Prolific commentator Andrew Steinmann has produced this replacement volume on Genesis in the Tyndale Old Testament Commentary (TOTC) series. As with several of these replacement volumes, they are a little thicker than those they replaced. In this case, Steinmann has replaced Derek Kidner, who is the master of the briefer commentary. That being said, Steinmann has proven to be more conservative and dependable at key points even if Kidner’s pithiness may never be matched. As great as Kidner was, I’m not sure if I ever liked him on Genesis as much as I did on other books that he wrote on anyway. As for Steinmann, this is my first foray into his works. Though he has written massive commentaries on Ezra and Nehemiah, Proverbs, and Daniel, they were part of the Concordia Commentary series of which I am not familiar. In any event, Steinmann did prove adept at matching the TOTC style.

He begins his Introduction describing the foundational place of Genesis in the Old Testament. He well explains the traditional view of the Pentateuch as being the work of Moses including his marshaling of the witness of the New Testament. To meet scholarly demands, he well describes the Documentary Hypothesis too. Though he was gentle, it’s so easy to see that that hypothesis should be relegated to the trash heap of history. He does a fine job discussing literary features and addressing the historical and archaeological issues that so often plague studies of the Book of Genesis. He uses a few helpful tables and charts before he gets into the theological themes of the book. Fortunately, he doesn’t hesitate to highlight the messianic promise of Christ. He provides a lengthy outline for analysis as well.

The commentary was conservative and wonderful. He knew how to succinctly overview scholarly thoughts before giving some guidance without pushing the book beyond reasonable length requirements. I worked through his commentary on the creation of man and the Fall and felt his comments were ideal for what this series is trying to accomplish. Pastors will love this book and it could easily be the best volume now to put in the hands of the serious Bible students in our congregations.

I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.

Thomas Schreiner’s volume on Romans in the Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (BECNT) series has been one of the top-rated commentaries on this pivotal doctrinal book of the New Testament since its release in 1998. That the publishers would ask for a second edition rather than a new contribution is of no surprise at all. Don’t miss his preface to the second edition as he explains the major contributions that have come out since his original work and the passages (Romans 2:14-15, 5:12, 7:13-25) where he has altered his conclusions. He describes these changes as “a different direction in defining the righteousness of God”. Works he has released during the intervening 20 years between these two editions have already revealed that he has moved to an even stronger reformed position, particularly on the subject of justification. Most second editions don’t kindly point out where to expect changes as he has done in this preface, so I believe he should be congratulated. As for these changes themselves, those of a more reformed persuasion will only like this new edition better while those who are not as much of that persuasion will not find enough passages involved to downgrade the commentary. At the end of the day, no matter where you fall on that spectrum, this is still an outstanding work in a respected series by a major scholar.

Since I had the first edition on hand to compare, I can let you know that the Introduction is not majorly changed. The layout is better, there’s occasional editing, and most of the new content is near the end on rhetoric and structure. Still, it doesn’t seem dated, especially as he adds new references to more recent scholarly works, and because he tackles the key issues that introductions ought to address rather than esoteric scholarly preoccupations that often sound ridiculous 20 years later. Without question, this commentary would still be one of the places I would turn to consult introductory issues.

The commentary is clear and helpful, up to anyone’s scholarly requirements, and insightful where needed. He does better than most at putting what should be in footnotes in their proper place so the commentary itself flows better. Even if you aren’t as reformed as he is, you can get a clear explanation of those viewpoints in those passages where it’s most debated. The BECNT format is helpful to the reader and he follows it well. Without being overly verbose, he gives Romans the meaty treatment it deserves.

This second edition is so well done that I predict it will easily remain near the top for another 20 years.

I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.

Craig Keener turns out massive scholarly books at a rate unmatched by anyone I can think of. More impressive, they tend to be quite highly rated. Though I haven’t personally used it, his recent multivolume commentary on Acts is already legendary for its scope. To be honest, I wondered if this commentary on Galatians would be dry or overly padded. It wasn’t. I was pleasantly surprised at the engaging quality of the writing. Though there are some paragraphs that pastors can afford to overlook and copious footnotes, bibliography, and indices, I felt the commentary itself was the perfect length for a true in-depth exegetical commentary. He has a knack for surveying scholarly opinion and providing clarity in telling you what he concludes that is truly helpful whether you agree with him or not.

The Introduction for Galatians that followed his translation and outline for the book could fairly be labeled to-the-point. He began by sharing insights on how Galatians has been interpreted historically including a nod to Luther. From there, he addressed whether Galatians is an apocalyptic letter. He tackled author, provenance, and date with a skillful thoroughness. Without a doubt, you will have all the information you need to conclude on Galatian’s date after you read here. He defined Paul’s audience and laid out the well-known North Galatia versus South Galatia hypotheses that scholars have been debating for years before landing on the North Galatian side himself. Next, he gets into another debatable area, this time that of Paul’s opponents in Galatians. He gives, perhaps, his most detailed attention to this subject in his introduction. I found it really enlightening as that was not a debate I had deeply considered before. Finally, he looked at structure, rhetoric, polemic, before he gave a short summary of the effectiveness of Paul’s letter.

The commentary proper runs from page 47 to 588. I’m, again, impressed at his balance between thoroughness and effectiveness. No doubt, he will address some topics that only scholars will find interesting, but I fail to see how anyone couldn’t get help in understanding what each passage is addressing. You could be like me, and not agree with his conclusions as much as you might with some other commentators, but it is his laying out the issues, explanations of word meanings, and stellar historic and scholarly background that makes this book such an asset. Though it’s not in one of the major series, I suspect it will be as influential as if it were. If you are a scholar, I imagine his footnotes and bibliography will be a gold mine for you. Perhaps the book could have used a few pages of conclusion for the letter as a whole after the commentary, but I certainly can’t think of anything else that you will find lacking here. Like the best of commentaries, he will share his conclusions, but his real help is giving you the information to draw your own. That always wins for me.

I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.

David Toshio Tsumura has finally completed the second volume in his now two-volume set covering the books of Samuel. It’s great to see that the New International Commentary on the Old Testament (NICOT) series now has both books of Samuel covered. After I’ve carefully looked this book over, I feel that maybe his first volume was not fairly evaluated. Even when I reviewed the first volume myself, I think I missed how high of quality this book really is. Most have said that the author is a fine philologist, but perhaps the overall impact of this commentary is not as keen as others. Since I took more time with this second volume to understand his approach, I want to greatly upgrade the ranking I would give to it and now label it as totally top-notch. I fear that some have graded him more for his opinion about MT texts over the LXX and other variants than for his actual work. What we really have here is a superior approach linguistically to most commentaries on the market today as well as solid commentary for readers.

He begins his introduction by explaining his approach to textual criticism. I found it to be totally refreshing. Most textual critics today butcher the text, even lord over it trying to tell us what we can receive or not receive, but his approach allows the Scripture to speak for itself. What is brilliant about it is how he proves it at a linguistic level. I don’t possess that specialty but found him easy to follow as I read. He gets into the genre, style, discourse, and structure, before he gets into the message of the book. His section on themes and theology is not long, but good as far as it goes. His outline is as good as anyone’s and his bibliography is quite extensive.

I dug into his commentary for my favorite II Samuel passages, passages that I was most familiar with and have studied before. I found that he continued to make his brilliant linguistic points while truly contributing thoughtful reflection on what the text was saying. He also always stayed close to the text which is what we are really looking for in a commentary, wouldn’t you agree?

Some may be influenced by the reviews given for his first commentary, but I recommend you check it out for yourself. As for me, it is a five-star volume all the way.

I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.