Loads of good stuff here on my favorite book of the Bible.
First-rate: Achtemeier, Clowney, Jobes, Michaels, Schreiner, Goppelt, Selwyn, Cranfield, Marshall, Grudem, Brown, Charles (EBC rev.)
Second-rate: Davids, Best, Elliott, McKnight, Clark, Nisbet, Bigg, Kelly, Luther
Third-rate: Stibbs, Bartlett
Forthcoming: DeSilva (ECC), Green (THNTC), Hafemann (PNTC), Horrell (ICC), Martin (NIGTC), Wilkins (ZEC)
Conservative: Clowney, Jobes, Schreiner, Selwyn, Grudem, Brown, Charles, Michaels, Davids, McKnight, Clark, Nisbet, Bigg, Luther, Stibbs
Moderate: Achtemeier, Goppelt, Cranfield, Marshall, Best, Elliott, Kelly, Bartlett
Of the forthcoming commentaries, Hafemann, Martin, and Wilkins will probably be conservative; Green and DeSilva will be moderate, and Horrell is an unknown to me.
davejes1979
glwjohnson
greenbaggins
jeffhutchinson
Wes White
Andrew Webb
paigebritton
Reed Here
reformedmusings
Jeremy Pierce said,
September 7, 2006 at 7:56 am
I wouldn’t put Grudem on the first level. He doesn’t evidence much interaction with other scholars, except on the “spirits in prison” passage, which he’s got an appendix on. He seems to me to be a lone ranger on this book. Davids, on the other hand, I might put on the top level. It’s not quite up to Achtemeier, Clowney, Jobes, Michaels, or Schreiner, but it seems to be above most of the other ones you have on the second level.
Elliott, by the way, is highly received in the academic community. It’s only his views that I would consider second-rate, not his scholarship. But you regularly put people with differing views on the top level.
The forthcoming Martin (NIGTC) is Troy Martin. Some might get confused and think it will be by Ralph Martin.
I don’t consider Michaels a conservative. I think of him as a moderate. He defends the possibility of Petrine authorship, but he doesn’t seem to me to endorse it the way someone with a full commitment to inerrancy normally would. He’s much more conservative than Achtemeier or Elliott (who I consider a liberal, actually), but he’s not as conservative as the genuine conservatives in the list.
Doesn’t Marshall take conservative views on this book (except for his egalitarianism, but that doesn’t stop others from being conservative in your lists)?