Gregory Goswell, A Commentary on Daniel (Kregel Exegetical Library)

Goswell, Gregory. A Commentary on The Book of Daniel. Kregel Exegetical Library; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel, 2026. 510 pp. Hb; $57.99.   Link to Kregel Academic

Gregory Goswell (PhD, University of Sydney) is an Honorary Research Fellow of Christ College Sydney and Adjunct Lecturer in Biblical Studies (Old Testament). He is an ordained Presbyterian minister (PCA) and has published over one hundred peer-reviewed journal articles (including many on the shape of the canon), and several books, including Text and Paratext: Book Order, Title, and Division as Keys to Biblical Interpretation (Lexham, 2023, reviewed here) and co-authored with Andreas KÜstenberger, Biblical Theology: A Canonical, Thematic, and Ethical Approach (Crossway, 2023).

Goswell states from the very beginning of the book that Daniel announces a “strong assertion of God’s central control of history,” and as such, it contributes to a “robust Christian worldview” (13-14).  His interest in canon and canon arrangement is clear from his preface. He does not think the four kingdoms in Daniel 2 and 7 refer to specific kingdoms, and he resists interpreting the “seventy sevens” in Daniel 9 as a specific 490-year period. In addition, he does not interpret Daniel 11 through the lens of the Maccabean crisis since that would tie the book to one historical context. He argues that the book applies to all times, especially today. This is unusual for a commentary on Daniel, since most introductions get bogged down arguing for one view of the four kingdoms and an early or late date.

Goswell, Daniel

In fact, in his forty-seven-page introduction, Goswell does not start with the usual arguments about date or authorship, but rather with its place in the canon. As is well known, Daniel is found in different places and various canons. In the Hebrew Bible, Daniel appears in the Writings alongside the book of Esther as a court tale (placing the focus on Daniel 1-6). In the Greek Canon, Daniel is a prophet, following Ezekiel as the last of the prophets (placing the focus on the prophecies in Daniel 7-12). For Goswell, Daniel is a final summary of prophecy (21).

His statement on authorship appears in his commentary on Daniel 7:2, where the text shifts to the first person. That Daniel 7-12 was written in the first person does not prove a historical Daniel who wrote the book, but neither does the use of the third person in the first six chapters of the book disprove it (278). He argues that concealing the author of the court details is “probably deliberate and purposeful” (278). Since chapters 7 through 12 are prophecy, the author follows the Old Testament convention of connecting oracles with named prophets. Still, this does not prove Daniel as the author, but it makes the suggestion more credible (279). Daniel could have written both halves of the book, and that would affect interpretation (279).

Daniel has two genres. Daniel 1-6 are a third-person narrative, often referred to as “court tales,” and chapters 7-12 are apocalyptic. Goswell states that Daniel is a “prime example” of biblical apocalyptic (277). The most common view in scholarship is that the court details were written in the diaspora and the apocalyptic portions in Palestine. This assumes two different stages of composition. Goswell argues for the unity of the book because the two halves are so well coordinated. For example, the four kingdoms appear in both chapters 2 and 7, in both genres. The two halves of the book overlap chronologically. Indeed, there are differences (for example, the second half has no companions), but the coordination of the two sections of the book argues for unity.

The book’s two languages span the genre as well. Goswell surveys several suggestions for explaining the use of two languages, but he is interested in the hermeneutical implications of using two languages rather than authorship or compositional theory. He argues that Daniel 1, written in Hebrew, initially explores relevant themes such as the destruction of the temple, the question of God’s sovereign rule over the nations, and key ethical issues (28). How can a Jew live faithfully and enjoy promotion in the court of a foreign king? Daniel seven is a “hinge” connecting the two halves of the book. Parallels between chapters 2 and seven and the use of the Aramaic language are “important structural clues” (29) for the design of the book (29, following Portier-Young). When the book reverts to Hebrew, the contents start to reflect Jewish concerns such as the temple, despoiling Jerusalem by the “little horn” (30).

