Having written extensively on Matthew’s Gospel in the past, Charles Quarles here delivers the latest entry in the EBTC series. It strikes me as being of the same value as most of the previous entries in the series and it seems to strike the balance the EBTC series calls for as well.

Somewhat surprising is the 100 page Introduction before you even get to the commentary proper. The first 45 pages cover basic introductory issues like author, date, provenance and destination, language, genre and purpose, and structure. The author’s vast learning is on display here, the conclusions conservative, and the coverage adequate.

Even better is the rest of the Introduction that embraces theological themes as this series promises. At first, I thought it was odd that these discussions began focusing exclusively on Christological titles. As I continued I had to confess that they are critical to unlocking Matthew. I especially loved later the discussion on the Kingdom of Heaven for its perceptiveness and restraint. New Covenant, New Creation, and New Israel continued fleshing out what Matthew was up to. By the end, I was sold on his approach.

The commentary proper was also a success. 650 pages for Matthew means the commentary is mid-length by today’s standards. For many, though, that’s going to be just right. This one will be especially enjoyed by pastors and anyone who is interested in careful study. The deep learning is there while the parade of it is subdued. For many, this would be all they would want or need on Matthew.

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 ZECOT has certainly found its own niche with its discourse analysis orientation and in the process has become a commentary series you simply must not miss. Here the wooly Book of Judges gets its turn and it seems to me the discourse analysis approach especially gives a rich payload in this book that many don’t know what to make of. Boda, whose commentary on Zechariah impressed me a few years back, and Conway have done good work here. The two are colleagues at McMaster Divinity College and proved to be seamless collaborators as well.

After a bibliography and translation, there’s a successful 50 page introduction that slows down where it should while zipping along where it should as well. When discussing Judges and its historical context, the authors see a dichotomy between the history itself and that of the original readers as they see Judges being written later on. Obviously, much of that is speculative. The intent of the writer taken from clues from the text is the rose among the thorns of this section. That next section leads them to an in-depth look at clause function as originated by Roy Heller. The detail is complex, but the conclusions are easy to follow and quite interesting.

My favorite section of the Introduction, entitled Judges and its literary shape, is eye opening. The earlier detailed work is marshaled into an outstanding explanation of the structure. That means, of course, the unique goal of this series is fully realized here. You’ll understand Judges fair better because of it too.

The theology section was a little brief but perhaps some would blame Judges for that.

The commentary proper with the good foundation laid in the Introduction is ideal. One of the strengths of the ZECOT is its layout and its advantages are evident here. People love Daniel Block’s work on Judges and rightly so, but you’d do yourself a favor to get this one 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.

Goldingay is a prolific writer of commentaries to say the least. Sometimes you wonder if he has some captive researchers locked up in his basement. As Baker expands its major commentaries in the OT, we find that he will soon have in print a commentary for them in the Pentateuch, History, Wisdom, and Prophetic sections. At what point is he just showing out?

More seriously, I really like this commentary. In over a decade of book reviewing, I’ve found myself not particularly liking some of his earlier ones that I reviewed and then really liking his more recent contributions like Jeremiah and Lamentations. Maybe he changed. His comments don’t strike me as subversive as before to be sure. Maybe I changed. I had to make myself admit the possibility.

So for this review I want to focus on specifically why this volume and his other recent ones ( I hadn’t seen his Genesis or Joshua yet) are so effective. When you pick up this volume, read the Author’s Preface that mostly describes the process of how he wrote this commentary. I wish all commentaries told this information up front. Later it hit me. He didn’t just collate a mass of scholarly details (a fair description of many modern works), but he had something to say himself. He is one of the leading OT scholars today, so isn’t that as it should be? I can look up what everyone else says myself. I like to hear what the author has to say. The footnotes will back up this assertion.

Further, he has settled into a comfortable, mature, capable writing style that belies his scholarly prowess mingled with effective communication that belies his years of teaching. He writes as one who wants to get his message across and has honed the skills necessary to do it. In his paragraphs both what he has learned and what you have just learned rise to the top.

His next great strength is in OT background. Again, offering to us from his decades of work that we don’t have. Only when his assertion arises from critical assumptions alone does he miss. He often transports the reader to Bible times. He harnesses a mass of details and makes it a palatable morsel to swallow. He is closer to average on theology and structure, but he excels in bringing to bear the broad sweep of OT times while sitting you down in a particular text. That is really how he stands out in the pack and that really helps in these lesser-known Minor Prophets.

This book is not as long as some on just one of these prophets from Hosea to Micah, but I bet it will do you as much good. I still must spar with him in places. “Wind” instead of “spirit” in Joel 2. Ok, whatever. The historicity of Jonah? I knew that was coming. At least he said it was still authoritative. The whole theological message of Obadiah is that “God will take redress”. That’s it? Really? I could list more examples, but there are far more places where he taught me something. Even where he failed to convince me, he often made me think. I can overlook a few places where I rolled my eyes to get all that good stuff. And of course you, the reader of this review, might have rolled your eyes at me instead at these disputed points.

I like this volume so much that I wonder if I should go back and look up and review a few of his that I missed along the way like, say, the Psalms. In any event, you can’t miss with this one.

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.

I’ve always enjoyed these books that help us by ranking the best commentaries among the nearly endless options available. Here Nijay Gupta throws his hat in the ring and offers up his choices. Of necessity, this type book is going to work best for you the better you line up with the one doing the ranking.

