Genesis through Job

A BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR CHRISTIANS: PART 5

The number of English-language commentaries available on any given book of the Bible is legion, and it is especially important to spend your dollar wisely. The value of certain multi-volume sets has already been indicated (CHRISTIANITY TODAY, November 6, 1970); you can hardly go wrong buying a good multi-volume commentary if the price is right.

In addition to the series noted (e.g., International Critical Commentary [ICC], Westminster Commentary [WC], Interpreter’s Bible [IB], Wesleyan Bible Commentary, Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges [CB], Tyndale Commentary on the Old Testament [TCOT], and the Anchor Bible [AB], other contemporary collections should be considered for Old Testament helps. The Torch Bible Commentaries are popular in style and varied in theological outlook but generally cheap and useful. The Old Testament Library (OTL), edited by G. E. Wright, J. Bright, J. Barr, and P. Ackroyd (Westminster), already includes fourteen volumes on individual books plus assorted studies in Old Testament history and theology. Designed for the educated interpreter with or without Hebrew, this commentary features translations of much material formerly available only in German dress. A third set, under the editorial hands of F. M. Cross, K. Baltzer, P. Hanson, S. D. McBride, and W. L. Moran (Fortress’s new “Hermeneia” series), promises a more technical level of scholarship and is due to begin soon. A preview of the caliber intended is available in the German prototype of several proffered volumes (each from the form-critical Biblischer Kommentar: Altes Testament [BKAT]); maintenance of the original level of scholarship will ensure this commentary a permanent place in English-language biblical studies.

From a Reformed perspective, the forthcoming volumes of the New International Commentary: Old Testament (NICOT), now edited by R. K. Harrison, will fill a definite void. The only volumes available thus far are the three on Isaiah by E. J. Young; however, after a slow start, it seems that the production wheels are now turning, and a number of additional volumes are expected for the not-too-distant future.

Apart from the series mentioned, various single volumes are available both in the exegetical tradition of the multi-volume works already cited and in the devotional tradition so well known to many readers. If generally I avoid the latter category it is only because the commentary should always be primarily a means for elucidating the text by the presentation of historical, cultural, philological, theological, and critical data, rather than a forum for homily on the passage. This may help to explain why I have ignored many of the older works. Calvin, Luther, Matthew Henry, and G. Campbell Morgan, to say nothing of such ancient divines as John Chrysostom and Theodore of Mopsuestia, can and should be read for their insight and Christian devotion; but most of the exegetical plums available in the better works of antiquity are caught up in the contemporary works cited. Even the great exegetical work of Johann Keil and Franz Delitzsch—despite its unquestioned value for the Hebraist—is now nearly a century out of date and needs to be supplemented by more recent commentaries that reflect the advances in modern philological science. (Note: all twenty-five volumes of this work have recently been reissued to six at a bargain price.) In short, while one should not ignore the divines of the past, especially Calvin and Luther, he should go to them only after working through the biblical text itself in a thorough exegetical study using the best of available tools.

THE PENTATEUCH For the student with special interest in traditional Pentateuchal criticism, a plethora of material is available. Oswald T. Allis’s The Five Books of Moses (Presbyterian and Reformed, 1949) is a painstakingly detailed critique of Wellhausen and S. R. Driver. Two volumes by Jewish scholars, The Documentary Hypothesis by U. Cassuto (Magnes Press of the Hebrew University, translation 1961) and The Pentateuch (Magnes, 1967) by M. H. Segal, though not concerned with traditional Protestant controversies, have much to say to that debate. We must stop with the mention of just two more works, both slim Tyndale Monographs: W. J. Martin, Stylistic Criteria and the Analysis of the Pentateuch (in which still current arguments for stylistic criteria are compared to the same questions in Homeric studies), and J. A. Motyer, The Revelation of the Divine Name (both from Tyndale Press, 1955 and 1959 respectively).

GENESIS For those with Hebrew there is still nothing in English to match J. Skinner’s volume in the ICC (1925), but U. Cassuto’s two-volume Commentary on the Book of Genesis (Magnes Press, 1961–4), though rendered incomplete by the death of its author, combines the philological detail of the ICC with the reverence of a conservative Jewish approach to sacred Torah. For historical and linguistic background, the AB volume by E. A. Speiser (1964), though a classic in its own right, is upstaged by a lesser-known work, Understanding Genesis (Schocken/MacMillan, 1966) from the pen of N. Sarna. By documenting a wealth of Ancient Near Eastern detail and creatively applying it to the problems of Genesis, Sarna has illuminated the text at many points, without recourse to the vagaries of traditional documentary hypotheses. Representing conservative Christian thought in a format designed for a popular audience is D. Kidner’s small book in the TCOT series (1967), useful despite its brevity. In the same tradition, but longer, is Exposition of Genesis (Baker, 1949) by the Lutheran scholar H. C. Leupold.

Special questions concerning Creation and the Flood are dealt with in the commentaries already cited, but a few titles of supplementary value may be helpful. For contrast and comparison between biblical and Mesopotamian cosmogonies there is still nothing to match A. Heidel’s The Babylonian Genesis (University of Chicago, 1951). An interesting thesis, hinted at in the title, is presented by P. J. Wiseman in Creation Revealed in Six Days (Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1948). A modern evangelical summary is to be found in D. F. Payne’s monograph Genesis One Reconsidered (Tyndale Press, 1964), while traditional questions concerning both Creation and Flood are discussed in detail in B. Ramm’s foundational work, The Christian View of Science and Scripture (Eerdmans, 1955). In a theologically inspiring work, C. Westermann opts for setting Genesis one and two in the context of Israel’s praise literature in his The Genesis Accounts of Creation (Fortress, 1964). Similarly committed to a plurality of narratives in Genesis and also designed for the preacher is T. E. Fretheim’s Creation, Fall, and Flood (Augsburg, 1969). Although both the latter books assume the J and P origin for the material (too facilely, perhaps), each in its own way is successful in proclaiming the great truths contained in the biblical account.

For specifically Flood-centered discussion see Ramm (supra) and the discussion in J. C. Whitcomb and H. M. Morris’s The Genesis Flood (Presbyterian and Reformed, 1961). The latter symposium opts for the so-called flood geology, a view widely accepted by fundamentalists. The student should be aware, however, that the majority of Christians who are geologists regard the conclusions of the authors as tenuous in the extreme. Finally, for the question of Ancient Near Eastern parallels to the Genesis narrative, nothing rivals The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels (University of Chicago, 1949) by A. Heidel. (Note: Almost all the literature cited in this section is available in paperback and can economically form a good base for your library on Genesis.)

EXODUS The fare in English is more limited. Exodus (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1963) by U. Cassuto is probably the best for literary and philological detail but lacks the depth of his work on Genesis. In the OTL series Martin Noth has contributed a commentary (translation, 1962) that begins with the cultic professions of faith in the central theme of Sinai, framed by the themes of Passover and Conquest and bound together by the tradition of the wilderness wandering. Literary analysis is valuable, but precise help in exegesis of the text is lacking. A popularized form of Noth with special reference to Christian interpretation is given by the Roman Catholic J. Plastaras in The God of Exodus (Bruce, 1966), but here too the help required for the serious student is lacking. On specialized subjects a couple of monographs are worthwhile. Full competence in handling the sources is evident in D. W. Gooding’s The Account of the Tabernacle (Cambridge, 1959), though his primary purpose of explaining the divergent texts in the Hebrew and Greek accounts will render the book too technical for most. A more popular treatment is found in C. deWit, The Date and Route of the Exodus (Tyndale, 1960).

LEVITICUS Apart from the OTL volume of M. Noth (translation 1965), the weaknesses of which are similar to those described for his Exodus volume, there is really nothing available except the older work of A. T. Chapman and A. W. Streane in the CB (1914). Until a new volume in the NICOT or the ICC comes along, you will have to depend on shorter treatments in one-volume commentaries.

NUMBERS For work in the Hebrew text use the ICC (1903) of G. B. Gray. The continuing Pentateuchal work by M. Noth in the OTL (translation 1968) is valuable, though he sees little unity in Numbers, a book that “participates only marginally in the great themes of the Pentateuchal tradition.” A conservative Jewish view is given by J. G. Greenstone in an extensive treatment entitled Numbers With Commentary (Jewish Publications Society, 1939).

DEUTERONOMY Since the work of the German DeWette (1805), Deuteronomy has generally been considered literarily separate from the other four books of the Pentateuch, a thesis that will be assumed by most technical works recommended. In a conservative counterattack, M. Kline in Treaty of the Great King (Eerdmans, 1963) argues that the form of the book is that of a second-millennium covenant and therefore must represent a period much earlier than Josiah’s reformation. A less extensive work by G. T. Manley, The Book of the Law (Tyndale Press, 1957), also studies the sources of the book and argues for acceptance of the book’s own claims, but neither his nor Kline’s work has stimulated the debate the question deserves. Still the best technical commentary is that of S. R. Driver in the ICC (1895). G. von Rad’s offering in the OTL series (translation 1966) contains interesting analyses of parallels between Deuteronomy and other Pentateuchal books while its theological discussion benefits from the author’s perspicuity in that field. Finally, the older work by G. A. Smith (CB, 1918) is still useful.

JOSHUA The work of J. Garstang, Joshua-Judges (Constable, 1931), though badly out of date, is still helpful. Other than that, J. Bright’s treatment in the IB and another dated volume by G. A. Cooke in CB (1918) are all that is available in English.

