Book Review: Old Testament Introduction – Back to Basics
By John Hooper
An extended review of OLD TESTAMENT INTRODUCTION – Back to Basics by Michael P. V. Barrett. Reformation Heritage Books, 2025; 688 pages, hardback. ISBN 979-8-88686-186-0
“Bible Introduction” does not sound like an academic specialty but it is very much so, taught in theological seminaries as a distinct foundational subject within a Department of Biblical Studies. It is also the subject of scholarly text books. Some readers may be familiar with the Old Testament Introductions of E. J. Young (1949, revised in 1964) and R. K. Harrison (1969). Many others have been published over the years, from both conservative and liberal or critical perspectives. Another related genre is the “Theological Introduction,” of which there are several covering the Old Testament. When reading an Introduction it needs to be borne in mind that it is just that, an introduction, so cannot be expected to say all that could be said, but a good one will steer the reader in the right direction and point to other reliable but more expansive sources.
The author and his book
The present volume is written by the Academic Dean and Professor of Old Testament at the Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary in Grand Rapids, but it should not be assumed from this that the book is only suitable for ministers and seminary students. Its back-to-basics approach means that there is much to inform, interest and indeed fascinate the general Christian reader who wants to learn more about the Old Testament. It is not a heavy read.
Professor Barrett has drawn on his thirty years of experience in teaching Old Testament in conservative evangelical and Reformed seminaries to produce an attractive and readable book of high quality. He writes well, having a great ability to get to the crux of a matter quickly and express it with clarity. The text is supplemented with colour illustrations, photographs, maps (though some of these are rather small), tables, text boxes, and footnotes, together with excursuses that delve further into some of the more difficult and controversial questions that the Old Testament raises. These include inciteful studies on “The Old Testament’s Theology of Life after Death” (pp. 352-361) and “The Day of the Lord” (pp. 440-442). At the rear of the book are a glossary of terms, a bibliography, and Scripture and subject indices. Scripture quotations are either the author’s own translation from the original languages or are taken from the Authorised Version. It is reassuring that Barrett’s high view of Scripture extends beyond its divine inspiration to include its providential preservation (e.g. pp. 384, 525).
Barrett introduces us to his book with a few encouraging words about himself: “I am an old-school evangelical conservative,” and that soon becomes clear as he makes no concessions to higher critical, evolutionary or liberal ideas. A few quotes will illustrate this:
- God’s redemptive plan progresses through time and history; therefore, if the history is not trustworthy, the gospel message is reduced to tradition and religious folklore. This is why Bible believers must affirm and defend the Mosaic authorship and the historicity of all the events detailed in the Pentateuch. (pp. 83-4)
- The Bible is the touchstone of truth. Since fossils are records of death, they could not have existed before Adam. Since all fossils are post-Adam, there is no need for epochs of time to account for their existence. If there is no need for long ages of time, there is no reason to reject the six literal consecutive days of the Genesis narrative. (p. 106)
- The first thing to establish is that Job was a real historical character, not a mythical or even legendary fabrication. (p. 344)
- The straightforward reading of Jonah and the theological issues that are at stake demand the literal, historical interpretation. (p. 463)
- The prophet Isaiah is the sole author of the book that bears his name. (p. 489)
- Daniel is the sole author of the book that bears his name. (p. 551)
No concessions
Barrett’s consistent adherence to the letter of Scripture is commendable, and rare in these days to the point that even when theologians profess to be evangelical and Reformed we can make no assumptions. In the Oct-Dec 1998 issue of the Bible League Quarterly the editor published an extended review of An Introduction to the Old Testament by Raymond B. Dillard and Tremper Longman III, first published in 19941. At that time both authors were professors of Old Testament studies at Westminster Theological Seminary, and yet their book demonstrates an alarming tendency to make concessions to theological liberals2. There is nothing of that in Barrett. Again and again, he demonstrates how scholarship, not to mention Scripture itself, undermines the arguments of the critics.
But do not assume that Barrett’s book has no surprises for us, or that every conservative will agree with him on every issue. For example, concerning Job, Barrett writes, “It is best to date the book to the time of Solomon and written by Solomon himself” (p. 341). That took me by surprise, especially as the only evidence he provides to support it is the rather weak one of literary style. On the basis of internal evidence, most conservatives would date the book very early, back to patriarchal times, so it would be extraordinary for it not to be composed until hundreds of years later. While much has been written on the book’s human authorship, all we can say with certainty is that the Holy Spirit – who is the real Author – has not seen fit to tell us. Can we not be content with that?
