Book Review

Douglas J. Moo, The Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon (Second Edition; PNTC)

Moo, Douglas J. The Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon. PNTC. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2024. xlix+478 pp.; Hb.; $53.99. Link to Eerdmans.

This second edition of the Pillar New Testament Commentary on Colossians and Philemon replaces Moo’s 2008 volume. In his brief preface to the second edition, Moo indicates that this new edition updates the commentary with secondary literature written over the last fifteen years. The original commentary had a select bibliography (twenty-one pages), while the second edition has a full bibliography (thirty-six pages). In the introduction to Colossians, the first edition had 87 footnotes; the second edition had 107. Many older notes have been updated with newer literature.

Colossians Philemon

In his introduction to Colossians (pages 3-54), Moo begins where most commentaries on Colossians must begin, by discussing the authorship of the letter. Did Paul write Colossians, or is it pseudepigraphic? Colossians appears quite different from Romans, 1-2 Corinthians, and Galatians in style and theology. Moo interacts with Luke Timothy Johnson’s suggestion that Paul authored the letter but did not write it. He “supervised” the production of the letter. Similarly, James Dunn suggested Timothy wrote the letter with loose supervision by Paul. Although these are possible ways to avoid Colossians as a late pseudepigrapha, Moo rejects both. “Paul must be seen as the real author” (20). Concerning provenance, Moo recognizes that the letter may be written from a hypothetical Ephesian imprisonment, but he slightly prefers Rome as the place of writing (26). This introductory material remains more or less the same as the first edition of the commentary.

Commentaries on Colossians also need to deal with the nature of the false teaching Paul responds to in the letter. As Moo observes, there are a bewildering number of scholarly reconstructions of the so-called Colossian Heresy (27). He rejects the view of older commentators that Colossians is walking about Gnostics. If Paul wrote the book, then Gnostics as we know them do not exist yet. Nor does he think calling the opponents proto-Gnostics is helpful. Any Gnostic or Stoic elements in Colossians are simply part of the general first-century intellectual environment. Moo suggests the best solution is to admit there are two or more perspectives behind the false teachers. He summarizes what Colossians 2:8-23 implies about the false teachers in eleven points, none of which are controversial. Following this list, he makes three more controversial points. First, the false teachers use the language of “fullness.” But this is not drawn from Gnostic or Stoic thinking. Second, the false teachers advocate circumcision, implying Jewish influence. Third, the false teachers denigrate Christ or at least question the sufficiency of Christ.

Based on this evidence, Moo surveys several possible solutions for the identity of the false teachers. First, the Colossian Heresy was some form of Jewish mysticism. This was most recently Scot McKnight’s solution in his NICNT commentary. Second, James Dunn suggested that false teaching is nothing more than Judaism. Third, Clint Arnold thought the opponents represented a syncretic mix of local Phrygian folk belief, Judaism, and Christianity. Moo is convinced by Arnold (especially since it also includes the first two elements). This conclusion remains unchanged from the first edition.

In his introduction to Philemon (pages 351-370), Moo observes that Pauline authorship is rarely doubted for this short letter. The introduction to commentaries on Philemon uses mirror reading to construct a plausible story explaining why Paul is sending a letter about a slave named Onesimus to Philemon. Moo lists out several points that seem clear from the letter and then summarizes several suggested scenarios. Two merit discussion. First, Onesimus was an escaped slave who arrived where Paul was in prison (whether Ephesus or Rome) and somehow encountered Paul. Paul led him to Christ and now sends him to his master to ask forgiveness. The letter is a “letter of recommendation” for Onesimus, in which Paul advocates clemency. A second solution is to argue Onesimus is not an escaped slave. He was wronged in some way by his master and knew Philemon was a Christian under Paul’s influence. Onesimus purposefully traveled to visit Paul and enlist his help as an advocate. Like the first edition, Moo finds deciding between these two likely scenarios challenging.

