Baker (TOTC, not NIVAC) under Obadiah. Alexander has excellent theological insights. He ably defends his conservative approach to the prophecy in this commentary. You might also consult “Jonah and Genre,” TynBul 36 (1985): 35 – 59, a significant, wisely cautious article for conservatives to read. [JETS 6/92].
★ Bruckner, James K. Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (NIVAC) 2004. Preachers especially will esteem this as an excellent addition to the series. Together with my friend, Dale Brueggemann [CTJ 4/08], I find his treatment of Jonah inferior to the fine exposition of Nahum through Zephaniah. The particular weakness is a straining to rehabilitate Jonah as a good prophet. As I wrote earlier, one needs to remember that prophets, priests, and kings (2 Sam 11 and 24) can point to Christ — the need for a perfect prophet, priest and king — in their failures as well as their successes. I note, however, that Longman disagrees and finds the Jonah section “the most stimulating.” Alongside this book and Ferguson, preachers should also consider Brown, Keddie, Martin, Nixon, Estelle, Phillips, and Robertson.
★ Ferguson, Sinclair. Man Overboard, 1982. Reprinted by Banner (2008), this wise, theologically insightful study in sermonic form was originally from Tyndale House Publishers. I consider the vol. to be model preaching. See also under Daniel.
★ Sasson, Jack M. ‡ (AB) 1990. Masterful. Along with Wolff, one of the leading scholarly commentaries in English. Sasson’s approach is essentially synchronic, using the new literary criticism and focusing on the text’s being rather than its becoming. Much fuller in its discussion than ContC or OTL, this work is often consulted, and scholarly pastors will want to purchase it. [JBL Spr 92; CBQ 1/93; Int 7/92; JNES 4/95; AsTJ Fall 92].
★ Stuart, Douglas. (WBC) 1987. See Hosea above. Evangelicals value this reverent defense of the miraculous in Jonah’s prophecy, but there is far more substance to the work than just that. The exegesis is well-reasoned and insightful. Stuart’s literary observations and theological guidance meet the needs of preachers.
★ Youngblood, Kevin J. (HMS) 2014. Deft rhetorical analysis is paired with discourse analysis (text linguistics) in the service of providing solid theological exposition. Those who can handle the Hebrew will be able to make fullest use of this, but it is accessible to those without that competence. He nuances his position on the genre question, saying that, “while [it] . . . relates historical events, the book of Jonah was not written as strict historiography” (p.31). Youngblood believes “the author’s interests were more theological and didactic than historical and chronological,” and this accounts for the story having “less historical detail.” This is a very fine book for both preachers and teachers, written with remarkable clarity. It may prove helpful, too, to those who desire to learn how to apply discourse analysis to an OT text by following an example. My first-pick. See ZECOT. [JSOT 39.5; JESOT 3.2; BTB 5/15].
✓ Aalders, G. Charles. The Problem of the Book of Jonah, ET 1948. A short defense of the book as fitting the genre of history and as credible.
✓ Achtemeier, Elizabeth. [ℳ], Minor Prophets I (NIBC) 1995. See Hosea above.
☆ Allen, Leslie C. [ℳ], (NICOT) 1976. See Joel above and Micah below. The major deficiency here is the brevity of the commentary, a little over 30pp; by contrast Stuart spends 67pp. Allen reads Jonah as a non-historical parable, though it is certainly not an impossible “sea yarn” — see the note below. This has long been a leading evangelical commentary.
☆ Alter, Robert. ‡ Strong as Death Is Love: The Song of Songs, Ruth, Esther, Jonah, and Daniel, 2015. See under Ruth.
☆ Baldwin-Caine, Joyce. The Minor Prophets: An Exegetical and Expository Commentary, Vol. 2, Ed. Thomas E. McComiskey, 1993. A solid work which rivals the other evangelical commentaries now available, but this was perhaps not her finest hour — see her numerous vols. in the Tyndale series. It is not among my top picks for Jonah, but the whole set has been recommended for purchase.
✓ Bewer, J. A. ‡ (ICC) 1912.
☆ Brown, William P. ‡ Obadiah – Malachi (WestBC) 1996. Well done and conservatively critical. See Obadiah.
Cary, Phillip. ‡ (Brazos) 2008. I have not yet had a chance to explore this exposition by an Augustine scholar, said by reviewers to read Jonah as a humorous allegory. [JETS 6/09; HBT 31.2; BL 2010; RelSRev 9/09; CBQ 4/10; BBR 21.3; Int 1/11].
Clark, David J., Norm Mundhenk, et al. A Handbook on the Books of Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah (UBS) 1993.
Ellison, H. L. (EBC) 1985. Honorably retired and replaced by Walton.
