Book Review

James W. Barker, Writing and Rewriting the Gospels: John and the Synoptics

Barker, James W. Writing and Rewriting the Gospels: John and the Synoptics. Foreword by Mark Goodacre. Eerdmans, 2025. xvi+188 pp. Pb. $22.99   Link to Eerdmans

James W. Barker serves as an associate professor of New Testament at Western Kentucky University. He wrote his PhD dissertation on John’s use of Matthew (Vanderbilt, 2011; Amy-Jill Levine, advisor), now available as John’s Use of Matthew (Fortress, 2015). In addition to many essays and journal articles, he also published a monograph, Tatian’s Diatessaron: Composition, Redaction, Recension, and Reception (Oxford Academic, 2021).

For many years, one of the few things Gospel scholars agreed on was that John was written last and that John wrote more or less independently of the three Synoptic Gospels. P. Gardner-Smith and C. H. Dodd made this case early in the twentieth century, and it held strong until at least the 1960s. Since then, there has been a slow erosion of John’s independence from the Synoptic Gospels, but solutions to the Synoptic Problem rarely (or ever) included the fourth Gospel. One notable exception is Mark Goodacre, in his recent The Fourth Synoptic Gospel (Eerdmans, 2025, reviewed here).

Barker Writing and Rewriting the Gospels

Barker’s method can be fairly summarized as “snowballing” (a word he uses in this book). “The central thesis of this book is that each subsequent gospel writer knew and used every gospel that came before it” (41). Why is this a case? Because this was how writing was done in the ancient world. Barker uses evidence from Oxyrhynchus papyri of Homeric epics, recensions of the Septuagint, Tatian’s Diatessaron, and Joseph’s use of canonical Samuel and Chronicles. He suggests, “Josephus could not compose this section of his history without scrupulously and continually comparing both his biblical texts” (49).  Since “all writers are readers” (52), he suggests the gospel writers “usually maintain visual contact with their source texts, and that each subsequent evangelist could easily reposition within every previous gospel” (55).

In terms of the Synoptic Problem, Barker’s book is a defense of the Farrar Hypothesis extended to include John’s gospel (chapters 2 and 3). Mark wrote first, then Matthew and Luke both revised Mark. Luke also revised Matthew (dispensing with the need for the hypothetical sayings source, Q). Like many scholars, Barker thinks John wrote last, but he argues that John knew Mark and its revisions in Matthew and Luke. Essentially, the author of the fourth gospel had the three previous gospels available. This means no Gospel writer was independent except Mark (or at least this book is not interested in hypothetical pre-Markan sources or oral tradition). This means how John wrote his gospel is an extension of the Synoptic Problem.

Barker wants to avoid two “paths” in this book. First, this book is not a historical Jesus study. He thinks “literary dependence and creative writing can be explored without regard to his historicity” (14). Second, he does not speculate on how or where any Synoptic material originated (oral tradition, M-Source, L-Source, etc.).  But he does want to consider the role of textual criticism, because copies of the gospels were harmonized so they would agree verbatim. He thinks Gospel authors revised their sources to fit their theological emphasis, but this book does not engage in Redaction Criticism. Barker thinks Redaction Criticism went too far by creating “communities” for which the gospels were written. A major emphasis in his method is the Greco-Roman practice of imitation and rewriting. This was ubiquitous in Greco-Roman literature. After providing many examples, he concludes, “I find the same literary techniques to play as John rewrote the synoptic” (25).

In the first chapter of the book, “How to Write a Gospel,” Barker suggests that the gospel should not be considered an oral traditional composition. He doesn’t deny that Oral tradition existed, only that it is “utterly unrecoverable” (28). The gospels “are not transcriptions of Oral performances” (52). The Roman orator Quintilian (c. AD 35-100) provides evidence that the gospels were extensively drafted and revised before publication (31). He seriously doubts any author wrote a book from start to finish (38), using the analogy of the Beatles writing their song Get Back. As Peter Jackson’s documentary has shown, there are over 150 hours of tape documenting the writing, revising, and recording of this simple song. The Gospels are far more complicated than a three-minute pop song.