The problem for modern readers of Philemon is that Paul did not ask Philemon to set his slave Onesimus free. Why did Paul not tell Philemon to free his slave now that he was a brother in Christ? To answer this question, Moo discusses slavery in the Roman world and early Christian attitudes toward slavery. Even though it appears that there is no explicit command to free Onesimus, Moo wonders if a master/slave relationship is appropriate now that he is a “dear brother.” Moo observes that slavery is “not what Philemon is ultimately about.” Following N. T. Wright, he concludes that the book is about fellowship in Christ. “In Christ, we belong to one another; we enjoy each other’s company and support; and we are obliged to support, to point to the point of sacrificing our own time, interests, and money, [on behalf of] our brothers and sisters” (370).

The body of the commentary follows the pattern of other Pillar commentaries. Moo proceeds through the text verse-by-verse, commenting on the English text. Although the commentary is based on the NIV, he does refer to the Greek text with all Greek words transliterated, so readers without Greek training will have no trouble with the commentary. Interaction with secondary sources appears in footnotes. The notes are often updated with additional secondary sources published since the first edition. Like the introduction, there are slightly more footnotes in the section edition. For example, the first edition covers Colossians 2:6-4:6 in 156 pages (175-331), and has 522 footnotes. The second edition covers the same section in 163 pages (162-325), with 565 footnotes. The first edition reset note numbering for each section; the second edition has continuous numbers throughout the 163-page section. I also noticed one other helpful cosmetic change. Passages in Colossians are now given as chapter and verse (3:12-17) rather than vv. 12-17.

Conclusion. Twelve years ago, when I wrote a post on the top five Colossians commentaries, I included Moo’s first edition in the Pillar New Testament Commentary series. After reviewing what I said, I still think this commentary is excellent. Along with Scot McKnight’s NICNT volumes on Colossians and Philemon, this is one of the first commentaries I pull off the shelf when I study Colossians. It will serve academics, pastors, and Bible teachers as they prepare to present this essential but often overlooked Pauline letter.

If you already own the first edition, do you need the second edition? Maybe. The updated bibliography makes this new edition essential to scholars working on Colossians. However, the content of the exegesis has not changed much, so pastors and teachers may not need to upgrade to the second edition.

 

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

Paul Barnett, The Trials of Jesus: Evidence, Conclusions, and Aftermath

Barnett, Paul. The Trials of Jesus: Evidence, Conclusions, and Aftermath. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2024. viii+223 pp.; Pb.; $24.99. Link to Eerdmans.

Paul Barnett’s new book on the trials of Jesus joins three similar size books on the origins of Christianity: The Birth of Christianity: The First Twenty Years (Eerdmans 2005), Paul, Missionary of Jesus (Eerdmans 2008), Finding the Historical Christ (Eerdmans 2009). Barnett also wrote the 2 Corinthians volume in the NICNT series (Eerdmans 1997). Formerly the Anglican Bishop of North Sydney (1990 to 2001), Barnett is now a fellow in ancient history at Macquarie University and a teaching fellow at Regent College.

Trials of Jesus

How did Jesus get crucified for a political crime? Barnett traces hundreds of years of political and social change in Judea that led to Jesus’s trial as a rebel against Rome. The first half of the book describes this political struggle in detail. Barnett argues that the power of the high priest had increased in the early first century, and the Pilate lost his support in Rome. This allowed Caiaphas to manipulate Pilate into crucifying Christ.

The Trials of Jesus is divided into twenty-seven short chapters in four sections. Part one, Barnett describes the dynastic background of the New Testament. He begins with Israel’s return from exile and life under the Persian Empire and the rise of Hellenism leading up to the Maccabean Revolt. Some readers might question the need to go this far back into backgrounds to describe the trials of Jesus. However, as he warns in his concluding reflections, “Reading the gospels easily gives the impression that their narrative picks up where the leader books of kings end” (203), but this is not the case. This background material is necessary to understand the power struggle between the Herodians, Rome, and the high priests in Jerusalem. The clash between these powerful forces resulted in the crucifixion of Jesus.

In part two, Barnett tracks the end of Herod the Great’s reign and the division of his land between his three sons, which led to political chaos. It was to this world that Jesus came as a “prophet and rabbi” in Galilee. He introduces political players in Jesus’s crucifixion: the two high priests (Annas and Caiaphas), Pontius Pilate, and Herod Antipas. Barnett emphasizes the role of an often-overlooked figure, Judas the Galilean. In his concluding reflections, he stresses that the crucifixion results from political jealousy (207). In A.D. 6, Judas led a rebellion against Rome when Herod Archelaus was deposed. Jesus would have been a teenager at the time. Judas is sometimes associated with Josephus’s Fourth Philosophy, a group that argued Jews ought to recognize no king but God.

