« Book Review: The Theology of John Zizioulas | Main | If Radical Orthodoxy gives you a headache ... »

June 26, 2007


jim gordon

Now I think there's a real difference between 'must read' and 'can't do without'. But there's also the question of manageability when commentaries are so huge the text simply disappears under an avalanche of micro-analysis. The beauty and enjoyment of Hauerwas on Matthew is his whole commentary is shorter than the introduction to at least three of the standard commentaries! Jewett on Romans is a lifetime achievement - but consulting him on the wretched man passage in Romans 7 made me feel like a wretched man who looks at such a BIG book and admits, the good I would I don't do....' As a repository of today's scholarship unsurpassed; as an original and persuasive case...still to be decided who's persuaded. But enough wingeing - I think Phil Towner on the Pastoral Letters in NICNT, Luke Johnson's Anchor commentary on James, and yes, Tom Wright's Romans in the New Interpreter's Bible (despite Jewett's bright red bulk nearby)!


Whatever the difference is between a 'must read' and 'can't do without', Cranfield on Mark, and Cranfield on Romans (2 vols) definitely fits both bills.

I also love Carson on John, Hughes on Hebrews and both Lincoln and O'Brien on Ephesians.

You definitely hit the nail on the head with Thiselton on 1 Corinthians!

Sean Winter

The focus here seems to be on theological insight. If that is the case then Bultmann on John and Kasemann on Romans. Luz is by far and away the best Matthew commentary. Schrage on 1 Corinthians (in German only). Joel Marcus on Mark (2nd volume still awaited, Doubleday have had the MS for 2 years now). 2 Corinthians has a gap in your list - its a tricky one but Murray Harris' recent NIGNTC is very good. I also agree with Jim Gordon's love of Raymond Brown on the Johannines.

Les Hutchinson

Just finished preparing a Bible study series for teenage "Nurture Group" on Revelation - Ben Witherington III's book was superb. I also enjoyed ('must read' or 'can't do without'?)Morna Hoooker on Mark


A few of my own faves would have to include John - "John~Evangelist & Interpreter" by Stephen Smalley 1978

So many good Romans commentaries, But I'd say if this is a "must read" list then Luther's commentary should be there. In terms of most helpful I'd have to place John Ziesler's "Paul's Letter to the Romans" on the list too.


I've only started reading Jewett's commentary, but it might well usurp Stowers on my list. For the Johanine Epistles, I would also cast a vote for Brown and the Anchor series would also get my vote for Philemon, with Fitzmyer's commentary. Although old now, I still like JND Kelly on the Petrenes, Morris on Thessalonians and Bruce on Hebrews.

In terms of changes, I would have gone for Witherington on Acts and Philippians, Martin on 2 Corinthians, Chevalier on Revelation and Hoehner on Ephesians.


Andy - filling in the gaps, I'd go for Richard Bauckham for Jude & 2 Peter (Word Biblical Comentary), and would suggest his "The Climax of Prophecy:Studies in the book of Revelation (1998)" is a must have for dealing with this book.

simon jones

I'd put Gorden Fee's Philippians on my must have along with his 1 Corinthians - though both Thiselton's tomes are now alongside it. Wright, Jewett and Grieb are conversation partners on Romans, Hays is 'must have' on Galatians along with Martyn's book of essays (not used his commentary). Greg Beale is 'must have' on Revelation, though needs to be read in conversation with Bauckham and Smalley. The thing about commentaries is that they shouldn't be read and relied on solo. I always need to use a couple in dialogue to get me thinking and working on the text.


Baukham is a really good call on revelation.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad