The first three bible commentaries I ever bought.....and read

My biblical library has two or three commentaries on each Bible book - and on a number of the more substantial books, quite a bit more than three. As newer or better commentaries become available (though newer doesn't always mean better), I happily weed out those that have been superseded. Which keeps my biblical work up to date and keeps my library within the limits of the bookshelves. But in all the culls and clearouts, the new additions and the jettisoned, there are commentaries I'd never let go.

The words 'benchmark', 'gold-standard', 'definitive' are too loosely thrown around by those who churn out the  publishers blurb, those literary spin doctors who endorse, commend and give borrowed authority. And sometimes they boldly say 'destined to become a classic'. Maybe so. But isn't a classic a book that has proved itself, that bears rereading, that has enduring value for its content and insights, that has the capacity to address universal human questions, or to transcend limits of time and idiom? Those amongst other critieria? So a 'classic in its field', say a classic commentary - what would that be? And which commentaries would any of us hold up as such an example?

I'm happy to hear suggested classics from those who use commentaries. Meantime the reason for this post was a revisit I made to one of the first commentaries I ever bought...and read. Not all commentaries are readable. By their nature they are somewhere between a reference book to be consulted on a word, phrase, verse or section of text, or to be one of several perspectives being weighed as part of the comparing of evidence, perspective and interpretation that helps overcome our subjective often distorting individual preferences. That's why I have several commentaries on each biblical book. Not all from the same publisher; or the same theological perspective; or with the same exegetical approach.

And amongst them all are several I bought in my earliest years of Christian study. Not many of them would be called classics, benchmarks or definitive. At least not by others. But from the start of my Christian life, my spiritual development has always been closely indexed to my exegetical growing up. Taking text seriously, reading Scripture and hearing the Word of Christ opening up the Scriptures; trying to read the Bible from a heart informed by honest study.

And in all those years some commentaries have been for me, and without the say-so of blurb writers, benchmarks, definitive of my approach to the text, and thus for me, classic commentaries. One of them is pictured here. Published in 1976, the year of my ordination. I paid £2.25 for it, in the John Smith University Bookshop of Stirling University. There isn't a single word of endorsement or publisher's blurb. So if the publisher were to reprint it (the only Amazon copy is currently priced at £46.25), I'd happily do a wee endorsement, thus:

" This commentary is written with elegant brevity and an unembarrassed enjoyment in explaining ancient texts in accessible language. In 220 pages we have "multum in parvo" - Ephesians in 94 pages and 24 footnotes. Caird is allergic to academic jargon and is the kind of scholar who knows so much about the text and its world that he feels no need to prove it by killing the text under an avalanche of scholarly see how much I know footnotes. This is a book all scholars should read and reckon with - as an example of commentary writing that serves the Church well by serving the text faithfully."

Or words to that effect! Wonder if Wipf and Stock would republish it? Think I'll suggest it......it's a classic.  

Comments

[Stuart]

OK, I don't know if these would fit the criteria of "Classic" however both these commentaries I have read and been challenged by both authors to read and re:think through the text of Scripture in a different light and lens. They may not be classic to others but to me they are classically profound.
R. Alan Culpepper., Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary: Mark (Georgia: Smyth & Helwys, 2007).
Stanley Hauerwas., SCM Theological Commentary on the Bible: Matthew (London: SCM Press, 2006).

[Catriona]

"Caird is allergic to academic jargon" - hurrah! Sounds like the kind of commentary I would like!

No sure I know any classics but Bruggeman on Psalms was one I found especially good (unfortunately I borrowed it so can't give details)

Alas beyond a few one volume things I can't claim to have a commentary on anywhere near every book - my grand plan to buy one a month once I began in pastorate ran aground very rapidly when I began buying stuff for research instead. Maybe I can restart the process some time soon...

[SteveH]

I love this little book. My reflection on it would be that it is a true preachers' commentary: Caird focuses not on questions of authorship, date, and text, but on questions of meaning. When a group of us preached through Philippians a while back, I read seven or eight commentaries, but this one, and Markus Bockmuehl's in the Blacks series, were consistently the most helpful.

[David K]

I have a copy of Caird's commentary and am delighted to know its worth £46. I hasten to add of course, a la 'Antiques Roadshow', that I wouldnt dream of selling it. My offering? Alec Motyer's "The Prophecy of Isaiah" IVP 1993. Never preached on Isaiah more than in the years following my purchase. Great for preachers especially with wonderful headings crying out for sermonising.

[Jim Gordon]

Hi David. Thanks for your offering of Motyer's Isaiah (the big red one not the Tyndale one). You're right about his way with language - I still remember reading his Bible Speaks Today volume on Amos The Lion has Roared. It too was a fine combination of exegesis, exposition and honest to goodness readability.