In part three, Barnett describes the various trials of Jesus. Beginning with a chapter on the Jewish trial, he has separate chapters on the Roman trial in the synoptic gospels and the same trial in the gospel of John. Barnett includes a chapter on Josephus’s account of the trials. The problem for historians is that Josephus’s brief paragraph on Jesus contains clear Christian additions. Barnett thinks these Christian additions can be removed so that Josephus can be used as a witness to the trial of Jesus.

In part four, Barnett begins with a chapter on the theology of the gospel of Marc, the earliest Gospel written. Mark presents Jesus as the spotless lamb and a new sacrifice leading to a love-based ethic. Chapter 24 tracks what he calls “Annas Vendetta” against Jesus’s disciples, who continued to preach the resurrection of Jesus despite being warned by the high priests to be silent. This is basically an overview of the first nine chapters of the Book of Acts leading up to the conversion of Saul. He observes that Galatians is “arguably the most important documentary evidence for earliest Christianity” (193), describing Paul’s revelation on the way to Damascus (which Barnett dates to A.D. 34). He compares information from Galatians to the gospel of John, one of the last books written in the New Testament.

Conclusion. For a book entitled The Trials of Jesus, there is less on the trials than expected (as little as three short chapters). However, the book’s goal is not a complete explanation of the trial sections of the Gospels. Barnett wants to explain why Jesus came to be tried as a political prisoner. To do this, he must necessarily review the remote background to the entire New Testament so that readers can understand the political machinations of the Herodians, the high priests Annas and Caiaphas, and Pilate. Readers should appreciate his short explanations of detailed history. Barnett connects often complicated history to the events of the New Testament. Although some chapters seem like tangents, they all contribute to the larger project of offering the political background to the trials of Jesus.

 

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

Tucker S. Ferda, Jesus and His Promised Second Coming: Jewish Eschatology and Christian Origins

Ferda, Tucker S. Jesus and His Promised Second Coming: Jewish Eschatology and Christian Origins. Foreword by Dale C. Allison, Jr. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2024. xxvi+538 pp.; Hb.; $69.99. Link to Eerdmans.

Tucker S. Ferda is associate professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. He previously published Jesus, the Gospels, and the Galilean Crisis (LNTS 601; Bloomsbury, 2018) as well as several articles on Jewish eschatology. In his foreword, Dale Allison Jr. says this book significantly contributes to recent research on Jesus of Nazareth and early Christianity.

Jewish Eschatology

How did the expectation of Jesus’s imminent return emerge in early Christianity? In this book, Ferda argues that the idea came from Jesus himself. His interest is historical, and this book contributes richly to Historical Jesus studies. He is not interested in making theological claims. Ferda comes at the topic backward. Most scholars are interested in determining the authentic words of Jesus using various criteria; once this pool of authentic sayings is recovered, differences between Jesus and the early church emerge. Since sayings implying an interim after his resurrection before his return as the eschatological judged are usually deemed as non-authentic, scholar assumes the early church created them as they developed ways to deal with the shocking death of their leader.

In Part One, he begins with the pervasive idea in scholarship that Jesus was not interested in eschatology, nor did he expect to be killed, resurrected, and then, after an interim, return to earth as the eschatological judge. Since Jesus is assumed to be non-eschatological, scholars then argue that anything implying Jesus thought he might go away for a time and then return after an interim is a later addition by the early church. In Part Two, he suggests reasons for this pervasive rejection of an eschatological Jesus in Historical Jesus studies. In Part Three, Ferda outlines early Christian expectations of the return of Jesus. He begins with the apostle Paul and moves to the various layers of the gospel tradition. Only after establishing the early church belief in an imminent return of Jesus does he examine the words of Jesus (Part Four).