✓ Ellul, Jacques. [ℳ], The Judgment of Jonah, ET 1971. A stimulating and successful study which seeks to interpret the book’s message christologically; it is more of a reflection on Jonah than an exegesis or textual exposition. Though difficult to pinpoint on the theological spectrum, Ellul was essentially Barthian. See his other books on Kings and Ecclesiastes.
F Erickson, Amy. ‡ (Illum).
☆ Estelle, Bryan D. Salvation through Judgment and Mercy: The Gospel According to Jonah (GAOT) 2005. An attractive, well-studied, biblical theological reading (157pp.) by a prof at Westminster Seminary California. Suitable for pastors and Bible study groups.
Fairbairn, Patrick. 1849. Another classic 19th century exposition besides Martin which would provide preachers with grist for the mill.
F Fischer, Irmtraud. ‡ (IECOT).
Fretheim, T. E. [ℳ], The Message of Jonah, 1977. Warmly received in mainline circles as a theological exposition and literary analysis. It remains useful, if you make allowances for his critical stance. [JBL 9/79].
Fretheim, Terence E. [ℳ], Reading Hosea-Micah (ROT) 2013. See Hosea.
✓ Hasel, Gerhard F. [ℳ], Jonah: Messenger of the Eleventh Hour, 1976. A fine treatment of Jonah by an able biblical theologian.
F Hoyt, JoAnna M. Amos, Jonah, Micah (EEC).
✓ Jenson, Philip Peter. [ℳ], Obadiah, Jonah, Micah: A Theological Commentary, 2008. See under Obadiah.
✓ Kamp, Albert H. ‡ Inner Worlds: A Cognitive Linguistic Approach to the Book of Jonah, ET 2004.
☆ Keddie, Gordon J. Preacher on the Run (WCS) 1986.
Kleinert, Paul. (Lange) ET 1874. Defends reading the account as historical.
Knight, G. A. F., and F. W. Golka. ‡ The Song of Songs and Jonah (ITC) 1988.
F Kugel, James. ‡ (Herm). This will have some of the same strengths as Sasson’s work, and I expect it to be of high quality as a technical research tool.
Legg, John. When We Don’t Understand: God’s Ways with Jonah and Habakkuk (WCS) 1986.
✓ Lessing, R. Reed. (Concord) 2007. A very large (451pp.), reverent exegetical and theological treatment from an OT scholar at conservative Concordia Seminary. No doubt, it is panned by critics for taking the fish story literally. He aims to help preachers and students in christological interpretation and with proclamation. The usual Lutheran move from Law to Grace is common here. The complaint of some will be that, as he labors to explain elements of NT theology in Jonah, he seems to mute the “authentic voice of the OT.” Students can expect to find some penetrating exegetical insights, especially in the area of literary parallels (biblical intertexts). [JETS 12/08; BSac 10/09; VT 60.1; CBQ 7/10].
Limburg, James. ‡ Hosea – Micah (I) 1988. See under Hosea. For expositors.
✓ Limburg, James. ‡ (OTL) 1993. This is much more thorough and scholarly than his treatment of Jonah in the Interpretation series. Still, at 123pp. it appears brief compared to, say, Sasson’s work, which I also find more interesting. P. R. Davies writes with characteristic bite, “Rarely do I think a commentary might have been longer; here is an exception.” Certainly classed as one of the most important commentaries from the critical camp. Some (e.g. Jenson [BSB 9/96]) have recommended Limburg highly. [ThTo 4/94; Int 4/95; JTS 4/95; VT 10/95; JSOT 3/95; Them 10/95; JETS 3/96; JSOT 65; HS 1995, 1996].
Mackay, John L. Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (Focus on the Bible) 2008. Lengthy exposition (420pp.) from a Reformed perspective.
Magonet, Jonathan. Form and Meaning: Studies in Literary Techniques in the Book of Jonah, 1983.
☆ Martin, Hugh. (GS) 1870, 3rd ed. 1889. A classic theological exposition from the 19th century. Spurgeon rather overstated his case, even for his own day, when he wrote, “No one who has it will need any other.” Still, it is very good, edifying, and was worth buying for its thoughtfulness, “unexcelled warmth and fervour” (Murray). In 1990 I made this a purchase recommendation (359pp.), but it is now free online. Frankly, it is one of my favorite older commentaries on either Testament.
F Möller, Karl. (Apollos).
☆ Nixon, Rosemary A. (BST) 2003. Though open to interpreting Jonah as allegory, Nixon is not insistent on that reading scheme. She is sharp in picking up literary features and offers a surprisingly full theological exposition (about 220pp. on four short chapters). There is real learning here, and students can profitably consult Nixon. Evangelical pastors will find this BST homiletically rich and stimulating. [JETS 9/04; JSOT 28.5].
