Bible Commentaries

The Beginning of the World by Henry Morris

/ jimmyreagan / 1 Comment

Some years ago, I read a few works by Henry Morris and always had warm feelings about them. He wrote on Creationism and Christianity, sometimes even commentating on books of Scripture. His forte was clearly laying science before Scripture. He always showed evidence of being studied and had no doubts of the validly of Scripture. Not really an exegete, so devotional is really the space he works in.

I’m excited to see the reprinting of several of his titles in a new series called The Henry Morris Signature Collection. They have a crisp look and are a good mixture of the familiar and the new. One of the titles that was new to me was this one that digs deep into the scientific aspects of the first 11 chapters of Genesis.

Obviously, this portion of Scripture is the battlefield of the war between Creation and Genesis. I’m amazed at what simple arguments he presents that absolutely obliterates evolution. For example, the two Laws of Thermodynamics as he well explains are simply insurmountable for evolution. Once after an incredible list he says, “The vaunted evidences of evolution are actually quite trivial”. Ouch! But after reading what went before you are thoroughly compelled to feel the same way.

This book will be helpful for a wide spectrum of users. Pastors and teachers will enjoy it beside a regular commentary to see the science boldly confronted in the text. Bible students, and even younger ones, can still follow the presentation and learn so much.

When you read this book you will wonder how it could possibly be such a minority position with both the Bible and science so clearly on its side. Warmly recommended.

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.

Hebrews (ZECNT) by Douglas Moo

/ jimmyreagan / Leave a comment

A master exegete tackles the toughest book for exegesis in the New Testament. What could be better than that? I often think of Moo as a Pauline scholar, but he already has an excellent work on James to his credit. Hebrews is not for amateurs and this book is a win for us.

At first, I saw the 17-page introduction and I thought, you’ve got to be kidding! Silly exaggerations entered my mind—was he not going to give this the same level of intense work he gave other commentaries? Reading it run all that silliness right out of my mind. When he made the case with perfect clarity for all that we just can’t know about Hebrews, things that make up the bulk of many Introductions, you realize that there was no need for more pages. Perhaps a few pages more on structure would have been nice, but that is never going to dominate his writings.

On to the commentary of the text—wow! He is an exegete par excellence. Honestly, I felt like I was reading someone in awe of the text accompanied by a rock-ribbed determination to be true to it wherever it took him. I offer up the warning passage in Hebrews 6 as a case in point. It was the text first and his theological predilections second. It’s hard for me to fully express how much I respect that. I’m not sure I agreed with his final conclusions completely, but I am better for having read it. I’ll never study the passage again without reading it.

This may be the best commentary for exegesis on Hebrews available. Peter O’Brien’s commentary is the only one I felt that way about before, but it’s in a defunct status now anyway. Moo needs no commendation from me, but I offer it nonetheless.

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.

A Guide to Biblical Commentaries (11th Ed.) by John Evans

/ jimmyreagan / Leave a comment

Here’s a book I love and use regularly, at least I have for over a decade with previous editions. So I deliciously devoured this new edition when it arrived. I have personally reviewed several of the new entries here that have been published since the last release, but I really value his assessments.

He’s the best in the field for these kinds of recommendations and it isn’t even close. And, yes, I’ve seen all the others. His presentation is the most logically organized and his evaluations, though a bit complex, can be followed to advantage if you read his explanation a time or two.

His work is what Spurgeon’s was long ago and Cyril Barber’s works were a generation ago. Strangely enough, he denigrates Barber for being too dispensational. Methinks a few reformed/covenantal theology titles got extra stars for that alone here just as Barber flipped it before. And let’s don’t even discuss what Spurgeon said of Plymouth Brethren writers. But it’s no problem in any of them. Find their bias and adjust accordingly. The bias is real enough that not holding Mr. Evans’ theology may get more negative comments than, say, a very critical or liberal volume. I’ll never understand that, but the world has passed me by in many ways anyway . Still, I wouldn’t even think of not having and using this book.

