Introduction

Michael Heiser’s The Unseen Realm represents an ambitious and learned attempt to argue that a coherent “divine council” worldview underlies and organizes the entire biblical narrative, from Genesis to Revelation, and that recovery of this worldview is the key to unlocking a host of exegetical puzzles that have long troubled readers of Scripture. The book has been warmly received in many evangelical circles, praised for its originality, its command of Ancient Near Eastern (ANE) background material, and its willingness to engage texts that more cautious interpreters have left undisturbed.

The present paper does not dispute the genuine value of Heiser’s ANE scholarship, nor does it deny that divine council imagery is present in the Old Testament and that this imagery has been underexplored in much popular biblical theology. What it disputes is the methodological and hermeneutical framework within which Heiser deploys this material—and, most fundamentally, the textual foundation upon which the entire project rests. The argument will proceed across four areas of critique, concluding with a summary assessment of the project’s overall viability as a work of biblical theology.

The Text-Critical Foundation: Deut 32:8 and the Isolation of the Qumran Reading

The entire edifice of Heiser’s argument rests, by his own account, on a single textual judgment: that Deuteronomy 32:8 originally read “sons of God” (bene elohim) rather than the Masoretic Text’s “sons of Israel.” This reading is attested in a Dead Sea Scrolls fragment (4QDeut^j) and has been preferred by a number of critical scholars on the grounds of the standard text-critical principles of lectio difficilior and the general antiquity of some Qumran textual traditions. Heiser treats this preference as effectively settled, and proceeds to erect upon it a comprehensive theology of the divine council, the allotment of the nations, and the cosmic geography of redemptive history.

The first and most fundamental problem with this procedure is one that Heiser consistently minimizes: the Qumran reading is attested in effectively one manuscript, and it left no discernible trace in the broader transmission history of either the Old Testament or the Greek and Aramaic versional traditions as received by the church and synagogue. The manuscript situation deserves to be stated plainly.

The Masoretic Text, representing the mainstream of Jewish scribal tradition across many centuries and geographic locations, reads “sons of Israel.” The Samaritan Pentateuch, an independent textual tradition, likewise reads “sons of Israel.” The Targums (the Aramaic paraphrastic translations used in synagogue worship) follow the Masoretic reading. The Peshitta, the ancient Syriac translation, follows it as well. The Septuagint reads “angels of God” (angelon theou)—which Heiser treats as corroborating his reading, but which in fact represents a distinct interpretive tradition that domesticates the phrase into angelology rather than confirming a divine council framework, and which itself seems to reflect theological interpretation of a Hebrew Vorlage rather than a variant text. Against all of this, the “sons of God” reading is present in one fragmentary manuscript from one sectarian community[1] … and a community that itself preserved manuscripts of the Book of Enoch and the Book of Jubilees. This may thus be more indicative of this community’s readings than of anything wider among Jews of the second Temple period.

This manuscript isolation is not a minor footnote. It is a datum of the first importance that cuts directly against the theological weight Heiser places on the reading. If the bene elohim text were the original reading[2], and if the divine council worldview it encodes were as foundational to Israel’s theological self-understanding as Heiser claims, one would expect at minimum some broader manuscript tradition to have preserved it. The virtual absence of the reading from the broad channels of textual transmission (Jewish, Samaritan, and Christian) demands explanation that Heiser does not provide.

The character of the Qumran community sharpens this concern considerably. The Dead Sea Scrolls community was not a neutral repository of pristine pre-Masoretic texts. It was a sectarian movement with well-documented theological distinctives: a highly developed angelology, a cosmic dualism between the sons of light and the sons of darkness, an elaborate hierarchy of spiritual beings, and an intense interest in precisely the divine council and territorial spirit traditions upon which Heiser’s framework depends. The Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, the War Scroll, and 11QMelchizedek all attest to a community that was deeply invested in elaborating the kind of cosmic hierarchy that the bene elohim reading of Deuteronomy 32:8 supports. The possibility (which Heiser does not adequately entertain) is that the Qumran reading reflects a theologically motivated scribal adjustment congenial to the community’s own cosmological commitments, rather than the preservation of a more original text.

There is, finally, a theological dimension to the manuscript question that goes beyond text criticism proper. The doctrine of providence as applied to the transmission of Scripture (held in varying forms across Jewish, Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant traditions) carries the implication that the text God preserved and the communities of faith received is the text that bears canonical authority for those communities. A reading preserved in one manuscript of a sectarian movement, unattested in the broad streams of Jewish and Christian canonical transmission, cannot responsibly serve as the fulcrum of a comprehensive biblical theology without extensive argument about why providential guidance apparently suppressed the “true” reading across every other stream of textual tradition. Heiser provides no such argument. He offers a text-critical judgment and then proceeds as though a theological conclusion has been established. It has not.

The Hermeneutical Problem: Poetic, Apocalyptic, and Visionary Texts as Governing Framework

Even granting Heiser’s preferred textual reading of Deuteronomy 32:8, a second and equally serious problem emerges at the level of hermeneutical method. The texts that form the backbone of Heiser’s divine council argument are, almost without exception, drawn from the genres least suited to serve as the governing framework for systematic biblical theology: poetry (Deut 32, Ps 82; 89; 110), prophetic taunt and lament (Isa 14; Ezek 28), apocalyptic vision (Dan 10), and the elevated cosmic poetry of the wisdom tradition. Heiser’s interpretive procedure is to read these texts as straightforward cosmological claims and then to use them as the framework within which plainer narrative and didactic texts are read.

Image: Adrien Olichon

This inverts the most basic principle of classical biblical hermeneutics. From the patristic period through the Reformation and into the modern era, the consistent counsel of interpreters across traditions has been that clear, didactic, and narrative texts govern the interpretation of figurative, poetic, and apocalyptic ones—not the reverse. The rationale is straightforward: poetic and visionary texts are more susceptible to a wide range of interpretation, more embedded in specific literary conventions and rhetorical purposes, and more likely to employ figurative or hyperbolic language that is not intended as literal cosmological description. None of this is to suggest that such texts may not nor should not be allowed to say whatever they say as informing a biblical theology of anything. The question is what they are actually saying … as this cannot be assumed on any proposed straightforward reading given the nature of such texts for interpretation.

Psalm 82 illustrates the problem acutely. The Psalm depicts a scene in which God stands in a divine assembly and judges the “gods” (elohim) for their corrupt exercise of justice, pronouncing their mortality. Heiser reads this as a straightforward account of a divine council of genuinely supernatural personal beings who have been entrusted with the governance of the nations and have failed in that trust. But the genre of the text—what appears to be a judicial Psalm employing the language and imagery of the divine court—does not straightforwardly license this reading. The “gods” of Psalm 82 can plausibly be read as human rulers employing the honorific language of ancient Near Eastern kingship ideology, as the Johannine Jesus himself suggests when citing this very psalm in John 10:34-35. They can be read as a rhetorical device for the Psalmist’s polemic against injustice, using the language of divine council mythology precisely to subvert it. Heiser dismisses these alternatives too quickly and without adequate engagement with the strongest advocates of alternative readings.

Daniel 10, with its references to the “prince of Persia” and the “prince of Greece,” presents perhaps the starkest genre problem. The passage is embedded in a vision narrative—a form that the biblical tradition itself consistently marks as requiring interpretation (“wisdom”) and as not straightforwardly representing literal cosmological states of affairs. To project the imagery of Daniel’s vision into a systematic theology of territorial spirits and their governance of nations is to make a genre error of the first order. It treats as cosmological description what the text presents as visionary symbol. This is not to suggest that our attempts at genre identification rule out his reading, but he does not seem to take such into account as part of his whole approach to what he is claiming is the best reading of these texts.