Very few historical Jesus scholars think Jesus predicted a return after his death. Ferda begins part one by examining two studies on the return of Jesus.: T. Francis Glasson, The Second Advent (originally published in 1946, third edition, 1963; reprinted W&S, 2009) and J. A. T. Robinson, Jesus and His Second Coming: The Emergence of a Doctrine (Abingdon, 1957). Although it might be objected that these books are more than 60 years old, it is true that most scholars in the last half of the twentieth century did not think Jesus predicted a second coming. More recently, N. T. Wright suggests the entire Olivet Discourse is symbolic of the fall of Jerusalem.

Referring to nineteenth-century scholars, Ferda says older critics fought an eschatological Jesus who was far too carnal, unspiritual, and, in their words, “too Jewish.” In most of these studies, there are assumptions about Jesus’s ethical teaching and the caricature of Judaism. The evangelist misshaped Jesus’s words. “But it does not bode well for the overall plausibility of a historical hypothesis if it requires us to conclude that Jesus was so roundly misunderstood by those who came after him” (37).

Later theological trends problematize eschatology, even a simple “second advent hope” (to say nothing of the eschatological weirdness described by Norman Cohn, for example). Earlier critics wanted to separate Jesus from Jewish eschatological ideas. Ferda charts Christian eschatology over the centuries in part two of the book. The vast majority of church history did have eschatological hope. Even though there has always been vigorous debate about when the Parousia would occur or what its nature might be, “the Parousia of Christ has been a hope for a real change of scenery” (63). Few denied that Jesus’s second advent would happen.

Ferda calls this early second advent hope a “painful thorn” for Historical Jesus scholars. An enlightened Jesus, as defined by nineteenth-century Protestant liberals, would not predict his return, so eschatology gets downplayed in scholarship. “They had assumed that suggesting the second coming hope had anything to do with historical Jesus with something only a Christian apologist would do” (93). Or worse, I would add, it is something only a dispensationalist would do! Why removed eschatological hope from the historical Jesus? First, most scholars have a disparaging attitude towards popular-level eschatology (premillennialism, dispensational theology). Second, mini scholars site to distance Jesus from “Jewish messianism.” Although this is associated with Strauss and Remarius and their predecessors, anti-Jewish Jesus began early in the church, developing, especially after Constantine. However, Tertullian once observed that “Christians expect Jesus to do exactly what Jews hope their Messiah will do” (cited 108-09).

Ferda begins to outline early Christian eschatology in part three of the book. It is generally agreed that the earliest Christians were expecting Jesus’ future to appear (133), or they were trying to make sense of hope. This is not an isolated belief of a few early Christ followers; it is pervasive in the New Testament. Beginning with Paul’s letters and moving chronologically through the synoptics, he surveys what these texts say about second hope. (Ferda assumes Markan priority and some form of Q, but this is unimportant for the overall argument.) “The general hope for Christ’s return was a fundamental element of Paul’s kerygma” (167). After carefully examining 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 and 1 Corinthians 15, he observes that in Mark, “we see a good deal in common with what we found in Paul” (194). The present state of things for Jesus’s followers is incomplete in his absence. They live in a time when the “bridegroom is taken away” (195). He carefully examines how Mathew and Luke wrote with Mark as a source.

Although Matthew and Luke’s Jesus do not say exactly the same thing as Mark’s Jesus, there is still hope for Jesus’s return in these later Gospels (implying that the hope for an imminent return of Jesus is not fading away at the end of the first century). All three Synoptic gospels are informed by well-known messianic texts from Isaiah, Daniel, etc. (255). Ferda compares the use of Daniel 7:13-14 in Mark 14:62, Matthew 26:64, and Luke 22:67-69 and concludes that both gospels see a future return, even if this is about a future enthronement. “Everywhere else we look, we find widespread agreement and creative development, wherein expansion and invention accentuate what the sources already contain” (232). This is true, even for the gospel of John. He argues that John does not represent a totally realized eschatology, nor does he see this as a “cooling” eschatological hope. Ferda examines the farewell discourse in John with parallels to the Synoptics. “John’s Jesus, too, talks about his future coming” (249), even if this language has been “stripped down” (250).

