NLT Guys Slimline Holy Bible

The NLT Guys Slimline Holy Bible is nicely bound, very slim and lightweight. The cover has some of the 'leather-touch' material that feels very nice (not that boys will care that much), and the bright blue lines intermixed with the black should make it very easy to spot if misplaced and also catches the attention which would hopefully be a reminder for young guys to read it each day.   The letter font on the inside is small but not too small, I found it quite easy to read.  At the back of the book, Bible includes a dictionary/concordance, a list of suggested memory verses on various topics, a Bible reading plan and of course the usual maps of the Holy land and Europe.

The translation itself is very readable, the translation notes say that they were trying for a mix of formal equivalence and dynamic, I think this translation leans a bit more to the latter, a 'thought for thought' type of translation which then necessarily has some heavily imposed biased interpretation on certain texts.  I'll give a couple of related texts as an example,   Matthew 19:9: "….whoever divorces his wife and marries someone else commits adultery - unless his wife has been unfaithful"  and 1 Corinthians 7:15, "But if the husband or wife who isn't a believer insists on leaving, let them go.  In such cases the believing husband or wife is no longer bound to the other…"   Both of these verses evince a bias on the part of the translator.  In the Matthew text they make the 'exception clause' permit remarriage rather than just a separation of the couple, and in the Corinthians text they make it sound as though the couple are no longer bound to one another in marriage (in God's eyes) rather than using the simple statement, "no longer bound." Which statement does not give the impression that the marriage is done in God's eyes.  I do not see how people don't see the problem with the 'remarriage allowed' interpretation (which in my view is an eisegetical interpretation not an exegetical one). When you think about it for a moment you realize that if a marriage is ended in God's eyes by adultery or separation then the couple CANNOT forgive one another and stay married - they MUST legally divorce and separate if the marriage is finished before God, otherwise the couple would be living together out of wedlock (in God's eyes) even if they are not legally divorced.  Legal divorce was permitted by Moses because of the hard hearts of the people, but Christ came to give us NEW hearts.  Remarriage after legal divorce should not be an option in a Christians eyes because they have a new heart, not a hard heart and if they must be separated from their spouse then they should be willing to live a celibate life for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt. 19:11-12, 1 Cor. 7:10-11).  I know it's hard to accept but we should not reject or accept what we like in God's Word simply because "it's not fair" or "I don't feel that God would allow that".  Our feelings and our idea of fairness are not the authority, God is, and His Word is our standard, not ourselves. So, as you see, I think this translation is a bit too biased/not literal enough.  *Cough* sorry for rambling on, I just had to get that out and it's been on my mind because we're hitting the topic at my church.

I also didn't understand why some traditional words like, "Justification" were changed to "made right with God" but others, like the word "tongues" in 1 Corinthians 14 were kept instead of changed to "different languages".  It just seemed rather inconsistent.   'There were several translations of verses that I liked and thought did a pretty good job of carrying the original idea of the passages over into modern English but overall I think that they could have done a better job, (the ICB seems to be more consistent in that area).

Overall the translation is okay (maybe a little too clear/modern/explicit a translation in some parts- especially for kids) though I strongly prefer the NASB.

Many thanks to the folks at the Tyndale Blog Network for sending me a free review copy of this Bible (My review did not have to be favorable)

NKV APPLY THE WORD Study Bible

I am disappointed with many of the 'study' Bibles of our day but the Apply the Word Study Bible is quite refreshing in its commitment to prompting one think to about the text one is studying.  he Bible has many "application notes" and also includes maps,  charts and little character profile boxes throughout.    It really is more of an application type of study Bible, not a linguistic study Bible but the application used seems to be mostly exegetically based. 

I think that the application notes are quite good, none of them really seem forced onto any text they're commenting on, even the ones found throughout the books of the law, and prophets, are quite good and don't seem as though someone was grasping at straws (as some study Bibles seem to do) to find an application of those seemingly tedious parts of Scripture and so they come up with some  eisegetical way to get some personal-meaning out of them.

