John Goldingay is an Anglican Old Testament scholar, and is the David Allan Hubbard Professor Emertius of Old Testament at Fuller Theological Seminary. I have his new commentary on Genesis (2020) in the Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Pentateuch series. I have his massive (1033 pages) new commentary on Jeremiah (2021) in The New International Commentary on the Old Testament series published by Eerdmans. I also have his volume on Daniel (1989) in the Word Biblical Commentary series, but it is not worth consulting, as will be evident by the end of this post.
I recently read Goldingay’s book Do We Need the New Testament? Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself (InterVarsity Press, 2015). The relationship between the Old and New Testaments is an area of special interest to me, and I have many books on this subject. Goldingay’s book is not one I will be keeping. Most of the chapters are based on papers given at theological conferences. I have heard many papers delivered at such conferences. I would certainly have slept through Goldingay’s. He maintains that there is little that is distinctive or unique about the New Testament. He dislikes the term “Old Testament,” and prefers “First Testament.” Because Goldingay is about as far from a dispensationalist as one can be, even though he is a revered Old Testament scholar, he really has no clue how to interpret the Old Testament. His book Do We Need the New Testament? shows us that he has no clue about how to interpret the New Testament either.