Commentaries

Comment on Commentaries

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

I’ve written on commentaries before, such as here and here, and even here. I was just prompted by something I read to point out something else concerning commentaries. As well as the standard sage advice to not overly revere the commentaries, but rather treat them as conversation partners; as well as the solid suggestion to not invite them into the conversation too early; one more suggestion:

Don’t only read commentators that are solidly within your own theological tradition or denominational stream. It is tempting, especially with limited resources, to always buy from the same denominational publishing house, or in a series that is largely of your kind theologically.  Some people seem to only read Reformed Calvinists, others look for well-known Arminian theologians, others like anything connected to Dallas, others want Abingdon Press, others only John MacArthur, others only Tom Wright, others only buy UK/Australian authors, etc.  Tempting as such an approach may be, you will find that richer insight is gained by engaging with a variety of voices.  All of these that I have mentioned can be helpful, as can Roman Catholic commentators, or Jewish commentators, etc.

A couple of caveats (since I know some readers will take me out of context and write me off theologically for one of the items in that list, or perhaps for all of them – I could list more until I find your favorite!)  (1) Just because it’s different, doesn’t make it right, any more than it makes it wrong.  That is to say, whatever their tradition or theology, some commentators deal with the text better than others – you are still looking for good commentators.  (2) Make sure you have some grounding yourself before you bounce around in other camps.  Reading multiple voices is part of good seminary training, but be careful not to intellectually buy into anything and everything in print.  (3) Don’t neglect quality commentators from “your camp.”  They will probably form the “spine” of your collection.  (4) It is helpful to know where a commentator is coming from.  It helps to know that this guy always looks for an obscure position and takes it.  It helps to know that that one comes from a theology that tends to read these kinds of verses in this way.

Finally, I’ve mentioned John Glynn’s helpful book in the past.  I’d like to point you to a very helpful online resource strongly influenced by John Glynn’s book.  Perhaps you have not come across it yet – bestcommentaries.com. I would not say that I always agree with the scores given to a commentary, of course, but it largely seems to be a very helpful guide.  Take a look around it, you will probably be glad to add it to your bookmarks!

Concerning Commentaries

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

Commentaries are an interesting blessing.  Most of us have access to various commentaries, both in print, perhaps in software form and online.  For some they can be a crutch that bears all the weight of their study – they simply look up what their favorite expert says about a passage and preach that (sometimes with all the grace of a person walking with one crutch and no legs!)  For others commentaries provide conversation partners – the opportunity to interact with an expert or two regarding their take on a passage.  For some commentaries can be both conversation partner and source of frustration.

Why frustration?  Well, often the commentaries we look in are too atomistic in their approach to the text.  They move from one word or phrase to the next with relatively little comment on the flow of the text, the flow of thought, the implications of the broader context.  Some commentaries become a source of word study information and grammatical analysis, but fall short of the discourse level awareness that we need in order to more fully understand and preach a passage.

So I am wondering . . . have you used a commentary recently that proved really helpful in your sermon preparation?  Not just in terms of the details, but also in terms of the flow of thought?  It could be a technical commentary from the NIGTC or WBC series, or a literary-driven work like Fokkelman’s voluminous work on Samuel, or it could be a “paperback” like Donald English’s little work on Mark for the BST series. Sometimes the paperbacks are more aware of flow of thought than the heavyweight commentary siblings on the shelf.  Anyway, we’d all be interested to read any recommendations for helpful commentaries – helpful conversation partners in the often lonely work of sermon preparation.

Commentaries – The Golden Ones

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Since we’re talking commentaries, here’s another thought.  How are we supposed to know which ones to buy?  As a preacher I often note a common problem in commentaries – they tend to be atomistic.  That is to say that many of them seem to deal only with the word or phrase at hand.  As a preacher I benefit from this, but value very highly those commentaries that wrestle with the flow of the text, those that include a significant macro view as well as the micro.  This is determined more by author than by series, so we have to hunt carefully in order to find them.  But when you find one that gives a very clear picture of the flow of a text, snap it up, it’s worth its weight in gold!

A couple of basic tips on commentary buying:

If possible, don’t buy blind. If you are able to access a library or borrow from a friend, then do so.  Once you’ve used a commentary you have a much better idea of whether you need to own it.

Try to have more than one. Since commentaries are conversation partners, it is better to have more than one so he or she doesn’t dominate the conversation.

Generally buy selectively rather than a whole series.  No series keeps up the same standard throughout, so it is worth picking and choosing from different series.  If you’re looking for “flow” commentaries that I described at the start, recognize that they can come in the small format (EBC, Tyndale, BST), or substantial English format (NAC, PNTC), as well as the chunkier exegetical formats (Hermeneia, NICNT/OT, WBC, NIGTC, BEC).  However, it is worth noting with discount retailers doing their thing, it may be worth buying a good series for the PC and letting that be the conversation partner, for example NAC or WBC.

Before you buy another commentary, meet John Glynn.  John Glynn’s Commentary & Reference Survey from Kregel is worth its weight in platinum!  I find his evaluation and suggestions on commentaries and other reference tools to be generally excellent.  Paying a few dollars, pounds, euros, yen for this will save money on poor purchases – guaranteed!

Commentaries are important tools of the trade, and buying well is a skill worth aquiring.  But if you can find those commentaries that do a good job on textual flow and macro appreciation of the literary artistry in a book – well, then you are finding gold!

Rumors of Commentaries

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

When I get to listen to a sermon, I sometimes pick up on a commentary vibe.  That is, a sense that the preacher has been spending some time in the commentaries.  Sometimes it is overt references to “the commentators” or a specific commentary (I am describing what I hear, not affirming the practice of citing and quoting the commentaries).  Other times it is a series of background facts that feel like they’ve come from some time in the books.

On the positive side I am always glad to know the speaker has been working in preparation for the sermon.  I’d much rather have somebody who has prepared responsibly than someone who is “winging it” without humble reference to “experts” in the field.

On the negative side I sometimes get a feeling of concern.  It’s hard to pinpoint, but it’s a feeling of concern nonetheless.  I wonder whether the commentaries have been conversation partners in the personal study of the text, or crutches leant on to short-cut the process of exegesis.  I wonder whether the commentaries have simulated wrestling with the structure and flow of the text and consequently the sermon, or whether they have merely furnished a dissected structure on which to hang the broken pieces of a partial sermon.

I thank God for commentaries and good commentators.  We are so blessed today with access to these reference works.  I think it is either arrogance or stupidity that would lead us to ignore them in sermon preparation (provided we are blessed with access to them).  However, they are just one part of our preparation.  We have to wrestle with the text, with its flow of thought, its meaning, its purpose, its idea.  We have to wrestle with the sermon purpose, its idea, its strategy, its structure, its flow, etc.

Commentary study alone will provide a veritable pile of tidbits that can easily fill the sermon time.  But remember that as the preacher, our job is not to fill sermon time, but to prayerfully, carefully, and personally develop a sermon that faithfully explains and relevantly applies the text for our specific congregation.