For example, toward middle of Ezekiel one of the application notes reads:

"…when the show was over, so was the people's interest.  They heard Ezekiel's words but did nothing to put them into action.  They enjoyed the presentation but ignored the message…Their curiosity about Ezekiel's sermons did not change their lives.   When faith becomes more about entertainment than genuine commitment, we become spectators rather than players, concerned more with What is the latest word from God?  Than What am I going to do with what God has said? …Self-deception is the worst thing about a faith that exalts entertainment.  True conversion and true obedience involve not just expanded knowledge about spiritual things or good feelings toward God, but changed purposes, commitments, and actions."

Some of the application notes are quite strikingly insightful, In Luke 18, where the blind man begs Christ to have mercy on him there is a note entitles "Holy Interruptions", part of which reads: "Jesus didn't treat these interruptions like intrusions, He let needy people elbow into His life, even when His closest ffriends tried to block their way.  In fact, one could argue that Jesus did much of His work during moments of interruption.  We often grown annoyed at disruptions, feeling as if life has been put on hold.  When are we missing out on some of life's holiest moments?" Though I have heard of similar concepts/teachings about 'holy interruptions',  I had never noticed their significance in Christ's life before and His handling of them.

There were some problems that I had with it though, for instance, some references that were made to specific times when Christians "enter into the presence of God" which concept really seems to discount His omnipresence and His promise never to leave us or forsake us.    I also don't like that some of the notes call the land of Israel 'Palestine', I thought that the land did not become 'Palestine' until Hadrian's day, not to mention that in our day it’s basic area is the state of Israel.  I didn't understand why they didn't call that present day land area 'Israel'.

And then there were some things that seemed laughably odd to me (though they didn't mean them to be),  three samples of which I'll give here. First:  in the intro to each book of the Bible there are lists of key people in that book and key events..etc.  Among the key people of 1st Chronicles is "Sheerah, an Ephraimite woman who built three cities".  Umm…that just seems odd to me as, though she is mentioned, she hardly seems "key" to the account of book of 1st Chronicles. Second: In a chart comparing Joshua and Paul entitled "Profiles of Leadership" the two men are compared to each other, and in the section "Early indications of leadership potential" one of Paul's early leadership displays was  that he "Aggressively tried to stamp out Christianity"?  That just seemed too odd of an example  in my opinion.  And the last that I'll mention is the notes on Matthew 13 where Christ tells some parables, here is a tiny excerpt from the notes, "Jesus captivated listeners by putting spiritual truths into everyday terms they could understand.…His images and language brought His message to life for ordinary people."  But if the author of those notes would have just read vs. 10-17 of that very chapter they would realize that they are contradicting what Jesus said, when the disciples asked Him why He spoke in parables He said that He spoke in parables so that the people WOULD NOT UNDERSTAND!!  Even the disciples did not understand until Christ explained the parables to them.

 But, excepting all of the above and some other things, I was pleasantly surprised at the format and study content of this study Bible.  I have read too many Christian books and even, if I remember correctly, study Bible notes that seem too, for lack of a better term, "lovey-dovey", too "God is in love with YOU!", too uncomfortably and almost irreverentially romantic.  This study Bible is refreshingly un-overly-sentimental…if that makes any sense.  

I received a free review copy of this book from the BookLook Blogger program (My review did not have to be favorable)

This Bible may be purchased at (among other places) CBD and Amazon.com

Happiness - By Randy Alcorn

God commands His people to be happy and therefore being 'happy' is a matter of obedience for Christians. Such is the argument of Randy Alcorn's newest book "Happiness".  It seems that he has encountered a lot of Christians who seem to think, or imply, that happiness is sin and that God's purpose is for us to be holy, not happy.  He declares that the oft cited difference between happiness and joy is in reality a nonexistent difference, that the terms are so alike in meaning they are synonymous.  "The distinction between joy and happiness is not biblical".   

