Of the several commentaries I own on Romans, this one is by far the best. One should not be afraid of this book because of its length. Much of it is becasue of the many long footnotes, which themselves are helpful. Mr. Moo gives several suggested interpretations and then supplies us with his thoughtful and well reasoned conclusions as to the meaning of the passage under consideration. An excellent addition to anyone's library.D. Cooper
This is an outstanding commentary, and belongs in the library of every Bible teacher, church elder or Pastor. In each place where there is a difference of interpretation, Moo traces through all the possible views in a fair manner, and then explains his own. I understand this work took Moo 12 years, and I'm thankful he invested so much of his life into it. It really sets the standard for what a Bible commentary should be.
Without question, the best commentary I have read on Romans (which is saying a lot considering the fine works available: Hodge, Haldane, Bruce, Wiersbe, Moule, Lenski, MacArthur, etc). Thorough, balanced, extremely fair to the text. His devotion to truly expositing the text without pre-conceived concepts is remarkable. Many technical details but most are confined to footnotes. Devotional while maintaining scholarly aspects. Excellent at maintaining the flow of Paul without "missing the forest because of the trees." Not the only commentary on Romans I would recommend but it would definitely be one of the highest on the list to buy.
Let me say that I only give a 5 for the best commentary out there, which this is not. However, Dr. Moo has written one of the best of all time. He interacts well and often thoroughly with scholarship in every section. He makes reasoned arguments and decisions. This is definitely a work which can be labeled magisterial. The failing in this book is that sometimes the detailed arguments come at the wrong point of the verse, or else do not help us see Moo's decision. While Moo generally interacts with the grammar of the Greek very strongly in the footnotes, there are a few points in the book where he ignores a debate and makes a ruling by fiat without explaining his reasoning, which does not help the reader. This commentary, though, is on te second tier with Cranfield, and only Schreiner's commentary is stronger.