Ogilvie, Lloyd J. Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah (WCC) 1992.
☆ Patterson, Richard. (CorBC) 2008. See under Hosea.
Perowne, T. T. Obadiah and Jonah (CBSC) 1889.
☆ Phillips, Richard D. Jonah & Micah (REC) 2010. Regrettably, I have only used this briefly (355pp.). Phillips is a veteran expositor (see Hebrews and Zechariah), and this is quite useful as an example of rich, well-studied gospel preaching. Because there is so much competition among devotional-sermonic books on Jonah, I suspect that his treatment of Micah (20 sermons, 220pp.) will meet more of a need.
F Potgieter, Johannes H. ‡ (HCOT).
☆ Robertson, O. Palmer. Jonah: A Study in Compassion, 1990. An exposition from one of today’s more insightful OT theologians in the Reformed camp. Published by Banner.
Roop, Eugene F. [ℳ], Ruth, Jonah, Esther (BCBC) 2002. See under Ruth.
F Sherwood, Yvonne. ‡ (BBC).
✓ Simon, Uriel. [ℳ], (JPS) ET 1999. This is the first JPS commentary outside the Pentateuch. “The author tries to combine the insights of the traditional Jewish commentators and modern biblical exegesis” [JSOT 89]. Though not of much length (xliii + 52pp.), this book will set you back $40. Whew! A helpful commentary with much to offer in theological reflection (especially on the theme of God’s compassion versus the prophet’s demand for justice), grammatical analysis, and literary sensitivity. I find little here which could be termed higher critical, except the notion that the story is fictionalized. [Int 10/00; CBQ 4/00; RelSRev 1/01; DenvJ].
✓ Simundson, Daniel. ‡ Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah (AbOTC) 2005. See under Hosea.
Smith, Billy K., and Frank S. Page. Amos, Obadiah, Jonah (NAC) 1995. See under Amos.
☆ Timmer, Daniel. A Gracious and Compassionate God: Mission, Salvation, and Spirituality in the Book of Jonah, 2011. From NSBT. [Them 11/12].
✓ Trible, Phyllis. ‡ Rhetorical Criticism: Context, Method, and the Book of Jonah, 1995. One in the Fortress series, Guides to Biblical Scholarship. She discusses the new rhetorical approaches and then applies the methods in interpreting Jonah. All in all, an excellent introduction to the newer synchronic approaches and a very rich reading of Jonah — she wrote her 1963 diss. on Jonah. [CBQ 7/96; JBL Win 95; Int 1/97; JR 1/97]. Mention should also be made of her Jonah contribution to NIB, 1996.
☆ Tucker, W. Dennis. Jonah: A Handbook on the Hebrew Text (BHHB) 2006. The first vol. in the Baylor series (see under Commentary Series). Not a commentary in the traditional sense, this 120-page work will encourage students and pastors to make good progress in reading and understanding the Hebrew. [VT 58.1; ExpTim 9/08; JETS 3/08].
☆ Walton, John H. (EBCR) 2008. A very fine replacement for Ellison — one of the two or three best entries in the vol. The quality here could make one wish for more than 38pp. The stance is conservative, saying that “the Israelite audience would have considered the narrative a reflection of reality” (p.463), and he will follow their lead. But this is not a “journalistic history.” There is more straight exegesis here and less theological reflection. [BL 2010].
✓ Wolff, H. W. ‡ (ContC) ET 1986. See Obadiah above.
NOTES: (1) Consult the list of works in the above section, The Twelve Minor Prophets. (2) In this modern age with its short attention-span, few OT books are as inviting as Jonah to the minister inclined to systematic book expositions. One article well worth reading prior to preaching on Jonah is John H. Stek’s “The Message of the Book of Jonah,” CTJ 4 (1969): 23 – 50. (3) See Kenneth Craig, “Jonah in Recent Research,” CurBS 7 (1999): 97 – 118. (4) Critical scholars often speak of Jonah as a fictionalized story, perhaps in the genre of parable or allegory. Many church folk, too, consider it a fish tale, and the expositor certainly must deal with the genre question before commencing a sermon series. With my own congregation I made the following points (in simpler language). First, it is a mistake to make the story’s historicity and matters of piscine/cetacean anatomy our major concern. See the sage remarks of Ferguson (p.45) on this point. Second, while mere stories can teach truth (e.g. Jesus’s parables), there are still reasons in the Jonah text for reading the account in a more straightforward fashion, not as a parable. “The incident is reported very matter-of-factly” (Brown, p.23). On the all-important genre question, see Alexander above. Third, there have been similar stupendous stories told of “fish swallows person.” Some are obviously fiction while others seem quite within the realm of history (cf. Sasson, pp.150 – 51; Princeton Theological Review 25 [1927] 630 – 42; but note also ExpTim 17 [1905/6]: 521, and ExpTim 18 [1906/7]: 239). Finally, our approach to Scripture ought to be “faith seeking understanding” (fides quaerens intellectum – Anselm). We begin our search with faith, not rationalism and positivism which a priori reject all supernatural claims. Instead of the world’s “seeing is believing” skepticism, we stand on Jesus’s principle that only by believing will we see — see the glory of God (John 11:40).