JUDGES On a popular level, A. Cundall’s short volume in the new TCOT (1968) meets a real need. For the Hebrew text, and a mixture of still current and now outdated interpretative theories, C. F. Burney’s The Book of Judges and Notes on the Books of Kings (a composite volume) has just been reprinted by KTAV (1970) with a prolegomenon by W. F. Albright but a price that limits its availability. The older volumes by G. F. Moore (ICC, 1895) for the Hebraist and G. A. Cooke (CB, 1913) for the layman can be profitably used. Garstang’s book (see Joshua) also provides historical guidance but suffers from the same need for revision applicable to each of these works.

RUTH Ruth is often treated with Judges, to which in certain early canonical arrangements it was an addition. Both the CB and the TCOT handle the material this way, though in the later volume L. Morris takes over the task from A. E. Cundall. A short book, useful as a theological supplement to the commentaries available, is R. M. Hals’s Theology of the Book of Ruth (Fortress, 1969), in which the unseen hand of God guiding history is seen as the dominant theme of the book.

I and II SAMUEL First-rate help is available for the student who seeks to understand the somewhat confused Hebrew text in S. R. Driver’s Notes on the Hebrew Text and the Topography of the Books of Samuel (Oxford, 1890), a work that, together with the volume by H. P. Smith (ICC, 1899), provides ample technical resource. Theological themes are beautifully illuminated in the OTL contribution by H. W. Hertzberg (translation 1964); and as a short study of Second Samuel 9–First Kings 2, R. N. Whybray’s The Succession Narrative (Allenson, 1968) is basic. Finally, a brief laymen’s study focusing on archaeological and historical background through the period of Solomon has been contributed recently by J. J. Davis: The Birth of a Kingdom (Baker, 1970).

I and II KINGS Most up to date on the text and cognate linguistic material is J. Gray’s volume in the OTL (revision 1970), though the writer tends to get bogged down in traditional literary criticism. The ICC (1951) offers a solid commentary on these books by J. A. Montgomery and H. S. Gehman, while C. F. Burney’s Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Book of Kings (reprint KTAV, 1970) has been noted earlier under Judges. Various studies are available on the lives of Elijah and Elisha, two prophets whose activities dominate parts of both books. Noteworthy among them are R. S. Wallace’s Elijah and Elisha (Oliver and Boyd, 1957) and the two devotional volumes by F. W. Krummacher (reprint Zondervan, n.d.).

I and II CHRONICLES A fresh look at the Chronicler in light of contemporary historical and linguistic data (often confirming the work of these much maligned books) is given by J. M. Myers in his two-volume set in the AB (1965). The first volume contains a valuable introduction spelling out the Chronicler’s theological position and interest, while the second volume has particularly useful appendices on genealogical and onomastic (pertaining to names) data. More technical and less theological is the treatment by E. L. Curtis and A. A. Madsen in ICC (1910).

EZRA-NEHEMIAH Myers’s work is continued in the AB (1965) for both these books. Although not all will like his rearrangement of material (Ezra follows Nehemiah and writes about 400 B.C.—for an alternative argument cf. J. S. Wright, The Date of Ezra’s Coming to Jerusalem, Tyndale Press, 1947), the volume will be helpful for sorting out the problems inherent in the memoirs of these post-exilic figures. Similarly directed to the general reader is H. E. Ryle’s volume in CB (1893), while for Hebrew exegetical help the ICC volume by L. W. Batten (1913) is again recommended.

ESTHER Beside the commentary in the ICC (1908) by L. B. Paton and the one in the CB (1907) by A. W. Streane, there is only the older, but exegetically valuable, work, The Book of Esther (Clark, 1888) by P. Cassel.

JOB Of books on Job there is no shortage (see the bibliography listed in IDB or NBD for a sampling). The AB volume by M. H. Pope is a good place to start, while a second inexpensive volume with practical relevance is From Tragedy to Triumph (Zondervan, 1958) by H. L. Ellison. Plumbing the exegetical depths will, however, require use of a volume such as S. R. Driver and G. B. Gray’s ICC offering (two volumes, 1921) or its contemporary, the extensive work of E. Dhorme, The Book of Job (Nelson, translation 1967). Modern Jewish scholarship in all its diversity is seen in the work of N. H. Tur-Sinai (The Book of Job, Kiryath Sepher, Jerusalem, 1957) and R. Gordis (The Book of God and Man, University of Chicago, 1966). The former treatise is marked by its author’s ingenuity in the field of lexicography, while the latter is more a study of various problems in Job than a commentary proper. Finally, the volume by H. H. Rowley in the New Century Bible (Oliphants, 1970) provides a wealth of bibliographic information and detailed discussion of the text.

Carl E. Armerding teaches Old Testament at Regent College in Vancouver. He received the B.D. from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School and the Ph.D. from Brandeis. He spent a year in Israel doing post-doctoral study.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.