He tries to write for pastors, but he’s just as interested, and maybe more, for the scholarly volumes. Pastors, don’t worry about that as you’ll know inherently how to adjust. If you compensate for the few biases, you will I think find evaluations easy to line up with. At least I did. You might occasionally disagree. For me, he’s far too harsh on the EEC on the Epistles of John (Gary Derickson). He drowned on the differing theology and overlooked the impeccable exegesis. But that is mostly rare.

This can really help you plan and build a library. Even if like me you have a fair number of the books reviewed, you’ll see something you’ve just got to have. I’ve just got to grab Morales on Numbers after reading here. Grab this book, read it, and let the fun begin.

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.

Esther (CSC) by Andrew Steinmann

/ jimmyreagan / Leave a comment

Esther gets its own volume now as the NAC morphs into the CSC. The old volume was combined with Ezra-Nehemiah, and though serviceable, this one improves the commentary on Esther. Andrew Steinmann has produced quite a body of work by this point and is getting a good reputation. He is pleasantly reliable in his approach to the text.

Esther is a challenge for some scholars and the result is that plenty of commentaries have been written on this lovely book that have the equivalent value of a mechanical pencil without lead. Here the pencil is stocked and writes again.

Steinmann marshals fine material and helpfully presents it even in areas that are often dull. In my estimation, he is better presenting the trees than the forest. To be sure, he beautifully presents the trees, picks the right trees to present, and leads us to being proficient spiritual arborists. I’m not saying he never presents the big picture, it just doesn’t seem he carries it over with the right oomph. In fairness, he discusses things like reversals and things that God is doing and so he doesn’t miss it. Fortunately, he gives you every thing you need so that if you are paying attention at all, you will arrive at the big picture on your own.

In the introduction, he covers everything well except structure. An outline is all he offers on that score.

The commentary is sufficiently detailed and is exactly what most people will need. If you need a massive exegetical commentary, check out the superb EEC volume on Esther. If you just need something for teaching and preaching or personal study, you will likely highly value this work. It would in my opinion substantially outrank the similarly styled TOTC volume on Esther.

I feel this commentary might be exactly what many are looking for.

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

Proverbs (ZECOT) by Christopher Ansberry

/ jimmyreagan / 1 Comment

I’ve often not been satisfied with the newer exegetical commentaries on Proverbs. My complaints run from brevity on individual verses or even saying nothing meaningful to drowning in scholarly issues and still saying very little. To be sure, I cracked this book open with expectations. Were they met? You bet they were.

It took a few pages to figure out how much I liked it. The Introduction started slowly. Maybe he buried the lead for a bit. At length, I realized that he was giving me the pieces before he weaved them together. What I ended with was an articulate presentation of what’s really going on in the Book of Proverbs. Along the way, he obliterated the common criticism that Proverbs is either moralistic at best or boringly cliche at worst.

The discourse analysis that is the hallmark of this series was tangibly good. The scholarly minutiae was handled well without bogging down the periscopes. The exegesis was rich and the theology thoughtfully given.

And here’s the best thing: no verses are passed over or given a cursory, bland sentence or two. You can go to that specific verse and get real help. That’s what I was wanting and I got it.

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.

The Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon (PNTC) [Second Edition] by Douglas Moo

/ jimmyreagan / Leave a comment

This is the kind of commentary that demands a second edition. Had the editors replaced it as is often the case in these major ongoing series they would have had a lot of explaining to do. This commentary went straight to the upper echelon sixteen years ago when it came out and Mr. Moo is still in his prime in commentary writing. Cliché yes, but nonetheless accurate, it was a “no-brainer” that this new edition arrived. It will not lose its lease in that upper echelon for at least a couple decades from now for sure either.

It’s specifically a blessing as well that he writes on Colossians. Many scholars today like to mug Paul and take Colossians away from him. In this work they were caught in the act and hauled to jail. Since Moo handles those critics with gentleness perhaps its surprising I’d use such a violent analogy; but then again his respectful tone does not make him any less lethal, so maybe it’s not surprising after all. Read the Introduction and you will see. When he ends the authorship section with “But Paul must be seen as the real author”, he’s in no way being condescending. His masterful analysis leaves him with nothing else possible to say.