The Second Temple Problem: Extra-Canonical Literature as Exegetical Authority

The third major structural flaw in Heiser’s project concerns his use of Second Temple Jewish literature. He makes extensive use of 1 Enoch (particularly the Book of the Watchers), Jubilees, the Dead Sea Scrolls (especially the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, the War Scroll, and 11QMelchizedek), and related texts as though their witness clarifies and confirms the meaning of the canonical Old Testament texts. This procedure is never adequately defended at the methodological level, and when examined carefully it proves to be hermeneutically incoherent.

There are two defensible uses of Second Temple literature in biblical interpretation. It may be used as evidence of how canonical texts were received and elaborated in a particular historical period, that is, as reception history. And it may be used as background for illuminating the conceptual world assumed by the New Testament authors, since those authors wrote within a Second Temple context. What it cannot responsibly be used for (without explicit methodological justification) is as an exegetical key that unlocks what the Old Testament texts were always and originally saying. Heiser consistently uses the literature for this third, illegitimate purpose, conflating reception history with authorial intention.

The historical diversity of Second Temple Judaism compounds this problem. Heiser frequently appeals to “Second Temple Judaism” as though it constitutes a coherent tradition that uniformly elaborates the divine council worldview. This is historically untenable. The angelology of 1 Enoch differs markedly from that of the Qumran community (despite the presence of this collection among the Qumran findings), which differs from Philo’s Hellenized tradition, which differs from the Sadducees who rejected the elaborated angel tradition altogether, which differs from the emerging rabbinic tradition’s deep ambivalence about angelological speculation. When Heiser appeals to Second Temple Judaism as confirming his reading, he is selecting the streams of that tradition that confirm his thesis and marginalizing the ones that complicate or contradict it.

The case of 1 Enoch is particularly instructive. Heiser leans heavily on the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36) as elaborating and confirming the divine council and fallen elohim framework he finds in Genesis 6 and Deuteronomy 32. But 1 Enoch is not straightforward theological exposition of earlier Scripture. It is a sophisticated rewriting of tradition for specific apocalyptic and sectarian purposes. The Enochic literature functioned, in significant measure, as a rival to the emerging Mosaic Torah-centered Judaism of the Second Temple period, offering an alternative cosmology, an alternative calendar, and alternative priestly claims rooted in the figure of Enoch rather than Moses. To use this literature as a transparent window into what the Mosaic texts originally meant is therefore not merely chronologically problematic, it imports a theologically tendentious document with its own agenda as a neutral explanatory key.

The treatment of 11QMelchizedek illustrates the problem from a different angle. Heiser uses this Qumran pesher to connect Psalm 82, the Melchizedek tradition, and New Testament Christology within a divine council framework, arguing that Jesus’s claims are intelligible only against this background. But a pesher is, by definition, a community-specific interpretation produced for sectarian purposes. Its use of Psalm 82 tells us how the Qumran community read that Psalm in the context of their own eschatological expectations; it tells us nothing about what the Psalm originally meant, and it cannot be assumed to represent the conceptual background of the author of Hebrews or the Johannine Jesus. Heiser slides between these distinct questions with insufficient care.

Theological Difficulties: Divine Council, National Allotment, and the Limits of Sovereignty

Beyond the textual and hermeneutical problems, Heiser’s project generates a cluster of unresolved theological difficulties that his disclaimers cannot fully neutralize.

Heiser is careful throughout to insist that he is not arguing for polytheism: the elohim of the divine council are, on his account, ontologically subordinate to Yahweh, dependent beings rather than independent deities. But this disclaimer does not resolve the theological problem. If the elohim are genuinely supernatural personal beings with delegated authority over the nations, then they are morally responsible agents, and the question of their moral responsibility creates difficulties his framework never adequately addresses. If they sin in the exercise of their delegated authority (as Psalm 82 apparently implies), does their sin operate independently of human sin? Do they stand in need of redemption? Are they objects of Christ’s atoning work? Heiser gestures at some of these questions in connection with his reading of Colossians 1 and Ephesians 6, but the systematic implications remain underdeveloped, and in several places the framework edges uncomfortably close to a soft polytheism that the theological disclaimers cannot fully contain.

The “allotment of the nations” thesis presents the most acute theological difficulty. Heiser argues, on the basis of his reading of Deuteronomy 32:8-9 and Genesis 11, that Yahweh “disinherited the nations” at Babel and handed them over to the governance of subordinate divine beings: that there is a period in redemptive history when entire peoples were, in some meaningful sense, outside Yahweh’s direct providential governance, awaiting reclamation through the mission inaugurated with Abraham.

Heiser’s framework requires a far more limited and intermittent divine sovereignty than the canonical prophets seem to allow. He does not sufficiently reckon with the weight of this counterevidence, tending to treat the texts that fit his framework as primary and those that resist it as requiring explanation within it, rather than the reverse.

The Comparative Method and Its Limits

One of the genuine strengths of Heiser’s work is his command of Ancient Near Eastern textual and iconographic material—the Ugaritic texts, the mythology of El and Baal, the traditions of the bene el, the Rephaim, and the assembly of the gods. This material is genuinely illuminating as background for understanding the conceptual world in which the biblical texts were written and against which they were at least in part composed.

The Absence of Engagement with the Strongest Counter-Readings

A final concern bears mention. For a work of the theological ambition of The Unseen Realm (and Heiser’s many other books, podcasts, blogs, articles, etc), the engagement with counterarguments is surprisingly thin (though to be fair he cites himself extensively for where he deals in far greater detail on given topics). The classic monotheistic and monolatrous readings of the relevant texts are largely bypassed in favor of engagement with popular-level evangelical assumptions in order to reorder this according to his revisioned hermeneutic. Heiser tends to set up the weakest available alternative readings and demonstrate their inadequacy, rather than engaging the most sophisticated defenders of positions contrary to his own.

A more rigorous engagement would include, for example, Meredith Kline’s interpretation of divine council imagery as theophanic and juridical rather than referring to an ontological hierarchy of supernatural beings; the prolonged pointed readings countering many of Heiser’s approach in John Walton and J. Harvey Walton’s Demons and Spirits in Biblical Theology; John Goldingay’s careful and nuanced treatment of the same texts in his Old Testament Theology; and the extensive tradition of interpretation that reads Psalm 82 as addressed to human rulers employing the honorific language of ancient Near Eastern kingship. These are not easily dismissed readings, and their absence from serious engagement in The Unseen Realm represents a significant gap in the project’s scholarly apparatus. Though I must submit that in the end, he did not write this book for scholars, but for lay readers who themselves would feel overwhelmed by the technical comments (that fall short for those who know the primary and secondary literature as incomplete at best).

Conclusion

The case against the hermeneutical and textual foundations of The Unseen Realm can now be stated in summary form. The project rests, at its base, on a single contested text-critical judgment (the preference for the bene elohim reading of Deuteronomy 32:8) whose manuscript support reduces, upon examination, to one fragmentary scroll from one sectarian community whose own theological commitments were directly aligned with the reading’s implications. The broader tradition of textual transmission, Jewish and Christian, Masoretic, Samaritan, and versional, does not attest this reading. The theological weight Heiser places upon it is entirely disproportionate to the manuscript evidence that supports it.