I suspect that another area of difference will be Barrett’s preference for Yahweh over Jehovah, as the pronunciation of God’s personal name. He uses Yahweh throughout the book, which I found irritating3.
Old school
Of all the sources Barrett references and lists under “Works Cited” (pp. 613-630) not many are contemporary, but that does not embarrass him. He comments, “I suppose some in the academy would frown on referring to these dated sources, but I’m old school” (p. xv). “When it comes to issues of orthodoxy, novelty is not a virtue” (p. 23). He summarises his governing presupposition like this:
… it will be the unwavering conviction governing this entire volume that the Bible is the word of God. Because it is the word of God, whatever the Bible says is true. It is not what ancient people thought; it is what God has revealed. That is my closed-minded presupposition about the Bible. I confess that even before I open a page, I believe that what I will read on that page will be reliably accurate and authoritative regardless of any notions to the contrary. (p. xviii)
This is the presupposition of faith and it gives us confidence to read on.
Theological grid
As for the book’s structure, the first 75 pages are taken up with “General Introduction” to the Old Testament, covering subjects such as the canon, text, and chronology of the Old Testament. The remaining 526 pages are devoted to “Special Introduction,” focussing on each one of the Old Testament books in turn. Barrett deals with them in three groups: historical, poetic and wisdom, and the prophetic. The core facts he gives us of each book include its name, authorship, date, theme, purpose, and outline, together with its setting in the world and in the canon.
Crucially, one of Barrett’s major objectives is “to set each Old Testament book within the progression of God’s redemptive message.” He comments, “My theological grid, framed by Reformed and covenant theology, accounts for the sections addressing a book’s contribution to redemptive revelation” (p. 604). These sections are a distinctive and valuable feature, revealing something of the unity of the Old Testament and acting as the “glue” which holds the whole book together. Barrett’s grid is a good one, but more attention to its covenantal aspect would have given a better sense of the organic structure of the Old Testament.
Interpretation
The sections focussing on “Special Problems of Interpretation” are important and cover many areas of difficulty, including challenges in dating the exodus, the chronology of the judges, and the historicity of the book of Esther. In each case helpful conservative arguments are put forward in answer to the claims of liberal critics, and all with commendable clarity. Where conservatives themselves are divided, on such issues as the interpretation of the Song of Solomon and the marriage of Hosea, Barrett summarises the different views fairly, pointing out their respective strengths and weaknesses before settling on the one he believes to be most consistent with divine revelation.
In a book that is as good as this one, what we might perceive as the few weaknesses stand out all the more starkly. The danger is that by now drawing attention to those drawbacks I give them greater prominence than they deserve. One of these is the tendency to be a little uneven at times. For example, the book of Ecclesiastes is given more space than the prophecy of Isaiah. This is not to say that the chapter on Isaiah is lacking – Barrett is skilled in providing concise and excellent overviews of the books of Scripture – but Ecclesiastes is clearly a book on which he has decided, and possibly distinctive, convictions. He says of it, “There is hardly another book of the Bible more maligned, misunderstood, and ignored” (p. 403).
As a further example of unevenness, Jephthah’s vow (Judges 11) is dealt with at length while the witch at Endor (1 Samuel 28) is given only passing mention in a footnote. Barrett admits, “The details of this incident are difficult to interpret,” and the only clue he gives us as to his own thoughts is a quote from J. Barton Payne’s Theology of the Old Testament, that it was actually Samuel who appeared (p. 359).
I was surprised to read that since Ezekiel was in Babylon, “hundreds of miles away from the temple,” he was “incapable of performing priestly duties” (p. 538). The matter is not that simple as by now the glory of the Lord Himself had left the temple (Ezekiel 9:3; 10:4, 18-19; 11:22-23), and God’s message concerning the captives was, “I will be to them as a little sanctuary in the countries where they shall come” (11:16). God cannot be confined to a building. Patrick Fairbairn writes, “it is impossible not to see how the Lord was preparing the way for the better times of the gospel, when the material temple should pass away, and the spiritual alone should rise into view.4” Sadly, Barrett seems to have missed this.
The Psalms
The chapter that truly disappointed me is the one on the Psalms, which Barrett sees as a “how-to” book of worship, providing patterns for worship today (pp. 364-365). That is weak, and in view of the prevailing contemporary worship scene, could be easily misunderstood. It is a missed opportunity to say something about the place the psalms themselves occupy in the worship of God, especially in view of Ephesians 5:19-20 and Colossians 3:16.
