New American Commentary series - would you recommend?

I'm after your insights about the quality of these commentaries, and their readability etc, not so much their theological slant.

How is NAC as a series? Overall quality? Outstanding volumes? Weaker volumes?

This is part of a decision to upgrade to Logos 4 Gold or whether to just cherry pick the best ones.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

John Bowling

This may be of some use: http://www.bestcommentaries.com/best.aspx

Russ Quinn

I'm after your insights about the quality of these commentaries, and their readability etc, not so much their theological slant.

How is NAC as a series? Overall quality? Outstanding volumes? Weaker volumes?

This is part of a decision to upgrade to Logos 4 Gold or whether to just cherry pick the best ones.

Some of the better volumes include:

Genesis by Ken Mathews
Judges, Ruth by Daniel Block
Hosea, Joel by Duane Garrett
Luke by Robert Stein
Acts by John Polhill
Galatians by Timothy George
2 Corinthians by David Garland
1,2 Peter, Jude by Tom Schreiner

I'm sure there are other fine volumes but these are some of the ones I would label outstanding.

Mark Smith

Richard,

Readability is very good. They are much easier than the Word series in those terms. Not as technical, either.

I use the NAC all the time, but rarely would rate it as one of the best on any book. Those that are strong are: Genesis, Exodus, Judges/Ruth, 1&2 Kings, Isaiah, Matthew and 2 Corinthians.

The NAC fills somewhat of a void in covering a lot of the books of the Bible right now. There are others, but they are not in Gold.

The UBS series of handbooks is quite useful. Between NAC and the two UBS series, Gold is compelling.

Mark Barnes

Carson says:

"The Broadman Bible Commentary is a product of scholars related to the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). The series is compact, expository, not technical, not particularly insightful, frequently bland, and sometimes speculative. The reformation in the ranks of the SBC during the last two decades has dictated that an alternative and more conservative series, The New American Commentary, be produced by the same press. Quite a few volumes have now appeared. Its authors have been drawn from Baptist ranks both within and outside the SBC. The early volumes are generally competent enough, pitched at a middle level."

He rates Matthew ("not to be missed"), Luke ("good value"), 2 Corinthians ("one of the best in the series"), Galatians ("sui generis, far richer than most substantial commentaries")

Mark, Acts, Romans, Philippians are "workmanlike", John and the Pastorals are "bland", James is "singularly poor [at exegesis]".

Greg Corbin

I have used the NAC regularly since the first volume came out. I largely agree with Russ Quinn regarding the strongest volumes - although I would personally add Matthew as well. I have found them overall very much worthwhile, although not the most outstanding in any area. Other commentaries are more technical and have more original language information. Other commentaries make more practical application. Other commentaries offer more background information, etc. However, the NAC does a solid job in each of these areas - just not the best job. They are very readable.

Russ Quinn

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/56906#Comment_56906

I have used the NAC regularly since the first volume came out. I largely agree with Russ Quinn regarding the strongest volumes - although I would personally add Matthew as well. I have found them overall very much worthwhile, although not the most outstanding in any area. Other commentaries are more technical and have more original language information. Other commentaries make more practical application. Other commentaries offer more background information, etc. However, the NAC does a solid job in each of these areas - just not the best job. They are very readable.

Really just an oversight on my part not to include Blomberg's volume on Matthew. Sorry about that.

Donovan R. Palmer

I'm after your insights about the quality of these commentaries, and their readability etc, not so much their theological slant.

How is NAC as a series? Overall quality? Outstanding volumes? Weaker volumes?

This is part of a decision to upgrade to Logos 4 Gold or whether to just cherry pick the best ones.

Personally, the NAC is good enough to make upgrading to Gold worth it as I think the NAC is an overall good commentary for reasons already stated on here. One of the things that is helping when considering a commentary is to know why you want it. Some commentaries are more devotional, some are more expositional, technical, etc. The NAC mostly falls within the expositional category.

Randle Bond

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/56946#Comment_56946

I've stuck with Logos Silver as it includes the NAC and I didn't see any key resources I wanted in Gold. I have added the PNTC, BECNT, NICOT/NICNT and a couple of individual volumes to fill the gaps so that I have a great commentary on every book of the bible...

I find NAC covers most of the key issues really well as a general rule

Kevin A. Purcell

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/56950#Comment_56950

I think it is very good with only a few exceptions. Not impressed with Romans. It is simple to use and with the footnotes can be more scholarly, but you will have to do some digging to find those resources elsewhere.