In chapter 3, Barker offers evidence of John’s intentional rewriting of the Synoptic Gospels. Where there are parallels to the Synoptic Gospels, they can be compared. Barker argues John is using oppositio in imitando, a literary practice found in Quintilian. Although this practice is recognized in classics studies, Barker is one of the first to apply oppositio in imitando to biblical studies.

His “quintessential example” of oppositio in imitando is John 5. Barker argues John rewrites the story of Jesus healing the paralyzed man from Mark 2:1-12 (and revised in Matt 9:2-8 and Luke 5:18-26). John has moved the story from Galilee to Jerusalem and made it into a Sabbath controversy. John’s gospel never actually states that the man was paralyzed (he was merely sick, using ἀσθένεια). When Jesus says, “Pick up your bed and walk” (5:9), John is imitating Mark’s gospel. A key feature of Mark’s version is the authority of the Son of Man to forgive sin, which appears to be missing in John 5. However, 5:14b implies that Jesus did forgive the man’s sin. Something Barker omits that would strengthen his case is Mark 2:7. When Jesus claims to forgive the man’s sin, the scribes think to themselves that Jesus is blaspheming since only God can forgive sin. In John 5:17, when questioned about healing o the Sabbath, Jesus says “My Father is working until now, and I am working,” followed immediately by John’s observation that the Jews “were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.”

The problem is, is John 5 really an imitation of Mark 2, or is it a completely different story? What Barker identifies as creative adaptations of the earlier story are indications that this is an entirely different event. The same could be true for his argument that Jon has rewritten Luke 16:19-31 (Lazarus and the rich man) as the resurrection of Lazarus and John 11. The main parallel is the name Lazarus, a common one in the Second Temple period. Although it is tempting to see the poor man in Luke 16 as the dead man in John 11, the only parallel is the name.

In both examples, Barker thinks anyone who does not see the parallels simply is not taking oppositio in imitando into account.  It seems to be a better example of oppositio in imitando is miracle stories that are parallel in all four gospels, such as the Feeding of the 5000 (98-99) and the walking on the water, or perhaps the reason why Judas betrayed Jesus (100-03). Jesus’s entry into Jerusalem is in all four gospels, providing data that can be compared with the Synoptic Gospels. In these examples, Barker’s “snowballing” is evident. I need more evidence to convince me that John radically rewrote Mark 2 in John 5, or that the Lazarus resurrection in John 11 rewrote the Lazarus story in Luke 16.

 Conclusion. Barker’s book is an engaging challenge to the (eroding) consensus view that John’s gospel was written independently of the Synoptic Gospels. His introduction of oppositio in imitando into the discussion is a significant contribution to New Testament Studies. Along with Mark Goodacre’s The Fourth Synoptic Gospel, Writing and Rewriting the Gospels is a considerable step forward in Gospel research.

NB:  Mark Goodacre interviewed Barker on his NT Podcast (I did not listen to the podcast before writing this review). This book was the subject of a review session at the Society of Biblical Literature annual meeting in Boston, 2025, in the Johannine Literature section. Once again, this review was published before this review session.

NB: Thanks to Eerdmans for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.

Simon J. Gathercole, The Genuine Jesus and the Counterfeit Christs: New Testament and Apocryphal Gospels

Gathercole, Simon J. The Genuine Jesus and the Counterfeit Christs: New Testament and Apocryphal Gospels. Eerdmans, 2025. ix+131 pp. Pb. $24.99   Link to Eerdmans

Simon Gathercole is Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity, and Director of Studies at Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge. He has written extensively on both the Gospels and Pauline letters, including two monographs on the Gospel of Thomas and one on the Gospel of Judas. This new book compares the canonical Gospels to several apocryphal gospels to show that the canonical Gospels are considerably different than these other “lost” gospels.

Gathercole has two propositions for this study. First, the four New Testament Gospels share key elements of theological context that mark them out from most of the non-canonical gospels. Second, the reason why the four New Testament gospels are theologically similar to one another is that they—unlike most others—follow the existing gospel message of the apostles. Essentially, the canonical Gospels are based on apostolic preaching and aim to preserve it; the non-canonical gospels “have a clear desire to distance themselves from key elements” of the apostolic preaching (109).