Goswell devotes a portion of his introduction to the differences between the Hebrew and Greek versions of the book. He begins by noting that “there was a thriving Daniel industry in the intertestamental period” (30). He briefly summarizes the Greek additions and places them in context. He concludes that “the value of examining apocryphal additions to Daniel is not to adjust the form of the story found in our Bibles, but, by way of contrast with their content, to see what light they throw on the message of the canonical book of Daniel” (35). This is well stated, and he is correct. In the commentary on Daniel 3:26-30, Goswell applies this observation to the story of the seven martyrs in 2 Maccabees (influenced by Daniel’s court tales) and its expansions in 3 Maccabees and 4 Maccabees. Would Goswell consider this “Daniel industry” a form of reception history?

For Goswell, a major theme of Daniel is the temple. He surveys various mentions of the temple throughout the whole book and concludes that “the temple is a leading theme in the book rather than simply a motif” (36). Since Daniel is among the prophets in the Greek canon, chapters 7-12 are the next prophecy following Ezekiel’s new temple (Ezek 40-48). In fact, he notes that after Ezekiel’s description of the eschatological temple, the next canonical words describe its destruction (Daniel 1:1-2).

This raises the whole question of canon and its value for interpreting biblical books. Goswell’s suggestion is intriguing, but when was Daniel placed after Ezekiel? Would this have happened before the great Bibles were published in the fourth century? Before codices, Ezekiel and Daniel would have occupied separate scrolls and may never have been read in sequence. It seems clear that Jesus, the gospel writers, and the book of Revelation all read Daniel 7-12 eschatologically, but as Jewish writers, they never connected the end of Ezekiel with the beginning of Daniel since Daniel was placed in the Writings.

Goswell begins his discussion of Daniel’s ethics by stating that the book’s date and provenance shape its ethical content. The common view that the book was written in the second century implies a Maccabean context. But Goswell wants to avoid placing the book in a Maccabean context, so Daniel’s ethical teaching applies to all periods. “Ethical concerns of the book are not what they are often said to be” (37), and looking for Maccabean connections “skews the ethical teaching,” especially in the first half of the book. He cites John Collins as an example. Collins thinks the humiliation of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 4 has Antiochus IV Epiphanes in mind. This is too specific for Goswell, because in Daniel 1-6, Daniel and his friends are exemplary, moral examples, “a model of an ethic based on kingdom values” (38) and demonstrate “oppositional ethics in the face of Babylon, Persia, or Hellenistic authority” (39). Whatever the specific issue, “the motive of loyalty to God as king leads the heroes to resist the unrestrained political power and various imperial authorities” (39). Although he does not make the point, this could be extended to Rome, or any other empire today. But is it necessary to jettison all historical context to achieve universal application? Do not pastors and teachers find reasonable application to their time and culture for any given passage of Scripture? There may be good reasons for giving up a Maccabean context, but “skewing” the ethical teaching of Daniel is not one of them.

This discussion leads to the next section of the introduction, historical specificity of the visions of Daniel 7-12. Just as Goswell decouples Daniel From, a specific context in the Maccabean period. For the court details, he wants to do the same thing for the four kingdoms. Most commentaries will include several pages discussing the various options for the fourth kingdom (Greece or Rome), and often this discussion is connected to the date of the book. Goswell thinks all this misses the point. “The reader is not meant to supply names” (41). The angelic interpretation in Daniel 8 and Daniel 10-12 is not meant to be read back into the four-kingdom scheme. In his commentary on the four kingdoms in Daniel 2 and 7, Goswell does not identify any of the four kingdoms, because the prophecies are meant to describe all human empires at all times. The beasts in Daniel seven are examples of apocalyptic chaos beasts, a common motif known as chaoskampf, and they are not to be read as specific kingdoms.

This position is difficult for me to accept. In Daniel chapter 2, Daniel specifically identifies the head of gold as Nebuchadnezzar. Does this not invite the reader to extend that identification to the other metals? If Daniel 2 and 7 are intended to be read in parallel, then the first kingdom described in chapter 7 must be Babylon. In fact, the winged lion imagery fits well with Babylonian imperial imagery. It is difficult for me to not see the leopard with four wings and four heads as a reference to Greece. I also wonder about canonical placement. If the placement of Ezekiel and Daniel was intentional enough to help interpret the book of Daniel, why would the intentional placement of Daniel 8 after Daniel 7 not be considered a hermeneutical tool for understanding the text? Daniel 8 clearly identifies the second beast in that chapter as Alexander the Great and Greece.