★ Andersen, Francis I., and David Noel Freedman. [ℳ], (AB) 2000. Scholars waited a long time for this massive work; it was essentially completed in 1993. Along with Waltke, this vol. is the most comprehensive commentary available on Micah, though lacking in the area of theological reflection. The coauthors are brilliant scholars who have a long history of collaboration — see Hosea and Amos above. Freedman was editor of the ABD. This 600-page work is definitely for the academically inclined; the average pastor will have difficulty digesting the material here without surrendering the time necessary for personal reflection and meditation. Students should make ready use of the 67-page bibliography! The scholarly approach in this AB is cautiously critical, patiently exegetical, detail-oriented, and more inclined to treat the final form of the text. Do note that Hillers and Wolff (ContC) below are both valuable in their own way — perhaps just as valuable for scholarship as Andersen-Freedman. Pastors not interested in buying this more expensive and technical vol. should rely on Waltke and McComiskey-Longman for exegetical help. [CBQ 7/01; JTS 10/01; JETS 12/02; JBL Sum 02; JSS Spr 03; BSac 4/02; VT 53.2; JSOT 94; RelSRev 4/02; BBR 13.2; TJ Fall 04; Int 1/05; RBL; DenvJ 1/02 (Carroll R)].
★ Davis, Dale Ralph. (EPSC) 2010. A very fine Reformed exposition for pastors, including some discussion of the Hebrew. This whole book is aimed at the theological message and can be used devotionally (180pp.). There is less available currently to assist preachers with Micah, so I’m glad to see the appearance of Davis — he is more learned in the OT than some other expositors: Prior, Phillips, Boice. [RTR 12/11]. Others offering good homiletical suggestions on Micah are Calvin and Craigie (see Twelve Minor Prophets above). Attractive critical expositions for pastors would be Brown and Limburg.
★ Smith, Gary V. Hosea/Amos/Micah (NIVAC) 2001. See Hosea above.
★ Waltke, Bruce K. A Commentary on Micah, 2007. Don’t get confused. Waltke has three different works on Micah. First came the Tyndale Commentary (1988), superb but brief [JETS 6/92]. In 1993 he gave us a fuller exegesis with much more discussion of the Hebrew text; see the McComiskey-edited work below. Now we have the 2007 commentary, which is twice the length of the 1993 work and is the best evangelical exegesis (nearly definitive from the grammatico-historical angle). Students and more scholarly pastors should all start here, after first doing their own exegesis. Waltke is such a good Hebraist! [CTJ 4/08; RTR 12/07; CBQ 1/08; BBR 19.1; JTS 4/08; Int 7/08; BL 2008; VT 58.3; RelSRev 12/08; JETS 3/08].
✓ Achtemeier, Elizabeth. [ℳ], Minor Prophets I (NIBC) 1995. See Hosea above.
Alfaro, Juan I. ‡ (ITC) 1989. Interesting majority-world perspective on Micah’s issues of wealth and poverty. Many of us Westerners do need our eyes opened to the fact that economic justice is a theological and spiritual concern. Somewhat brief (85pp.). [CBQ 1/91; HS 1991].
☆ Allen, Leslie C. [ℳ], (NICOT) 1976. See Joel above. Allen gives proportionally more space and careful attention to Micah than to the other three books covered: Jonah’s four chapters get about 30pp., and Micah’s seven chapters get 140pp. of exegesis. Unfortunately, Allen treats portions of chs. 4 and 7 as non-Mican, which I consider unnecessary. So often a more fragmentary reading causes the interpreter to miss points in the book’s unfolding theology. For one attempt to redress this limitation (though he denies single authorship), see David Hagstrom, The Coherence of the Book of Micah: A Literary Analysis (1988). Also note Culley below. Allen is a good work to have, but I do not rave about it.
☆ Barker, Kenneth L., and Waylon Bailey. Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (NAC) 1999. A very competent dispensational treatment by Barker that many pastors would prefer to the large technical AB above. Bailey covers the three shorter books here. [JETS 9/00].
☆ Bentley, Michael. Balancing the Books (WCS on Micah and Nahum) 1994.