Apocryphal Gospels

The first two chapters of the book introduced the “other gospels.” Gathercole includes the Gospel of Marcion, two Valentinian gospels (The Gospel of Truth in The Gospel, Philip), two Gnostic gospels (The Gospel of the Egyptians and The Gospel of Judas), The Gospel of Peter, The Gospel of Thomas, and The Gospel of Mary. Each is introduced with a short sample. How can you tell the gospel apart? He suggests that the non-canonical gospels lack a certain “normality” when compared to the canonical gospels. There are strange elements in each of his examples, such as the talking cross in the Gospel of Peter. With respect to the origins of these non-canonical gospels, authorship is usually unclear, and they tend to date later than the canonical gospels (this may be debatable for the Gospel of Thomas, but he is generally correct). The non-canonical gospels lack biographical narration, focusing on dialogue between Jesus and a main character. Gathercole suggests that the non-canonical gospels may have been less popular, but this is a difficult criterion since truth is not measurable by popularity or majority.

It is the theological differences that distinguish the non-canonical gospels from the canonical ones. These differences are the burden of the rest of the book. He compares four issues of critical concern in the canonical gospels to those in the apocryphal gospels, devoting a chapter to each. For each theological topic, he summarizes how the canonical Gospels present the idea, highlighting the diversity between the four while showing they are remarkably similar. He then surveys his eight examples, looking for similarities and contrasts with the canonical gospels.

First, Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. In the canonical gospels, this is a central fee. However, in the non-canonical gospels, some will reject the idea that Jesus was the Messiah or ignore Jesus as the Messiah. Second, the canonical gospels focus on Jesus’s death as necessary for salvation, while the non-canonical gospels tend to downplay the crucifixion or bury it in the background. Third, another key element of the canonical gospels is Jesus’s resurrection. The resurrection was part of apostolic preaching from the beginning (1 Cor 15:4), and in many ways, the canonical gospels reach their conclusion with the resurrection of Jesus. Non-canonical gospels either rejected Jesus’s death and resurrection (Judas and Egyptian) or collapsed the death and resurrection together (the Valentinian gospels). Some accept the idea of resurrection. Jesus is alive, but that is the extent of the resurrection. Fourth, in each of the canonical gospels, Jesus fulfills the Hebrew scriptures.  This is a significant feature in all four of the canonical gospels. However, in non-canonical gospels, the idea that Jesus fulfills scripture is either irrelevant or ambiguous in its fulfillment.

After surveying these for theological points in both the canonical and non-canonical gospels, he returns to his original two propositions. The reason why the canonical gospels are similar is that they are all based on apostolic preaching. The reason the non-canonical gospels are different is that they are not based on that same tradition. Obviously, they have some awareness of the gospel story and may have known the canonical gospels. But the theology of the canonical gospels is not important for their theological emphases.

Gathercole makes an important point in this book. The non-canonical gospels are not an alternative Bible that presents a unified view (53). There is quite a range of theological motives and interests in the eight gospels he has chosen to feature in this book. There are many more apocryphal gospels, often with even more divergent theological views. Too often, studies of apocryphal gospels lean towards conspiracy theories. It is not the case that these apocryphal gospels represent a strand of Christian theology that was violently suppressed by orthodoxy.

In most cases, they differ enough from the canonical gospels that they never gained traction with the majority of the church. Significant church theologians indeed condemned many, but the fact that we have copies today indicates they were copied and studied. Considering the expense of copying a book in the ancient world, it is no surprise that there are fewer manuscripts available.

Conclusion. This brief book is a good introduction to eight examples from the New Testament Apocrypha. Noncanonical gospels are often interesting to read since they give an insight into the wide range of theological views in the early church. Gathercole’s introduction to this literature and his comparison of it to the canonical gospels are a valuable contribution that most readers will enjoy.

Gathercole recently edited an edition of the Apocryphal Gospels for Penguin Classics (2022). This extensive collection includes the gospels mentioned in this volume, as well as many others, including fragmentary gospels found among the Oxyrhynchus Papyrus. This inexpensive book is a good value for readers interested in the Apocryphal Gospels.

 

More on Apocryphal Gospels from Reading Acts:

NB: Thanks to Eerdmans for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.