Regarding the one “like a son of man,” Goswell has a “futurist eschatology,” but he contends that Daniel’s eschatology is not messianic as such. It does not expect a future king in the line of David (42). Daniel 7 is certainly apocalyptic, but it is not messianic (43). “One like a son of man” is a description, not a title, messianic or otherwise (43). The beasts are not human; the son of man is. In the animal kingdom, the beasts are under Adamic rule, which could be the Davidic kings, but not every Adamic type points to David.

A major hermeneutical assumption in this commentary is that apocalyptic does not equal prophecy. In his comments on the anointed one in Daniel 9:25-26, he does not argue that this is a messianic prophecy or attempt to trace the limits of the “seventy sevens.”  Other than Mark 13:14 (the abomination that causes desolation), the New Testament does not use the 490-year scheme. The Gospel observes that the anointed one’s function in Daniel nine is that he is “cut off,” and then the people who are to come destroy the holy city. Daniel 9 certainly does not describe an anointed one who restores David’s line. This, of course, challenges the now-common view among New Testament scholars that first-century Jews believed they were still living in exile or nearing the end of the “times of the Gentiles.” And we’re looking for a Davidic Messiah. Like elsewhere in Daniel, Daniel nine is a conflict between a foreign king and the divine king (46). “Christians are not required to view [the seventy sevens] as a prophecy of Jesus (46). In his comments on Daniel 9:24-27, Goswell says, “it would be a mistake to view the numerology involving sevens in either Daniel 9 or 2 Chronicles 36 as aimed at providing a timetable of historical events (388).

Goswell’s introduction concludes with a survey of how the New Testament uses Daniel. While quotations are rare, there are many allusions. Jesus’s statement that the Sanhedrin will see “the son of men coming in the clouds” (Mark 13:26) alludes to Daniel 7:13. Thinking more broadly, Cowell sees Daniel as the primary background for all of Jesus’s teaching on the kingdom of God, and the son of man self-reference is based on Daniel, even if it is not a title. As the son of man, Jesus says he will sit on his glorious throne (Matt 19:28), equating himself with both the ancient of days and the son of man (53). Mark 13:14 clearly refers to Daniel’s “abomination that causes desolation” (8:13; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). Goswell rightly observes that the abomination is referenced more than once. Jesus’s use of the phrase makes it clear that it cannot refer only to the Maccabean period, and most New Testament scholars think it prophesies Rome’s destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

The details of Goswell’s method, as outlined in the introduction, play out in the body of the commentary. Each chapter is broken into several subunits. He begins with a fresh translation, using footnotes to treat syntactical and lexical details. Unlike other KEL commentaries, Hebrew and Aramaic only appear in footnotes. Goswell often compares English translations and occasionally deals with textual variance arising from the various recensions of Daniel in Greek. The translation is followed by an exegetical analysis of the unit. This is written so readers without training in Hebrew or Aramaic can follow the commentary. Detailed footnotes point interested readers to secondary literature. This is a well-researched commentary! After the exegesis of the unit, Goswell has a short theology of the unit, followed by the ethics and application. The theology unit is less interested in canonical issues than I expected. The commentary is followed by a forty-one-page bibliography.

Conclusion. Goswell’s excellent commentary on Daniel differs from other recent contributions (Paul Tanner, EEC, Joe Sprinkle, EBTC) in that it consciously avoids some of the usual controversial issues that plague Daniel commentaries. This may frustrate readers with strong views on the book’s date, the identity of the four kingdoms, or the identification of particular historical events in Daniel 11. Dispensationalists will certainly be surprised by Goswell’s approach to the Seventy Sevens. Nevertheless, Goswell provides nuanced exegesis, along with theological and ethical observations, that will help pastors and teachers of any theological persuasion prepare to present Daniel to their congregations.

 

Other Commentaries in the Kregel Exegetical Commentary series:

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

Duane A. Garrett, Psalms 1-72 (POTC)

Garrett, Duane A.. Psalms 1-72. POTC; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2026. xxxiv+686 pp. Hb; $61.99.  Link to Eerdmans

Duane Garrett is John R. Sampey Professor of Old Testament Interpretation and professor of biblical theology at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Garrett has published commentaries on Exodus (KEL, reviewed here), Job (EEC, reviewed here), Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs and Lamentations (WBC, with Paul House; NAC), Jeremiah and Lamentations (Kerux, reviewed here), Hosea and Joel (NAC), and Amos (Handbook on the Hebrew Text), and numerous other shorter commentaries and monographs.

