1 Corinthians

It has a good view of the literary context, with schemes that help to organize the idea of the text

In my Amazon review of this commentary, I gave the work three stars. I did that because I needed the readers to understand that I was writing a critical review, and that the work was overrated. It was receiving too many undeserved accolades. Here the story is different, however. It has only received one review! Therefore I can give a different (and unpolemical) review here. [This does not mean that my words were dishonest there, just that they were for a reason that is not needed here]. That said, I would recommend this work prior to Garland. For Garland is primarily a product of Fee+Thiselton. Gardner, however, actually offers his own original commentary and he offers the reader much more than Garland does (ie. Application, flow of the text, etc). I would consider Gardner to be in the Top 5 exegetical commentaries (1-Thiselton, 2-Fee, 3- Fitzmyer, 4-Robertson Plummer, and 5- Gardner). I recommend Gardner prior to Ciampa-Rosner because ZECNT does not use transliteration, and because ZECNT offers more features than PNTC (I greatly dislike transliteration). Thus I give priority to Gardner over Collins (SP) for the same reason; and also because Gardner is not a Catholic. If you have Fee and Thiselton, Gardner will not add much to your exegetical studies. If you are a preacher and feel the insatiable desire to have Gardner on your shelf because of sermon preparation then I would recommend the following, but you DO NOT need any more than these commentaries on your shelf if you are a *preacher* (who is not planning on spending years in 1 Corinthians): (1) Thiselton, (2) Fee, (3) Gardner, (4) Thiselton Shorter-Pastoral Commentary, (5) Oropeza

This is an excellent, readable commentary that is aimed at both the scholar and the pastor. It is up to date and it has lengthy excursions on all relevant issues in the letter.