BUILDING A NT LIBRARY: HEBREWS—REVELATION

Below I have chosen at least three commentaries on each biblical book under discussion that I think are the best from an evangelical perspective. I have also included some commentaries whose authors would not claim to be evangelical, but whose works are strong, creative, and will greatly benefit the reader.

Unlike some of the biblical books being covered in this review, the book of Hebrews is graced with a wealth of fine evangelical commentaries. W.L. Lane provides an excellent two-volume commentary in the Word Biblical Commentary that is erudite and benefits from Lane’s extensive study of Hebrews (WBC; Word, 1991). Commentaries like this in the WBC series have a useful layout, with each section provided with bibliography, translation, form/structure/setting, comment, and explanation sections. P. Ellingworth, in the New International Greek Testament Commentary, has written an equally thorough commentary based on the Greek text (NIGTC; Eerdmans, 1993). However, since the Greek words are not translated, knowledge of Greek is required to fully utilize the commentary. The commentary by D.A. DeSilva (Perseverance in Gratitude [Eerdmans, 2000]) brings the interdisciplinary study of socio-rhetorical analysis to bear on the interpretation of Hebrews. He explores the inner-texture, intertexture, social and cultural texture, and ideology of the book of Hebrews. Although not specifically evangelical, the commentary in the Anchor Bible by C.R. Koester is superb (AB; Doubleday, 2001); it highlights the rhetoric of Hebrews and makes a strong contribution to its interpretation.

P. Davids’ commentary on James has stood the test of time (NIGTC [1982]). It is a careful interpretation based on the Greek text, but does require knowledge of Greek. The current standard evangelical commentary continues to be the work of R.P. Martin (WBC [1988]), which benefits from his careful, mature work. The commentary is particularly strong in the explanation sections where Martin interprets the text for today. A recent readable, scholarly, and pastoral commentary in the Pillar NT series from an evangelical perspective is that of D.J. Moo (Eerdmans, 2000). This commentary dialogues with the best in scholarship to provide a practical commentary for moral living. Well worth careful scrutiny is the commentary by L.T. Johnson (AB [1995]). A wonderful feature of this commentary is its effort to trace the reception of James in church history and to hear James’ voice today.

When it comes to 1 Peter, the commentary by J.R. Michaels is a strong evangelical staple (WBC [1988]). The commentary benefits from the careful balanced exegetical work of its author. The introduction is particularly helpful in navigating the labyrinth of discussions surrounding the origins of this biblical book. His commentary was quickly followed by P. Davids’ commentary in the New International Commentary on the NT (NICNT; Eerdmans, 1990). The simpler format of the NICNT series does not enable this commentary to be as thorough as that of Michaels, but is a very readable and solid work written with pastors and educated laypersons in mind. The Hermeneia commentary by P. Achtemeier (Fortress, 1996) provides a wealth of insight from a scholar-churchman. Finally, there is the monumental commentary by J.H. Elliott (AB [2000]). This magnum opus provides nearly 1,000 pages from a senior scholar whose work in 1 Peter has been life-long and innovative, especially in incorporating social and cultural insights into interpretation.

One of the most thorough, creative, and useful commentaries on 2 Peter and Jude is that of R.J. Bauckham (WBC [1983]). Bauckham provides a satisfying interpretation through a thorough study of pertinent literature contemporary with these biblical books. Study of intertestamental Jewish literature places Jude within Palestine in the 50’s in an early Jewish Christian community. Study of early Roman Christian literature places 2 Peter in the Petrine school at Rome in the late first century. Bauckham’s vast literature search also helps explain numerous references and allusions in Jude and 2 Peter derived from intertestamental sources and thought. My own commentary on Jude and 2 Peter in the New Interpreters Bible (NIDB; ed. L.E. Keck; Abingdon, 1998) uses the Greco-Roman and Jewish rhetoric that was used in the writing of these biblical books as a tool of interpretation. It demonstrates that the authors of these works were rhetorically sophisticated and created argumentative schemes that would be considered effective in their time. Knowing the intricacies of these arguments provides an inroad for interpretation. J.H. Neyrey’s commentary on 2 Peter and Jude (AB [1993]) benefits from his extensive knowledge of the philosophy, rhetoric, society, and culture of the Mediterranean world, as well as his innovative work in social scientific and cross-cultural anthropological study of the NT.

The study of 1-3 John has long benefited from the commentary by S.S. Smalley (WBC [1984]). The recent commentary by C. Kruse (Pillar; 2000) interacts with contemporary scholarship, but is not overly technical and keeps theology and contemporary application in the forefront of the interpretation. J. Painter’s commentary (Sacra Pagina; Liturgical, 2002) is an exciting addition to study these letters and is one of the most thorough commentaries available in English. Each section is presented with a translation, notes, and interpretation. Excurses are added on important matters. Still, for creativity and challenge in interpretation, I am always driven to R.E. Brown’s commentary (AB [1982]). It provided the interpretative framework for most of the commentaries that followed it. It amazes me how much it remains a powerful catalyst for interpretation.

A longstanding evangelical commentary on Revelation is that of R.H. Mounce (NICNT [1973, rev. 1998]). It provides a readable, intermediate-level commentary. Unfortunately the revised version is not fully conversant with recent scholarship and does not place Revelation within the broader world of apocalyptic literature as studied over the last 30 years. G.K. Beale has provided a fine commentary on the Greek text of Revelation (NIGTC [1999]). Most of the Greek words are defined in context so that knowledge of Greek is not necessary to follow the interpretation. Finer details are placed in smaller type at the end of sections so that the narrative remains clean. The commentary has several strengths, among which are incorporating the OT allusions and their Jewish exegetical tradition more centrally into the interpretation and adding theological reflections following major sections. Most recently, S. S. Smalley has published a commentary based on the Greek text (InterVarsity, 2005). He is very careful to transliterate each word and provide an English translation too so that it is useful for a wide range of readers. Revelation is presented as a drama and each “scene” is discussed with translation, text matters, literary setting, extended comments, and a theological conclusion. Head and shoulders above the other commentaries on Revelation is the magisterial 3 volume commentary on Revelation by D. Aune (WBC [1997-1998]). This commentary contains a thorough introduction and discussion of Revelation within the broader apocalyptic and Jewish literature and thought of the Mediterranean world.

By Duane F. Watson, Ph.D., John Wesley Scholar and Professor of New Testament Studies, Malone College.