Since I posted recently on the NIGTC set, I thought I’d put some comments up about the Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Overall I like this set. These commentaries are laid out nicely. The shaded section at the beginning of each pericope orients the reader to the flow of the passage. Often, after the verse by verse comments there is a shaded section that summarizes the pericope. These shaded sections help keep the commentary from becoming atomistic. I’m also very pleased that the Greek is printed in Greek font and not merely transliterated.
Here are my thoughts on the individual volumes.
Turner, Matthew – It’s nice to have a volume on Matthew by a Progressive Dispensationalist, especially in light of key eschatological passages like the Olivet Discourse. However, his comments seem exceedingly brief in many places. Perhaps I need to use Turner more, but right now I’m not sure this was the best purchase.
Stein, Mark – This may be a fine commentary, but I’ve not looked into it because I feel as though I have Mark well-covered between Edwards (PNTC), France (NIGTC), Cranfield, Hiebert, and Lane (NICNT). [Note: I just read the RBL Review of Stein’s work; it didn’t incline me toward purchase.]
Bock, Luke –Bock’s 2 volume work is massive. He defends the historicity of Luke and interacts with the Jesus seminar. He deals with the synoptic problem. He includes helpful text critical notes. The commentary proper provides verse-by-verse exegesis, and Bock often helpfully surveys and adjudicates various interpretations. He is not as helpful when it comes to tracing the flow of thought or literary themes of the passage in light of the rest of the book. Nor does this commentary consistently bring out the major theological themes of Luke. Joel Green’s NICNT contribution, though not as conservative as Bock, does a better job on those points. Nonetheless, Bock is invaluable and I’m glad I own these volumes.
Köstenberger, John –I like Köstenberger, and his commentary is not bad. But after reading Morris (NICNT), Carson (PNTC), and Ridderbos, I don’t sense that he is adding anything. He’s in many ways similar to Carson, but Carson packs more in. For this reason, I’ve not bought this volume.
Bock, Acts –This volume is okay. Once again it is light on literary approaches and theology. The notes are moderately helpful, but the lack of synthesis makes this commentary not all I was hoping it would be. Peterson’s contribution to the Pillar series looks to be a fine commentary on about the same level, and in addition to solidly explaining the text it is very strong on synthesis and theology. I prefer Peterson to Bock.
Schreiner, Romans – Douglas Moo has written the finest commentary on Romans (NICNT), but I’m also glad to own Schreiner’s Romans commentary. Schreiner does a good job of tracing Paul’s flow of thought and of explaining Paul’s meaning. Well worth owning. [Do note that in Paul, Apostle of God’s Glory in Christ, 205ff., Schreiner humbly corrects some of his interpretations in the Romans commentary]
Garland, 1 Corinthians – I’ve found every commentary by Garland to be helpful. More recent than Fee (NICNT) and more manageable than Thiselton (NIGTC), I’m very glad I own this volume.
Silva, Philippians – I’d rank commentaries on Philippians: Fee (NICNT), O’Brien (NIGTC), Silva (BECNT) [I’ve not looked at the recent PNTC contribution yet]. Silva does a good job showing how the book fits together. I’m glad to own this volume.
McCartney, James – This is newly out, and I hear good things about it. It’s on my look into getting list.
Jobes, 1 Peter – I’ve read good things about Jobes’ commentary, and I’ve found it moderately useful when I’ve used it. But I already have Schreiner (NAC), Grudem (TNTC), Hiebert, Achtemeier (Hermenia), Stibbs (TNTC), Davids (NICNT), and a number of older works. So I’ve not felt a Jobes necessary purchase. (I would rank Schreiner, Grudem and Achtemeier among the most helpful commentaries on 1 Peter. Achtemeier is liberal, but his comments on the Greek are helpful.)
Green, Gene, Jude & 2 Peter – I’ve not spent a whole lot of time with this volume, but I’ve been impressed with what I’ve seen. But having Schreiner (NAC), Bauckham (WBC), Hiebert, and Michael Green (TNTC), this isn’t a priority purchase for me.
Yarbrough, 1-3 John – This looks to be an excellent commentary on the Johannine epistles. It looks as though between Yarbrough and Carson’s forthcoming NIGTC volume, these epistles will be well covered. This volume is high on my to-get list.
Osborne, Revelation – This is my favorite Revelation commentary. Osborne writes from a premillennial perspective and carefully exegetes the book. His section on the theology of Revelation is also very helpful.
