There is much to like and much that is useful in Bock's commentary on the Gospel of Luke. Bock obviously has done his homework. One feature of his commentary that is first rate is that when he approaches difficulties in the text or areas where scholars disagree, Bock provides lists of the alternative explanations, who advocates them, and his view of their respective strengths and weaknesses. If Bock does not see a clear winner, he is candid about it.
Bock's practice of providing clear explanation as to different approaches to the text or problems of history or sources extends to an excellent series of "Excursuses" at the end of the book. Topics covered include the Census of Quirinius, Sources and Synoptic Relationships, The Genealogies of Matthew and Luke, and discussions about the Son of Man sayings. Each section is well written and provides the reader with a clear picture of the possible conclusions. Bock is more emphatic in his own conclusions in some sections than others. This section greatly enhances his commentary.
Another feature that distinguishes this book from other commentaries on Luke is its focus on sources and historicity. Bock spends more time on these issues, obviously linked in his mind, than most other commentaries. He also highlights the discussions in their own sections. Though they are well written, the degree of satisfaction I felt after reading each one varied. Some left me wanting much more discussion. I realize that there are space limitations in gospel-specific commentaries, but sometimes felt that Bock had bitten off more than he could chew. Not that he could not handle the issues in an informed manner, but that he simply had insufficient space to do so.
The introduction is well written, but did not spend as much time on issues like authorship and dating than I would have liked. I am sure Bock has more to offer on those issues. Instead, the introduction spends more time dealing with specific topics in the Lucan text, such as Jerusalem: The Innocent One Slain and Raised, Faith and Dependence, and Prayer. Most commentaries introduce the reader to some of the gospel's authors theology and focus, but I thought some of these discussions would have been better served as Special Notes within the general discussion of the text, or as more Excursuses on the end. This is simply an organizational preference of mine. The sections are well written.
Finally, I have one other organizational criticism. He usually begins his discussion of a particular set of passage with an overview of his opinions on the passages. Then he discusses "Source and History", and includes an examination of the structure and outline of the passage. Only then does he actually repeat the text in full in a section on "Exegesis and Exposition." Bock then includes a Summary and Additional Notes. Placing the actual text in the middle of the discussion seemed odd to me and bugged me throughout. Again, this is just an organizational, ergonomic, preference of mine. The actual discussions were good. I simply believe they could have been enhanced with a different organization.
Overall, though I have my organizational quibbles, a valuable commentary that exposes the reader to many different perspectives on and potential solutions to problematic passages in Luke.