I have mentioned Stuart's commentary in several previous posts. It is a must-read on the first five Minor Prophets. On Jonah, Stuart argues for the historicity of the book. [Full Review]

It is a must-read. Very highly recommended. [Full Review]

I have already mentioned in my posts on Hosea and Joel commentaries that the best commentary on the first five minor prophets is the commentary by Douglas Stuart in the Word Biblical Commentary series. Very highly recommended. [Full Review]

I have already mentioned in my comments on Hosea commentaries that the best commentary on the first five minor prophets is the commentary by Douglas Stuart in the Word Biblical Commentary series. Stuart argues that Joel is a late pre-exilic prophet, a view with which I agree. He also takes a minority view on the interpretation of Joel chapter 1, seeing the locust invasion as a figurative description of a human army rather than a literal locust plague. I find his arguments persuasive on this point. Whether you agree or disagree on that point, however, his commentary is always worth consulting on these books. Very highly recommended. [Full Review]

The single best commentary on the first five minor prophets is the commentary by Douglas Stuart in the Word Biblical Commentary series. The commentary on Hosea within this volume is 220 pages of the total. Stuart deals with the details of the text as well as the big picture. He is especially helpful at tracing the curses and blessings proclaimed by the prophets back to their Mosaic origin. Very highly recommended. [Full Review]

Gomer is presented typically as a harlot because she is a member of wayward Israel not because she was immoral. Clever but not convincing! Nevertheless, a very good commentary.

Douglas Stuart's WBC is the classic evangelical treatment. It's getting pretty dated now, but Stuart is revising it for publication next year (according to Thomas Nelson). Several reviewers I've read have said they Stuart is their favorite on Hosea. His work on Hosea and Jonah in this volume generally get placed as the best of the commentaries on the five books it treats (Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah). He is especially strong on theology but handles other matters judiciously also. One key strength is his tying the prophetic oracles back to covenant blessings and curses in the Torah, with his conception of prophets as enforcers of the covenant. One reviewer wishes Stuart spent more time explaining alternative views and thinks he's a little too willing to emend the MT. Stuart has also written the NAC on Exodus, the Preacher's Commentary (formerly Communicator's Commentary) on Ezekiel, and a commentary on Malachi in the same series as McComiskey's Hosea (see below). He is currently working on a second WBC volume to replace the current one on Micah-Malachi. Stuart is also a conservative evangelical. I don't like the format of this series, but I do think it's easier to read than McComiskey below, and Stuart is usually a clear writer. I look forward to the revised edition, which may well replace Garrett as my first choice on this book. [Full Review]

Conservative scholarship with useful insights. Emphasis on the covenant. I think Garrett (NAC, 1997) is better on Hosea and Joel and is worth purchasing.

Solid textual and expositional commentary. Stresses covenantal background. Evangelical. [Full Review]

Solid textual and expositional commentary. Stresses covenantal background. Evangelical. [Full Review]

Solid textual and expositional commentary. Stresses covenantal background. Evangelical. [Full Review]

Solid textual and expositional commentary. Stresses covenantal background. Evangelical. [Full Review]

Solid textual and expositional commentary. Stresses covenantal background. Evangelical [Full Review]

Solid textual and expositional commentary. Stresses covenantal background. Evangelical [Full Review]

Solid textual and expositional commentary. Stresses covenantal background. Evangelical. [Full Review]

Solid textual and expositional commentary. Stresses covenantal background. Evangelical. [Full Review]

Solid textual and expositional commentary. Stresses covenantal background. Evangelical. [Full Review]

Solid textual and expositional commentary. Stresses covenantal background. Evangelical. [Full Review]