Comprehensive and careful, this is the first and only full-length commentary on "The Shepherd" in English. The revelations are glimpses of the religious imagination, social world, and moral ideals among early second-century Roman Christians.
Having read in a preterist commentary on Revelation (by David Chilton I think?) that the Shepherd of Hermas relied heavily on Revelation, I though I should study this book. As it turns out, either Chilton is wrong or I misunderstood him. Whatever parallels exist between the Shepherd and Revelation probably should be attributed to them both drawing from a common stock of Christian apocalyptic imagery, as, for example, Richard Bauckham (1974) and Ned Bernard Stonehouse (1929) have pointed out. Osiek does not even examine whether Revelation could be a source of the material in the Shepherd.
The two books really don’t have a lot in common, other than their both being apocalypses. The main point in common are the eschatological sea beasts of Revelation 13 and 17 and vision 4 of the Shepherd. But in the Shepherd the sea beast is a minor player, as compared to Revelation. The main focus of the Shepherd is not eschatology, but rather ecclesiology. The Shepherd gives us a fascinating look into how the ideal church should look, according to the author. I was especially intrigued by the author's mostly negative view of wealth and luxury, contrasting so much with the views of so much of the contemporary church.
The commentary is clear and concise, but as is often the case with Hermeneia, style is completely rejected in favour of lucidity, even where it may not be present in the original text. Given the wealth of commentary that Hermeneia offers, it seems silly to me to sacrifice the beauty of the text for comprehension that can easily be glossed from the notes.