As a Lutheran, I use these commentaries quite regularly for Sermon Prep - they do have a strong Lutheran flavour.
Comments
Sort by:
1 - 15 of
151
- D. A. Carson
- Denver Seminary Journal
- Derek Thomas
- Desiring God Ministries (John Piper)
- Invitation to Biblical Interpretation
- Jeremy Pierce (parableman)
- Jim Rosscup
- Joel R. Beeke
- John Glynn
- Journal of Hebrew Scriptures
- Ligonier Ministries (Keith Mathison)
- Review of Biblical Literature (RBL)
- Scot McKnight
- Tim Challies
- Tremper Longman, III
Please, Logos, split this commentary series into individual volumes! You are selling Lessing's last volume on Isaiah individually, but I really want his other volume on Isaiah in this series. John MacArthur spoke very highly of this volume during his series on Isaiah 53, one of his best series of messages.
Not many of the volumes are ranked in the top 10 on BestCommentaries.com. I'm going to pass.
This Commentary Series is an unabashedly confessional Lutheran.
It is, what I would call, a technical commentary written by authors who believe in the inerrancy and Christo-centrocity of Scripture. They do a good job addressing modern evolutionistic theories regarding Scripture. Some volumes are better than others, but the Old Testament are some are best I have seen.
I highly recommend this series. It is my favorite technical commentary. The exegetical notes - especially in the Old Testament books - are wonderful!
Lutheran to be sure, but they're not bad. I prefer the Evangelical Press Commentary over Concordia, but not all EPC are out yet. But if they're a good price, pick them up.
mm.
Please, Logos, split this commentary series into individual volumes! You are selling Lessing's last volume on Isaiah individually, but I really want his other volume on Isaiah in this series. John MacArthur spoke very highly of this volume during his series on Isaiah 53, one of his best series of messages.
Paying for the full set is not an option for me at this point. Given a lot of volumes already individually available it would be good to see this split to make the rest available too. I expect it will happen but no idea of course when it will happen.
Not many of the volumes are ranked in the top 10 on BestCommentaries.com. I'm going to pass.
I hear what you are saying, but a lot of great commentaries fall through the rating system cracks at bestcommentaries.com. I am always bewildered by the extremely low ratings of the newer Hermeneia commentaries (And I say this as an evangelical). That is just one series example. From the experience of using commentaries and from examining recommendations from OT and NT scholars, I have come to the conclusion that bestcommentaries.com is often innacurate.
I hear what you are saying, but a lot of great commentaries fall through the rating system cracks at bestcommentaries.com. I am always bewildered by the extremely low ratings of the newer Hermeneia commentaries (And I say this as an evangelical). That is just one series example. From the experience of using commentaries and from examining recommendations from OT and NT scholars, I have come to the conclusion that bestcommentaries.com is often innacurate.
Thanks. It's one guy doing his best to aggregate and weight reviews from a multitude of sources (journals and individual reviewers), but of course it is subject to his own time limitations, his own personal biases (he graduated from and works for DTS, though he's a pretty broad-minded guy; I know him personally), and perhaps copyrights that prevent him from including some reviews. If you feel he's overlooked some gems, users can submit commentaries for him to list, and can give their own reviews of commentaries there. He weights the ones from published scholars more highly, but it's good that he opens up the review page to anyone. Unfortunately he was getting bombarded by spammers setting up fake accounts for a while.
Just to give you an idea of where the slant of BestCommentaries.com might lean, its "featured reviewers" are. Pretty much conservative evangelical on the whole.
Featured Reviewers
I personally might prefer a wider panel of reviewers, but as a default when I have nothing to go by yet it's OK for me to start with. I'm pretty sure he takes into account Longman's "Old Testament Commentary Survey" and Carson's "New Testament Commentary Survey." I would also want to see him factor in the list of commentary recommendations at the back of Fee and Stuart's How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, though it's a bit outdated now.
I don't recognize a single author of this set. For me that's a bit more iffy than I'd be willing to go.
Given that the authors are probably mining from the same field as everyone else, outside of the denomination there's not much to call for this set.
The mind of man is the mill of God, not to grind chaff, but wheat. Thomas Manton | Study hard, for the well is deep, and our brains are shallow. Richard Baxter
Neither did I. I don't claim to remember authors perfectly but I do memorize what sets are out there and I've never been interested in this series, and I doubt the uni would care if I did - so far I haven't heard much denominational "expectations/requirements" at least not regarding commentaries:
I don't recognize a single author of this set. For me that's a bit more iffy than I'd be willing to go.
Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 12
I am always bewildered by the extremely low ratings of the newer Hermeneia commentaries
New commentaries are always ranked lower for the simple reason that they don't appear in older lists.
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!
I am always bewildered by the extremely low ratings of the newer Hermeneia commentariesNew commentaries are always ranked lower for the simple reason that they don't appear in older lists.
I recognize I could have been more clear. I meant newer as a relative term. There are some older Hermeneia gems, but the later releases are often great commentaries. Take Achtemeir on 1 Peter. It was published in 1996. It is arguably the best commentary on 1 Peter, yet best commentaries.com ranks it as #8. Again, I am bewildered. I have seen the scholarly recommendations, heard evangelical scholars talk about Achtemeir's commentary, and have used most of the highly recommended 1 Peter commentaries in graduate level research and sermon preparation. I get that it may not be the favorite of everyone, but ranking it 8th seems to miss the mark considerably. That is just one example. I see a lot of misranking on best commentaries, so much so that it hardly seems reliable. I think it is better to go directly to the commentary surveys (Carson and Longman for example).