This new commentary on Psalm 1-72 is the first volume of the new Pillar Old Testament Commentary. D. A. Carson remains as the editor for the New Testament. The Old Testament commentaries are edited by Eric J. Tully (Trinity Evangelical Divinity School). Tully is known for his work on Hosea and the recent Reading the Prophets as Christian Scripture (‎Baker Academic, 2022). Beginning with this commentary, Eerdmans has created a new imprint: Pillar Books. This will include all the Pillar commentaries and select monographs. Pillar commentaries now have a new logo on the spine. John Currid’s Joshua commentary will be the next volume published (due October 2026, reviewed here), with Gary V. Smith on 1 Chronicles in Spring 2027.Garrett Psalms 1-72

Garrett begins his sixty-four-page introduction by observing that “the Psalter gives us the vocabulary for prayer, confession, and praise” (1). The book is not really an overarching history of Israel, nor should it be read as a collection of messianic prophecies. This sets the tone for the commentary: Garrett will not engage in the increasingly popular typology found among many conservative commentators on the Psalms (see, for example, James Hamilton’s Reading Psalms as Scripture or his EBTC commentary on the Psalms).

Regarding the authorship and date of the Psalms, Garrett argues for a more personal and devotional function, even if they later found use in the Temple worship. The idea that the Psalter functioned as a handbook in the Second Temple period overlooks the oral nature of ancient music. People sang these songs everywhere. Psalms were often occasional and spontaneous (for example, the songs of Deborah, Hannah, Jonah, and Mary). None of those songs were composed for liturgical use, even if they later became part of temple liturgy. This is not to say that some psalms were composed as temple worship (the psalms of Korah, for example), but that cannot be the rule.

Are the superscriptions reliable for reconstructing historical context? Garrett answers common objections and concludes that the Hebrew superscriptions were added early, unlike the Septuagint, which contains obvious historical inaccuracies (for example, Psalm 137 could not have come from David). Many terms in the superscriptions were obscure when the Septuagint was translated, pointing to their antiquity. For example, the header for Psalm 5, “for the choir director,” is translated in the Septuagint as “for the end” (Εἰς τὸ τέλος).

Because many superscriptions identify David as an author, Garrett discusses the possibility that David authorship is reliable. In Samuel 16, David is described as a musician (cf. 2 Chron 29:30; David and Asaph are listed among Israel’s psalmists). It is therefore not implausible that David wrote some of the psalms. However, Garrett points out that some songs seem to be incompatible with David as the author. Psalm 5 refers to Zion and the temple, which post-date David.

He therefore suggests discussing authorship in the context of how ancient songs were composed and transmitted. For example, he cites Psalm 60:5-12 and Psalm 108:6-13, which are nearly identical. When David first sang Psalm 60, he would not have written it down with fixed, unalterable lyrics. As the song is sung repeatedly, transformations occur, in this case, with words used in different contexts. Garrett does not make this point, but this is what a modern ethnomusicologist would call “the folk process.” Singers adapted songs and tunes for many years, but only with the modern music publishing industry and the invention of recordings in the twentieth century did words and tunes become fixed. Artists as diverse as Bob Dylan and Led Zeppelin adapted old folk and blues songs, resulting in quite different songs. David was not a Tin Pan Alley songwriter!

In the second section of his introduction, Garrett discusses the audience and occasion of the psalms. Biblical psalms mirror their cultural context as ancient Near Eastern prayers and hymns. He recommends Othmar Keel’s work, which traced similar motives and metaphors in the Hebrew Bible and the ancient world. However, Garrett warns his readers not to let parallel material govern their interpretation of the psalms. The original Sitz im Leben (“situation in life”) is impossible to know, and any given Psalm could have been composed for a generic situation or transformed to be less specific. Does the Psalmist actually need to be sick to write a song asking God for healing?