In part four, Ferda argues that the most plausible explanation for this early and pervasive second advent hope is the Historical Jesus. By the time 1 Thessalonians was written (the earliest book in the canon), the return of Jesus was already raising questions, and by 2 Peter (the last book written in the canon), it was an object of mockery! Ferda does not engage in recovering the actual words of Jesus as if that were possible. Instead, he suggests, “Jesus said things like this…” A second advent hope makes sense in the light of what the followers believed and in the context of the Second Temple Judaism (259). Although he is certain writers reframed traditions, “deeschatologiclization is not the key to understanding the development of early Christianity” (268, citing J.C. Paget).  For Ferda, Jesus himself used Daniel 7 eschatologically and as a self-reference (375). If Jesus thought he might die, he likely expected an interim between his resurrection and his second advent (427).

Conclusion. In Jesus and His Promised Second Coming, Tucker Ferda significantly contributes to the study of Historical Jesus. Picking up threads from recent studies of an apocalyptic Jesus and reception history, he makes a clear case that the simplest explanation for the early and pervasive hope that Jesus would return as the eschatological judge of Daniel 7 is that Jesus made these kinds of claims. I have long thought that the best way to understand Jesus’s eschatology, as well as that of the early church, is to understand Jewish eschatology in the Second Temple period. Ferda examines the issue from the other direction, suggesting that modern scholarly consensus bracketed out this evidence in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. I suspect many Historical Jesus scholars will remain unconvinced, but Ferda opens the possibility that Jesus thought he would return sometime after his death.

 

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

 

Brad East, The Church: A Guide to the People of God

East, Brad. The Church: A Guide to the People of God. Christian Essentials. Bellingham, Wash.: Lexham Press, 2024. xxii+198 pp.; Hb.; $18.99. Link to Lexham Press

This volume in Lexham’s Christian Essentials series focuses on the nature of the Church. Brad East is associate professor of theology at Abilene Christian University. He has previously published The Doctrine of Scripture (Cascade, 2021), The Church’s Book: Theology of Scripture in Ecclesial Context (Eerdmans, 2022), and Letters to a Future Saint: Foundations of Faith for the Spiritually Hungry (Eerdmans, 2024).

East The Church

Lexham’s Christian Essentials series offers short meditations on Christian doctrine to open up the meaning of the foundations of Christian faith. Brad East’s book on the Church has twelve chapters intended to be read as devotional exercises. Chapters include a series of prayers and other liturgical elements, which make the book useful for personal spiritual reading or part of a small group Bible study. Between each chapter is a short prayer adapted from the 1549 Book of Common Prayer. East intends his book to “feel at once biblical and theological, Jewish and catholic, evangelical and ecumenical, ancient and contemporary” (17).

Chapters 1-2 serve as an introduction to the book. First, the “mystery of the church” invites readers to consider the miracle and mystery of the church. In this first chapter, East is clear that the church is the Bride of Christ. Citing Jonathan Edwards, God created the world “to provide a spouse for his Son Jesus Christ, [who] might enjoy him and on whom he might pour forth his love.” He states, “This is a book about the bride and body of Christ, the blessed mother of all God’s children” (14). “I will refer to the bride of Immanuel as ‘Israel-Church.’ The awkwardness is intentional: it forces us to come to grips with the challenge of the simultaneous unity and duality of God’s people, without letting either crowd out the other” (93).

Chapters 3-10 trace the idea of church throughout the Bible. East picks up on the theme of election from the story of Abraham, redemption from the story of the Exodus, holiness from the Jewish Law, leadership from Samuel and Kings, the incarnation from the Gospels, and mission from the book of Acts.

Chapter 11 is different. Here, East makes twelve theological statements about the church. The first several statements clearly state that Christ is only found in the church and salvation is only in Christ. The church’s apostolic mission is to faithfully transmit the gospel and teach Christians the “doctrines and duties of discipleship” (139). Following John Calvin, East says, “The mission of the church is to proclaim the gospel in word and sacrament” (141). These statements made a good outline for another book.

Conclusion. Setting aside art pages, endnotes, works cited, and indices, the book’s body is only about 120 pages. Like all the Christian Essential series, it is an attractive 5×7 hardback. The book is well-written and ought to appeal to a church small groups and individuals who want to think more deeply about the Church and their role in it.