✓ Ben Zvi, Ehud. ‡ (FOTL) 2000. Here the erudite Jewish scholar, who teaches at the U. of Alberta, has written a dense form-critical treatment of Micah (200pp.). It is a more critical interpretation than some other first-rate scholars have recently offered (e.g. Andersen-Freedman). As with all of FOTL, this work is solely of interest to academics. Ben Zvi is well-known for advocating that form-critical researchers consider “prophetic book” as a form. What is revisionist here is that, while older typical forms are discarded as useful categories, his form critical approach treats every unit in Micah as a “prophetic reading.” [OTA 10/00; JTS 4/01; CBQ 1/01; JETS 3/02; JBL Win 01; HS 2002; VT 51.4; JSOT 94; RelSRev 4/03].
☆ Brown, William P. ‡ Obadiah – Malachi (WestBC) 1996. See Obadiah.
☆ Calvin, John. Sermons on Micah, ET 1990. An initial translation published in hb was terribly expensive; Blair Reynolds was the translator (Mellen, 1990). Now P&R has released an inexpensive 424-page pb rendering by Ben Farley: Sermons on the Book of Micah (2003). This is different from the commentary and makes for fascinating reading.
Clark, David J., Norm Mundhenk, et al. A Handbook on the Books of Obadiah, Jonah, and Micah (UBS) 1993.
✓ Culley, Kenneth H. ‡ The Literary Coherence of the Book of Micah, 2015.
F De Moor, Johannes C. ‡ (HCOT).
Fretheim, Terence E. [ℳ], Reading Hosea-Micah (ROT) 2013. See Hosea.
☆ Hill, Andrew. (CorBC) 2008. See under Hosea.
☆ Hillers, D. R. ‡ (Herm) 1984. With 21pp. of introduction and 70pp. of packed commentary, Hillers is more concise than Wolff and much more cautious in its critical approach (avoids redaction-critical analysis). A good, solid technical piece of work. Scholarly students and pastors (with money) wanting to do close work with the Hebrew text of Micah might be interested in obtaining this. Hillers was Stuart’s first choice in 1990, but it is now becoming dated. [TJ Fall 84; HS 1985].
F Hoyt, JoAnna M. Amos, Jonah, Micah (EEC).
✓ Jacobs, Mignon R. The Conceptual Coherence of the Book of Micah, 2001. A reworked Claremont dissertation, completed under Knierim and employing his concept-critical method. The prophecy is coherent, she argues, mainly as the result of redactors’ work, contemporizing even the oldest material.
✓ Jenson, Philip Peter. [ℳ], Obadiah, Jonah, Micah: A Theological Commentary, 2008. See under Obadiah.
☆ Kaiser, Walter. Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi (WCC) 1993. If you are looking for a homiletical commentary on these books, this vol. provides broad coverage (nearly 500pp.). It has pastoral insight and, as one of the few WCC written by a professional OT scholar, is better researched than most. The average preacher will prefer, and be more than satisfied with, having Waltke, Davis, and Gary Smith on the shelf. Kaiser could be an inexpensive add-on (very cheap s/h).
✓ King, Philip. ‡ Amos, Hosea and Micah: An Archaeological Commentary, 1988.
✓ Kleinert, Paul. (Lange) ET 1874.
✓ Limburg, James. ‡ Hosea – Micah (I) 1988. See under Hosea.
Mackay, John L. Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (Focus on the Bible) 2008. See under Jonah.
✓ Mason, Rex. ‡ Micah, Nahum, Obadiah (OT Guides) 1991.
☆ Mays, James L. ‡ (retired OTL) 1976. One of the more suggestive critical commentaries available on this book. It is thorough, readable, and asks many of the right theological questions. His position is a bit more critical than Allen’s, for he denies most of the book to Micah. Not as worthy as his OTL commentaries on Hosea and Amos. By the way, Mays later did exceptionally fine work on Psalms. See Smith-Christopher below. [JBL 6/78].
☆ McComiskey, Thomas E., and Tremper Longman III. (EBCR) 2008. The 1985 EBC, authored by McComiskey, is superseded by EBCR. McComiskey-Longman is to be considered among the finest brief (60pp.) evangelical treatments of this prophecy.
✓ McKane, William. ‡ 1998. Published by T&T Clark, this detailed critical commentary runs to 256pp. The prophecy suffers division into three parts at the hands of this scholar, who also did Jeremiah for ICC. Only chs. 1 – 3 are supposed to have come from the 8th century prophet. Few younger scholars today — outside Germany, I should say — have McKane’s confidence that they can decide what the prophet could and could not have said (and therefore what must be ascribed to later redaction). This vol. is for advanced students and scholars. [BL 1999; EvQ 7/00; JTS 10/99; CBQ 10/99; OTA 6/99; RelSRev 7/99; JSS Spr 01; VT 51.3].