Garrett also discusses the Psalter’s structure and rhetoric. The Psalms are well known to have five subsections, but do they have a macrostructure? Is the Psalter a mini-canon that has a discernible narrative? He surveys several suggestions, such as a history of Israel, a history of the Davidic Dynasty, or a messianic or Christological reading in every psalm. Garrett concludes that most suggested macrostructures do not account for all the evidence. Some psalms simply do not fit the pattern. Most schemes rely on a reading of Psalm 2, 72, or 89 as “seams” hinting at a final editing of the whole Psalter, but even this can be challenged. Garrett does not deny that the Psalter has subsections, such as Psalms 42-83 as an “Elohistic Psalter” or the songs of Korah, Asaph, or the Songs of Ascent.  But he is less inclined toward complex theories of a final addition to the Psalter with an overarching plotline.

The second major section of the introduction concerns the rhetorical context of the psalms. Garrett begins with an overview and critique of form criticism, beginning with Hermann Gunkel. For Garrett, the formal elements of Psalm types offer little help, and a given psalm can rarely be classified as a single type. The search for an original Sitz im Leben is “dangerous and futile,” and Psalm headers are obscure and often unhelpful (21). Form criticism, therefore, adds little value and “seriously constrains interpretation” (22). He turns to the cultic interpretation popularized by Mowinckel. Some psalms may have arisen in the context of individual worship, but very few psalms explicitly reference a cultic context. Garrett examines the narrative, or salvation history view originally suggested by Gerald Wilson. The Psalms are messianic and can be read intertextually in the Psalter’s final editing. Garrett disagrees, because he thinks very few psalms have a coherent narrative (25) and any “grand narrative” imposes itself on the Psalter. Most suggestions for a “grand narrative” are “intricate but dubious patterns” (27). “A more promising approach” focuses on patterns of repetition in the Salter. There are duplicates, psalms, formulas, catchwords, and recurring motifs. He lists eighteen recurring themes, giving a deeper appreciation of the Psalmist’s poetry. For example, Garrett mentions enemies, mockers, false friends, complaints to God, and moral and spiritual instruction.

The most valuable part of his introduction is a long section on the nature of Hebrew poetry (40-57). This section could be read as a basic primer on Hebrew poetry. He begins by discussing meter, Masoretic cantillation, and parallelism. Parallelism is usually described as the most important feature of Hebrew poetry, although some scholars are moving away from, or past, parallelism as a formal category. Garrett provides a catalog of poetic and musical terms often used in the psalm superscriptions. Except for selah, these are brief introductions because the vocabulary is quite obscure.

Regarding the theology of the Psalter, Garrett begins by noting that the Psalter is so varied that it is difficult to make a general statement about the “theology of the psalms” (59). He offers several themes that appear often in the psalms, such as the importance of maintaining a holy life, enemies, and why the evil prosper. Since he has already rejected the idea of a grand narrative for the entire Psalter, he argues that the claim that the psalms are inherently messianic or Christocentric “cannot be substantiated” (59). Nevertheless, he discusses messianic prophecy at length and warns readers to discuss messianic prophecy in the psalms carefully. It is often too forced, or the result of “special pleading.” Any righteous character in the psalms reflects the character of Christ. Some messianic texts are considered fulfilled in the New Testament, but what that means is sometimes unclear. His example is in Acts 1:15-16, where Peter cites Psalms 69:25 and 109:8 as fulfilled. But was that prophecy? Or was Judas just the ultimate wicked man described in the Psalm?

But Garrett concedes that David’s experience in the songs often uncannily mirrors Jesus and can be described as “literally fulfilled.” Psalm 22 is his example. Some psalms referred to David kings in such exalted terms that they go beyond David’s actual descendants. This could be hyperbole (or propaganda?), or it could be considered messianic prophecy. Garrett considers Psalm 2 and Psalm 45 examples of oracular psalms, prophecies about David and his kingdom that are clearly eschatological. “Although some psalms are distinctly messianic, it is not correct to speak of psalms as messianic narrative” (62). Garrett cites with approval Ben Witherington’s observation that Isaiah was the “go-to source” for messianic texts, not the Psalms.

