Featured Commentaries: Leviticus
I am looking for your favorite commentaries on the book of Leviticus!
What commentaries—available from Logos—are your go-to studies when studying the third book of the Pentateuch?
Comments
-
Milgrom, Jacob. A Continental Commentary: Leviticus: A Book of Ritual and Ethics. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2004.
0 -
Jayson Bradley said:
What commentaries—available from Logos—are your go-to studies when studying the third book of the Pentateuch?
If I told you I have a 'go-to' commentary on Leviticus, I'd be lying. However if I needed to check something in Leviticus I'd turn to Wenham in the NICOT first, then either Hartley in WBC or Rooker in NAC.
Pastor, North Park Baptist Church
Bridgeport, CT USA
0 -
I would not always recommend a more devotional commentary...only when they are outstanding, and I have personally benefited from them (moreso then the more academic offerings)...so it would be remiss of me not to mention...
0 -
BradN said:
Milgrom, Jacob. A Continental Commentary: Leviticus: A Book of Ritual and Ethics. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2004.
[Y]
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Milgrom from the Continental Commentary series is in many respects a companion to his work in the 3 volume Anchor Bible set on Leviticus (over 2700 pages of exegetical goodness). I'd
all of Milgrom.0 -
Rooker - NAC
Harrison - TOTC
Harris - EBC
Lindsey - BKC
A.P. Ross - Holiness to the Lord
0 -
Vincent Setterholm said:
Milgrom from the Continental Commentary series is in many respects a companion to his work in the 3 volume Anchor Bible set on Leviticus (over 2700 pages of exegetical goodness). I'd
all of Milgrom.[y] on both counts!
BTW: how long till you can break Milgrom out of the AYB?
Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you. 0 -
Is it unusual for the same person to do a book of the Bible for two different commentaries? Or are the Continental and AYBC somehow connected?
0 -
AFAIK Paul, they are connected through the Author. The Continental commentary is dubbed a distillation of the AYB material.
Milgrom writes with a distinctly Jewish Flavor (See bestcommentaries which lists Milgrom Lower because of his overly critical stance).
By all accounts he is a stellar Levitical scholar.
Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you. 0 -
Thomas Black said:
Milgrom writes with a distinctly Jewish Flavor (See bestcommentaries which lists Milgrom Lower because of his overly critical stance).
The problem with Milgrom is not merely his critical stance, but that he cannot engage in Biblical theology because he doesn't hold Christian beliefs. If the purpose of all of Scripture is to point to Jesus Christ, Milgrom (and other Jewish and other non-Christian exegetes) miss the main point - however good their exegesis and understanding of cultic background and so on.
That said, we must understand the original meaning of the text if we are to truly see how the Scriptures point to Christ. In that, Milgrom can be a great help. But he could never be the main commentary I go to. I guess Wenham (NICOT) or Hartley (WBC) would be my first choice. But Rooker (NAC) makes up for Milgrom's lack without much repetition, so Milgrom+Rooker is a pretty powerful combination.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Paul Newsome said:
Is it unusual for the same person to do a book of the Bible for two different commentaries?
It happens reasonably regularly when you have a scholar who has devoted a very large portion of his life to one biblical book, and then a more accessible version is created. I can think of Alec Motyer's two volumes on Isaiah (one in TOTC, the other not in a series), Doug Moo on James (Pillar and TNTC) and Romans (NICNT and NIVAC), John Oswalt on Isaiah (NIVAC and NICOT), Anthony Thiselton on 1 Corinthians (NIGTC, the other not in a series), Gary Smith on Amos (Mentor Commentary and NIVAC), Darrell Bock on Luke (BECNT and NIVAC). There are probably others.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
For Leviticus: Kleinig (Concordia Commentary Series)
0 -
Mark Barnes said:Thomas Black said:
Milgrom writes with a distinctly Jewish Flavor (See bestcommentaries which lists Milgrom Lower because of his overly critical stance).
The problem with Milgrom is not merely his critical stance, but that he cannot engage in Biblical theology because he doesn't hold Christian beliefs.
Correct. To be fair I was paraphrasing from the bestcommentaries site.
Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you. 0 -
Mark Barnes said:
The problem with Milgrom is not merely his critical stance, but that he cannot engage in Biblical theology because he doesn't hold Christian beliefs.
Are you telling me I have to call it Tanakhian theology?
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Tanakhian. Good point.
I wonder at the requirement for 'Christian beliefs'. One, they're quite broad. And two, a sizable share of my Logos library wouldn't qualify.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
Are you telling me I have to call it Tanakhian theology?
You can call it what you like [:)] - I know better than to start a discussion with you defining what I mean by 'Bible' [:D]
Denise Barnhart said:I wonder at the requirement for
'Christian beliefs'. One, they're quite broad. And two, a sizable share
of my Logos library wouldn't qualify.For the purposes of this discussion, I am content to allow commentators to speak for themselves regarding their approach to the Old Testament. Milgrom is quite open that his discussion of Leviticus is not one shaped by Christian or New Testament beliefs.
My library too has much that is non-Christian, and I recognise its value — as I hope I made clear above. But I also recognise its limitations, and for a Christian the limitations of a non-Christian approach are more pronounced in a commentary on the Biblical text than they would be (for example) in a Hebrew lexicon, or in a discussion of archaeology. Supplemented by Christian writers, Milgrom can wonderfully aid our understanding. But on its own, it can never be adequate for me - as Paul puts it (2 Corinthians 3:14-16) his understanding of Leviticus was veiled.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Mark Barnes said:MJ. Smith said:
Are you telling me I have to call it Tanakhian theology?
You can call it what you like
- I know better than to start a discussion with you defining what I mean by 'Bible' 
And here I expected some scrollical comeback[;)] I don't really disagree with you - you just left such an opportunity, I couldn't resist.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Just coincidentally this afternoon, I was reading the section from McNamara's Targum and Testament on 2 Cor 3:14-16. The Targums demonstrate much of Paul's usage.
It's strange to end up on the same passage and probably along the same vein.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Allen P. Ross Holiness to the Lord: A Guide to the Exposition of the Book of Leviticus - AVAILABLE ON LOGOS
0