McKeating, H. ‡ (CBC) 1971. See under Hosea.
F Möller, Karl. (Apollos).
F Ollenburger, Ben. (BCBC).
☆ Phillips, Richard D. Jonah & Micah (REC) 2010. See under Jonah. This would be an excellent purchase for the preacher.
☆ Prior, David. Joel, Micah, Habakkuk (BST) 1998. See Joel above.
F Sharp, Carolyn. ‡ (Illum).
✓ Shaw, Charles S. ‡ The Speeches of Micah: A Rhetorical-Historical Analysis, 1993.
✓ Simundson, Daniel J. ‡ (NIB) 1996. See also the next entry.
✓ Simundson, Daniel. ‡ Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah (AbOTC) 2005. See under Hosea.
✓ Smith, J. H. P. ‡ (ICC) 1911.
✓ Smith, Ralph L. ‡ Micah – Malachi (WBC) 1984. Workmanlike, but not very stimulating. Not at all up to the standard of Stuart’s work on the first five Minor Prophets and much more critical. I had hoped for more theological discussion. Overall it is a disappointment, though offering some help with the Hebrew. While students will consult Smith for papers, pastors should probably steer clear of this older WBC. In past editions I expressed my hope for a replacement vol. It will happen. See Stuart below. [RTR 1/86; ExpTim 6/85; JBL 105.3; JETS 6/85; HS 1984].
✓ Smith-Christopher, Daniel L. ‡ (OTL replacement) 2015. I have yet to see this replacement for Mays (see above), but it has been announced as 256pp. Having read several pieces by Smith-Christopher, I am reasonably certain his OTL vol. will be a leading critical work for many years to come. See also his work on Daniel in NIB.
F Stuart, Douglas. Micah – Malachi (WBC replacement). This was once announced for late 2009, as a replacement for Ralph Smith.
Vawter, Bruce. ‡ Amos, Hosea, Micah (OTM) 1981. See under Hosea.
☆ Waltke, Bruce K. The Minor Prophets: An Exegetical and Expository Commentary, Vol. 2, Ed. Thomas E. McComiskey, 1993. Prior to the fuller 2007 work recommended above, I urged people to start here. This is still a very satisfying exegesis for pastors, who might even prefer this more condensed commentary (which is still quite full with 175 large pp.).
✓ Wolff, H. W. ‡ (ContC) ET 1990. See under Hosea. Once again, as with the earlier BKAT vols. in translation, Wolff provides very valuable textual and exegetical notes, prior to probing theological reflection (240pp.). No question, this continues to be a standard reference commentary. The demerits of the earlier Wolff vols. (Hosea, Joel-Amos, Obadiah-Jonah) are present here too. [SJT 93.4; Int 7/91].
✓ Wolff, H. W. ‡ Micah the Prophet, ET 1981. A different work than his entry in ContC, as is clear from the German title, best translated Conversing with Micah. This contains exposition and essays with some rich homiletical thoughts. Seems less critical in its approach than his other commentaries because he addresses a different audience: the church rather than the academy. [ExpTim 1/82].
NOTES: (1) Consult the list of works in the above section, The Twelve Minor Prophets. (2) See Sheri L. Klauda, “Micah: An Annotated Bibliography,” SwJT 46.1 (2003): 48 – 56. (3) Mignon Jacobs, “Bridging the Times: Trends in Micah Studies since 1985,” CBR 4.3 (2006): 293 – 329.
★ Bruckner, James K. Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (NIVAC) 2004. See under Jonah. Other worthwhile pastoral commentaries are Boice, Calvin, Bridger, Craigie, and Kaiser; more critical are Achtemeier and Brown.
★ Longman, Tremper, III. The Minor Prophets: An Exegetical and Expository Commentary, Vol. 2, ed. Thomas E. McComiskey, 1993. I believe I prefer Longman’s exegesis to Patterson’s more lengthy treatment. This was his first scholarly commentary, and it is well informed and presented. He did much research and reflection on the divine warrior theme (God Is a Warrior, 1995) and expertly covers this prophecy about Yahweh’s vengeance against Assyria. Longman and Robertson are a well matched pair.
★ Patterson, Richard P. Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah (WEC) 1991. This provides the Hebrew exegetical helps for the student which aren’t so plentiful in Robertson. Patterson is admired as a leading evangelical OT scholar, and he was one of the OT editors for this series (with Ronald Youngblood). A full treatment at 416pp., this vol. went o/p with Moody but was reprinted by Biblical Studies Press. Longman and Robertson should take priority on your to-buy-list, especially if not working with the MT.