Garrett’s commentary on each psalm begins with a brief overview and introduction to the song, along with a fresh translation of the Hebrew text. He transliterates all Hebrew and uses footnotes for textual, lexical, and syntactical details. Readers without specialized Hebrew training should have no trouble following the commentary. He breaks the Psalm into major sections and summarizes his outline in the headings. He then provides a verse-by-verse commentary, making comments on keywords and grammar to illuminate the poetry. These are not too detailed. He provides 577 pages of commentary for 72 psalms, so on average only about eight pages per Psalm. After the commentary, Garrett adds about a page on the psalm’s theology. This might be considered “application” for sermons, but it is not a homiletical guide. Because he rejects a grand narrative for the entire Psalter, he rarely makes inner-Psalter connections, though he does relate the Psalm to the larger narrative of the Bible and Christian theology.

Conclusion. Pillar Commentaries are advertised as “careful, clear and conservative.” Garrett’s commentary on Psalms 1-72 is certainly that. But “conservative” needs careful and clear definition. This commentary is not conservative in the sense that it rejects the academic study of the text, nor does it refuse to interact with voices outside of the conservative bubble. The Pillar series as a whole is conservative because the authors believe the whole Bible is God’s word. Garrett therefore interprets the Psalms in a way that illuminates their complex poetry while also speaking to Christian theology and spirituality. As he says in his preface, Garrett’s goal is to help readers “see how every psalm has a profound meaning for the church” (xv). This commentary will serve pastors and teachers well as they present Israel’s poetry to a modern audience.

 

Other Pillar Commentaries reviewed:

 

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

Book Announcement: 40 Questions about Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha

Some regular readers of Reading Acts have noticed I have slowed down a bit this year. Here’s why: I have been writing a book on the Apocrypha and pseudepigrapha for Kregel’s 40 Questions series. The book is now finished, edited, (nearly) printed, and will be available mid-November. Kregel tells me they will have copies at ETS and SBL in November, so if you are at the conferences, pick up a copy at a good discount. For most of the summer I have been working on a second project for Kregel, the Acts volume in their Through Old Testament Eyes commentary series. I am about three-quarters of the way through the first draft.

40 Questions Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha I am extremely grateful to David deSilva, who wrote the foreword for 40 Questions about Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. I read the first edition of his Introducing the Apocrypha when it came out and reviewed it for Trinity Journal (TJ 27 [2006]: 172-4). The Amazon link below includes all the endorsements, and I am also thankful to the scholars who read an early draft of the book and thought enough of it to write some very kind words.

Here are the links to Amazon and Logos for preorders (so you can beat the Christmas rush).

     Amazon

     Logos Bible Software

I hope you will read this book and benefit from it. One nice thing about the 40 Questions series is that you don’t need to read the whole book cover to cover. Read the chapters that interest you (or answer the questions you want to ask). This first section covers questions about the Old Testament canon and why some Christians accept the Apocrypha while others do not. Then I cover the books of the Apocrypha and selected books of the pseudepigrapha.

What is this book about? As I explain in the introduction, the Apocrypha and pseudepigrapha have fascinated me ever since I found a copy of the Lost Books of the Bible in a bargain bin at a used bookstore. I grew up in a conservative evangelical environment, which barely recognized the Apocrypha, usually dismissing the books as “in the Catholic Bible.” They did not even know books like 1 Enoch or Jubilees existed. Reading these “lost” books felt rebellious! Biblical studies classes in my undergraduate studies introduced me to more of the literature. Professor Dale DeWitt assigned W. D. Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism (Fortress, 1970), which first exposed me to the breadth of literature that could help contextualize the New Testament. As an undergraduate, I recall holding the freshly published volumes of James Charlesworth’s Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (Doubleday, 1983). I knew I wanted to read as much as I could in these books, but that was not possible at the time. In my first PhD seminar, I was told to “read Charlesworth and write a paper on it.” That was the whole assignment. I ended up writing several hundred pages (badly edited) on the value of each of these books for studying early Judaism and the New Testament (and my professor was unimpressed; he told me to never do that again). As I wrote my dissertation (published as Jesus the Bridegroom), I often returned to Second Temple literature. I integrated these books into my research for undergraduate classes on apocalyptic literature and early Judaism. In 2022, I published The Book of Enoch for Beginners. Although the book is very basic (and short), it has sold well, and I continue to receive good feedback on it.

40 Questions about Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha has two goals. First, many Christians consider these books non-canonical and therefore unimportant for understanding the New Testament. Since they are not part of the “real Bible,” they can be safely ignored, or even shunned as dangerous. I want this book to demystify the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha so that this rich literature can be used to understand the context of the New Testament and the development of both early Christianity and early Judaism.