Upon this narrow textual foundation, Heiser erects an interpretive framework drawn primarily from the genres least suited to serve as governing theological authorities for clearest theological articulation: the imagery of poetic, apocalyptic, and visionary texts, read in a maximally literal cosmological key against the controlling testimony of the narrative and didactic witness of Scripture. The hermeneutical procedure inverts the classical principle that the clear governs the obscure. One does not even have to commit to such an idea to still understand that such texts remain unclear and thus demand far more from their readers to hear well.

This framework is then confirmed and elaborated by appeal to Second Temple Jewish literature (primarily from the Enochic tradition and the Qumran community) which is treated as an exegetical authority for the meaning of canonical texts rather than as reception-historical evidence of how those texts were later read in particular sectarian contexts. The canonical text is effectively governed from both directions by extra-canonical literature with its own theological agendas.

The theological results compound these problems. The allotment of the nations thesis requires a limitation of divine sovereignty that sits in severe tension with the prophetic and apostolic witness. The divine council hierarchy raises unresolved questions about the nature, moral responsibility, and ultimate destiny of its members that Heiser’s disclaimers about ontological subordination do not seem to adequately resolve.

None of this is to deny the genuine value of Heiser’s ANE scholarship, the legitimacy of attending to divine council imagery in the Old Testament, or the interest and stimulation his readings generate. The Unseen Realm is a work that rewards serious engagement, and it has helpfully pushed readers toward texts and backgrounds that deserve more attention than they typically receive in popular biblical theology. However, it has also fed the “weird” or “strange” (something which Heiser specifically says are the texts that matter most).

But as a hermeneutical and theological project (as a claimed key to the whole of Scripture) it rests on foundations that will not bear the weight placed upon them. A single isolated Qumran manuscript supplies the preferred text; a body of sectarian Second Temple literature supplies the interpretive framework; a collection of poetic and apocalyptic texts, read against classical hermeneutical priorities, supplies the canonical evidence; and the whole is presented as recovering what the mainstream traditions of both Israel and the church somehow failed to transmit. That pattern, taken as a whole, should give any careful reader serious pause and perhaps even a turn toward the seen realm that is more clearly present in the texts.

PR

Notes

[1] By saying “community” I am not indicating by such that this was only a singular group or even that the nature of the group/s involved in the texts of the Judean Desert are to all be identified only with some narrow vision of such. Yet, in common speaking those who were responsible for the community texts seem likely to have also been those responsible for texts like 4QDeut^j and 1QEnGiants^ab, for example.

[2] The explanation is that bene el or bene elim is the proposed Vorlage that was altered to bene yisrael in the MT, but prolongated to bene elohim in 4QDeut^j.

Select Works Consulted

Collins, John J. The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016.

Goldingay, John. Old Testament Theology. 3 vols. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2003–2009.

Heiser, Michael S. The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible. Bellingham: Lexham Press, 2015.

Kline, Meredith G. Images of the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980.

Nickelsburg, George W. E. 1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch. 2 vols. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001–2012.

Sanders, James A. Torah and Canon. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972.

Tov, Emanuel. Textual Criticism of the Old Testament. 3rd ed. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2012.

VanderKam, Javames C. The Dead Sea Scrolls Today. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010.

Waltke, Bruce K. An Old Testament Theology: An Exegetical, Canonical, and Thematic Approach. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007.

Walton, John H., and J. Harvey Walton. Demons and Spirits in Biblical Theology: Reading the Biblical Text in Its Cultural and Literary Context. Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2019.

James W. Sire (Ph.D., University of Missouri), formerly a senior editor at InterVarsity Press, is a frequent guest lecturer at colleges and universities in the United States and Europe. He has written many books and Bible studies, most of which are available from IVP. The current title under review attempts to demonstrate how the psalms that relate closely to the mission of Jesus can also become our answering speech. The central thesis of this book is that the psalms give us insight into God himself. Indeed, through the psalms we come to know both who God is, and who we are. The studies in this book continue the method first set forth by Sire in his Learning to Pray Through the Psalms. In the course of these pages, Sire pointedly examines nine different psalms, their relation to Jesus, and their fulfillment in Jesus. Sire lists five different goals in relation to this book, all of which are laudable: to learn what the psalms say about prayer, to learn to pray the psalmist’s words, to develop corporate prayer from the psalms, to explicate more fully the heart of Jesus as he prayed the psalms, and to suggest how by praying the psalms of Jesus, one can gain insight into humanity of our Lord.

Sire makes a bold assertion that every psalm is a psalm of Jesus (10), as each one of them undoubtedly was filtered through his mind via training in his youth. In fact, he is recorded as using the psalms more than any other Old Testament book. It’s not surprising, then, that at key moments in his life on earth, Jesus of Nazareth turned to the psalms for words to express his deepest thoughts and emotions. Fortunately for us, in the psalms, we too have a voice from eternity (12). As Sire acknowledges, it is not hard to foresee Jesus, his mind and heart saturated with the words and thoughts of the psalms, going off early in the morning to pray. In so doing, they became his answering speech to his heavenly Father. Sire forthrightly states that his desire for his readers is to inculcate the psalms Jesus used into their lives as well, making the psalms their answering speech back unto God.

Sire begins the journey into the mind of Christ by immersing readers into several psalms which Jesus himself refers to and fulfills (e.g. 22, 110, 118, 2, and 69). Within the second half of the book, entitled ‘The Psalms in Jesus’, several psalms that Jesus would have meditated upon are examined. The psalms in the second half of the book, though not typically considered messianic in orientation, all focus upon the heart and mind of Jesus (e.g. 29, 23, 45, and 80). Structural analysis of each psalm helps the reader to grow in their ability to read the Psalms. The guided personal prayer liturgy included within each chapter helps one go deeper in the experience of praying the Psalms.

In this work, Amy Peeler presents a robust reading of the New Testament incarnation narratives, arguing for a view of God that transcends gender. She energetically exposes the presuppositions undergirding the traditional claim that God is male. Peeler draws from her well-rounded experience as an associate professor of New Testament at Wheaton College and associate rector at St. Mark’s Episcopal Church in Geneva, Illinois.

Peeler’s argument proceeds in three steps—elaborating on the meaning of sex, gender, and roles. First, she draws from Israelite history and New Testament writings to tackle the claim that God is male. Through an analysis of the purity laws of Judaism and the Gospels’ portrait of Mary’s pregnancy and birthing of Jesus, she uncovers the shortcomings of traditional assumptions. The work proceeds by reaching beyond the ordinary conception that God is masculine because of attributes such as sovereignty and divine initiative. Peeler challenges the usual trope of the oppressed feminine woman, underscoring how Mary represents strength. The third move of the argument addresses the controversial subject of gender “roles.” Peeler builds her position around the doctrine of the virginal conception, implying that the nature of the dogma makes Jesus’ maleness one of a kind.

Peeler’s argument against the alleged maleness of God engages Hebrew and NT scripture interpretations. She concedes that the OT scriptures characteristically represent God as male but maintains that they never depict God as a “sexual” male deity. She argues that the frequent Hebrew scripture allusions to God as Israel’s Father or King remain purely figurative, “contained within the ideas of founding or care, never procreation” (p. 13). Although NT depictions are more direct—God causes the birth of a baby—Peeler emphasizes that God’s maleness remains one of analogy. God is like a father. He is not a “sexual” male that impregnated a human woman (p. 19). Peeler’s most impactful argument is a pneumatological one, drawing on the linguistic representation of the Holy Spirit. In the OT, the Spirit is referred to using the feminine Hebrew ruakh. In the NT, the Spirit is neither masculine nor feminine, but referred to using the neuter Greek pneuma. In Trinitarian perspective, the agent of birth in the Gospels is the Holy Spirit who is responsible for Mary’s pregnancy (Matt. 1:18, 20) and the one whose power overshadows her making the child the holy babe of God (Luke 1:35).

