Over the years it has been my experience that I think I understand a biblical text only to realize after obtaining new data that I was either very mistaken or partial in my understanding. This is a process documented by Grant Osbourne in the Hermeneutical Spiral and as I understand was something addressed by philosophers such as Wittgenstein and Gadamer. We have a “horizon” of language, culture, and time from which the author writes and the “horizon” of language, culture, and time from which we read. Often the task of hermeneutics is described as trying to bring these horizons together over time in a cycle of presuppositions to new data to new presuppositions and so forth.
When I want to know more about the Book of Genesis, or the Epistle to the Romans, or the Book of Revelation it would seem that one of the first tasks would be to find a good commentary. Anyone who has done this knows there are dozens upon hundreds of commentaries available. Where two authors may agree on one or two parts of a given text it does not seem possible for the entire text to ever be understood the same by any two people. This has been somewhat problematic for me.
It is not troublesome because I expect the opposite. It is troublesome because I wonder if the whole project of commentary writing is as valuable as we make it to be. If there are hundred people reading one text and it results in ninety-eight opinions what is the purpose of you formulating your own ideas? Do you see this as a worthwhile endeavor and if so, why? Or do you think there is another approach to the biblical text–for scholarship and the church–that would be more profitable?
I think commentary and journal article reading is worthwhile but mostly because I want to formulate my own opinions and be prepared for discussion and dialog on a given text. Is there more to it that this? What do you think?
the archives near Emmaus 
Brian –
Good questions.
I think it is still worthwhile, though, as one man reminds us: Of making many books there is no end (Ecc 12:12). And I think I would caution writing another one just for the whim of it, which many people write today because it is pretty cool. But it’s good to keep writing as we come into more understanding of the history, culture, archaeology, etc.
Well, I would say asking questions that are worth asking in each culture and time period is part of the endeavour, which can come out in newly released writings and commentaries. And staying relationally accountable and connected to a healthy body with solid people to discuss issues that arise, that is important. But these are all more practical that come alongside commentary writing.
Commentary writers are just people like anyone else. They may be very intelligent, educated people, but they, too have their filters and gaps. I think that is one of the greatest benefits of reading commentaries–shows me my gaps–something that for some reason I hadn’t considered. Doesn’t mean they are right, but I agree with you, that the exercise helps us formulate solid opinions.
There are innumerable opinions out there from both the dead and living, but I know enough insightful people whose ideas I’d love to hear that I say “bring on the new commentaries!” There are many gems to found from contemporary scholars that may have been missed or poorly communicated by their predecessors.
As to another approach–yeah, but maybe with a different value, not a better one.
Yes.
Gordon Fee knows the text. Everyone else is just making it up.
I think commentary writing and reading is a must for us all.
Firstly I believe the numbers of commentaries can cause a check and balance system against bad theology and sermonising….if one reads widely.
Secondly for the language student it helps in gaining a greater understanding of the nuances of the language …again another check / balance against the arm chair pulpitpert whose only knowledge of Greek is through a quick word study or quick check of Strongs.
Thirdly while the commentary is a useful tool…its use should never replace ones seeking the lord for understanding and what He is saying through the text. I believe because the Holy Spirit is alive today there is a 3 way understanding of the Scriptures.
1.) What was being said to those it was written to.. historical accuracy.
2.) What is being said to the church today?
3.) What is God saying to me through this text.