I think the idea of having a textbook written by multiple authors defeats one of the main purposes of a "textbook": introduction, synthesis, and overview. Having multiple authors necessarily breaks down the ability for there to be a cohesive narrative.
The argument about having experts in their fields write chapters is spurious, because again, this is an introductory textbook–and in my opinion, the lack of cohesiveness and awareness of the surrounding chapters and their context outweighs the benefits of having multiple authors.
Another drawback of this volume is that it suffers, even more than many textbooks, from the disease of textbookitis–writing analysis and summary in an attempt to cover all possible sides of a particular issue–and by saying everything, you really say nothing. Part of this is an attempt to conform to how textbooks are written, and part of it is an attempt to be unbiased and PC. But it's not helpful, in my opinion.
I might do a more in-depth review and if so will link the review here. In the meantime, read Gonzalez if you want pictures; Maculloch if you want lively narration; Shelley if you want an introductory text; or Cairns if you want an authors' actual opinion now and then (plus good integration/impact of the historical situation).
I've also heard really good things about Nick Needham's multiple-volume set.