Describing the false teaching addressed in Colossians is equally adept. His eleven points are balanced, biblical, and fog clearing. Scholars must have something against Colossians because they went quite rogue in this area as well. His theological overview was just right too. Perhaps only structure comes up short (as is usual with him) as it gets not one sentence beyond the outline.

Philemon is probably less a battleground than Colossians and ironically Moo is less certain about the big picture of the letter, though he slightly favors the traditional viewpoint. Still, he writes skillfully and mixes all the ingredients perfectly so you can make your own cake. To me, his work on Philemon is of immense value as well.

Moo needs no recommendation from me as an exegete. He has already attained something of legendary status. I can say, though, that that reputation is fully on display in this commentary. If you are studying Colossians and Philemon, avoid this commentary at your own peril.

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.

Lexham Geographic Commentary on the Pentateuch

/ jimmyreagan / Leave a comment

Having enjoyed the earlier two volumes of this series covering the New Testament, I was pleasantly surprised to come across this volume. I guess now I’ll expect the rest of the OT to be covered. On the surface, we might suspect that the Pentateuch would be the area most in need of geographical assistance. Father back in time and having generations trample over its environs, there is simply less certainty. Enter, then, this volume.

This volume is a massive undertaking. In some ways it seems like a Bible encyclopedia while at other points it’s more of an atlas. Despite the title, it’s not a commentary per se. What you get is a thorough article on any geographical subject that greatly impacts our understanding of the text. Some are quite scholarly (like ones explaining from a “socio-spatial” perspective!) but they are often still fun. I loved the one arguing, for example, for the traditional site for Sinai. Though I found it less plausible, it was worthwhile to have an article arguing for an alternate site. Not all articles are explicitly geographical like, for instance, ones on burial practices. Still, it’s all good stuff.

Sometimes even theology was addressed and usually effectively when it appeared. Perhaps my only complaint mimics mine of the earlier volumes: some maps strain the eyes to read. Charts, though, are usually fine.

I can’t help but love a book like this one. Even if every article isn’t your thing, you are bound to find several that are simply fascinating. No other volume I know brings these loose ends so tastefully together. What you have is an asset not duplicated anywhere else. That’s saying a lot these days.

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.

Acts 1-9:42 (WBC) by Steve Walton

/ jimmyreagan / Leave a comment

Well, we have waited for this one a long time. I think I first heard it was coming 15 years ago. Perhaps I noticed because it was anticipated to be an excellent commentary on Acts. I heard that the exegesis that Walton would likely produce were why the expectations were so high. Though it has grown into a three-volume set, and though this is only the first volume, I can see what all the hullabaloo was about.

There is an anomaly—the Introduction for Acts as a whole is not in this first volume. There is a bit about textual issues, but the rest of those things normally addressed in an Introduction will come in the third volume. At first I thought maybe he just wanted more time to write it, but he states that at the end is where those issues should be handled. He is in the minority there and I cannot concur. That also makes the staggered release of the volumes a bit unfortunate. I’m not complaining as most all major publishers of Christian academic works do the same thing. I suspect budgetary concerns are in play. It’s not that serious a problem in any event and the three volumes are going to be fantastic when they are all here.

But volume 1 is here now and the prognosticators were correct: the exegesis is expert level. The Introduction of sorts is worth reading as it explains his approach. In short, he wants a commentary on the text rather than on previous commentaries. I’m glad someone figured that out.

We are all used to the WBC format by now even if it would never occurred to us to design a commentary in such a fashion. He advises that in each periscope that we read the “Explanation” section first, which ironically is the last one in each periscope. The WBC format can’t keep a good man down, or a good commentator I suppose.

The scholarship is mature and thorough. There’s some Greek but English is always at its side. He is considered conservative, but some critical, and a bit wrong-headed orientation, is to be found occasionally. This big volume on only the first nine chapters of Acts proves that this will be detailed enough for the most demanding student imaginable.

He writes well too. It’s hard to really hold attention when we have this kind of depth, but he pulls it off. There are some good one-volume commentaries on Acts that are indispensable, but I’d think we’d have to rank this as the best major, heavy-exegesis volume on Acts we have.

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.