★ Robertson, O. Palmer. Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah (NICOT) 1990. This quickly established itself as the standard conservative commentary on these books, i.e. for the pastor’s study. Robertson excels at theological exposition, but has less for students in the way of scholarly helps (philology, grammar, textual criticism, etc). The relative neglect suffered by these books makes a detailed exegesis of the Hebrew text the more valuable. Even as an aging vol., Robertson retains value for the preacher who wants to get at the message of the text. See Renz below. [WTJ Spr 92; Them 1/93; Int 1/92; CBQ 7/92; JETS 6/95; HS 1994; CRBR 1992].
☆ Achtemeier, Elizabeth. [ℳ], Nahum – Malachi (I) 1986. Good from a more conservatively critical perspective, even distinguished. You may think it suffers a bit, however, on account of its brevity (200pp.). As expected from this series, she focuses on the theological message and writes mainly for pastors. [CRBR 1988].
☆ Armerding, Carl E. (EBCR) 2008. A good solid commentary made better with the revision. The 1985 EBC was easy to recommend for we had hardly any exegetical commentaries on Nahum. Now we have several excellent ones, and the competition makes Armerding’s EBCR seem less substantial, at least for students (47pp.).
☆ Baker, David. Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah (TOTC) 1988. This is a thoughtful, well-researched vol. of 120pp., the first-pick in my 1989 guide. All three Bible books are well covered. [EvQ 1/91; JETS 9/92].
☆ Barker, Kenneth L., and Waylon Bailey. Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (NAC) 1999. Bailey covers the three shorter books here, and some judge his work to be a better guide than Barker’s Micah commentary in this same vol. This is very well done and of value to students as well as pastors. Some will argue that this deserves a place on the recommended purchase list. Praised by Longman.
☆ Bentley, Michael. Balancing the Books (WCS on Micah and Nahum) 1994.
Boadt, Lawrence. ‡ Jeremiah 26 – 52, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Nahum (OTM) 1982.
✓ Bosman, Jan Petrus. ‡ Social Identity in Nahum: A Theological-Ethical Enquiry, 2008.
☆ Bridger, Gordon. The Message of Obadiah, Nahum & Zephaniah (BST) 2010. See Obadiah.
☆ Brown, William P. ‡ Obadiah – Malachi (WestBC) 1996. See Obadiah.
F Callender, Dexter. ‡ Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah (Illum).
F Cathcart, Kevin J. ‡ (ICC – new series). Scholars anticipate good things here, as Cathcart’s research on this Minor Prophet goes back to his much-cited Nahum in the Light of Northwest Semitic (1973). One wonders if this may be published together with Habakkuk and Zephaniah.
✓ Christensen, Duane. (AYB) 2009. Not for the faint-hearted! Christensen has delivered an extremely detailed, conservatively critical commentary (464pp.). Pastors and seminarians won’t invest in this ($85 list), but diligent doctoral students will, if focusing on Nahum. The obvious strengths here are exhaustiveness, poetic analysis (both larger structures and the fine points), interaction with previous interpreters, and bibliography (82pp.). Very simply, nothing compares with this in scope. The problem is digging through all the idiosyncratic “logoprosodic analysis” of “the numerical and musical composition of the biblical text.” Here are examples: “the balance in terms of mora count becomes (24 + 16) || (16 + 25) = 40 || 41 morae” (p.389). “The invariant five tones on the central axis (C G D A E) provide five pentatonic modal permutations” (p.37). Got that? Some bright students might be able to learn German and digest Rudolph’s great commentary or Heinz-Josef Fabry’s vol. in Herders (2006) sooner than they could pick up on what the author is doing here. Christensen is obviously a genius, and you will discover he also has a large commentary on Deuteronomy. [JETS 9/10; CBQ 10/10 (Renz); Int 1/12; JSOT 36.5; ExpTim 11/11; RelSRev 6/11].
✓ Clark, David J., and Howard A. Hatton. (UBS) 1989. Covers Nahum to Zephaniah in 357pp. [CRBR 1992].
✓ Coggins, R. J. and S. P. Re’emi. ‡ Nahum, Obadiah, Esther (ITC) 1985. One of the best commentaries oriented more toward historical criticism (63pp.). See under Esther and Obadiah. The problem that pastors may find in Coggins’s work, both here and elsewhere, is that he tends to emphasize the great distance between the ancient text and modern day and what terribly hard work it is to find the text’s relevance.
✓ Davidson, A. B. [ℳ], (CBSC) 1896. Also covers Habakkuk and Zephaniah. One of the old mildly critical scholars from Britain.
F Dietrich, Walter. ‡ Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (IECOT) 2015?