Second, the literature surveyed in this book is fertile ground for conspiracy theories. It is easy to find someone on YouTube talking about esoteric hidden knowledge they have “discovered” in the Enoch literature. I have been asked about “portals” after an uninformed reading of 1 Enoch, or about real-life giants from the Book of the Watchers.  An important goal of this book is to shed light on the Apocrypha and pseudepigrapha, clarifying misconceptions and false information in popular media.

Logos Free Book of the Month: Jeremy M. Kimble, How Can I Get More Out of My Bible Reading?

Logos Free Book

For the second half of September, get a free copy of Logos Free Book of the Month: Jeremy M. Kimble, How Can I Get More Out of My Bible Reading?  for your Logos Library.  Part of the 9Marks series, Kimble explains how the church acts as God’s school and offers biblical answers and practical applications that provide sound and accessible biblical teaching by answering common questions.

The other “almost free” books in this promotion are pastoral and practical books from Crossway.

  • Collin Hansen, Where Is God in a World with So Much Evil? (TGC Hard Questions; Crossway, 2025), $2.99
  • David Powlison, God’s Grace in Your Suffering (Crossway, 2018), $3.99
  • Wayne Grudem, C. John Collins, and Thomas Schreiner, Understanding Scripture: An Overview of the Bible’s Origin, Reliability, and Meaning (Crossway, 2011), $4.99
  • David R. Helm, Expositional Preaching: How We Speak God’s Word Today (9Marks Building Healthy Churches Series; Crossway, 2014), $5.99
  • Andreas J. KĂśstenberger and Michael J. Kruger, The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture’s Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity (Crossway, 2010), $6.99
  • David L. Allen, 1–3 John—Fellowship in God’s Family (Preaching the Word; Crossway, 2013), $8.99
  • Andrew David Naselli, Romans: A Concise Guide to the Greatest Letter Ever Written (Crossway, 2010), $9.99
  • Richard B. Gaffin Jr., In the Fullness of Time: An Introduction to the Biblical Theology of Acts and Paul (Crossway, 2010), $11.99
  • Bruce K. Waltke and Fred G. Zaspel, How to Read and Understand the Psalms (Crossway, 2010), $12.99
  • Douglas Sean O’Donnell, Mark (Expository Reflections on the Gospels, vol. 3; Crossway, 2010), $11.99

Waltke and Fred G. Zaspel, How to Read and Understand the Psalms looks like my first pick, although I will probably get Naselli’s Romans Concise Guide to Romans as well. As always, subscribers save another 5%, so go ahead and buy them all. This Free Book goes away October 15…check back for a new deal then.

In October, Logos celebrates Pastor Appreciation Month. Save up to 50% off hundreds of resources for preaching, sermon prep, pastoral care, and leadership—then stack an extra 15% off orders of $50+ with code PASTORTHANKS through October 25. The 2026 Leader and Preacher Libraries are 25% off all month, and eight HCCP Preacher’s Commentary titles are 50% off October 5–18. You can also save 50% on the highly rated Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (BECNT) series, but only until October 15. Pick individual volumes or grab all 18 volumes. To celebrate their recent merger, you can also save big on Baker and Lexham books in October.

What is new in Logos 53? If you don’t already know, Logos recently moved to a subscription model. Rather than a major upgrade every couple of years, they roll out upgrades about every six weeks. Logos has been integrating more AI into the software for years (smart searches, fuzzy searches, etc.), but over the last year this has evolved into Study Assistant. This is a basic chat-style AI that uses only the books in your library. In Logos 53, when you highlight a few verses, you now have “Explain” and “Ask” in the context menu. The Study Assistant will then explain the text using commentaries from your library. Users can then ask further questions in a typical AI dialogue. The “Ask” option does just that; you ask a question about whatever you highlighted. For example, I highlighted “adverbial acc” in the Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. The Study Assistant gave me the definition from Dictionary of English Grammar for Students of Biblical Languages, plus additional information from Pocket Dictionary for the Study of Biblical Hebrew. It also gave an example from Joshua 7:25 and some examples from the New Testament (citing A.T. Robertson). All of these references include page numbers and links to the book, so I can open directly to the page and read the context of the citation.

