Skip to main content

Recommended Bible Study Resources: NT for the Lay Bible Study Leader

A friend of mine at church recently asked me for help building a his personal library. I thought that it would be helpful to post my recommendations here as well. This first of two posts will cover New Testament study resources geared towards the lay Bible study leader. They have, in my opinion, sufficient detail for really engaging the text, but not too technical so as to limit their utility for someone without formal training. I don't claim to have examined every commentary for any book at this level, but I do believe that each of these would be a very helpful to a lay person putting together a Bible study. I also tried to select commentaries that are priced reasonably but occasionally I did recommend slightly more expensive commentaries. This page will be periodically updated as I read commentaries I haven't checked out before or as new ones are published. I will also add in some additional books that are not commentaries as time goes on.

NT Introduction and Theology:
Introducing the New Testament Its Literature and Theology - Paul Achtemeier, Joel Green, and Marianne Meye Thompson
New Testament Theology: Many Witnesses, One Gospel - I. Howard Marshall

Commentaries (series abbreviations in parenthesis are defined below):
Matthew (NAC) - Craig Blomberg
Mark (NIVAC) - David Garland
Luke (NIVAC) - Darrell Bock
John (IVP) - Rodney Whitacre
The Book of Acts (NICNT) - FF Bruce
Romans (NCCS) - Craig Keener (review)
First Corinthians (INT) - Richard Hays
2 Corinthians (IVP) - Linda Belleville
Galatians (NIVAC) - Scot McKnight
Ephesians (NIVAC) - Klyne Sondgrass
Philippians (NIVAC) - Frank Theilman
Colossians and Philemon (TNTC) - N.T. Wright
1-2 Thessalonians (IVP) - Greg Beale
1-2 Timothy & Titus (IVP) - Philip Towner
Hebrews (NIVAC) - George Guthrie
James (NIBCNT) - Peter Davids
1 Peter (TNTC) - Wayne Grudem
2 Peter & Jude (IVP) - Robert Harvey and Philip Towner
1-3 John (IVP) - Marianne Meye Thompson
Revelation (NIVAC) - Craig Keener

Key (Here I tried to link to the publishers page here when possible)
INT: Interpretation
IVP: IVP Commentary
NAC: New American Commentary
NCCS: New Covenant Commentary Series
NIBCNT: New International Biblical Commentary on the New Testament
NICNT: New International Commentary on the New Testament
NIVAC: NIV Application Commentary
TNTC: Tyndale New Testament Commentary

Comments

  1. Hard to argue with this list... but I'll try. =)

    Actually, the only possible adjustments are make are these:

    Tom Schreiner on 1-2 Peter, Jude (NAC)- more cost effective (1 volume) and is better (in my opinion) than Grudem on 1 Peter. Haven't used Harvey & Towner on 2 Peter & Jude so I don't know.

    Doug Moo on James- if his Pillar commentary is too advanced, his Tyndale commentary is still good. Toss up between him and Davids, so I wouldn't necessarily change it.

    Fee on the Pastorals- Towner may be better, just throwing this out there.

    Howard Marshall on Acts- Tyndale commentary is really good.

    As for NT Intros, I don't like any. In fact, I don't like any OT Intros, either.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I did think about Schreiner on 1+2 Peter and Jude. The difficulty was that when I gave my friend 4 commentaries on 1 Peter to gauge the style he liked, Schreiner was checked out of the library. I gave him Grudem and he really liked it and when I was just getting my feet wet studying I loved that commentary too. But perhaps I should have gone with Schreiner. It was a tough call.

    I have Marshall in the Tyndale series and I like it (but admittedly haven't used it a lot). I waffled on that one a bit, but I felt he interacts a bit too much with other scholars in the main text which I think makes it a bit less useful for lay people. One I haven't checked out is Larkin's in the IVP series. Have you?

    James was one of the borderline cases for me. It ultimately came down to the fact that I think Davids is just a tad bit more accessible.

    Much of my choice of Towner was based on his effort in the NICNT. I really like that commentary. Fee is never a bad choice though.

    I actually like the intro I recommended. It spends a fair amount of time on literary which is sometimes overlooked in NT Intros. It's also from a moderate Evangelical position which I find to be a bonus. That said I like it, but I don't love it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I forgot about Larkin on Acts. I've never used it, but it comes highly recommended.

    I also forgot about the Expositor's series (revised nowadays). Carson on Matthew and Longenecker on Acts stand out in my mind as good ones from that series.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If you plan to refer lay leaders to this post in the future, it might be good to write out the commentary series names instead of having the abbreviation.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks for the suggestion Brett, I added a key to the abbreviations below.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Commentary Series Overview

When I write commentary reviews, one of my main goals is to assess how well the commentator hit the intended audience of the commentary and utilized the format of the commentary. This often necessitates cluttering up the post discussing issues of format. To eliminate that, I thought that I would make some general remarks about the format and audience of each of the series that appear in my reviews. Terms like liberal, conservative, etc. are not used pejoratively but simply as descriptors. Many of you are familiar with Jeremy Pierce's commentary series overview. If you don't see a particular series covered here, check out his post to see if it's reviewed there. I am making no attempt at covering every series, just the series that I use. Additionally, new series (such as the NCCS) have been started in the five years since he wrote his very helpful guide, so I thought that it might not be completely out of order to have another person tackle commentary series overviews. This…

Paul's Argument in Galatians 3:15-29

15 Brothers and sisters, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. 16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. 17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise. 19 Why, then, was the law given at all? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator. 20 A mediator, however, implies more than one party; but God is one. 21 Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! Fo…

Doctor Who: Rose Tyler - Traitor?

The end of season four was very, very controversial. When I first saw it, I felt cheated. I was angry. The more I think about it, the more I think I see what Russell Davies was doing. He is too good of a writer and the show is too carefully crafted for him to screw up Rose's character and the end of a four season storyline. So while the ending isn't strictly part of our series, it is tangentially related, and I've agonized over that scene in Bad Wolf Bay so much that I have to write about it. :)

To briefly set things up, near the end of the final episode of season four, there is a meta-crisis, that results in a part human. part Time Lord Doctor being generated. He has all of the Doctor's memories, and thinks and acts like the Doctor. However, importantly, he only has one heart and cannot regenerate. He only has one life to live. The meta-crisis Doctor brought full resolution to the battle fought against the Daleks, and in the process, wiped them out. Thus, the real Doc…