Mike Aubrey says
I’d say that Jobes & I Howard Marshall (IVPNTC) on Peter are both far superior to Grudem…and I don’t really understand why Hiebert even get mentioned…
Jon Watson says
Brian,
It seems as if, though you’re writing a review of the series, you would still argue for individual purchases, rather than a series on the whole. My question is this, does the fact that a commentary is in a series really tell you anything about its quality or conservative viewpoint?
Brian says
Jon,
No commentary series has volumes of equal quality, though some sets seem to have volumes of fairly consistently high quality. BECNT seems to be one such set so far.
In general it is possible to judge a set as generally conservative or not. The Anchor Bible is not a conservative set, but the commentary on Obadiah by Raabe seems to have been written by a conservative. On the other hand, NICOT tends to be evangelical, but Leslie Allen’s contribution on Joel, Obadiah, and Jonah trends in the critical direction.
Tom says
I agree with your evaluations here on Silva, Bock, Osborne, and I’m not familiar enough with the others to have an opinion.. I don’t have Garland, so I may have to pick him up. Thanks for the help.
Steve says
Hi,
Which do you prefer between Edwards and Stein on Marks Gospel?.I like Garland commentary. Interesting you prefer Peterson over Bock for Acts, I found Bock gives more cultural background and discusses more views. But I see your point Peterson discusses more theology within the text and flows better. Any additional thoughts since your first comments.
Cheers
Steve.
Brian says
I would prefer Edwards over Stein. I’ve just not found Stein’s commentaries overly helpful. I think Edwards packs a lot of literary and theological insight into his volume. If I were to revise anything since first posting, I’d probably rate Jobes a bit higher and Green a bit lower.
Steve says
Hi,
Thanks for the feedback. I had a quick comparison, and I found Edwards commentary very easy to read and he has these one line statement that are very quoteable for sermons. I love how he gets into the historical background and kind of paints a picture. I found stein dryer and probably better for a bible college context when looking at various points of view. I get Edwards.
On Matthew what are your preference commentaries, I have carson and Keener IVP. I was looking at the new ZECNT on Matthew or Leon morris, Knox chamblin or the NIVAC. Which would you recommend here for sermons and studies. Also on Ephesians the new ZECNT, obrien (pillar) or the new BECNT volume. Is Bock acts commentary as good as his Luke comentary, have you changed your oppinion on bock or still prefer Peterson as I have ordered both but need to choose one? Have you checked out the new ZECNT series – any volumes you like. Thanks in advance.
Cheers
Steve.
steve says
Hi Brian,
Thanks for your input, it was a great help. I compared both stein and edwards and I brought Edwards. It just seem to flow better as a commentary and be better for sermon prep. I need some other recommendations. On Matthew what do you think of the NIVAC volume or the ZECNT by osborn, for Ephesians obrien or the new zecnt by arnold. With Acts do you still think Petersen is better than Bock,
Thanks in advance.
Steve.
Brian says
Hi,
I’ve not done a whole lot of work in Matthew. I do really like Carson, and I usually turn to him first. I’d like to look into Keener more. I also use France, NICNT and Blomberg, NAC. I used Osborne in ZECNT for SS prep this summer and found it useful. I’ve not found Leon Morris to give me much beyond what I get in Carson. I’ve not used the NIVAC volume on Matthew, but I’ve recently read some other things by Wilkins that makes me think I should give it a look.
On Acts I still like Petersen better than Bock, but I have both and use both.
On Ephesians, O’Brien is superb. And though I’ve just looked thorough and not used either Theilman (BECNT) or Arnold (ZECNT), I’d prefer Theilman.
The only ZECNT commentary I’ve used in depth has been Schreiner on Galatians. A superb commentary. I’ve used Osborne on Matthew and Garland on Luke and both were helpful.
Brian
steve says
Hi Brian,
Thanks for your insights into the various commentary’s. I bought Edwards and am pleased with the purchase. I am now looking at both Bock and Peterson. Would osborn commentary be better than Morris, blomberg’s, turner commentary commentary. Have you seen Chamblin’s commentary on Matthew.
Cheers
Steve.
Brian says
I’ve not seen Chamblin’s commentary. I know that I’ve appreciated Blomberg’s NAC commentary in the past. Osborne may now supersede it, but I’d have to spend more time in both of them to say for sure.
Steve says
Hi,
I bought osborn (ZECNT). Thanks for your input, much appreciated.
Cheers
Steve.
Chita says
I have been recking my mind about which commentary to settle for between Mark by France and Stein. I have read RBL reviews of both but they are not as helpful in making a choice between them. Sadly, you haven’t looked at Stein but what your experience with France?
Brian says
I’ve had a good experience with France. I’d recommend him on Mark.