The Epistle to the Hebrews (Rev. ed.)

Bruce’s commentary has aged remarkably well and remains one of the best combinations of scholarship, clarity, theological judgment, and pastoral usefulness available on Hebrews. He has an extraordinary command of early Jewish and Christian literature, yet rarely allows background material to overwhelm the argument of the text. Especially valuable is his refusal to press the Day of Atonement analogy beyond Hebrews’ own usage: Christ’s sacrifice is decisively accomplished at the cross rather than being completed by a second heavenly presentation of blood, and the cleansing of the heavenly sphere is related to the removal of sin from the consciences of worshipers rather than speculative contamination of heaven itself. Bruce is similarly balanced on the warning passages, treating apostasy as a genuine and continuing danger while distinguishing it carefully from ordinary Christian failure. Some aspects of his reconstruction of the recipients now seem more confident than the evidence warrants, and subsequent scholarship has naturally moved beyond him in several areas, but his independent judgment and exceptional readability ensure that this remains a genuinely first-rate commentary rather than merely an historically important one.

Extensive for it's size. Bruce shows good detail to what should be paid attention to (for the most part). Deals consistently with extra biblical Jewish literature if that's your thing. Doesn't neglect OT context for use of OT quotes. Introduction wasn't too much. You can tell how well he moved forward the work on Hebrews by all of those after him that use him as a sort of foundation to build off of. Some notable omissions, including skipping over "our confession" in 3:1-6 and didn't mention the word for atonement(lit. Propitiation) at all in 2:10-18. Reading him along with Calvin, you can see that Bruce follows Calvin's thought closely in many places, which Bruce himself admits in the preface to the commentary of his being a large help(although I thought he had singled him out early on for his brevity among other things, but can't seem to find it now if I had read that).

I have the old edition, which is quite dated. Haven't seen the revised version and how much was changed. In spite of its somewhat outdated wording, it is still a helpful resource. It is my second choice (behind L.T. Johnson). Bruce is always a trustworthy exegete, and can be counted on to provide a solid analysis.

Keith Mathison says that this is one of the best of the many commentaries Bruce wrote over the course of his lifetime. He concludes “The commentary is thorough yet accessible and should be consulted by all students of this book of Scripture.” Note that this commentary was originally published in the 60’s but revised and republished in 1990; if you have the older volume, or can buy it used, there may be little use in purchasing the update. [Full Review]

Great resource.

Bruce's work is lighter than either Lane or O'Brien. Though exceedingly valuable, particularly in the expositional chapters (7:1-10:18), Lane and O'Brien's commentaries are just a slight cut above Bruce's work, I believe.

F. F. Bruce wrote a number of fine commentaries during his lifetime. His commentary on Hebrews is one of those. Originally published in the mid-1960s, this commentary was completely revised and republished in 1990, the year of Professor Bruce's death. The commentary is thorough yet accessible and should be consulted by all students of this book of Scripture. [Full Review]

[Full Review]