Reviewed by Paul J. Palma

Publisher’s page: https://www.eerdmans.com/9780802879097/women-and-the-gender-of-god/

John H. Walton, professor of Old Testament at Wheaton College (at the time of publication), teams with his son J. Harvey Walton to address the contested area in contemporary biblical interpretation regarding the nature and activity of demons and spirits in Scripture. Their central thesis challenges dominant spiritual warfare paradigms by arguing that the biblical authors were less concerned with ontological realities of the spirit world than with communicating theological truths through the cognitive environment of the ancient Near East. This approach, consistent with Walton’s broader hermeneutical project evident in works like The Lost World of Genesis One, prioritizes understanding Scripture within its original cultural and literary contexts rather than imposing modern systematic categories onto the text.

The Waltons organize their study around three primary sections: Old Testament perspectives, New Testament developments, and theological synthesis. Throughout, they maintain that biblical demonology must be understood functionally rather than ontologically—that is, Scripture’s purpose is not to provide information about the nature of demons but to communicate theological truths about God’s sovereignty and humanity’s relationship to the divine.

Turning to the New Testament, the Waltons acknowledge a more developed demonology but maintain their functional hermeneutic. They argue that Jesus’ exorcisms and confrontations with unclean spirits address the fundamental problem of human alienation from God rather than engaging in cosmic territorial warfare. Demon possession, in their reading, serves as “living metaphor” for humanity’s captivity to sin and the powers of disorder. When Jesus casts out demons, he demonstrates divine authority over chaos and previews the restoration of creation rather than engaging in strategic spiritual combat. The Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:1-20), for example, illustrates Israel’s uncleanness and alienation, with the exorcism symbolizing restoration to community and covenant relationship.

The Waltons make several valuable contributions to biblical theology. Their insistence on reading Scripture within its ancient cognitive environment prevents anachronistic interpretations that force modern categories onto ancient texts. Their functional approach helpfully refocuses attention from speculation about demonic ontology toward the theological purposes of biblical authors. Additionally, their critique of simplistic spiritual warfare models that lack clear biblical warrant serves as a necessary corrective to some excesses in popular-level demonology.

Furthermore, the book’s dismissal of territorial spirits and strategic spiritual warfare may overreach. While excesses certainly exist in much spiritual warfare literature, passages like Daniel 10:13-21, which describe “princes” associated with kingdoms, suggest some idea of a territorial dimension to spiritual conflict, even if not in the manner popular spiritual warfare models propose. The Waltons’ eagerness to avoid contemporary excess may lead to underreading the biblical data.

Demons and Spirits in Biblical Theology offers a provocative and carefully argued challenge to dominant evangelical demonology. The Waltons succeed in demonstrating that much contemporary spiritual warfare theology lacks a clear biblical foundation and that Scripture’s primary concern is theological rather than providing information about the spirit world. Their work serves as an important corrective and will benefit readers by fostering more careful biblical interpretation. Pentecostals and Charismatics would do well to read carefully this contribution to the ongoing conversation. It would serve far better than nearly everything that gets published in the popular marketplace (in articles, books, YouTube, etc.) by Pentecostals and Charismatics on the subject.

Nevertheless, the book’s strengths may be undermined by an overly reductive functional hermeneutic that seems to throw out ontological reality with its methodological bathwater. A more nuanced approach would affirm both the theological purposes of demonic narratives and the personal reality of spiritual beings, recognizing that ancient authors could simultaneously pursue rhetorical goals and describe genuine encounters. For Pentecostal and charismatic readers especially, the Waltons provide valuable cautions but may not adequately account for biblical precedent and experiential dimensions of deliverance ministry that have characterized these movements. The book makes an important contribution to the conversation but should be read as one voice in an ongoing discussion rather than as a definitive resolution to complex questions of biblical demonology.

As a further note, this book offers specific counterpoints throughout to the works of a number of influential scholars on the topic, including the late Michael Heiser. Heiser is well known for his proposed biblical theology of demons, angels, and “the gods” and what has been widely disseminated in his numerous popular publications, most notably his best-selling 2015 book The Unseen Realm (just updated and expanded posthumously in 2025).  The Waltons have taken great care to address many of the issues which Heiser has popularized (having written extensively in academic forms as well) for his theology of the gods (e.g., divine council, sons of God, etc). It is with this in mind that it would be recommended that those who have read Heiser should also read this work by the Waltons, as offering the most cogent counterpoints to date.

Reviewed by Rick Wadholm Jr

Publisher’s page: https://wipfandstock.com/9781625648259/demons-and-spirits-in-biblical-theology/

Preview this book: https://books.google.com/books?id=WvGaDwAAQBAJ

“Women can be ordained and preach, but they are not permitted to teach theology.” These were the instructions I heard in a Pastoral Epistles class during my junior year at an Assemblies of God Bible college. I walked away from it confused and frustrated because I sensed a call to teach. As a female, I had heard that I was empowered by the Holy Spirit to minister. However, in that moment, I simultaneously heard both a message of empowerment and disempowerment. It is this paradox Joseph Dutko addresses in The Pentecostal Gender Paradox: Eschatology and the Search for Equality. In this well-researched, thoroughly Pentecostal publication, Dutko beckons Pentecostals to a live out today an equality as imagined in the eschaton—the time when God will be all in all (1 Cor 15:28).

As both a pastor and an academically-trained theologian, Dutko intersects Pentecostal history, eschatology, pneumatology, and biblical texts to form a solid foundation for a praxis of equality. By outward appearances, Dutko’s proposal may seem to some to be strictly theoretical, but it is not. It is a praxis, which, to quote theologian Ray Anderson, is “truth in action.” It is a living out today a biblical theological egalitarianism of the future. While Dutko’s Gender Paradox is academic, church leaders will appreciate how he offers specific ways (praxes) for churches to play with an expression of an eschatological egalitarianism. That is, he puts forth how we as Pentecostals may creatively live out a biblical equality between men and women that is based on our future in the new heaven and the new earth.

Dutko explores the historical pentecostal movement to demonstrate that early Pentecostals (those from 1901-1920s) drew from eschatology to authorize women in ministry. Dutko analyzes women’s stories to see how women and men defended women’s recently discovered liberties. More specifically, he explores how an eschatological approach assisted in formulating early Pentecostals’ rationale concerning gender equality. At the beginning of the Pentecostal movement, early Pentecostal periodicals indicate that men upheld the new liberation of women in ministry, overriding previously held restrictions by drawing from eschatology. Dutko then underscores the stories of Maria Woodworth-Etter, Zelma Argue, and Aimee Semple McPherson in order to determine how they biblically justified their freedom in ministry. He perceives that these women mainly lived out their newfound freedom, but when they were called upon to defend it, they drew from eschatology.

