"Dogma clarifies rather than obscures" biblical interpretation...

Now here's a no nonsense statement on intent from the publishers of a theological commentary series.

This series of biblical commentaries was born out of the conviction that dogma clarifies rather than obscures. The Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible advances upon the assumption that the Nicene tradition, in all its diversity and controversy, provides the proper basis for the interpretation of the Bible as Christian Scripture. God the Father Almighty, who sends his only begotten Son Son to die for us and for our salvation and who raises the crucified Son in the power of the Holy Spirit so that the baptized may be joined in one Body - faith in this God with this vocation of love for the world is the lens through which toi view the heterogeneity and particularity of the biblical texts. Doctrine, then, is not a moldering scrim of antique prejudice obscuring the meaning of the Bible. It is a crucial aspect of the divine pedagogy, a clarifying agent for our minds fogged by self deception, a challenge to our languid intellectual apathy that will too often rest in false truisms and the easy spiritual nostrums of the present age rather than search more deeply and widely for the dispersed keys of the many doors of Scripture.(Brazos Theological Commentary, Series Preface, Matthew, Stanley Hauwerwas, page 12).

I've only used the Brazos commentary on Matthew by Stanley Hauerwas. It was definitely Matthew through the lens of Hauerwas, and none the worse for that. The truth is the Hermeneia Commentary is Matthew through the lens of Luz. Every commentator brings their self to the text, and the text is explored, exegeted, expounded, explained so that every commentary is treasure in an earthen vessel.

Has anyone who reads this blog, and reads commentaries, used any of the other commentaries in this series with the magnificent Series Preface as quoted above?

Comments

[Andy Goodliff]

Alongside Hauerwas' Matthew, I have Genesis, Deuteronomy, 1 & 2 Kings, Ezra & Nehemiah, Ezekiel, Pastoral Epistles, 1 &2 Peter and Revelation ... used 1 & 2 Peter by Doug Harink a fair bit and found it helpful ... not used others as much yet ... would like to get Dan Trier on Proverbs (read some via google books) and I will definitely be getting a copy of Sam Wells on Esther ... future volumes see John Webster on Ephesians, Wannenwetsch and Brock on 1 Corinthians ...

[Jim Gordon]

Hi Andy - I think this is one series where I would choose according to author rather than the bible book! Like you I have some cherry picks - Matthew Levering on Ezra Nehemiah, not my favourite books but Levering is a superb theologian - what will an authority on Trinitarian theology have to say about two books redolent with history told as apologetic?, oh yes and John Webster on Ephesians as soon as possible please, Kevin Vanhoozer on Jeremiah, David Hart on Hebrews - anyone who can write a book like The Beauty of the Infinite should make a good job of Hebrews, George Hunsinger a Barthian on Philippians. Thanks for your thoughts, Jim

[Andy Goodliff]

I'm interested too in the Belief Commentary Series http://belief.wjkbooks.com/ ... I have Stephen Long on Hebrews which has some good stuff, and google booked Placher on Mark ... and have forthcoming David Ford on John, Charles Campbell on 1 Cor, amongst others ... both series, along with Smyth and Helwys one, are becoming my series' of choice ... just got Fretheim on Jeremiah and hope one day to get Balentine on Job ...

[Jim Gordon]

Yes I like the Belief commentary format and approach. I just finished Harvey Cox on Lamentations - it is a deeply moving exploration of tragedy, exile, war and the other dark places of human experience. Placher on mark is beautifully written. As for Smyth and Helwys, apart from the mortgage required to buy them, you are right to covet Balentine on Job. I know no commentary quite like it as an honest wrestling with a text that sounds the depths of human experience. I also think some of the S&H commentaries are less successful - but Fretheim and Brueggemann are actually worth a mortgage, just about!

[Graeme Clark]

In addition to some others mentioned have Jaroslav Pelikan on Acts. Lets just say I prefer his five volumes on the history of the development of dogma and that this might be one to miss,

[Jim Gordon]

Agreed Graeme. Pelikan made an error of judgement not even his erudition could correct. I think this was done after he had completed the mammoth set on the Creeds - and that pattern of thought applied to Acts simply uses the text as coat hangers for other thoughts.