BUILDING AN OLD TESTAMENT LIBRARY: PSALMS—DANIEL

Due to its size, no one-volume commentary on the book of Psalms deals extensively with both textual and theological issues. Instead, one-volume works tend to focus on homiletical and theological concerns. Of these, the work of J.L. Mays in Interpretation (John Knox, 1994) rises to the top. Mays digests and evaluates the most critical research on the Psalms and presents the reader with concise, orderly, and accessible expositions. R.J. Clifford’s slightly more expansive two-volume commentary in Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries (AOTC; Abingdon; 2002/2003) is also worth reading for its evaluation of each psalm’s literary structure, poetic imagery, and theological significance. Even if one is not completely comfortable with reading poetry in Hebrew, a full-fledged critical commentary can be tremendously rewarding. Over the past two decades, the three volumes from Word Biblical Commentary (WBC; rev. ed.; 1983-2002) would have been the obvious first choice. Now, however, English-speaking audiences are gaining access to the work of F-L Hossfeld and E. Zenger (Hermeneia; Fortress, 2005). One volume, covering Pss 51–100, has already been published, and two more are on the way. In addition to its careful text-, form-, and literary critical contributions, the commentary is valuable for its use of ancient Near Eastern iconography.

With its diverse and sometimes arcane maxims, many struggle to understand the book of Proverbs as theologically normative. B. Waltke’s comprehensive two-volume commentary in the New International Commentary on the Old Testament (NICOT; Eerdmans, 2005/2006) approaches the book and its challenges from an expressly evangelical perspective. He writes with the pastor-theologian in mind, though always with an eye to larger scholarly debates in which his conclusions often go against the mainstream (e.g., authorship and organization of the book). L.G. Perdue (Interpretation [2000]) echoes more conventional scholarly perspectives on the critical issues in Proverbs. His sensitive, accessible readings take seriously the separation of the modern Christian context from the context of those who first received the book of Proverbs. One other commentary deserves mention, namely, E.F. Davis’s work, which appears in the same volume as her treatment of the Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes (Westminster Bible Companion; Westminster John Knox, 2000). In this tidy volume, Davis argues that Proverbs can serve as an ordering mechanism for communities during periods of social crisis and disorder.

Ecclesiastes seems to cut against the grain of much of the OT with its ruminations on human nature and existence. Among recent worthwhile commentaries on this complex book is C.L. Seow’s contribution to the Anchor Bible (Doubleday, 1997). Seow’s lengthy introduction to Ecclesiastes is a tour-de-force. While his verse-by-verse commentary is accessible to the lay reader, the exhaustive notes situate Seow’s conclusions within the latest scholarship. Less technical but equally compelling is W.P. Brown’s commentary (Interpretation [2000]), which should be required reading for thoughtful Christians whose experiences and observations resonate with those of Qohelet. M. Fox’s commentary A Time to Tear Down and A Time to Build Up: A Rereading of Ecclesiastes (Eerdmans, 1999) may be rather more difficult for many evangelicals to digest. It is comprised of a verse-by-verse commentary (the latter half of the book) and a series of provocative essays on the methods of reading Ecclesiastes and its themes. Throughout, Fox highlights the contradictions inherent in the book, which he considers “real and intended,” and, must be interpreted rather than eliminated.

While modern Christians often struggle to understand how the Song of Songs functions as Scripture, in earlier epochs the book was a source of sustained and earnest theological reflection. R.A. Norris Jr.’s The Song of Songs: Interpreted by Early Christian and Medieval Commentators (The Church’s Bible; Eerdmans; 2003) summarizes and captures the spirit of these early interpreters who looked to the Song for insight into the mysteries of the relationships among the Church, God, Christ, and the individual believer. R. Murphy’s technical commentary (Hermeneia [1990]) also treats the long and complex history of interpretation of the Song. Ultimately, Murphy presents a sound judgment on the modern theological and ethical implications of the book, namely, that the “reciprocal love between a man and a woman…[is] divinely instituted and sanctioned” (100). While such theological reflection is absent in O. Keel’s commentary (A Continental Commentary; Fortress, 1994), the volume is most certainly worthwhile. His iconographic approach to the Song of Songs provides the best means of apprehending the figurative language that pervades the Song.

