An Old Testament PhD student recommended Archer as a good, general, upper college level introduction to me. I went to liberal arts school where all the students kiss the ground that Wellhausen walked on. For them to even think of questioning The Documentary Hypothesis is to blaspheme Christ (or more accurately, liberal progressivism). Therefore, I trembled for joy when I bought Archer. Having been indoctrinated by the critical theories I was overjoyed when I saw someone apply sensible scholarship to a holy love for God.
Archer's set up is odd, to be honest with you. Unlike Dillard & Longman (Bibliography/Genre/Authorship/Background/theology/Approach to New Testament)Archer approaches the individual books quite differently. He is more into archeology breakthroughs, names of certain kings, "problem texts". My one flaw with the book is that he did not develop theological themes enough.
However, the First and last sections of the book are well worth the price. Archer aims his cannons at unbelieving critical theories and blows them out of the water. First he estavlishes the presuppositions of criticl scholars. If you do not believe that God is able to reveal Himself (or exists, for that matter) then naturally you will doubt the supernatural inspriation of the sacred text. In this section the most exciting part is the refutation of the Documentary Hypothesis. In the last part he examines the work of three prominent Old Testament scholars--Von Rad, Childs, and Noth. He is fair--analyzing them by their presuppositions--and then states his.
This book deserves highest possible praise. Interestingly, and I didn't know this when I first read it, but Archer holds to the pre-wrath rapture theory. I would like to reread what he said on Zechariah 14 in light of that information.