Best Older Bible Commentator

Best Older Commentator

  • Matthew Henry

    Votes: 9 12.5%

  • John Gill

    Votes: 14 19.4%

  • Matthew Poole

    Votes: 9 12.5%

  • John Calvin

    Votes: 39 54.2%

  • John Trapp

    Votes: 1 1.4%
  • Total voters
    72
Status
Not open for further replies.
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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...
 
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.
Click to expand...

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...

:up:

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

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? :book2:
 
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.
Click to expand...

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? :book2:
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.
 
I thought only Anglicans read Trapp. The results of this poll indicates that may be the case. Is he online anywhere?
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
 
I just ordered my first Calvin set! 22 volumes, is he as (for lack of a better word) enjoyable to read as M. Henry?:detective::detective::book2::book2:
 
Last edited:
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
 
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
Click to expand...


Jameison, Fauscett and Brown and Keil & Delitzsch are too recent to count. :coffee:
Click to expand...

Ok! :D

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."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
what is the best linguistic bible commentary?
Replies
3
Views
3K
greenbaggins
greenbaggins
ReformedWretch
  • Locked
In everyone's opinion, which version of the English bible IS the best?
2 3 4
Replies
107
Views
10K
WrittenFromUtopia
W
L
  • Locked
The eighteenth-century hermeneutics?
Replies
3
Views
2K
Ask Mr. Religion
Ask Mr. Religion
thistle93
  • Locked
Best exegetical textbook?
Replies
3
Views
2K
CharlieJ
CharlieJ
S
  • Locked
Best commentary series?
Replies
13
Views
11K
Somerset
S
Back
Top