Romans (NTL) by Beverly Gaventa

/ jimmyreagan / Leave a comment

This volume brings the NTL quite close to completion. The volume on Romans in any New Testament series will tell you much about its theological predilection. That is surely true here. This series gives perhaps the clearest presentation of a mediating or critical perspective. That is not my perspective at all, but I often read at least one entry from that side of the fence to stretch myself. This series’ best contribution is often theology that really gets you thinking. This volume succeeds along all those lines.

In fact, Gaventa is an especially translucent writer (or she has a grand editor). Your eyes will easily glide along the page understanding fully her thinking whether you agree or not. Often, when you don’t agree you will still find not as abrasive of arguments as we commonly find. If you are of her theological persuasion, you may develop a deep appreciation of this book.

After a large bibliography, she jumps into the Introduction. She begins by jumping into an orientation to how she approached this commentary including her influences. I wish more commentators used that method. I found she was true throughout to what she said here and I appreciate the transparency.

Again, appreciating transparency and agreeing with what was transparently presented are not the same thing. For example, she says she reads Paul “with a hermeneutic of generosity.” She then cites as an evidence things Paul has said. She states “and there are, to be sure, elements in the letter that disturb me, particularly Paul’s use of same-sex relations as evidence of humanity’s refusal to recognize God as God.” That statement raises far greater questions than merely commentary matters on Romans like, say, what moral system do we use to judge the Word of God? I mean, what’s higher or truer that we could use? If it can be produced, why aren’t we studying it instead of Romans anyway? See what I mean.

At least she tries. In her commentary on Romans 1&2 she twists the passages relating to homosexuality until they are contorted beyond recognition. Her description of Roman views of gender hierarchy (page 68) are beyond the pale in describing what Paul was saying. It came across as an act of desperation that on the one hand apologizes for what Romans actually says to saying it’s still a good book on the other. I can’t see how that would satisfy people on either side of the fence. Don’t misunderstand—I’m neither obsessing on this issue or stating it’s one of the main themes of Romans, but I do believe it might help you understand what you have in store for yourself between the covers of this volume.

With that settled, expect nice exegesis within the confines of her perspective. When she’s on, she’s really on because of her superior writing skills. Barth is clearly her greatest influence and that tells you what to expect doctrinally. Theological nuggets are to be found as well.

If you are like me and are conservatively minded and seek light on a different perspective with theological assists, you will find what you are looking for here. If you possess a critical mindset, you will too.

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.

Job (EEC) by Duane Garrett

/ jimmyreagan / Leave a comment

Here’s a bright, new commentary on the fascinating Book of Job from one of the leading commentary series of our day (EEC). The task fell to prolific commentator Duane Garrett. Ages ago he tackled other Wisdom books in the NAC series. Though that was a perfectly usable volume, it was the work of a rookie. Here the seasoned player steps to the plate and delivers a mature work on Job. I have not read everything he has ever written, but this is the best work he has done out of what I have used.

From the first pages of the Introduction his skills are apparent. He’s well researched, he distills that research to clearly state what the scholarly world has thought, and then he is not afraid to make a conclusion. With kindness to us he does it all without excessive verbiage.

I find myself in sympathy with most of his conclusions as well. The scholarly world has moved on from dating Job closer to Abraham and I just can’t go with them. The older generation had far better reasoning there and the new arguments strike me as vacuous. Garrett makes a strong argument for seeing chapter 28 as an inserted Wisdom Poem. I’m not sure, but he lays it out for you to decide.

He begins with the chiastic structure of Job and is spot on. Whether what he said above about chapter 28 is correct or not, it is the center of the chiasm it seems for sure just as says. The rest of the Introduction is well done. He writes with clarity on textual issues, genre, and biblical parallels.

There’s plenty of meat on the bone in the commentary proper as well. Exegesis, explanation, and theology are first rate. Some of those speeches are exceptionally challenging and there’s excellent help here.

So where does this one rank among commentaries on Job? Hartley (NICOT) is the most similar. He blows many others away as they commentate through a dark haze and so rob Job of its theological beauty. I guess, then, we will have to rank this as our best option for Job in the major commentary category.

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.