Eaton, J. H. ‡ (Torch) 1961. See under Obadiah.
✓ Floyd, Michael H. ‡ Minor Prophets, Part 2 (FOTL) 1999. Over 650pp. of extremely detailed form-critical and structural analysis of the last six Minor Prophets. In keeping with recent developments in form critical research, Floyd shows interest in synchronic concerns, as well as diachronic. This has become a standard reference commentary for scholars doing work on these books. [JTS 4/01; Int 7/01; CBQ 4/02; JSS Spr 03; HS 2003; VT 51.4; JSOT 94; RelSRev 4/03; JAOS 122.1].
✓ Garcia-Treto, Francisco O. ‡ (NIB) 1996.
☆ Goldingay, John, and Pamela Scalise. [ℳ], Minor Prophets II (NIBC) 2009. Goldingay covers Nahum to Haggai, and his colleague at Fuller Seminary treats Zechariah and Malachi. I’ve not had opportunity to do more than scan this vol., but these authors are recognized, productive scholars on the left wing of evangelicalism. Expect clarity and critical acumen in a briefer exegesis. [RTR 4/11; BTB 5/11; RelSRev 3/11].
☆ Kaiser, Walter. Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi (WCC) 1993. See under Micah.
Kleinert, Paul. (Lange) ET 1874.
✓ Mack, Russell. Neo-Assyrian Prophecy and the Hebrew Bible: Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 2011. A Hebrew Union College PhD. [JESOT 2.2].
Mackay, John L. Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (Focus on the Bible) 2008. See under Jonah.
☆ Maier, Walter A. 1959 (posthumous). This detailed commentary was written by a conservative Lutheran and had probably been the longest commentary on Nahum in any language at close to 400pp. Christensen now wins that prize. Meier is an aging (essentially late 1940s), technical and expositional work — still a good purchase for in-depth study. But it should be used with a more up-to-date commentary like Longman, especially on issues like textual criticism. This was Stuart’s favorite back in 1990; I doubt it is now.
✓ Mason, Rex. ‡ Micah, Nahum, Obadiah (OT Guides) 1991.
✓ O’Brien, Julia. ‡ Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi (AbOTC) 2004. A brief (326-page) and competent exegesis which is sometimes regrettably out of sympathy with the theology of these prophets (e.g. pp.288 – 89). See her earlier commentary below. [CBQ 7/05; Int 1/06; BL 2005; RBL; ExpTim 10/05]. O’Brien’s program for interpreting the prophets’ theology is set out in Challenging Prophetic Metaphor: Theology and Ideology in the Prophets (2008) [CBQ 4/10].
✓ O’Brien, Julia. ‡ (Read) 2002. This is much more in-depth (162pp.) than the AbOTC. She employs more postmodern synchronic analysis (intertextuality, etc.) in this work, which is of greater interest to students (especially those seeking a feminist reading) than to evangelical pastors. [Them Spr 04; RelSRev 1/04; BBR 16.1; BL 2006, 2010; JHebS].
☆ Patterson, Richard. (CorBC) 2008. See under Hosea.
F Renz, Thomas. (NICOT replacement). Though Robertson is still very serviceable for expositors of Nahum to Zephaniah, there is a replacement coming down the pike. Renz has a strong interest in prophetic rhetoric.
☆ Roberts, J. J. M. ‡ Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (OTL) 1991. This is now probably the leading critical interpretation of these three books (223pp.). The author is retired from Princeton Seminary and is a proficient text critic, exegete, and theologian. “Roberts’ commentary . . . is a jewel” (Hillers), and would not be an unwise purchase for the pastor who enjoys digging deep. I bought it and found it rich. The price even in pb is rather high: $40. [CBQ 7/93; JBL Spr 93; ThTo 4/92; JR 10/94; JETS 6/95; BSac 1/93].
✓ Smith, J. M. P. ‡ (ICC) 1911.
✓ Smith, Ralph L. ‡ (WBC) 1984. See Micah above.
✓ Spronk, Klaas. ‡ (HCOT) ET 1997. A very full Dutch commentary for specialists and students: 144pp. of introduction and exegesis. Spronk is keen to detail as far as possible the historical setting of the prophecy, which he dates earlier (660 BC) than many scholars. [JSOT 79; RelSRev 7/98; JBL Spr 01].
F Stuart, Douglas. Micah – Malachi (WBC replacement). See under Micah.
F Vanderhooft, David. ‡ (Herm).
F Warstler, Kevin. Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (EEC).
NOTES: (1) Consult the list of works in the above section, The Twelve Minor Prophets. (2) Michael Weigl, “Current Research on the Book of Nahum: Exegetical Methodologies in Turmoil?” CurBS 9 (2001): 81 – 130.