To be sure, I don’t align with Gupta as much as others with similar offerings. I simply wouldn’t choose many of his top choices and am baffled by some of his omissions. If you were a bit less conservative than me, he would likely fall right in line for you. I also feel his selections are more apropos for scholars than pastors though he attempts to offer advise to both.

The best value here for me is at the margins. I like to have a few works outside my box, and he offers real help in making those selections. A few recommendations he provided were totally off my radar and gave me a few good ideas for future selections.

If all such books were of the same stripe, you really couldn’t find much value in multiple authors recommending. It’s where disagreements arise that having a few of these type books on hand could help you.

I like the format more than the selections. That style of presentation makes a clearer case for what he’s suggesting than many such formats.

Commentaries cost a fortune, so some evaluations are needed. Let this title be one such evaluation.

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.

Rumors were that the Eerdmans Critical Commentary (ECC) series was halted, but the release of this two-volume set proves them false. I have no idea what the future of this series is, but I found this set exceeding my expectations. To be upfront, I’m very conservative in my approach to Scripture, but have long enjoyed some of these series that take a more liberal viewpoint because they can have such interesting theological takes at points. Again, not across the board, but here and there nuggets of brilliance can be dug out. Now that you understand what I’m looking for, and the basis I will rate the book on, I can tell you that this one provides far more of it than I usually get. There’s some nonsense to my conservative eyes on these pages, but there’s a bunch of what I hoped to find too—yes, reams of it really.

By the standards of major commentaries of this length, this set has a short Introduction of 20 pages and the footnotes are half of that. Good for me, the subjects where I’d find the reasoning most subversive are mercifully short in coverage. That might be a downer for some users of this work, but since “Q” and source discussions are served up ad nauseam in other works I think you’ll be ok. He quickly segues into “genre and orientation”. It’s the orientation angle that sparkles with profound observation. If you can’t enrich your studies with what’s found here, I suspect you’re not even trying. It’s the broad swaths that we somehow miss that were most compelling. The section on theological interests and involvements are really more of the same at the same high level. And then the Introduction is over. As it turns out, like Goldilocks, I’ll call it , just right.

The commentary proper continues the style I enjoyed in the Introduction. When he makes a conclusion based on the sources Matthew was using, I’ll pass. But when such things don’t derail him, the exegesis is quite good. Even better is how he looks at the text with eyes wide open and sees so much. When you can see important details, can see trends across the book, and can tie it all together, you can help we commentary readers. This he does. I really like this lovely commentary (nice book and dust jacket) though it’s final rating may be a matter of taste. It tasted good to 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.

Now Colossians and Philemon get a turn at revision in the Tyndale New Testament Commentary (TNTC) series with Alan Thompson replacing N. T. Wright. As famous as Wright is, I prefer this new volume. Thompson studied under Douglas Moo and since Moo has turned out one of the most-important major commentaries on these two epistles, you might think of this as Moo in a more accessible offering. I do not mean by that that Thompson has merely repackaged Moo, but that even though Thompson has done his own work, the conclusions are quite similar. In this case, that’s not a bad thing. Good conclusions expressed by two different authors in their own way can be quite helpful.

Colossians gets a 25 page Introduction while Philemon gets 6. That’s on the longer side for this series. Most importantly, the conclusions are conservative and sufficiently worked out. The reasoning is solid. Most pastors and teachers will find all the introductory discussions they would care to find here. There’s nothing here that falls short and the last section in the Colossians Introduction on why Paul wrote Colossians is best. That’s really where he works out the theology rather than in its own section. Structure isn’t really addressed directly besides in an outline either. The one on Philemon was similar in style and conclusions. Unusual for these days, no diatribe on slavery as if were the whole point Philemon exists. Since slavery is just a background for the story rather than the point of the little epistle, that’s a good thing.

The commentary proper meets the standards of this series and is on par with several others I’ve reviewed. Solid and dependable are the words that come to mind. Just as in every title in this round of revision of TNTC so far, let’s label it 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.

Here is another fine commentary in the widely-used Tyndale New Testament Commentary (TNTC). Before I describe this quality work, I must pause for a moment as my favorite volume of the series before this round of revision, Leon Morris’ Luke, passes from the series. For me, Perrin isn’t a replacement, but a happy addition. Morris AND Perrin will be on my shelves together for the duration.

Now for Perrin. He continues holding to conservative conclusions throughout, so he is trustworthy. He has his own specialties too. Along the way, he has written on the Kingdom of God and I see that knowledge adding sparkle to this commentary at several junctures. He, too, fully understands the design of this series and seemed comfortable in it. The book is near 500 pages, but as he points out at the beginning, Luke is the longest book in the New Testament. More pages were naturally needed, but the depth matches what we are used to in the series.

Also typical for the series, the Introduction is 12 pages. Everything is covered briefly but clear conclusions that will impact the commentary are there. I love how he is agnostic about sources. I’m kind of atheistic about them myself, but that’s a good way to stay out of the ditch in a commentary. Perhaps theological concerns and structure should have been longer in the Introduction, but I’m picking at him now.

The commentary proper is of real value. I read his commentary on Luke 1 and 2 early on Christmas morning and I enjoyed it so much that I may now be too emotionally connected to this book to give unbiased review. Still, I’m pretty sure it’s really good. You will have to cite real proof to convince me otherwise. Until you do, I’ll rate this one highly 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.