 

 

Allan Chapman, The Victorians and the Holy Land: Adventurers, Tourists, and Archaeologists in the Lands of the Bible

Chapman, Allan. The Victorians and the Holy Land: Adventurers, Tourists, and Archaeologists in the Lands of the Bible. Eerdmans 2025. xiii+271 pp. Pb. $33.99   Link to Eerdmans

Allan Chapman teaches the history of science at Wadham College at Oxford University. He has published several popular books on the intersection of science and faith, including Slaying the Dragons: Destroying Myths in the History of Science and Faith (Lion Hudson, 2013) and Stargazers: Copernicus, Galileo, the Telescope and the Church (Lion Hudson, 2014). He has many videos available on YouTube, including several for the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion.

Beginning with Herodotus as a “Greek tourist” and Egeria (380-384), who described the Pyramids as “Joseph’s Granaries,” Chapman traces the history of European exploration of Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia. The book tells stories about the early explorers. Chapman considers the first scientific explorer to the Middle East to be John Greaves (1602-1652), who visited Egypt in 1640 to measure the Pyramids. He was “less concerned with wonder, miracles, treasure, and legends than with measured and subsequently excavated facts” (14). According to Chapman, he was a “proto-Egyptologist.”

Allan Chapman, The Victorians and the Holy Land

Chapman tells the story of John Ludwig Burckhardt’s rediscovery of Petra (in 1812) and the adventures of Giovanni Battista Belzoni, a circus strongman turned archaeologist. Belzoni recorded his adventures in the 1810s in A Narrative of the Operations and Recent Discoveries within the Pyramids (link to the book on Archive.org). Chapman says Belzoni’s “real-life story reads more like a fictional adventure than an authentic biography” (32).

A major part of this history is deciphering hieroglyphics, beginning with Napoleon in Egypt and the discovery of the Rosetta stone. Most readers will be familiar with Jean-François Champollion, usually credited with deciphering hieroglyphics, but Chapman tells the story of an English Quaker, Thomas Young, who influenced Champollion’s work.

In Mesopotamia, while some explorers looked for evidence of Noah’s Flood, Leonard Wooley excavated Ur and Sumer. Wooley’s excavations at Ur and Sumer did not “prove the Bible as true,” but they did show that “the Bible reflects a world of real places, figures, kings, and customs that form a wholly credible context, or backdrop, for the early Bible narratives” (81). This seems to be the main thesis of the book. While some of the adventures Chapman narrates are like the stuff of Hollywood, many of these explorers provided crucial context for understanding the Bible. Near the conclusion of the book, Chapman says, “While archaeology has never been able to provide proofs for specific difficult events, what it has certainly done, as shown on several occasions in this book, is to demonstrate that the wider world described in the Bible was real and plausible” (228).

One of the earliest explorers in Palestine was Edward Robinson. He was a “reverend doctor”, a congregational professor at Union Theological Seminary. He traveled with Eli Smith, another Arabic-speaking clergyman. Many consider Robinson to be the founder of biblical archaeology. Chapman suggests they did more than any other two individuals to open Palestine to scholarly understanding (107). One of Robinson’s major contributions is the creation of detailed, accurate maps. Robinson’s work led to the founding of the Palestine Exploration Society in 1865. This society eventually supported numerous archaeological explorations and supported T. E. Lawrence in his pre-World War I travels, mapping Crusader castles and other ruins in Palestine.

Another little-known chapter of the exploration of the holy land is Thomas Cook (1808-1892). Cook was a Baptist minister who essentially created “holy land tours.” He hosted his first group of holy land pilgrims in 1869 (145). Chapman concludes, “one cannot but admire the enterprise and energy that Cook, the one-time itinerant village missionary, displayed in opening up the Bible lands to European and American tourists” (159).

Chapman devotes two chapters to the development of museums and color printing in bringing the holy land to people in Europe and America. Britain’s first public museum, the Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology, began when Elias Ashmolean donated his “cabinet of curiosities to Oxford in 1677. During the nineteenth century, museums became important additions to cultured civic life. Large crowds were drawn to museums to see dioramas, and museum shows (who doesn’t want to see a mummy?) At the same time, publishers began printing books with illustrations of biblical scenes. Reports from the early explorers of the holy lands informed these popular books.

