BestCommentaries.com
10 comments | Permalink
Posted by Andy Naselli
John Dyer (Th.M., Dallas Theological Seminary) just launched www.BestCommentaries.com. It's goal is to help
John Dyer (Th.M., Dallas Theological Seminary) just launched www.BestCommentaries.com. It's goal is to help
Bible students at all levels to make good, informed decisions about which commentaries they should purchase and use by providing a constantly updated biblography of commentaries on each book of the Bible and collecting reviews, ratings, and prices of commentaries from a variety of sources.My favorite feature is his compilation of forthcoming commentaries. Also included:
The most notable sources are the published books by D. A. Carson, Tremper Longman, III, John Glynn, and Jim Rosscup. In addition to these print publications, the web resources of John Piper's Desiring God Ministries, R. C. Sproul's Ligonier Ministries, and the Denver Seminary Journal are in the site. The data from these books and websites have been used with permission from the respective owners and aggregated to provide an average score representing a wider array of biblical scholarship than would be possible with a single book. These books are still extremely valuable and should be consulted directly along side of this website.
posted by Andy Naselli at Tuesday, August 19, 2008
10 Comments:
Surely putting James Brooks' Mark Commentary (NAC) as the #2 commentary on the gospel of Mark is a mistake. I'm no scholar, but France's commentary (NIGTC) was immensely more helpful.
Jason, thanks for your comment. Based on the current algorithm, France and Brooks have the same overall score. Partly based on your comment, I've updated the site to now give preference to newer commentaries (in this case France) when there is a tie.
I see the results of a scoring system under the "Best Commentaries" page.
I see that David deSilva received a -1.0 on his commentary on 4 Maccabees and I don't see anything scoring higher than a P.T. O'Brien's 6.7 on Ephesians.
What is the criteria used for scoring? How can someone get a negative number? What is the highest one can get? Is 10 the highest? If so, I feel better for getting B's on my exegetical papers! Even the best of the pros can't get better than 67%!
Also, I think it's a mistake not to have Scott Hafemann's 2 Corinthians (NIVAC) in the top two.
@Dad, thanks for the comments. The Apocryphal books don't have reviews yet, so it was a "mistake" to have them listed with the -1 score :)
Regarding your thoughts on Hafemann not making the top 2, remember that the list is an aggregate score based on the opinions of scholars like Carson, Longman, Piper, etc. The scoring algorithm is listed on the about page.
Also, you can add some reviews yourself which will adjust the book's overall score.
John,
I should have said this first before I offered a critique, namely that appreciate what you have put together. It is a helpful resource. Thank you.
not sure how it would work(or if you already have it and I missed it) but have you considered a "most anticipated" ranking.
So who favors Brooks highly enough for him to tie France? The way I read Carson's comments, he seems to prefer France and Edwards. Piper favors Lane. Blomberg and Klein don't even mention it. Are the scholars are getting outweighed by some other demographic?
@Jeremy, I'm still trying to tweak the overall rating system since the different scholars (Carson, Glynn, etc.) use different scoring, rating, and listing systems. I really appreciate hearing comments, feedback, and opinions from you guys as it will hopefully lead to something that will be more beneficial to the body of Christ.
Right now, France actually is the highest rated commentary in the aggregate score.As for Brooks, Carson lists him a "Best Buy" and Glynn includes him on the "Ultimate Commentary List" so that's why he's currently third. (Just click on any book to see the ratings, reviews, and libraries).
I would love to know what Blomberg and Klein works are you referring to so I might be able to use those as well. Jeremy, could you email me about that?
Thanks again for everyone's helpful feedback!
John, I only mentioned the Blomberg/Klein list at Denver Journal because it's one of the ones you link to. Did you link to their list but not include it in the rankings?
@Jeremy, oh right. See Denver Seminary Journal's reviews for all of their data.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home