(A mini-“best of the blogs”)
This past week, two Pauline scholar bloggers posted surveys of “the best of” books. Paul’s letters used to be my beat, until God “sidetracked” me into biblical theology fifteen years ago.
The people you would expect to be on the list are on the list: Wright, Barclay, Sanders (his “au revoire“, not his magnum opus of course), etc. His list expands beyond ten to include others worth mentioning, including a few on preaching Paul.
Barclay’s Paul and the Gift is next on my reading list.
Nijay Gupta posted a survey of commentaries on Romans at Logos Academic Blog. Up until 2005 or so, my knowledge of commentaries on Romans is pretty solid. His survey is up-to-date.
Any list of commentaries on Romans is going to have glaring omissions, and Gupta’s is no exception. The most obvious omission is Cranfield (ICC), which was for several decades the best commentary available; perhaps Longenecker’s offering (NIGTC), which he recommends, has taken its place for consideration of the Greek text?
The next most glaring omission is Fitzmyer (AB).
- Talbert (Smyth & Helwys), my favorite commentary on Romans.
- Morris (Pillar), knowledgeable of the Jewish sources, traditional in his treatment of them.
- Schlatter, frustrating and impenetrable but occasionally brilliant.
- Luke Johnson (Reading the New Testament), another (with Fitzmyer) critical conservative Catholic reading.
- The venerable Sanday & Headlam (old ICC), which I still turn to occasionally for analysis of the Greek text.
But seriously: any list of commentaries on Romans, especially one with space limitations, is going to have glaring omissions. An embarrassment of riches, indeed.