Impressive Bibliographical Skill

This commentary is impressive to me. I just got it in the mail yesterday. Most commentaries offer an apology for not being able to take into account the most recent monster commentary. Peterson’s commentary, however, was able to take into account both Bock’s and Longenecker’s recent (both 2007) contributions. The only recent commentary that Peterson doesn’t interact with is Pervo, too recent obviously to be included. So, like I said, I am impressed. Most of the time, there is a three year lag in the bibliography for commentaries. Peterson has been working on this commentary for a long time, and he is a noted Acts scholar even before this publication. Acts is starting to be well-served by modern evangelical commentaries. Still to come are Porter (NIGTC), Green (NICNT), and Walton (WBC). Walton is scheduled to come out at the end of this year, which means it will probably be available next year sometime. When these three commentaries are available, Acts will be as well served by good commentaries as it has been poorly served in the past. Previously, we really only had Bruce and Marshall. Both of these are still quite valuable. Then also there is now Witherington, Stott, Hughes, Barrett, Lloyd-Jones, and Fitzmyer.

Of first priority, in my opinion, are Peterson, Bock, Longenecker, Witherington, Barrett, and probably Pervo (I don’t own it, but it looks good, even though it’s in a liberal series). Second priority are Alexander, Bruce, Marshall, Lloyd-Jones, Johnson, Stott, Hughes, and Fernando. For those who really want a complete library, then Haenchen, Conzelmann, Willimon, and Pelikan will round it out.