I know many people who are concerned about AI in sermon preparation, and rightly so. Study Assistant will not write your sermon for you. I asked it, “Please write a sermon outline for Acts 20:1–6.” The response was, “I appreciate the request, but I’m not able to write sermons, outlines, or other long-form creative content. This falls outside my role as a study assistant.” Study Assistant is an amped up search engine that can do some amazing things, but it will not replace the Holy Spirit for pastors trying to write a sermon.

Should you subscribe to Logos? Some people just hate subscriptions. That’s OK. But if you’re the type to upgrade Logos every two years, you’d pay the same amount as you would for the subscription. I personally like the idea of getting smaller upgrades every six weeks rather than a massive dump of features every few years. I think I can use the newer features better when I get one or two at a time. I also think this system lets Logos be more flexible about what they choose to upgrade.

This Logos Free Book of the Month promotion runs through October 15. A new free book will be available on October 15 at 9:00 a.m. PST. As always, you can use the (free) basic edition or the inexpensive Fundamentals collection to access these free and discounted books. All the links are Logos Affiliate links. If you plan to buy Logos books, use this link to support Reading Acts.

Andreas J. KĂśstenberger, Introducing Jesus: The Fourfold Gospel

KÜstenberger, Andreas J. Introducing Jesus: The Fourfold Gospel. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel Academic, 2026. 248 pp. Pb. $19.99   Link to Kregel Academic  

Andreas Köstenberger is well known for his work on the Gospel of John, including A Theology of John’s Gospel and Letters (Zondervan, 2009) and his new two-volume commentary in the Evangelical Exegetical Commentary series (Logos, 2026). He served as the editor of the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society for twenty-two years. This new book is an introductory textbook on Jesus and the Gospels, condensing his Jesus of the Gospels: An Introduction (Kregel, 2020).

Andreas KĂśstenberger, Introducing Jesus

KĂśstenberger aims to provide an accessible textbook for high school and college students, as well as interested laypeople. His five main goals have not changed (p. 19-20), nor have his theological assumptions. But since this book is a primer on the Gospels, Introducing Jesus omits many technical details from his larger book. For example, although this book mentions a few key names for historical Jesus studies, the larger textbook has much more detail on the history of interpretation. The original text has many richly detailed footnotes; this primer has none. But this is not a problem since the target audience of the two books is quite different. Do college students ever look at footnotes? KĂśstenberger rarely addresses Synoptic parallels, and he does not cover source, form, or redaction criticism. But given the goals of Introducing Jesus, these critical methods are not important.

After an introductory chapter, Köstenberger covers each of the four gospels in four chapters (except for Mark, which receives only two chapters). There is no discussion of authorship or origins of the gospels, although there is a brief one- or two-page introduction before each new unit of the book that introduces the author, the distinctive contributions of each gospel, and some major emphases. Köstenberger then provides a running commentary for each gospel. In terms of depth, his comments are more than one might encounter in a good study Bible. He is brief and to the point (again, something that will appeal to students, even if that frustrates professors). Chapters begin with a chart outlining the section of the gospel under consideration, and occasional charts appear throughout the book. For example, one chart summarizes Jesus’s resurrection appearances (p. 196-97). Each chapter ends with a  few discussion questions and a short devotional reading based on the chapter’s content.

KĂśstenberger provides some teaching resources on his website, Biblical Foundations, including discussion questions, quizzes, exams (with a key for teachers), devotional reflections, and visual charts. The discussion questions match those at the end of each chapter in the book. The same applies to the devotional reflections. Under visual charts, there is a single-page PDF outlining each gospel. Each chapter includes a short, objective five-question quiz, but the four unit exams contain three essay questions each (and the final has two open-ended questions). I noticed that anyone could download the answer key. Perhaps changing this file to a password-protected PDF is a good idea.

Conclusion. Köstenberger’s Introducing Jesus certainly achieves its goal of condensing his larger, more academic textbook for use in lower-level classrooms. In this, the book is similar to Mark Strauss’s Introducing Jesus (Zondervan 2018), which condenses his Four Portraits, One Jesus (Second edition, Zondervan, 2020). By providing a brief running commentary for each gospel, Köstenberger’s book will be a valuable resource for laypeople working their way through the first four books of the New Testament.

 

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