Contrary to the restorative approach’s method of biblical interpretation, whose aim is to return to the New Testament church, Dutko draws from an eschatological lens when interpreting three essential biblical texts. By doing so, he seeks to create a unifying, egalitarian account of Scripture that mirrors early pentecostalism and contemporary Pentecostal scholarship. Dutko uses the following texts to serve as a guide for scriptural interpretation in relation to egalitarianism: Genesis 1—3, Galatians 3:28, and Acts 2:17-18, which are respectively entitled creation, the ministry of Jesus, and Pentecost. For Dutko, these are principal, egalitarian, interconnected, biblical texts that communicate the central narrative of Scripture: “creation, fall, redemption, and restoration” (132). Dutko contends that these texts have priority as they provide a model when confronted with other more culturally bound texts, such as 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and 1 Timothy 2:11-15, which restrict women. His granting privilege to certain biblical texts over others is not unusual since what is clear in Scripture is frequently used to interpret ambiguous texts. That is to say, not every passage of Scripture is regarded equally in Christianity. Pentecostals normally treat Luke-Acts as more important, turning it into a hermeneutical guide when discussing Pentecostal issues and theology. With this in mind, some texts are declared more significant in relation to egalitarianism because they offer an obvious direction eschatologically—one of equality. For Dutko, these texts beckon Pentecostals to picture how they may take part “in eschatological realities” (142).

Participating in eschatological realities leads to a Pentecostal praxis of egalitarianism, liberating women to minister according to God’s call. Dutko puts forth a pre-enactment praxis model rather than a re-enactment one. The latter centers on copying the events of the past while also assuring that a repeat of said events will be genuine. The former, too, is orientated by the past, but it envisions the future and explores ways to live that out in the present. As such, the pre-enactment praxis model is connected to previous, current, and upcoming events. Dutko writes, “Pre-enactment is an exploratory rather than an explanatory model” (180). An example, offered by Dutko, is Sabbath-keeping. A pre-enactment praxis of Sabbath-keeping contains an open inquiry of conceptualizing and testing how to live out an eschatological rest today (exploratory). Re-enactment of Sabbath-keeping is less open and more rigid as it centers on living out a Jewish ritual of the past (explanatory).

Dutko’s Pentecostal eschatological-egalitarian praxis is different from applying a biblical text, which is a linear approach. According to Dutko, an eschatological-egalitarian praxis is a process that is dialectical (back-forth dialogue of opposing/supporting ideas), experiential, and experimental while being firmly grounded in the authority of Scripture. As a Pentecostal community imagines and participates today in the realities of the eschatological biblical texts, it is both experimenting and experiencing the future hope of the texts. As such, the biblical texts become more alive and real as the community perceives more fully the meaning of the text. In this way, the praxis (truth in action) is a continual exploration as the biblical interpretation of an eschatological text is tested and experienced. The more the community experiments with living out an eschatological-equalitarian biblical text, the more they understand the meaning of the text, which leads to increasingly living it out and understanding more, etc. Pre-enactment praxis is a transformative spiral of experimenting, experiencing, and understanding the realities of the eschatological-egalitarian biblical text.

While The Pentecostal Gender Paradox mainly centers on the USA and Canada, the question remains whether or not Dutko’s proposal transfers to other races, ethnicities, and cultures, a question Dutko also asks. If it does, what characteristics or elements does it embrace that are similar or different to a Western expression? One possible varying factor is the independent revivals around the world that were separate from the Azusa Street revival, such as in India and Korea. In this light, one must inquire if the experiences of early Pentecostals in Asia were similar or different from those in the Azusa Street revival while considering the possible ways to live out eschatological realities in non-Western contexts.

Dutko’s approach is thoroughly Pentecostal in that it mirrors early Pentecostalism; provides strong biblical support; involves reflections on a theology of the Holy Spirit; and stresses a praxis that participates right now with the Holy Spirit in Christ’s ministry in the world. As I reflect today on that undergraduate lecture in Pastoral Epistles, I am greatly encouraged and hopeful by Dutko’s liberating Pentecostal theological praxis of egalitarianism. It departs from a concentration on self-agency by orienting Pentecostals to participate in the movement of the Spirit toward the renewal of all creation. Thus, may it be said of Pentecostals that our beliefs about the eschaton direct our lives today, particularly in relation to egalitarianism.

Reviewed by Pam Engelbert

Publisher’s page: https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/pentecostal-gender-paradox-9780567713650/

Preview this book: https://books.google.com/books?id=y8DREAAAQBAJ

Aída Besançon Spencer’s The Exegetical Process offers a comprehensive, step-by-step guide to New Testament exegesis designed primarily for seminary students and undergraduate biblical studies programs. The work systematically addresses each stage of the exegetical task—from initial text selection and translation through historical-cultural analysis, grammatical-syntactical investigation, literary context, theological synthesis, and contemporary application. What distinguishes Spencer’s handbook from others in the field is its granular level of procedural detail, complete with assessment rubrics for each exegetical component, and an extensive collection of reference charts, tables, and resource lists designed to support students through every phase of research and writing.

The Exegetical Process enters a well-established field of exegetical handbooks, positioning itself alongside Gordon Fee’s now-classic New Testament Exegesis and other methodological guides that have served generations of students. Spencer, an experienced New Testament scholar and professor emerita at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, brings considerable pedagogical expertise to this task. The result is a highly structured, mechanically precise guide that will prove valuable for certain learning contexts while simultaneously raising questions about its broader applicability.

The volume’s most distinctive contribution lies precisely where Spencer intends it: in its relentlessly systematic, step-by-step approach. Unlike many exegetical handbooks that describe the interpretive process in more general terms, Spencer provides exhaustive detail at each stage, breaking down complex exegetical tasks into discrete, manageable components. For instructors seeking to demystify biblical exegesis for beginning students—particularly those lacking strong backgrounds in hermeneutics or biblical languages—this granular approach offers genuine advantages.

Most notably, Spencer includes detailed grading rubrics for each component of the exegetical process. This feature distinguishes The Exegetical Process from its competitors and addresses a genuine pedagogical need. Seminary and Bible college instructors often struggle to communicate assessment expectations clearly, and students frequently complain about the opacity of grading criteria for exegesis papers. Spencer’s rubrics provide concrete standards, specifying what constitutes exemplary, adequate, or deficient work at each stage. This transparency serves both fairness and learning outcomes, helping students understand not merely what to do but how well they should do it.

Additionally, Spencer enriches the volume with numerous reference charts, graphs, and tables that function as practical tools throughout the exegetical process. These include terminological glossaries, taxonomies of grammatical and syntactical categories, lists of ancient sources (including extrabiblical Jewish and Greco-Roman literature), curated bibliographies of contemporary scholarly resources organized by exegetical topic, and visual aids for discourse analysis and semantic mapping. These reference materials transform the handbook from mere procedural guide into a portable research companion. For students unfamiliar with the landscape of New Testament scholarship or uncertain about which lexicons, commentaries, or databases to consult, these lists provide invaluable orientation. The charts on rhetorical devices, figures of speech, and argumentative structures offer quick-reference tools that students can apply directly to their textual analysis. This apparatus represents a significant practical contribution that extends the book’s utility beyond its methodological instruction.

However, the volume’s strengths paradoxically generate its most significant limitations. Spencer’s approach is markedly idiosyncratic, reflecting her particular pedagogical preferences and methodological commitments in ways that may not translate well across different institutional contexts or learning environments. While the exegetical terrain she covers substantially overlaps with Fee’s New Testament Exegesis—textual criticism, translation, historical-cultural background, lexical-syntactical analysis, theological interpretation, and contemporary application—her specific procedures and emphases often diverge in ways that seem arbitrary rather than methodologically motivated.

The step-by-step format, while initially appealing, risks fostering a mechanical, almost formulaic approach to biblical interpretation. Exegesis is fundamentally an art as much as a science, requiring interpretive judgment, synthetic thinking, and the ability to recognize which questions matter most for a given text. Spencer’s highly structured methodology may inadvertently obscure this reality, training students to follow prescribed steps rather than develop interpretive discernment. The danger is producing students who can execute exegetical procedures competently but struggle to think like exegetes—to recognize when standard approaches require modification, when certain steps deserve more or less attention, or how the various analytical stages integrate into a coherent interpretive argument.

Moreover, Spencer’s idiosyncratic details sometimes seem to reflect personal preference rather than exegetical necessity. Experienced instructors who have developed their own effective approaches may find Spencer’s specific requirements constraining rather than helpful. The risk is that the volume’s utility becomes tied too closely to adopting Spencer’s entire system rather than serving as a flexible resource that instructors can adapt to their particular contexts and emphases.

Gordon Fee’s New Testament Exegesis remains, in this reviewer’s judgment, the more helpful resource for most contexts. Now in its third edition, Fee’s handbook has proven its staying power precisely because it avoids Spencer’s level of prescriptive detail. Fee provides a clear, comprehensive overview of the exegetical task while maintaining sufficient flexibility for instructors to adapt his approach to their particular pedagogical goals and institutional contexts. His discussion is more discursive, offering methodological rationale alongside practical guidance, helping students understand not merely how to do exegesis but why particular procedures matter.

Fee also demonstrates greater sensitivity to the diversity of New Testament genres, providing genre-specific guidance that recognizes how exegetical priorities shift when moving from gospel narrative to Pauline argumentation to apocalyptic literature. Spencer’s more uniform approach, while simpler to follow, may not adequately prepare students for the genre-sensitivity that mature exegesis requires.

Furthermore, Fee’s integration of exegetical method with broader hermeneutical reflection provides students with a more robust theological framework for their interpretive work. Spencer’s focus on procedure, while pedagogically valuable, offers less guidance on the theological and hermeneutical questions that ultimately shape how one approaches the biblical text.

This is not to suggest that The Exegetical Process lacks value. For specific contexts—particularly undergraduate Bible programs, introductory seminary courses, or institutions where students arrive with minimal interpretive training—Spencer’s detailed scaffolding and explicit assessment rubrics may prove extremely beneficial. The volume could serve effectively as a supplementary text alongside Fee or other handbooks, with instructors selectively utilizing Spencer’s rubrics and detailed guidance for particular exegetical components while drawing on other resources for broader methodological perspective.

Spencer has produced a conscientious, pedagogically motivated handbook that reflects deep teaching experience and genuine concern for student learning. Her commitment to assessment clarity addresses a real need in biblical studies education. However, the volume’s idiosyncratic character and methodologically prescriptive approach limit its broader utility. Instructors should carefully evaluate whether Spencer’s specific system aligns with their pedagogical goals and institutional context before adopting it wholesale.

For most seminary and graduate programs seeking a comprehensive, methodologically sound, and pedagogically flexible exegetical handbook, Gordon Fee’s New Testament Exegesis remains the superior choice. Spencer’s The Exegetical Process offers a valuable alternative for specific teaching contexts but seems unlikely to displace Fee as the standard reference in the field.

Reviewed by Rick Wadholm Jr

Publisher’s page: https://www.kregel.com/biblical-studies/the-exegetical-process/

Craig S. Keener, Suffering: Its Meaning for the Spirit-Filled Life (Baker Academic, November 11, 2025).

Craig Keener: Seeing what dominates our culture’s interests reinforced my feeling that the church in the U.S. is largely unprepared for suffering. Although the Bible talks a lot about suffering, sometimes when it strikes people who have heard only messages about blessing, they can feel that God has not treated them as he promised. While we have foretastes of the kingdom today, such as healings, the kingdom isn’t consummated yet. There’s still sickness and suffering and death in this world. Jesus, prophets and apostles also modeled for us how to face suffering.

PneumaReview.com: Suffering can take many forms. What kinds of suffering do you address in your book?

Craig Keener: As you say, suffering comes in many forms; I could therefore illustrate the principles with only some of them. Because persecution features dominantly in the New Testament, and it remains a living reality (even to the point of martyrdom) among Christians in many parts of the world today, that naturally features heavily in the book. But we also suffer from other sources. Some accounts from refugees fleeing other sorts of violence or suffering are heartrending. Most of us have encountered, or know others who have encountered, health or financial challenges for which our theology of healing and blessing do not, sometimes, satisfactorily address. Broken families are among the many other struggles that Christians may face.

PneumaReview.com: All people are susceptible to some forms of suffering. Should Christians expect the possibility of more suffering in their lives because of their faith?

PneumaReview.com: How would you respond to a person who says that suffering is a sign that one has failed God or is out of His will?

Craig Keener: That makes nonsense out of Paul’s lists of sufferings and defies the message of the cross. Granted, some kinds of sufferings are biblically normal for Christians (opposition to our faith) and some are biblically abnormal (punishment for non-Christian behaviors, 1 Pet 4:15). But we have plenty of biblical examples of God-followers who suffered from things from which God often delivers; for example, Elisha died from sickness and Paul left Trophimus sick at Miletus.

PneumaReview.com: What teachings or trends in the church today downplay the biblical teaching about suffering?

Craig Keener: I’ve not run into many people who actually teach that Christians will never suffer; but in circles that teach almost exclusively about blessings, some Christians seem to get that idea. I’ve heard some versions of “prosperity teaching” that simply mean that we should trust God to supply our needs for our lives and callings, and I certainly agree with that. But there are also the many versions (what Michael Brown calls “carnal prosperity teaching”) that claim material prosperity as a selfish promise. There are some who insist that everyone with faith will always get healed—although it’s evident that, given enough time, everybody in history, no matter how much faith, without exception, eventually dies.

PneumaReview.com: Do you think ministerial training in the West should place more of an emphasis on the possibility of one suffering for their Christian ministry?

Craig Keener: So many seminary and Bible college graduates go out ready to change the world and are out of ministry after a few years. It would help them to graduate with open eyes. Church people can be mean. We walk with many other church people through their heart-wrenching hardships. We may face opposition from various sources. A church with financial challenges (or even without them) may not pay as much as ministers can get elsewhere (I worked in a restaurant and pastored for free). We also can face discouragement when exaltation does not come as fast as social media sensations might lead us to expect. But faith means not just following God’s call or a heart for ministry when things are going well; it means trusting the God who is trustworthy no matter what.

PneumaReview.com: Please share some things that believers in the persecuted church can teach the church in America.

PneumaReview.com: How can we practically help others when they are suffering?

Craig Keener: It helps us to remember that the sufferings of the present are not worthy to be compared with the glory that awaits us; the struggles of this world are birth pangs (Rom 8:22) from which God will bring forth the perfect world to come. It helps to know that in God’s plan, all things work for good, for us ultimately sharing Christ’s glory and image (8:28-29). But these are things we need to learn before we suffer, because not everybody is in a good place to hear them during their suffering. In all cases, though, we can weep with those who weep (Rom 12:15). Loving people means sharing with them as fellow members of the same body, walking with them, as best as possible, in their pain. In that setting, we can also join them in seeking healing and restoration, and reminding them of the hope that we too find in the face of our brokenness.

PR 

Publisher’s page: https://bakerpublishinggroup.com/products/9781540969439_suffering

Further Reading

Craig Keener, “How to Succeed at Suffering: Lessons from the Gospel of Mark” Influence (February 14, 2024)

“Why Do Christians Suffer?” WTC Theology (TheoDisc/YouTube, October 1, 2025)

Raul Mock of The Pneuma Review recently interviewed bestselling author Frank Viola about his new book The Untold Story of the New Testament Church (2025) with Foreword by Craig Keener.

Raul Mock: For PneumaReview.com readers that have not yet encountered you, please tell us about your spiritual journey and your ministry.

Frank Viola: I’m someone who writes books and speaks in conferences for hungry and thirsty Christians who love Jesus, but who know in their bones that “there must be more” to the Christian faith, to Jesus Christ, to the Bible, and to church.

I’ve been part of every denomination and every movement you can name. From the Pentecostals to the Charismatics, all their flavors, as well as most evangelical denominations and camps.

And while I learned valuable things from all of them, they all left me saying, “there’s got to be more than this.” That’s what my books, my articles, and my podcasts are all about.

I’ve written over 20 books to date, and they can be divided up into Light and Shade.

“Light” are books containing the element of the sublime.

“Shade” are books containing a prophetic edge that challenges the status quo.

Your readers can check out my entire book catalog at frankviola.org.

All the books take God’s people into the deeper Christian life.

I also have two podcasts – Christ is All and The Insurgence Podcast. Combined, the two podcasts have almost 3 million downloads.

These two podcasts are designed for Christians who know there must be more.

(Details for each podcast can be found on my website, linked above. We also have a YouTube channel.)

Raul: How do you describe your new book, The Untold Story?

However, we live in an era where Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians regularly face criticism for apparent gaps between experiential faith and biblical understanding.

And that criticism is often valid.

My book, The Untold Story of the New Testament Church: Revised and Expanded, resolves this problem. The book transforms how all Bible-believing Christians engage Scripture, including those in the Charismatic world

The book does this by providing a key that unlocks the New Testament, addressing a long-standing need within the Charismatic community for deeper and clearer biblical understanding.

Dr. Craig Keener, the world’s leading scholar in New Testament background and a Charismatic himself, wrote the Foreword to the book. This is how he describes it:

“In The Untold Story of the New Testament Church: Revised and Expanded, Frank Viola brings context and background together, inviting us on a captivating journey through the birth and growth of the first-century church. With a reputation for captivating prose and heartfelt storytelling, Viola brings his unique perspective to reconstruct the events from Matthew to Revelation. The Untold Story offers a plausible chronological narrative that reveals the grand tapestry of God’s kingdom plan and brings the characters of the story to life.”

Respected New Testament scholar Clinton Arnold, who is known for his work on spiritual warfare, powers and principalities, also endorsed the book saying,

“This volume is a creative and fascinating portrayal of the rise of Christianity and the establishment of churches throughout the Mediterranean world. Viola weaves the evidence of the New Testament into a single unfolding and compelling story. Yet he does so not with unbridled imagination, but with a profound reliance on the best scholarship available. The end result is an accurate, engaging and compelling account of this movement that has had a monumental impact on history and continues to do so today.”

The uniqueness of my book is that it blends together the narrative found in the book of Acts with the epistles, all in chronological order, telling one unified story with all the historical details filled in from different parts of the New Testament and from first-century history.

This approach puts you in the dramatic story. You watch it unfold before your eyes sequentially. The result is that you understand the New Testament like never before – accurately, powerfully, and in an electrifying way. The book is a cinematic experience that unlocks the letters of the New Testament.

Raul: The 2025 edition of The Untold Story is “revised and expanded.” What are some of the differences in this edition from the very old edition from decades ago?

Frank: Unfortunately, there is a very old edition from 20 years ago with an ugly orange cover on it. That book is similar to an experimental high school paper. I wrote it in my youth. It was written in a hurry, it wasn’t peer reviewed, and no scholars read it beforehand to ensure its accuracy.

In addition, the scholarship is outdated and most of the best books written on the New Testament didn’t even exist back then.

So it was a “rough draft experiment” from my youth. In this regard, the new book is not exactly a “new edition.” It’s a brand new work. We just kept the same title because it appears in my other books, which represents over 600,000 copies to date.

The Untold Story of the New Testament Church: Revised and Expanded – with the white cover and brushstrokes on the borders – came out this year (2025).

It’s been endorsed by 20 first-rate New Testament scholars. However, the main narrative is highly accessible and “reads like a motion picture on paper” as some readers have described it.

The Christians – including pastors and teachers – who are reading it have reported that they are experiencing a “revolution” in their understanding of the Bible.

Raul: In one of the early footnotes, you say that you set out to write a book that tells “the entire story of the primitive church from Pentecost to Patmos.” But this isn’t merely a study Bible or a textbook on Christian history. Who is your intended audience and what gap do you want this book to fill?

Frank: Correct, the book is not a textbook or study Bible or even a history book. It’s been described as “the New Testament guides of all New Testament guides.”

The intended audience is any Christian who wants to understand the New Testament in a powerful new way. The book also brings the people and places to life.

It’s also for any Christian who wants to understand the early church, what really happened and didn’t happen.

Therefore, the book was written for pastors, preachers, teachers, Bible study leaders, and all Christians who read their Bibles regularly.

(While there have been a few titles from the past that tried to reconstruct the New Testament story in chronological order, none of them were comprehensive, none were documented with up-to-date scholarship, nor have any of them been reviewed by scholars to ensure accuracy.)

A number of the twenty scholars who endorsed my book have confirmed it’s uniqueness by saying, “There is no book like this.”

I’ve described the book as a contribution to New Testament 3.0 in contrast with New Testament 1.0 and 2.0 (See New Testament 3.0 – A Breakthrough for details on what I mean by that).

The sad truth is that most Christians today, including preachers and teachers, have built their theology on a crossword puzzle of verses.

They don’t know The Story. They know chapters and verses. And some of them are experts at a particular book of the Bible, but this all misses the forest for the trees.

The Story – the narrative of what happened from Pentecost to Patmos chronologically and where the 21 letters in the New Testament fit into that grand drama – is largely unknown. Even among scholars.

That’s precisely why I decided to take the time and effort to write the book, which was no small endeavor. It was a super heavy lift.

Raul: In the Foreword, Dr. Craig S. Keener said that Untold Story is an invitation to see ourselves as part of the ongoing story God has been telling. What are some of the places that did this most meaningfully for you?

Frank: There are so many. One can never fully understand Paul’s letters unless they learn The Story. So it’s meaningful how the Story told in the book opens up the New Testament epistles, including those of Paul who wrote the majority of them.

Another is the way that Christian workers (ministers) were trained in the first century. It’s drastically different from the way ministers are trained today.

Also, the way churches were planted is completely different from how they are founded today.

Without knowing the Story, we are left to interpreting the New Testament we want through cutting and pasting verses together. The result is that we arrive at conclusions that are unbiblical, even though the conclusions are based on certain portions of the Bible. The problem is that context is missing.

Jeremiah 8:8 in the NET Bible says,

How can you say, “We are wise! We have the law of the Lord”? The truth is, those who teach it have used their writings to make it say what it does not really mean.

This text was delivered during a period of spiritual and moral crisis in ancient Judah, when the people and their religious leaders (especially the scribes) claimed wisdom and faithfulness to God’s word. But they were in fact corrupting it through false interpretation and misleading teaching.

The verse addresses the scribes and religious leaders who boasted, “We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us,” yet Jeremiah exposes their reliance on the pen of the scribes (the Bible experts) who “have twisted it by writing lies” suggesting they distorted or misrepresented the Torah, misleading the people.

This same thing is done today unwittingly and unknowingly when Christian leaders and teachers don’t know The Story. Yet they still teach the New Testament. So they inevitably misinterpret the text.

Knowing the Story prevents this problem. So far, it’s been a tremendous help to Charismatics and Pentecostals who honor the word of God and want to fully understand it. It’s done the same for other denominations and movements in the Christian world.

I explain this in more detail in the many of the interviews I’ve done on the book which your readers can check out here. The interviews delve deeper than this interview. (More interviews will be added to that page in the coming days, so check back.)

Also, we recently launched a visual podcast that goes along with the book. Your readers can check it out at TheUntoldStory.me.

PR

Glen Menzies, Commentary on Romans

First, my brother has produced an exceptional commentary on Romans (of course, I’m entirely objective here). This book is a member of the “Pentecostal Commentary Series” and I am confident that it will serve the church well by stimulating reflection and discussion on a host of important theological themes.

To order, click on this link: https://amzn.to/4mmOP20

Publisher’s page: https://wipfandstock.com/9781532610240/a-pentecostal-commentary-on-romans/

Timothy Dresselhaus, The Crimson Thread

Second, Dr. Timothy Dresselhaus, a gifted medical doctor (Professor Emeritus at the UCSD School of Medicine) and a dedicated teaching elder of the church, has produced a wonderful resource for Christians at every stage of their spiritual development. This book, The Crimson Thread: Tracing the Story of Jesus from Genesis to Revelation, offers a sweeping overview of the biblical narrative.

To order, click on this link: https://amzn.to/4of4u5a

Robert Menzies and Craig Keener, Commentary on Acts

Finally, the commentary on Acts that Craig Keener and I have written for Baker’s “Word and Spirit” NT Commentary Series is now available! This commentary uniquely highlights Luke’s missiological purpose, his understanding of the church as a community of prophets called to be “a light for the nations” (Isa 49:6), and his invitation for every disciple of Jesus to minister in the power of the Spirit (Luke 11:13; Acts 1:8).

To order, click on this link: https://amzn.to/3HcvWjk

Publisher’s page: https://bakerpublishinggroup.com/books/acts/417270

Bob with the Acts commentary he and Craig Keener have produced.

Holly Beers and Craig Keener: We love the Bible, and at heart we want to understand it well and help others understand it also. That’s how we see our scholarship – as a way to serve the church. We both have our specific areas of interest and specialty, including how Craig works with ancient Greek and Latin texts which help us better understand the New Testament, and Holly studies the way that the Old Testament is incorporated into the New Testament, but we both simply love to study and teach more generally. We are both very involved in our local churches: teaching, preaching, and offering our gifts in a variety of ways.

PneumaReview.com: If they asked, what would tell this leader about your experience with the contemporary ministry of the Holy Spirit?

Beers & Keener: Both of us are Pentecostal and desire to deeply know and be led by the Spirit. We regularly practice the gifts of the Spirit both individually and in (church) community. Craig especially has traveled extensively and observed and participated in the Spirit’s work around the world. Holly teaches at a college where most students come from non-charismatic/Pentecostal backgrounds, and she regularly exposes interested students to the Spirit’s contemporary work and trains them to engage in it.

PneumaReview.com: Where did the idea for the Word & Spirit Commentary on the New Testament series originate?

Word and Spirit Commentary on the New Testament Series from Baker Academic (as of July 2025)

Beers & Keener: We noticed that there have not been very many biblical resources authored by scholars from Pentecostal/charismatic traditions. When researching for projects or preparing for classes, we had difficulty finding those voices. The need for a series like this was even more apparent because of the documented growth of Spirit-filled movements around the world. In conversations with an editor at Baker Academic we suggested this series, and Baker was happy to support us as editors and publish it.

PneumaReview.com: How were the various contributors selected?

Beers & Keener: We wanted to be intentional about including scholars from across the global Pentecostal and charismatic spectrum, so we recruited accordingly. The range of voices includes denominational Pentecostals, Reformed charismatics, charismatic Methodists, and others. They also reflect a range of cultures, including Spirit-filled voices from multiple continents.

PneumaReview.com: In what ways is the importance of the Word emphasized in these commentaries?

Beers & Keener: They are, at their core, biblical commentaries; in that sense the Word is central. They explain the best of what biblical scholars know about the original context of the books as they work through the entirety of each. They also highlight the Spirit’s inspiration of the biblical texts.

PneumaReview.com: How is the work of the Holy Spirit highlighted in these volumes?

Beers & Keener: This series focuses on how the same Spirit who inspired the text speaks and works today. Our authors “preach” their way through the texts, emphasizing how we listen alongside the ancient audiences for the Spirit’s voice in our time and contexts.

PneumaReview.com: What is the most unique aspect of this commentary series?

Beers & Keener: The authors engage the biblical text in both its ancient setting and its message for Spirit-filled Christians today. The commentaries do not separate the exegetical and application sections, as readers in Spirit-filled traditions tend to integrate and move naturally between these categories. In other words, Spirit-filled readers traditionally blend the ancient and modern horizons so as to read themselves within the continuing narrative of salvation history—that is, as part of the ongoing biblical story (not culturally but theologically/spiritually/eschatologically). Particularly distinctive of this approach, then, will be observing how God works in the biblical texts and how Christians can expect God to be working today, even if in new and/or culturally surprising ways. The commentaries are written with distinctives of the tradition(s), including testimony, a conversational style (“preaching”), and sidebars that feature connections to Spirit-filled history and interest, such as healing, exorcism, spiritual gifts, etc.

PneumaReview.com: In your opinion, is the divide in the church regarding the Word and the Spirit declining?

Beers & Keener: Yes, we see a growing interest in and commitment to keeping the Word and Spirit together. We find this to be very encouraging, and are convinced that the Spirit’s own prompting is the main reason.

PneumaReview.com: What factors are contributing to this?

Beers & Keener: Beyond the Spirit’s own initiation, it seems due to our increased global awareness and connectedness. More and more Christians have contact and even relationships with Christians from different traditions in our neighborhoods, our workplaces, and online. We hear about what the Spirit is doing around the world.

PneumaReview.com: Can you tell us about some of the forthcoming volumes and who is writing them?

Beers & Keener: This summer Craig’s co-authored volume with Robert P. Menzies on Acts will be published, and this fall Craig’s volume on 1-2 Peter and Jude will also be released. In the next couple of years you will see commentaries on 1-3 John by Jamal-Dominique Hopkins, 1-2 Timothy and Titus by Amy Anderson and Gordon Fee (revising Fee’s earlier contribution), Matthew by David Instone-Brewer, and Galatians by Roji George.

PneumaReview.com: What do you hope the lasting legacy of this commentary series will be?

Beers & Keener: Although the series naturally welcomes all readers, we especially hope to serve those who identify as Spirit-filled (broadly defined) leaders: pastors, seminarians, theology and ministry students, youth leaders, and Bible study leaders. We pray that the series testifies to the creative work and restorative goodness of the triune God.

PneumaReview.com: When will the series be complete?

Beers & Keener: The goal is 2030; at this point the date appears realistic, as authors are very excited about and committed to the series.

Craig S. Keener (PhD, Duke University) is F. M. and Ada Thompson Professor of Biblical Studies at Asbury Theological Seminary. He is author of thirty-seven books, with some 1.4 million copies in circulation. The books have won fifteen national or international awards, including six in Christianity Today; together the books take up 19,000 pages. He has also authored roughly one hundred academic articles; seven booklets; and roughly two hundred popular-level articles. In 2020 Craig was president of the Evangelical Theological Society. He is ordained with the Assemblies of God. His YouTube channel is: www.youtube.com/c/CraigKeenerPhD; his blog site is www.craigkeener.com/.

Learn more about this series and series co-editor, Holly Beers: