Galatians
Although the epistle to the Galatians is not large compared with Romans or the Corinthian letters, it is a highly significant document for discovering the mind of Paul and thereby the mind of God on some really important issues.
A helpful introductory commentary which brings out the meaning of Greek terms simply and concisely is Alan Cole’s second edition in the Tyndale series (1983). Similarly, H. Ridderbos in the New International Commentary series (Eerdmans, 1953) or J.Stott’s Only One Way in the Bible Speaks Today series (IVP, 1973) would bring most of the key issues before the general reader.
For more detailed study, E. de W. Burton (International Critical Commentary, 1921) remains a thorough and stimulating work with some useful extended notes. However, F.F. Bruce in the New International Greek Testament Commentary series (Paternoster, 1982) gives a more up-to-date study with reference to the enormous amount of scholarship that has emerged in the last 30 years combined with the sort of insight into the text we expect from Professor Bruce. Serious students of this epistle will find George Howard’s Paul: Crisis in Galatia (Cambridge, 1979) a challenging introduction to the study of Galatians.
1 & 2 Kings
There is no apparent reason why the books we call 1 and 2 Kings are two books. They tell one story from the death of David to the downfall of the kingdom of which he was, in a sense, the founder.
Two brief books by Walter Brueggemann offer stimulating suggestions about the significance of the books of Kings (1 Kings and 2 Kings, Knox Preaching Guides [John Knox Press, 1982]). Readers should treat these suggestions critically, but there is plenty of food for thought here.
For some time the ‘standard’ scholarly commentary in English on 1 & 2 Kings has been J. Gray, 1 & 2 Kings, Old Testament Library (SCM, 1964). It is fairly ‘dry’, although there is plenty of information of a detailed nature (word meanings, place names, etc.)—a commentary to be consulted, rather than read.
For those with some familiarity with the methods of ‘form criticism’ the work by B.O. Long, 1 Kings, The Forms of the Old Testament Literature, vol. 9 (Eerdmans, 1984) will repay careful study. Its main strength is in analysis of the literary structure of sections of the work. Its main weaknesses lie in the assumptions on which ‘form criticism’ is based.
1 & 2 Kings, New Century Bible Commentary (Eerdmans, 1984) by G.H. Jones is worth consulting, but has less theological comment than, say, Brueggemann, and less technical detail than the next two volumes to be mentioned.
Overall the best commentaries on these books are probably the two volumes in the Word Biblical Commentary series (S.J. DeVries, 1 Kings and T.R. Hobbs, 2 Kings, Word Biblical Commentary 12 and 13 [Word Books, 1985]. The second of these is the better in my opinion. DeVries imposes his theological views on the text somewhat, and has a concept of ‘historicity’ which makes no sense to me.