Furthermore, Barrett devotes an excursus to “Identification of Messianic Psalms” (pp. 379-382) but he gives no consideration to the possibility that Christ is in all the psalms. Much more compelling is Christopher Ash’s conviction that “Jesus Christ is the subject and object of the Psalms, that His majestic divine-human person is woven into the warp and woof of the Psalter, and that He is the preeminent singer of Psalms, the focus of the Psalter, and the one without whom the Psalms cannot be understood aright.5” This Christocentric approach is the historic – certainly pre-1700 – understanding of the Psalter and it is disappointing that Barrett does not build on that older hermeneutic.
But I must emphasise again that these few weaknesses are in the context of a large book that is overwhelmingly wholesome. I must draw to a close on a much more positive note.
Sacred versus secular
Barrett’s comments on the differences between sacred and secular history are very much to the point. He notes that points of disagreement between the two are seen by some critics as evidence of mistakes in the Bible. Secular historians will always defend the veracity of their secular history above the Biblical, but Barrett contends fearlessly for the supremacy of Scripture:
To write a truly significant history requires omniscience and a pure motive. Only God knows everything and has the infinitely holy perspective to select from the past what is really important. In a very real sense, the Bible is the only truly significant and infallibly accurate history ever written. So of all the things that happened in the world from the fourteenth to the fifth centuries BC, the Historical Books [of the Bible] record the most important things to know and to believe. (pp. 212-213)
Sacred and political
Barrett is also at pains to show us just how close the relationship is between sacred history and political. While Jeroboam and his successors on the thrones of Israel and Judah were ripening themselves for coming destruction, by way of their idolatry, in the wider geopolitical sphere God was at work preparing the nations as His instruments of judgment. But above it all there is a higher purpose still. Barrett writes,
The focus on sins and failures serves an important redemptive function by highlighting the human condition that has no remedy apart from the King who was coming in fulfilment of God’s covenant promise. The worst of kings, whether from Judah or from Israel, contributed to messianic theology and expectation. Understanding the need for Christ is a crucial component of understanding the gospel. (p. 306)
In their very different ways both wicked Ahab and godly Hezekiah pointed the humble, believing Israelite to the coming King Jesus.
Comparisons
How does Barrett’s Introduction compare with others? I have mentioned those of Harrison and Young which, while probably thought of as being rather dated, continue to be valuable scholarly works ideally suited to the seminary and the minister’s study. In terms of both the breadth and depth of material they are not really open to comparison. Both are much more technical than Barrett and while E. J. Young’s work is shorter than Barrett’s, his approach is more analytical. Harrison’s, on the other hand, is over twice the size and more comprehensive as it engages extensively with the theories of Julius Wellhausen and other critical/liberal scholars. It is a masterly work.
A book that tends to be favourably cited by Barrett is Gleason L. Archer’s A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, though Barrett’s work differs from it significantly in some places. Archer’s Survey was first published in 1964 by Moody Press, with revised editions coming out in 1974 and 1994. Nowadays it is only available second hand and can be hard to come by in the UK. Archer is considered a conservative but he is one who sees the creation days of Genesis 1 as “[o]bviously … intended to represent stages of unspecified length, not literal twenty-four-hour days” (p. 201). “Conservative” is a commonly used label but it may not be telling us all that we need to know.
Another work to be considered, though it calls itself an overview rather than an introduction, is Gareth Crossley’s The Old Testament Explained and Applied. Now in its second edition (2016), it remains in print and is easy to obtain. Crossley spends very little time on general introduction and devotes over 750 pages to the individual Old Testament books. He includes some of the subject matter one would expect to find in an Old Testament Introduction, but his chief purpose is to tell us the meaning and message of each book in relation to Christ and His church, with application to the believer and New Testament churches. Thus, it is a different kind of book from the others.
Conclusion
Barrett’s Introduction is not an alternative to the older works of Young and Harrison, especially when it comes to technical detail. Its strengths are its indisputable conservatism, its back-to-basics plain-speaking, and its usefulness for the layperson as well as for theological students and ministers. Apart from the occasional idiosyncrasy, Barrett is a safe pair of hands. I have enjoyed reading his book and am more than happy to commend it to readers of the Quarterly.
Footnotes
- 1994 was also the year when Peter Enns joined the faculty as a professor of Old Testament. ↩︎
- Dillard and Longman’s book is still in print, now in its second edition. ↩︎
- A thorough vindication of ‘Jehovah’ can be found at https://reformedmasora.substack.com/p/the-masoretic-pointing-of-gods-name. ↩︎
- Patrick Fairbairn, Commentary on Ezekiel, (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, [1851], 1989), p. 121. ↩︎
- Christopher Ash, The Psalms: A Christ-Centred Commentary, Vol. 1 (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2024), p. xiv. ↩︎