NB: I appreciate Lexham Press’s generous offer of a review copy of this book, but this did not influence my thoughts about the work.

Reviews of other volumes in this series:

Michael A. Harbin and Mark C. Biehl, Leviticus (Kerux)

Harbin, Michael A., and Mark C. Biehl. Leviticus. A Commentary for Biblical Preaching and Teaching. Kerux Commentaries. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel Ministry, 2024. 458 pp. Hb. $39.99   Link to Kregel Ministry  

The Kerux commentary series pairs an exegete and pastor to provide a detailed exegetical commentary alongside preaching strategies. In this new commentary on Leviticus, Michael A. Harbin (professor emeritus of biblical studies at Taylor University) writes the exegetical portion. Harbin previously published To Serve Other Gods: An Evangelical History of Religion (University Press of America, 1994) and a Bible survey, The Promise and the Blessing: A Historical Survey of the Old and New Testaments (Zondervan, 2005). In addition, he has contributed several articles to academic journals on the year of Jubilee. Mark C. Biehl offers preaching outlines and presentation tips based on Harbin’s exegesis. Biehl serves as lead pastor of Upland Community Church in Upland, Indiana.

Leviticus Commentary Kerux

Harbin begins with the observation that Leviticus is part of Israel’s foundational documents and the core of a “socioeconomic-judicial-political-religious system designed not only to govern Israel but to transform it into a kingdom of priests who would mediate between God and the world and set the stage for the coming Messiah, who would redeem reconcile the world to himself” (9). This makes Leviticus one of the most challenging books of the Old Testament for Christian preachers and teachers. How does a Christian read and apply these laws appropriately? Biehl says Leviticus addresses two key questions: what does it mean to worship a holy God? What does it mean to love our neighbor? “The answers to these questions are incomplete without a deep dive into Leviticus” (12).

In the fifty-two-page introduction, Harbin assumes the traditional authorship: Moses wrote Leviticus in 1445 BC, based on an early date for Exodus. He has a detailed chart for his chronology on page 157). Several sidebars argue for Moses as an author, addressing such questions as “Could Moses Write?” Harbin argued in more detail for the date of the Exodus in the spring of 1446 in his The Promise and the Blessing (Zondervan, 2005).

The bulk of the introduction is a theology of the book of Leviticus (pages 34-82). Harbin suggests that Israel was uniquely situated to be a kingdom of priests. As a result, their worship has some affinity with the cultures of Egypt and Mesopotamia. However, there are significant differences, primarily in Israel’s covenant responsibilities and the anticipation of future divine redemption. These covenant responsibilities focus on social justice and the right relations within the community.

The first major section of this theology of Leviticus concerns sacrifice as worship. Since modern Western Christians do not sacrifice the first third of Leviticus, it needs careful explanation. He offers an excellent theology of sacrifice, observing that sacrifices are not just to atone for sin. Some sacrifices celebrate what God has done or are made in response to a vow. He describes the need for sin offerings as well as the theology behind them, including atonement, expiation, and propitiation. This section has a richly detailed study of the relevant Hebrew vocabulary.

The second major theological theme for Leviticus is holiness. Harbin wants to avoid an etymological fallacy where holiness means sacred, consecrated, etc. He follows Rudolph Otto (1958): holiness is a complex response to a mysterium tremendum. This mysterious holiness hints at a reality behind the physical and the concrete (51). Harbin uses the analogy of Isaiah’s throne room vision. Isaiah encountered the “numinous holiness” of God and immediately felt unclean. A careful study of God’s holiness leads to the moral and ethical teaching of the book. Citing Jacob Milgrom, “Emulation of God’s holiness demands following the ethics associated with his divine nature (Leviticus 1-16, 731). Holiness has ethical and moral dimensions, but what is meant by “moral”? For Israel, the standard for morality is the Torah, as outlined in the 10 Commandments and developed throughout the Pentateuch. Harbin sees a connection between proper actions and the love of the Lord, and the love of neighbors. “Leviticus has a focus on “social justice, suggesting morality as a corporate concept” (53).

