Originally a doctoral thesis, this is the third revision of a valuable work which should be read by more people than merely the original university examiners. It has the rigor of a thesis, but has been so well rewritten that it is readable, informative, and useful to students and pastors. The book aims to defend the value of the OT by surveying and critiquing approaches to the relationships between OT and NT. There are four sections to the book: (1) a history of biblical interpretation from the patristic era to the modern period is surveyed; (2) several modern approaches are detailed; (3) some key themes used to relate the Testaments are explored; AND (4) conclusions are drawn relating to doctrine and church.

The history of biblical interpretation is necessarily brief in its sweep. However, the most important points are made. Calvin gets less than a page, but the salient insight that he focused on the unity of the Testaments more than Luther is well made (pp. 39–40). More detail is given of modern approaches. This is helpful as these often lie behind the more destructive approaches to the Bible which still reign in many places of theological scholarship. The updating of the book permitted a new section on the 1990s, which highlights the influences of postmodernism, theological readings, and globalization (pp. 57–59). The whirlwind tour of biblical interpretation is helpful in sensitising us to possibilities—we so often plod along in our studies, assuming that the way we interpret the Bible is the way all sensible people have always read it.

The second part outlines four modern approaches to the relationship between the Testaments: the NT is the essential Bible; both Testaments are equally Scripture; the OT is the essential Bible; the two Testaments are one salvation history. Students will find this section invaluable in helping them to trace the origins of various texts they may have to study. Ministers and interested lay people will appreciate afresh the sheer complexity of the issue of relating the OT and NT. Weighing options and seeing the good intentions behind views we ultimately reject may lead to useful insights. Modern theologians such as Pannenberg, Moltmannn, and Cullmann are critiqued with clarity and deftness.

The third section of the book is the part which will be most consistent with the beliefs of evangelicals; the previous sections having alerted them to earlier and alternative views. This third section considers four ways in which Christians have attempted to articulate the development of the Bible’s narrative: (1) typology, (2) promise/fulfilment, (3) continuity/discontinuity; and (4) covenant. Again, it is surely a good thing to have it impressed upon us that expressing the relationship between the Testaments is no simple matter. The Lutheran who strongly emphasizes discontinuity and distinguishes law from gospel needs to wrestle with the underlying unity of God’s purposes. The Reformed theologian who sees law and gospel as a unity may need to be unsettled by the NT’s contrasting of new and old covenants. The literalist may do well to reflect on the typology used in Scripture and what it suggests about God’s use of language. The richness of Scripture is a cause for rejoicing and motivation to read it afresh. As the author observes, “The diversities within the Bible tend to be ignored or harmonised in the process of maintaining traditional beliefs. Catholics and Lutherans, Puritans and Pentecostals, conservatives and liberals, all have their favourite parts of the Bible (canon within the canon)” (p. 233).

David Baker has produced a masterful work, offering a pathway through what may well claim to be the most complex theological issue revealed to us by God, the relationship between the OT and NT. Every time we read the Bible, every time we preach, every time we make a statement about God’s character, we implicitly build upon a view of the relationship between the Testaments. This book will help us build on better informed foundations and is highly recommended. When it was submitted as a thesis in 1975, it was a solid academic survey. Now in its third updated revision it is a goldmine of theological insight which has matured over thirty-five years of reflection.