Scholarship on the book of Isaiah has long been concerned with its literary cohesion and its inner tensions. Since the early twentieth century, many scholars have treated the book in its three discrete “parts”: Isa 1–39, 40–55, and 56–66. J. Blenkinsopp’s three volume commentary in Anchor Bible (2000-2003) reflects this classic division, and has the benefit of being one of the most recent and thorough commentaries on the entire book. Readers will appreciate his able summaries of crucial scholarly debates and careful adjudication of thorny historical-critical issues. In contrast to Blenkinsopp, B. Childs’ commentary in the Old Testament Library (Westminster John Knox, 2001) is contained in one volume, illustrative of his goal of understanding Isaiah in its final unitary form. The Interpretation commentary series takes a different tack, dividing the book of Isaiah into two volumes: the first by C. Seitz (Isaiah 1–39; John Knox, 1993) and the second by P. Hanson (Isaiah 40–66; 1995). The very fact that the series editors split Isaiah into two volumes reflects the tensions within the book. While Seitz and Hanson acknowledge the distinct literary boundary that comes between Isa 39 and 40, they eagerly identify themes that run across the divide and unite all sixty-six chapters of Isaiah. In contrast to Blenkinsopp and Childs, Seitz and Hanson frame their writing for pastors and teachers.

The complex and apparently jumbled character of the book of Jeremiah puzzles many readers. More than any recent commentary, L. Stulman’s work (AOTC [2005]) helps one navigate the book. Indeed, Stulman finds a semblance of order within Jeremiah, seeing the book as a “literary reenactment of the death and dismantling of one world (Jer 1–25) in preparation for the emergence of another (Jer 26–52)” (xix). T. Fretheim’s contribution to the Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary (Smyth & Helwys, 2002) exhibits sensitivity to literary and historical issues in a “user friendly” format. With sidebars, graphics, and art, the book reads more like a series of webpages—replete with “hyperlinks”— than a stuffy commentary. W. Brueggemann’s A Commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and Homecoming (Eerdmans, 1998) offers the most compelling and often unsettling discussion of the theological claims of the book of Jeremiah. Those seeking in-depth treatments of historical-critical issues should look elsewhere, for Brueggemann believes that the book of Jeremiah belongs ultimately to the church and synagogue, not the academy. His interpretation is thoroughly and unrelentingly theological.

Three very different commentaries on the short book of Lamentations are worth reading. K. O’Connor’s commentary Lamentations and the Tears of the World (Orbis, 2002) connects the experiences of ancient and modern suffering communities. In so doing, she reveals the book’s profound pastoral value: Lamentations gives voice to grief. A. Berlin’s commentary (OTL [2002]) focuses on literary-critical issues to uncover the religious worldview that the text conveys. Her commentary is notable for its exploration of Lamentations’ theology of destruction, which “eschews systematization.” F.W. Dobbs-Allsopp’s work (Interpretation [2002]) demonstrates a close attention to the poetic features of the book and very helpfully situates Lamentations alongside similar ancient Near Eastern literary genres.

The book of Ezekiel presents a rich collage of literary images. M.S. Odell’s commentary (Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary [2006]), with its frequent references to ancient and modern art, is particularly useful for bringing the colorful text of Ezekiel to life. Throughout her commentary, Odell identifies the Neo-Assyrian characteristics of Ezekiel’s imagery, form, and theology, but nevertheless maintains that Ezekiel presents a “radical alterity” to neo-Assyrian culture and ideology. Unlike Odell, D.I. Block (NICOT [1997-98]) approaches the book through a specifically evangelical lens. His heavily annotated two-volume commentary is a massive work that expertly handles the historical, philological, and translational issues arising in the complex text of Ezekiel. Like Block, R.E. Clements in the Westminster Bible Companion (Westminster John Knox, 1996) discusses the implications of Ezekiel’s theology in its original and contemporary contexts. However, Clements exhibits far less certainty than Block about Ezekiel’s literary cohesion.

Modern readers rightly struggle to reconcile the different types of literatures within the book of Daniel. C.L. Seow’s accessible commentary (Westminster Bible Companion [2003]) reveals the single theological message about God’s sovereignty that pervades Daniel’s diverse parts. Readers of Daniel may also puzzle over its prophecies. In modern American Christianity, one frequently encounters dispensationalist interpretations of these prophecies. D.E. Gowan’s work (AOTC [2001]) is commendable for directly and sensitively engaging these issues. For a treatment of the larger history of the interpretation of Daniel in Jewish and Christian communities, one should consult the technical commentary of J.J. Collins (Hermeneia [1993]). While Collins’ concerns are not overtly theological, he deftly handles the book’s manifold textual problems.

By Joel M. LeMon, Ph.D., and John Wesley Fellow.