The third key theological issue in Leviticus is the idea of clean and unclean. Like sacrifice, this concept is difficult to explain to modern Western Christians. The word unclean refers to something associated with ordinary, everyday life. Older translations used the word “profane,” but this word has negative connotations in modern English. Clean has the connotation of purity concerning worship. Uncleanliness may result from sin, but this is often not the case. Leviticus 11-15 describes many unclean conditions that are not the result of sin. Harbin, therefore, talks about a “cleanliness spectrum” (58). Something “common” may be clean or unclean. It might be made unclean through contact with cleanliness but can be made clean through some ritual. Harbin suggests we should not seek an overarching rationale for the cleanliness laws. For example, eating pig is unclean. Pastors often try to associate this with the difficulty of preparing a pig to be eaten in the ancient world. This may not be the case. We should also not assume that Israel understood the rationale for the cleanliness laws. Complicating the teaching and preaching of the cuddliness codes is that much of this material has been annulled in the New Testament. For Christian Christians, clean and unclean foods are no longer important. Hygiene is important, but a ritual state of cleanliness is not. Harbin suggests a principle: our lifestyles differ from the culture from which we come (62).

The introduction covers several other issues. Harbin discusses the life and soul of both animals and humans (flesh, mind, will, emotions). He introduces the structure of the priesthood and the Levi, the biblical families who served in the Tabernacle. The introduction also includes an introduction to holy days and salvation history. Here, Harbin surveys the festivals in Leviticus with an eye to their fulfillment in the New Testament. “The festivals appear to be links to the New Testament and eschatology,” but they are not designed with predictive elements (82). This avoids the often wild eisegetical interpretations of the festivals connecting them to the end times.

The commentary is divided into sixteen preaching units in two major sections: guidelines for personal and corporate worship of a holy God (Lev 1-10) and guidelines for developing and preserving a holy nation (Lev 11-27).  The exegetical portion of the commentary focuses on the Hebrew text. Hebrew is left untransliterated, and most grammatical and tactical issues are dealt with through sidebars entitled “Translation Analysis.” These notes are frequent and often interact with other exegetical commentaries. Since the commentary is aimed at pastors and Bible teachers, the commentary often compares major English translations.

Like other Kerux commentaries, there are many sidebars scattered throughout the book. Some of these are quite lengthy. The sidebar on the Tabernacle Furnishings is three total pages. Other examples of lengthy sidebars include Urim and Thummim, The Colors Blue, Purple, and Scarlet, The High Priest’s Breastplate, Shekel (weight), and Cooking and Cooking Apparatuses. Most of these grey-boxed sidebars are brief paragraphs. There are also several valuable charts (for example, Feasts and the New Covenant, the Priestly Garments). The commentary also includes seven appendices (presumably, they were sidebars that were too long for the body of the commentary). These include Molech, Gleaning, herem, Slaves and Emancipation in Israel, The Year of Jubilee, Land Measurement and Crop Values, Vows, and the Nazarites (pgs. 421-448). For the lengthy sidebar on clean and unclean foods, it was unnecessary to include photographs of the animals (we all know what a rabbit looks like).

Preaching strategies begin with a brief Exegetical Idea, Theological Focus, and Preaching Idea. These short sentences synthesize the commentary into basic ideas to guide sermon preparation. This is followed by two paragraphs labeled “preaching pointers,” summarizing the direction of a sermon for each section of Leviticus. Mark Biehl also offers some suggestions for creativity in presentation. Sometimes, these include references to history, literature, or pop culture. Biehl gives a short outline of key application points to include in a sermon or Bible lesson and a few discussion questions (sometimes as many as ten).

Conclusion. This commentary on Leviticus is worth the price for Harbin’s introduction and excellent sidebars and appendices. Commentaries on Leviticus are sometimes influenced by later rabbinic discussion and application of Leviticus. Other (Christian) commentaries are driven by Christology, using typology to find Jesus in every sacrifice, feast, or coloring in the Tabernacle. Harbin and Biehl avoid these by focusing on the text of Leviticus and explaining it in a way that will serve pastors and Bible teachers who want to accurately communicate this important (yet overlooked) book.

 

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

 

Other volumes reviewed in this series: