Featured Commentaries?

I'm sure others have more on their shelves than me, but I have an NIV Application Commentary on Genesis and a Baker Exegetical Commentary on John that I have enjoyed.

I'm currently reading through The Message of Isaiah in the The Bible Speaks Today series. It's not exactly a commentary, but so far so good.

 

Forget the commentaries for now. Strip away everything you think you know about The Whole Book, approach it as a child that knows nothing, read through as quickly as possible to get the ideal of it, praying each time as David before reading, "Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold Wondrous things out of thy law". There's absolutely no commentary that can provide the sound foundation that this simple approach will give.

 

Oh, should have added, when I started my account at https://www.mywsb.com/, the Holman Commentary of the New Testament books on Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were on there for free. They aren't of the same caliber as the commentaries I previously mentioned, but you can't beat the price.

I see that Deacon has already liked your post. I have gotten a few commentaries from his Logos thread.

 

http://www.baptistboard.com/forums/books-publications-forum.9/

Yeah, Deacon has a great thread for Logos resources, and RevMitchell has another going for Kindle.

 

What kind of commentary are you looking for? Make your own mind up.

Begin collecting ones you can gather from used book stores and ones that interest you that you can pick up used on Amazon.

There are good one volume commentaries and thee are more specialized multi-volume commentaries.
There are devotional commentaries, pastoral commentaries and scholarly commentaries.

As you noted thee are free older commentaries of a century or more ago on the net - but generally you get what you pay for. These are usually classified as devotional commentaries.
Pastoral commentaries tend to be better for exegesis and application.
Scholarly commentaries work with the original languages and may test a younger believers faith at times.

Each commentary should be critically evaluated for the authors particular theological bias - what tradition he follows.

Rob

 

That is going to have to be gathered from your criteria. What do you consider to be "good" ?

In my opinion, Matthew Henry's is a pretty sorry excuse for a commentary. But you're using it, so you probably consider it worthwhile.

By which criteria would you like to rate a commentary:
Doctrinal agreement
Doctrinal diversity
Concise, brief notes
Lengthy, indepth explanation
Indepth introduction of books
Lexical information
Other....

 

Here's a thread from a while back concerning study bibles and commentaries. It's a really good thread. Read all the entries.....


http://www.baptistboard.com/threads/macarthur-study-bible…-are-study-bibles-a-good-idea.94157/

 

Wasn't that the approach taken by the Millerites, Campbellites, Russelites, and others associated with the Great Disappointment, Pentecostalism, etc?

 

So you've never read it through on your own without a commentary telling you what it means? I have and the two main themes that jumped out to me was the sovereignty of God and God revealed through Christ.

As far as commentaries goes none have influenced me as much Pink's writings. He's a master of the types, IMO.

 

Yes. A better source for online reading and free download is here http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/index.htm

Although most of these writings was from his Dispensational days, which he left and later wrote against, his writings are rich with deep insights for dispies and non-dispies alike.

His 'Gleanings In Genesis' would be absolutely superb to accompany reading Genesis. I was amazed at the types and allegories it contains.

 

I might have to check that one out. I was somewhat ambivalent towards typology, but I am becoming more and more interested in it as of late.

 

The thing about the Genesis types is that they are so simple wide open to see once you get in the 'type mode', which Pink does a superb job at directing you to. There's a redundancy, a continuity of them throughout the entire Bible. Genesis and Revelation REALLY go hand in hand with types.

 

In a manner of speaking I have, and feel like I'm in much better shape for it. But so have some pretty notorious heretics.

 

Matthew Henry is fine.
William Hendricksens NT commentaries are good.
AWPink on Hebrews
William Gouge two volumes on Hebrews
J.C. Ryle on Mt Mk, Lk, Jn

 

I used to have one, and couldn't count the number of times I was disappointed by his notes about a verse. He would likely have written 4 paragraphs, yet only two sentences actually pertained to the passage he was supposedly commenting about.

It read more like the mindless ramblings of somebody who suffered from dementia.

 

GEM.....

from wiki;