Publisher Thomas Nelson
This book appears in the following featured collections.
- Favorite Advanced Commentaries (NT) by Jeremy Pierce (parableman)
- Ultimate Commentary Collection - NT Technical by John Glynn
- Essential Commentaries for a Preacher's Library - NT by Derek Thomas
- New Testament Advanced Commentaries by Moore College Journal: Societas
- The Pastor’s Bookshelf by Scot McKnight
When I was teaching I Peter, I looked at several commentaries. Many of them were good, but Michaels stood out for sheer readability.
A good option for a thorough, technical commentary. I prefer Davids, Marshall, and Jobes ahead of this one, mainly because of user-friendliness. But because WBC is a more technical series, this has far more linguistic detail.
Michaels reads 1 Peter as a letter addressed to Gentiles, although the letter he says “sends mixed signals.” He recognizes that the opening verse could very well refer to literal Jews, but 1:14-18 seems to imply rather strongly that the readers are Gentiles. Since the commentary was published in 1988, Michaels can say there is a “near consensus” that Peter was writing to Gentiles. For Michaels, 1 Peter is an “apocalyptic diaspora letter to ‘Israel.’” While James was written to (real) messianic Jews in the Diaspora, Michaels thinks 1 Peter was written to (metaphorical) Jews in the Diaspora, ie., Gentiles. He surveys at length the problems with the historical Peter as author and concludes that we cannot be certain simply because the evidence is thin. In the body of the commentary, each section begins with a bibliography and fresh translation followed by textual notes. Since 1 Peter use the Hebrew Bible a great deal, Michaels often uses these notes to delve into the complicated matter of Peter’s used of Septuagint versus Hebrew Bible. The textual notes are followed by a “Form/Structure/Setting” section, often commenting on possible pre-Petrine forms (hymns, traditional formulae, etc.) The comment section proceeds phrase-by-phrase in Greek, no transliteration is provided. Michaels makes detailed lexical and syntactical comments; it is here that the commentary excels. Following the long comment sections is a more brief “explanation” which ties the pericope to the overall themes of 1 Peter. [Full Review]
It feels like an injustice to postpone a commendation of J Ramsey Michaels' exceptional commentary on 1 Peter to third place, but the competition is stiff; you can't go wrong with Michaels [Full Review]
Dates 1 Peter late.