Steven Harris has written a useful review of various commentary series’ (is there an apostrophe there?). I tend to use the BST, NICOT and WBC commentaries. How do other people read commentaries? My usual practice when studying a book is to start with the BST and read it right through. I don’t tend to read the more in-depth ones like that. I fear I would find it too draining. They are not exactly easy. I tend to use them for reference, or work through them as I am preaching through a book. What about you?
2 thoughts on “Sven on Commentaries”
Comments are closed.
Doggie's Breakfast 
I try to get a general idea of what I’m preaching before I pick up a commentary. An old professor of mine told me that once you see it laid out in an outline form (like the old Pulpit Commentary series), it’s hard to shake loose of that. I think many times he’s right.
I’ll use the NICOT, NICNT to flesh out some of the key points. Sometimes there is stuff in there I really hadn’t thought of. Sometimes I’ll use Boice or MacArthur’s commentaries to see a sermon laid out on a text and use them to come up with some illustrations.
Thanks rev-ed. Just to flesh this out a bit more, I use the BST commentary as a kind of orienting exercise before preaching through a book. (I speak as though I’m a pro at this! This is far from the truth – I am only on my third biblical book.)
Like you, as I also have been taught, my normal practice then is to spend a lot time mulling over the particular text myself before I attempt to get into a detailed commentary.