How did all this impact the study of the Bible? Chapman traces the development of biblical higher criticism, which often suggested the Bible was full of folktales and mythology. Certainly, there was skepticism about the details, but as these nineteenth-century explorers brought back reports from Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia, it was clear that the overall context of the Bible is credible. This transformed archaeology from antiquarian collecting into a scholarly science. Chapman suggests that Sir Flinders Petrie was the first scientific archaeologist to explore the holy lands.

Conclusion. Allan Chapman is always entertaining, and I love the documentaries he hosts. Victorians and the Holy Land was a joy to read. There are a few well-known characters in the book, but most of Chapman’s history will be new to most readers. Although written by an academic historian, the book targets a popular audience and provides a solid foundation for understanding the exploration of Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia in the nineteenth century.

NB: Thanks to Eerdmans for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.

David deSilva, Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul: A Visual Guide

deSilva, David. Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul: A Visual Guide. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2025. xvii+299 pp. Pb. $32.99   Link to Baker Academic

In this new book, well-known New Testament scholar David deSilva focuses on the archaeology of sites mentioned in the Book of Acts or Paul’s letters. He demonstrates their relevance for thinking about Paul’s missionary activity and illuminates his letters to congregations at these locations.

As deSilva explains in his introduction, context is everything in biblical interpretation, especially the historical, cultural, and geographic context of the New Testament. The best way to immerse oneself in culture and geography is to visit locations where events occurred. Since it may not be feasible to visit all the sites mentioned in Acts, this book introduces the most important features for Bible students studying Paul’s missionary journeys. deSilva has led many tours in Turkey and Israel and is a frequent speaker at conferences hosted by Tutku Tours.

deSilva, David. Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul

The book is divided into three sections. First, “Beginnings” covers locations associated with locations before Paul’s missionary journeys: Tarsus, Damascus and Arabia, Antioch-on-the-Orontes, and Paphos (which is the first stop on Paul’s first missionary trip on the island of Cyprus, Acts 13:6). Each chapter in this section is brief because the locations are not as well excavated for providing the first century context of Paul’s life. Certainly, large monographs are written on Syrian Antioch, but there are not many physical remains of the city as Paul would have seen it. deSilva mentions the Hatay Archaeology Museum as a “treasure trove of Roman Mosaics” (20). Unfortunately, the museum has been closed since it was severely damaged by a devastating earthquake in 2023 (it was still closed when I visited in 2025). There are spectacular mosaics at the Antakya Museum Hotel.

Second, “Church Plants” covers locations where Paul does ministry in Acts 13-19 or are mentioned in Paul’s letters. deSilva includes a chapter on Perga and Pisidian Antioch. Although the Perga is only mentioned as a city Paul passed through in Acts 13:13, Acts 14:25 says Paul and Barnabas spoke the word in the city on their way back to Syrian Antioch at the end of the first journey. Perga is often overlooked on tours to Turkey, but this is a mistake. The city has been well excavated, and there are ongoing projects at the site. In addition, the archaeology museum in Atalaya is one of the best in Turkey. The final chapter in this section covers Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis, cities mentioned in the Letter to the Colossians (4:13). Although Acts does not tell us how the churches in these cities were planted, Laodicea and Hierapolis are two well-excavated and restored cities that many “Pauline Missionary Journeys” tours include.

Third, “Endings” deals with locations mentioned in Acts 20-28, beginning with Miletus. deSilva includes chapters on Malta, Puteoli, and Rome. The chapter on Puteoli is brief, demonstrating that the city was a “hub of intersecting cultures” (253). Even though the archaeology of Rome is often the subject of an entire book, this chapter is excellent since it focuses on Rome in the first century.

Each chapter explains the significance of the location in the Book of Acts and Paul’s letters. The text is well-written and will be accessible for non-experts. deSilva often provides footnotes to additional academic studies for interested readers. The most attractive feature of the book is the photographs. Every chapter is richly illustrated with full-color photographs from the site or related museums (statues and inscriptions). The photographs have good captions identifying the details illustrated. One thing I noticed is that most of the on-site photographs do not include people. deSilva must have visited during the off-season!

David deSilva, Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul

Conclusion. This book serves two purposes. First, it is a guide for people reading the book of Acts. After reading Acts 16, reading deSilva’s chapter on Philippi will help a reader visualize the location where Paul met Lydia, or the agora where Paul encountered the slave girl with an unclean spirit. These images will help readers to see the biblical text in its original context, both cultural and geographical. Second, this book will be valuable for anyone taking a Pauline Missionary Journey tour. I would ask people on my tours to buy and read this book before we travel and bring it with them to review before visiting the sites. If visiting a site is the best way to understand the cultural and geographical context, preparing well for that visit is essential. deSilva’s Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul is an excellent first step in understanding the world of the Book of Acts.

 

See also my review of deSilva’s Galatians commentary in the NICNT series (Eerdmans, 2018).

NB: Thanks to Baker Academic for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.

Darrell L. Bock and Timothy D. Sprankle, Matthew (Kerux)

Bock, Darrell L. and Timothy D. Sprankle. Matthew. A Commentary for Biblical Preaching and Teaching. Kerux Commentaries. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel Ministry, 2025. 799 pp. Hb. $43.99   Link to Kregel Ministry  

Kregel’s Kerux commentary series combines exegesis from a leading scholar with a preaching pastor. This is a unique blend of academic rigor and pastoral heart, which is rare in a commentary series. In this new commentary on Matthew, the exegetical sections are written by a top New Testament scholar, Darrell Bock. He previously published several excellent commentaries (Luke, 2 vols. and Acts in the BENTC; Mark in the NCBC) and monographs on Jesus and the Gospels, such as A Theology of Luke and Acts (Zondervan, 2012) and edited volumes such as Parables of Enoch: A Paradigm Shift (with James Charlesworth; T&T Clark 2014); Who is This Son of Man? (with Larry Hurtado; LNTS 390, T&T Clark, 2011), and Key Events in the Life of the Historical Jesus (WUNT 247, Mohr Siebeck 2009). He serves as Executive Director of Cultural Engagement and Senior Research Professor of New Testament studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. Timothy D. Sprankle is the senior pastor at Leesburg Grace Brethren Church in Northern Indiana. He contributed the preaching sections to the Philippians Kerux volume.

Kerux Matthew

There are many strategies for outlining the book of Matthew. Often these focus on the five teaching units in the book, such as the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5-7). Bock and Sprankle divide the Gospel of Matthew into four major sections and fifty-one preaching units. Matthew 1:1-4:11 in an introduction to Jesus and John the Baptist (five units); in Matthew 4:12-12:50, Messiah confronts Israel in Galilee and meets rejection (fifteen units); Matthew 13:1-20:28, Jesus presents Kingdom, Provision, Acceptance-Call, and the Rejection by Israel (sixteen units); in Matthew 20:29-28:20, the Rejection and Vindication of the Messiah-Son in Jerusalem (fifteen units). Fifty-one preaching units make it unlikely any pastor will preach through Matthew in a single series (as one might for Philippians). Any one of the major sections would do for a shorter series. Sometimes Jesus’s long sermons make a good series. In this commentary, the Sermon on the Mount is subdivided into seven preaching sections, all part of the Messiah’s confrontation of Israel in Galilee.

The commentary begins with a brief introduction to the Gospel of Matthew. Beginning with Papias, Bock defends the traditional view that the Apostle Matthew Levi, the tax collector, was the author of the book. He is less confident about the place or writing, although Antioch in Syria has the most evidence. For Bock, “Matthew wrote his gospel for churches near the Judean homeland” (67). This means that Mathew was in touch with the earliest disputes between the emerging church and its Jewish neighbors. “Mathew is claiming to be a legitimate extension of Jewish hope in line with the promises God made long ago” (67).  The original readers of the gospel were both Jews and Gentiles. Since the gospel and the church are rooted in the promises of Israel, separation from the synagogue is not the fault of Christians; the Jews have forced them out.  With respect to date, Bock is confident that Matthew has made use of the gospel of Mark, which he dates to the late 50s or early 60s. He favors a mid to late 60s for Mathew. Because this is late in Nero’s reign, he briefly reviews Nero’s reign because Nero “generated problems in Judea” (69). This means the Olivet Discourse anticipates the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

The purpose of Matthew’s gospel is apologetic, both as legitimation and proclamation. “Jesus is the promised one of God according to the scripture and prophetic claims” (70). Mathew defends Jesus’s support of the law, but opposition to Jesus arose because of his actions and self-claims, specifically, how he handled the Sabbath and purity, among other issues. Objections to Jesus missed the point of the signs of his ministry, and this opposition is what led to his crucifixion. The Jewish focus of Matthew’s gospel suggests primary readers were Jewish Christians who interacted with the Jews (70). Matthew wants to equip Jewish Christians to tell the story of Jesus and how to interact with Jewish neighbors. They should deal with hostility by demonstrating Jesus’s connection to the messianic hope of Jewish Christians (70).

Exegetical portions of the books are based on the group text, although Bock does not often use Greek in the commentary itself. There is less focus on Greek grammar and syntax compared to other volumes in this series. There are no Translation Analysis sidebars (frequent in other Kerux volumes). One unusual aspect of this commentary is the use of sidebars. The majority are used for Old Testament verses to which Matthew may allude, or comparable literature from the Second Temple period (Apocrypha, pseudepigrapha, rabbinic literature). For example, in the commentary on Matthew 19:18-19, Bock provides several uses of Leviticus 19:18 in Judaism, including texts from Sirach, Jubilees, and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, demonstrating how the “golden rule” was used in Jewish literature written before the time of Jesus. Commenting on oaths in Matthew 23:16-19, Bock offers three lengthy examples from the Mishnah, another page of references on tithes for Matthew 23:23-24, and uncleanliness for Matthew 23:27-28. In all these cases, the text is conveniently printed in the sidebar rather than a list of references. These will be valuable illustrations of Jewish thought at the time of Jesus for those teaching and preaching the text who do not have easy access to this Jewish literature.

Since Bock is a premillennialist (often associated with progressive dispensationalism), some readers may be interested to learn how he treats the Olivet Discourse. In the introduction to Matthew 24, Bock briefly defines three possible approaches: preterist (Jesus refers only to the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70), futurist (Jesus refers to his future second coming), or typological (both timings are present since one event provides the pattern for the other). Bock suggests that typological is the best approach. Jesus does predict the fall of Jerusalem, but Matthew 24:6-13, 12-22, and 27-31 “discuss events of the end and look beyond A.D. 70” and Matthew 24:14-22 “may well point to both times at once” (658).

Bock suggests “great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be” can refer to the short-term events of the fall of Jerusalem, “yet reserve full fulfillment for the end with Jesus’s return. This is actually how typological-prophetic fulfillment works” (665). Bock does not think there is a hint of the Rapture in 24:38-41, (rightly) disconnecting the judgment of Matthew 24 from Paul’s revelation of a mystery in 1 Thess 4:13-18 (677).

Matthew 25 is unique to the first gospel: Matthew “was going out of his way to reassure his readers that God had a program in the midst of seemingly emerging chaos and rejection of much of Israel” (658). Bock’s comments on the Olivet Discourse are richly illustrated with Second Temple texts, showing that Jesus’s teaching stands within Jewish eschatological teaching from the first century.

Bock interacts with secondary literature with in-text citations. The commentary concludes with selected references with key commentaries marked with an asterisk. He most frequently refers to Davies and Allison (ICC), but he interacts with a range of academic commentaries.

Each preaching unit is outlined on one page (exegetical idea, theological focus, preaching idea, and preaching pointers) at the beginning of the commentary (pages 14-52). This material is repeated at the beginning of each unit in the body of the commentary. The Kerux series uses Haddon Robinson’s “big idea” method for sermon preparation (hence the exegetical, theological, and preaching ideas). Sprankle’s preaching notes are excellent. For example, his “contemporary connections” for Matthew 19:1-12 (on divorce), he illustrates first-century Jewish views on divorce with a short script for role-playing of Hillel and Shammai and a chart contrasting what he calls “maximalists and minimalists views of marriage (and other aspects of life). He also includes a sidebar suggesting several books as additional resources. On Matthew 5:21-48 (which he calls Jesus’s Six Elaborations), Sprankle offers case studies for each to help a pastor illustrate Jesus’s main point. Throughout the commentary, Sprankle points to various media that pastors can adapt and use in their presentations.

Conclusion. Bock’s commentary is excellent, and Sprankle’s preaching guides will be valuable for any preacher or teacher presenting the first Gospel to their congregations.

Other volumes reviewed in this series:

 

NB: Thanks to Kregel for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.