I've been considering this prepub and was interested in peoples opinions on it.
Thanks,
Ron
The answer depends on what else you have at hand.
I would put the ACCS in the third rank of commentaries I would use. The first would be modern exegetical commentaries. The second would be other modern commentaries (including expositional and devotional ones) and some older ones such as Calvin. Third would be the ACCS. I would do this because the ACCS isn't really a commentary as other modern commentaries are. Many volumes do not comment on every verse and sometimes the comments aren't exactly trying to explain the scripture. The comments might have come from a source that used that passage of scripture only in a supportive way for another purpose, for example. Many of the volumes lack anything like a modern commentary's Introduction section as well. There is a great deal of variability here. Obviously some Bible books like the Gospels and Romans attracted a lot of attention from ancient writers. Others did not and so the challenge to fill up a commentary on those books with valuable material is more of a challenge.
So if you have a number of other commentaries that will help you do the majority of your work, the ACCS can be an interesting extra read. To help you get at the real meaning of the scripture you will need to consult other works.
I think that ACCS will give you a good perspective on how early Christians looked at scripture. Comments are only with regard to those segments of scripture that were felt to warrant further explanation, and the context in which they were living, and the concepts, cultures and history that they would have assumed the reader was familiar with, would have been quite different from today.
What we talk of as modern comentaries are all far removed in time and often also in distance from the cultures that were the daily experience of the ACCS "authors", so they would have been primarily addressing a different audience than the modern reader. As such I can agree that the ACCS commentaries should not be your primary commentaries, but rather a source giving you a perspective closer in time to the origins of Christianity, far fewer generations from the authors ascribed to the NT scriptures, and hence possibly more in tune with the cultures and contexts in which the NT scriptures were written (given that things did not change quite as fast back then as they have between recent generations).
I am purchasing the ACC as essential to my historical theological studies. From that point of view it has pride of place in my library.
Ranks very high for me because I think the earch Church Fathers have much to say to us. If you think that we are the first generation God has spoken to, it wouldn't rank very high.
John Wesley (and Calvin and Luther) tended to highly regard the Church Fathers. That's a pretty good recommendation to take them into account.
Thanks for the feedback. I definitely want it in my library. I just have to prioritize what resources I want since I can't get them all.
Available Now
Build your biblical library with a new trusted commentary or resource every month. Yours to keep forever.
