# Best Older Bible Commentator



## Reformed Covenanter

I go for John Gill first, John Calvin second, Matthew Henry third.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian

I say Calvin first, Henry second and Gill third. Though Gill is gaining more esteem in my opinion the more I read from him.


----------



## Sonoftheday

Do I really have to choose just one???

I chose Mathew Henry because his is the only complete work of the group. (or at least the only one I have used.


----------



## RamistThomist

is Gill online anywhere?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Spear Dane said:


> is Gill online anywhere?



Sure, it's available right here.


----------



## Barnpreacher

Spear Dane said:


> is Gill online anywhere?



I like this site as well: Classic Bible Commentaries


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

My personal top 3 favorites are Poole, Henry, and Calvin. 

A couple of plugs for Poole:

Charles Spurgeon, _Commenting and Commentaries_:



> On the whole, if I must have only one commentary, and had read Matthew Henry as I have, I do not know but what I should choose Poole. He is a very prudent and judicious commentator; and one of the few who could honestly say, "We have not willingly balked any obvious difficulty, and have designed a just satisfaction to all our readers; and if any knot remains yet untied, we have told our readers what hath been most probably said for their satisfaction in the untying of it." Poole is not so pithy and witty by far as Matthew Henry, but he is perhaps more accurate, less a commentator, and more an expositor. You meet with no ostentation of learning in Matthew Poole, and that for the simple reason that he was so profoundly learned as to be able to give results without a display of his intellectual crockery.



Joel Beeke & Randall Pederson, _Meet the Puritans_, p. 487:



> Poole's commentary is somewhat shorter than Henry's and somewhat longer than _The Dutch Annotations_, which are well known in the Netherlands. Richard Cecil observed, "Commentators are excellent where there are few difficulties; but they leave the harder knots still untied; but after all, Poole is incomparable."
> 
> In our opinion, this is the best basic Puritan commentary for daily Bible study.


----------



## Barnpreacher

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> My personal top 3 favorites are Poole, Henry, and Calvin.
> 
> A couple of plugs for Poole:
> 
> Charles Spurgeon, _Commenting and Commentaries_:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the whole, if I must have only one commentary, and had read Matthew Henry as I have, I do not know but what I should choose Poole. He is a very prudent and judicious commentator; and one of the few who could honestly say, "We have not willingly balked any obvious difficulty, and have designed a just satisfaction to all our readers; and if any knot remains yet untied, we have told our readers what hath been most probably said for their satisfaction in the untying of it." Poole is not so pithy and witty by far as Matthew Henry, but he is perhaps more accurate, less a commentator, and more an expositor. You meet with no ostentation of learning in Matthew Poole, and that for the simple reason that he was so profoundly learned as to be able to give results without a display of his intellectual crockery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joel Beeke & Randall Pederson, _Meet the Puritans_, p. 487:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poole's commentary is somewhat shorter than Henry's and somewhat longer than _The Dutch Annotations_, which are well known in the Netherlands. Richard Cecil observed, "Commentators are excellent where there are few difficulties; but they leave the harder knots still untied; but after all, Poole is incomparable."
> 
> In our opinion, this is the best basic Puritan commentary for daily Bible study.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...




Poole seems to be the one I use the most frequently for my daily devotional reading.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> My personal top 3 favorites are Poole, Henry, and Calvin.
> 
> A couple of plugs for Poole:
> 
> Charles Spurgeon, _Commenting and Commentaries_:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the whole, if I must have only one commentary, and had read Matthew Henry as I have, I do not know but what I should choose Poole. He is a very prudent and judicious commentator; and one of the few who could honestly say, "We have not willingly balked any obvious difficulty, and have designed a just satisfaction to all our readers; and if any knot remains yet untied, we have told our readers what hath been most probably said for their satisfaction in the untying of it." Poole is not so pithy and witty by far as Matthew Henry, but he is perhaps more accurate, less a commentator, and more an expositor. You meet with no ostentation of learning in Matthew Poole, and that for the simple reason that he was so profoundly learned as to be able to give results without a display of his intellectual crockery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joel Beeke & Randall Pederson, _Meet the Puritans_, p. 487:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poole's commentary is somewhat shorter than Henry's and somewhat longer than _The Dutch Annotations_, which are well known in the Netherlands. Richard Cecil observed, "Commentators are excellent where there are few difficulties; but they leave the harder knots still untied; but after all, Poole is incomparable."
> 
> In our opinion, this is the best basic Puritan commentary for daily Bible study.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Are the Dutch Annotations on line anywhere in English?


----------



## etexas

I like some Matt Henry!


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Daniel Ritchie said:


> VirginiaHuguenot said:
> 
> 
> 
> My personal top 3 favorites are Poole, Henry, and Calvin.
> 
> A couple of plugs for Poole:
> 
> Charles Spurgeon, _Commenting and Commentaries_:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the whole, if I must have only one commentary, and had read Matthew Henry as I have, I do not know but what I should choose Poole. He is a very prudent and judicious commentator; and one of the few who could honestly say, "We have not willingly balked any obvious difficulty, and have designed a just satisfaction to all our readers; and if any knot remains yet untied, we have told our readers what hath been most probably said for their satisfaction in the untying of it." Poole is not so pithy and witty by far as Matthew Henry, but he is perhaps more accurate, less a commentator, and more an expositor. You meet with no ostentation of learning in Matthew Poole, and that for the simple reason that he was so profoundly learned as to be able to give results without a display of his intellectual crockery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joel Beeke & Randall Pederson, _Meet the Puritans_, p. 487:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poole's commentary is somewhat shorter than Henry's and somewhat longer than _The Dutch Annotations_, which are well known in the Netherlands. Richard Cecil observed, "Commentators are excellent where there are few difficulties; but they leave the harder knots still untied; but after all, Poole is incomparable."
> 
> In our opinion, this is the best basic Puritan commentary for daily Bible study.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are the Dutch Annotations on line anywhere in English?
Click to expand...


I don't believe so. The English facsimile is available at Reformation Heritage Books. Inheritance Publications is reprinting it in modern English too. It's also available on CD in pdf form from Still Water Revival Books.


----------



## JM

Gill.

Who's McGarvey and Pendleton?


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Not a single vote for John Trapp.


----------



## JM

Who's John Trapp?


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

JM said:


> Who's John Trapp?



An older Bible commentator .


----------



## yeutter

I thought only Anglicans read Trapp. The results of this poll indicates that may be the case. Is he online anywhere?


----------



## yeutter

Henry is who I look to first


----------



## MrMerlin777

I like Gill, I have his complete works on disc. I have Calvin's institutes but none of his Bible commentaries. I have Matthew Henry's commentary all in one volume (the one with the real small print that's extreemly hard to read) and appreciate his work as well.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

JM said:


> Who's John Trapp?



Here's a brief article on him. He is also referenced by Beeke & Pederson in _Meet the Puritans_. 



yeutter said:


> I thought only Anglicans read Trapp. The results of this poll indicates that may be the case. Is he online anywhere?



I read him; he's just not in my top three. Charles Spurgeon spoke very highly of him. However, as far as I know, he is not online.


----------



## danmpem

I lead a small group that is studying the OT right now, and Gill's commentary which incorporates Jewish historians' commentary has been VERY helpful. So much so that I really want to get it in print and not just on eSword.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Well Calvin is running away with this one . Still not a single vote for John Trapp.


----------



## danmpem

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Well Calvin is running away with this one . Still not a single vote for John Trapp.



Maybe it's because not very many people have read Gill or Poole, Henry is a little too general in his writings, and no one has heard of Trapp.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

For the record, here is what Spurgeon says about Trapp:



> Would it be possible to eulogise too much the incomparably sententious and suggestive folios of JOHN TRAPP?[6] Since Mr. Dickinson has rendered them accessible,[7] I trust most of you have bought them. Trapp will be most valuable to men of discernment, to thoughtful men, to men who only want a start in a line of thought, and are then able to run alone. Trapp excels in witty stories on the one hand, and learned allusions on the other. You will not thoroughly enjoy him unless you can turn to the original, and yet a mere dunce at classics will prize him. His writings remind me of himself: he was a pastor, hence his holy practical remarks; he was the head of a public school, and everywhere we see his profound scholarship; he was for some time amid the guns and drums of a parliamentary garrison, and he gossips and tells queer anecdotes like a man used to a soldier's life; yet withal, he comments as if he had been nothing else but a commentator all his days. Some of his remarks are far fetched, and like the far fetched rarities of Solomon's Tarshish, there is much gold and silver, but there are also apes and peacocks. His criticisms would some of them be the cause of amusement in these days of greater scholarship; but for all that, he who shall excel Trapp had need rise very early in the morning. Trapp is my especial companion and treasure; I can read him when I am too weary for anything else. Trapp is salt, pepper, mustard, vinegar, and all the other condiments. Put him on the table when you study, and when you have your dish ready, use him by way of spicing the whole thing. Yes, gentlemen, read Trapp certainly, and if you catch the infection of his consecrated humour, so much the better for your hearers.


----------



## etexas

I just ordered my first Calvin set! 22 volumes, is he as (for lack of a better word) enjoyable to read as M. Henry?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

As far as the list of best older (full-length) Bible commentators, besides the options given, I would add:

Dutch Annotations
English Annotations
John Diodati
Jamieson, Faucett, and Brown 
Keil & Delitzsch


----------



## MW

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> Dutch Annotations
> 
> John Diodati



The translations of these works are also valuable because they provide the Dutch and Italian Bible renderings in English.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian

etexas said:


> I just ordered my first Calvin set! 22 volumes, is he as (for lack of a better word) enjoyable to read as M. Henry?



in my opinion, Calvin is a real joy to read because he writes with a pastor's heart.


----------



## etexas

Southern Presbyterian said:


> etexas said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just ordered my first Calvin set! 22 volumes, is he as (for lack of a better word) enjoyable to read as M. Henry?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> in my opinion, Calvin is a real joy to read because he writes with a pastor's heart.
Click to expand...

Good! I enjoy reading commentary written that way.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> As far as the list of best older (full-length) Bible commentators, besides the options given, I would add:
> 
> Dutch Annotations
> English Annotations
> John Diodati
> Jamieson, Faucett, and Brown
> Keil & Delitzsch




Jameison, Fauscett and Brown and Keil & Delitzsch are too recent to count.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Daniel Ritchie said:


> VirginiaHuguenot said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as the list of best older (full-length) Bible commentators, besides the options given, I would add:
> 
> Dutch Annotations
> English Annotations
> John Diodati
> Jamieson, Faucett, and Brown
> Keil & Delitzsch
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jameison, Fauscett and Brown and Keil & Delitzsch are too recent to count.
Click to expand...


Ok! 

Here are some comments which may also be of interest concerning some of the older full-length Bible commentators:

Edward Bickersteth, _The Christian Student, Designed to Assist Christians in General in Acquiring Religious Knowledge. With a List of Books Suitable for a Minister's Library_ (1830), pp. 293-294:

Matthew Poole's Synopsis: "Poole's Synopsis is very valuable."

Matthew Poole's Annotations: "Judicious and full."

John Brown of Haddington's Self-Interpreting Bible: "Short evangelical notes and reflections, and a useful introduction."

John Gill: "Valuable for Rabbinical learning; a variety of meanings suggested; Calvinistic in sentiment."

Matthew Henry: "Very practical and edifying, lively, sound, and devotional."

English Annotations: "Sometimes furnish valuable remarks, not in other Commentaries."

John Mayer: "A Synopsis of the best preceding Commentators, with additions of his own."

John Trapp: "...contains many useful remarks with much quaint wit."

John Diodati: "Often has spiritual and evangelical remarks of much value."

Johannes Piscator: "Many good hints in these Commentaries."

David Pareus: "Have too much of what is valuable to be omitted in this list."

John Calvin: "...of inestimable value to every minister."


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Another to add to the list is Cotton Mather. Reiner Smolinski, who has been a great support of The Matthew Poole Project, I might add, is republishing Mather's _Biblia Americana_.


----------



## etexas

That poor Trapp fellow did not get one vote!


----------



## danmpem

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> Ok!
> 
> Here are some comments which may also be of interest concerning some of the older full-length Bible commentators:
> 
> Edward Bickersteth, _The Christian Student, Designed to Assist Christians in General in Acquiring Religious Knowledge. With a List of Books Suitable for a Minister's Library_ (1830), pp. 293-294:
> 
> Matthew Poole's Synopsis: "Poole's Synopsis is very valuable."
> 
> Matthew Poole's Annotations: "Judicious and full."
> 
> John Brown of Haddington's Self-Interpreting Bible: "Short evangelical notes and reflections, and a useful introduction."
> 
> John Gill: "Valuable for Rabbinical learning; a variety of meanings suggested; Calvinistic in sentiment."
> 
> Matthew Henry: "Very practical and edifying, lively, sound, and devotional."
> 
> English Annotations: "Sometimes furnish valuable remarks, not in other Commentaries."
> 
> John Mayer: "A Synopsis of the best preceding Commentators, with additions of his own."
> 
> John Trapp: "...contains many useful remarks with much quaint wit."
> 
> John Diodati: "Often has spiritual and evangelical remarks of much value."
> 
> Johannes Piscator: "Many good hints in these Commentaries."
> 
> David Pareus: "Have too much of what is valuable to be omitted in this list."
> 
> John Calvin: "...of inestimable value to every minister."



Besides Calvin & Gill, how many of these are available online?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

danmpem said:


> VirginiaHuguenot said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok!
> 
> Here are some comments which may also be of interest concerning some of the older full-length Bible commentators:
> 
> Edward Bickersteth, _The Christian Student, Designed to Assist Christians in General in Acquiring Religious Knowledge. With a List of Books Suitable for a Minister's Library_ (1830), pp. 293-294:
> 
> Matthew Poole's Synopsis: "Poole's Synopsis is very valuable."
> 
> Matthew Poole's Annotations: "Judicious and full."
> 
> John Brown of Haddington's Self-Interpreting Bible: "Short evangelical notes and reflections, and a useful introduction."
> 
> John Gill: "Valuable for Rabbinical learning; a variety of meanings suggested; Calvinistic in sentiment."
> 
> Matthew Henry: "Very practical and edifying, lively, sound, and devotional."
> 
> English Annotations: "Sometimes furnish valuable remarks, not in other Commentaries."
> 
> John Mayer: "A Synopsis of the best preceding Commentators, with additions of his own."
> 
> John Trapp: "...contains many useful remarks with much quaint wit."
> 
> John Diodati: "Often has spiritual and evangelical remarks of much value."
> 
> Johannes Piscator: "Many good hints in these Commentaries."
> 
> David Pareus: "Have too much of what is valuable to be omitted in this list."
> 
> John Calvin: "...of inestimable value to every minister."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Besides Calvin & Gill, how many of these are available online?
Click to expand...


From this list...Matthew Henry is available online. And select chapters from Genesis in Matthew Poole's Synopsis are online (see the link in my sig). Matthew Poole's Annotations, the English Annotations, Diodati's Annotations (and the Dutch Annotations) are all available in electronic form from various sources. The others are not available online or in electronic form, so far as I know.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Portions of John Trapp's commentary on the Bible are now available online as noted here:

http://www.puritanboard.com/358646-post6.html


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon

1. Poole first, then-
2. Calvin
3. Henry
4. Gill

I have very rarely consulted John Trapp.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

There are a lot of individuals who have written commentaries on the entire Bible besides Gill, including Trapp. I listed some of them in this thread:

http://www.puritanboard.com/f24/bible-commentary-28990/

Whether they commented on every single verse specifically is a separate issue, and I haven't yet fully researched that point.


----------



## holyfool33

*John Calvin*

I would have to say John Calvin his writing style and exposition is very readable and easy to comprehend.


----------



## Zadok

My vote- For superb pastoral and exegetical handling John Calvin and then for all the brilliance of Puritan thought and wisdom - JOHN TRAPP!! 

Those who have never read Trapp should do so - you'll be hooked!


----------



## JonathanHunt

I have to go Poole Henry Calvin with some others, on the criteria of how useful they are to me. Poole is unbelievably good in a short span.


----------



## AV1611

I chose Calvin.


----------

