There aren’t many authors about whom one can say this but here goes: Anything Chuck Hill writes is worth reading. Okay, I’m a friend and a fan but I’m the latter because Chuck is such an outstanding scholar and writer. In an age when revisionists such as  N. T. Wright and critics (and ex-evangelicals) such as Bart Ehrman seem to be setting the agenda for NT studies, it’s refreshing to read careful, thoughtful, articulate alternatives. I’m still waiting for my copy of his latest, Who Chose the Gospels? but he gave us a preview last month in the HuffPo. His earlier work on early Christian eschatology (Regnum Caelorum: Patterns of Millennial Thought in Early Christianity) is a standard in the field. His studies in Polycarp and in the authorship of the Treatise (Hill argues that it’s not an epistle) to Diognetus is a model of patient scholarship. See the review of Charles E. Hill, From the Lost Teaching of Polycarp: Identifying Irenaeus’ Apostolic Presbyter and the Author of ad Diognetum. vol. 186, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006) in The Confessional Presbyterian 5 (2009): 283–86. His work on the Johannine corpus is on my list of things I must read. Chuck is a fellow Cornhusker, a graduate of Westminster Seminary California, and a prof of New Testament at RTS/Orlando.