I am going to spend all of 2011 in the four canonical gospels. I have a number of commentaries on the gospels already, however, I am looking for new ones to research. I am interested in scholarly and popular, liberal and conservative, so any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Looking for Gospel Commentary Suggestions
What old commentaries have you used?
Warren Wiersbe has a Bible Exposition Commentary on all Bible books, which includes the 4 gospels.
I believe D.A. Carson has written commentaries on the gospels, though I don't recall the title.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Bible is also well know.
The Scofield KJV has notes and comments on the Bible books as well.
New Testament Theology by I. Howard Marshall
The People's New Testament by B. W. Johnson.
It's old (1891), but entirely new.
There are several Commentaries that I've found helpful. One is the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. This commentary has 29 volumes and covers both the Old and New Testaments, plus the Deutero-Canonical Books. Six of the volumes are on the Four Gospels. It's published by the InterVarsity Press, and is scholarly and conservative. An important feature of this Commentary is as the title says, it's commentary written by the ancient Christians.
The New Interpreter's Bible is a 12 Volume set with commentary on the Old and New Testaments and the Duetero-Canonical Books. This commentary uses both the New International Version and the New Revised Standard Version for the Bible texts. However, only two volumes are devoted to the Four Gospels. It's published by Abingdon Press and is scholarly and conservative.
You might also want to look at the Anchor Bible, now published by Yale University Press. The Anchor Bible is a new translation with commentary. The Anchor Bible has 8 Volumes on the Four Gospels. It's scholarly and liberal.
You may find Funk's New Gospel Parallels (2 vol.) to be a helpful aid to study. It is not a commentary but it presents the texts from the major gospels in synoptic fashion (with bold used to indicate common wording), along with minor parallels and important OT source texts.
Instead of reading other people's commentaries, how about creating your own.
e.g. Try writing your own commentary on Jesus and the fig tree.
I have brought up this event a few times with my Dubbies, but they all want to talk about anything else.
Early in the morning, as he was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" Immediately the tree withered.
When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. "How did the fig tree wither so quickly?" they asked.
Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done. If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."
The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples heard him say it.
When evening came, they went out of the city.
In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!"
"Have faith in God," Jesus answered. "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, `Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins."
Thank you all for your suggestions.
My current commentary collection on the gospels consist of Ellicott, Godet, F.F. Bruce, D.A. Carson, Hendricksen, Wiersbe, and others.
I do not use Scofield because he is too dispensational for me, as I am more Reformed and Covenental.
Matthew Henry is very general, but is great for a starter commentary.
Black Sheep, I utilize a number of exegetical techniques to gather the meaning of Scripture. Not being knowledgable of Greek, however, is where I rely on commentaries. For example, when I was studying The Acts of the Apostles I discovered that in the Greek of Acts 1:7 the Greek word translated into English "not" was pulled from its standard grammatical place in order to emphasize the fact that the Apostles were NOT to know the explicit details of the end times. It was also through a commentary on 2 Peter 3:9 that I discovered the principle of elipsis. This was a technique in Greek that writers employed when refering back to a previously mentioned subject. It was this understanding that helped move me from Arminianism to Calvinism. Further, commentaries help keep me on track. I am not so presumptuous to think that I can reinvent the wheel. Rather I prefer to stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before me when it comes to doing bible study.