He critiques the view that 'joy' is more 'contentment' without reference to the emotions, while 'happiness' is primarily circumstantial and emotional.  He makes a case that the word "joy" is also emotional in meaning.  He also believes that "happy" is the better term to use in the case of many of the Greek and Hebrew words translated in many Bibles as "blessed".  Perhaps the term "blessed" isn't the best term to express the actual meaning behind the original words, but is "happy" truly the best?    I don't deny that the words do, perhaps even often, denote 'joy' or 'happiness', but do those terms always express their primary meaning?  Alcorn quotes from dictionaries and lexicons to show that the definition of "happy" corresponds with aspects of the lexical definitions of the Greek and Hebrew terms. One of the elders at my church (also a biology teacher at a Christian school)  pointed out that the lexical meaning of a word is not necessarily the common usage/evolution of the word.  He used the word 'gay' for example: the dictionary still includes 'happy' as one of the definitions, but nowadays, to use the term in reference to happiness would be unwise as its primary usage in our society refers to homosexuals.

 So, when Mr. Alcorn makes statements like, "God threatens terrible things if we will not be happy" and "A Gospel that promotes holiness over happiness isn't good news. " and, "our happiness is a measure of our obedience"  what picture does that convey? When I think of "happy" I picture an emotion ,a beaming face, a person in a state where they are prone to laugh merrily.  I suspect that others may have the same idea of 'happiness'.  Am I sinning if I am not in a jolly state?  Am I disobeying God when I am simply content with His will and am in a serious, not a merry, condition of mind? What if I changed the quotes above using a synonym for happy, "Our merriness is a measure of our obedience",  "A Gospel that promotes holiness over jolliness isn't good news."  This is along the lines of what Mr. Alcorn's statements imply to me.   

Again, maybe he is right and "blessed" isn't the best English word to use to translate words like 'makarios', but are the words 'happy' and 'joyful' the best ones to use?  For instance in the beatitudes, is the best translation truly, "happy are the poor in spirit…" or would expressions like  "content", 'favored by God' or 'fortunate', fit better?   

Alcorn says that, "Maybe by defining joy as unemotional, positional, or transcendental, we can justify our unhappiness in spite of God's command to rejoice always in him" But is having the 'happiness' emotion to be our primary goal?  Or can we admire and be in awe of God without having a feeling of merriment or jocularity? Can't one serve God without being jolly and yet not be sad? "…feelings are not the entirety of joy, but since God's joy involves his emotions, shouldn't our joy involve ours?"  Alcorn asks. Maybe this is the case, but does the emotion have to be "happiness" or can it be emotions of "awe", "contentment", "peace", or can it be an action of the mind/thought processes like focusing on God's will and submitting to it, loving others, praying to God, or even weeping with those who weep? But  does delighting and rejoicing in the Lord always take the form of great emotional happiness?  I'm sincerely asking these questions, not just using them as counters to Alcorn's arguments.

Alcorn seems to think that a major problem among Christians today is that they are against happiness.  Maybe the ones he knows of are, but the ones that I know of aren't.  Actually, I've thought that a major problem amongst Churches has been the focus upon drumming up emotions and feelings, like happiness, over and above seriously trying to be intent upon learning and doing what God says.   The statement is made in the book that the word happiness has been, "a bridge between the church and the world - one we can't afford to burn".  Alcorn makes a great case that Christians should be happy in the Lord, and that true happiness can only be found in Him and doing His will. But Happiness, even happiness in the Lord, isn't the beginning of wisdom, rather, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom".  Our witnessing to bring others to Christ will not, and should not (I think) always be presented as an offer of happiness, but rather out of our reverence for the Lord, we may witness by warning of His judgement:  "having known, therefore, the fear(not the happiness) of the Lord, we persuade men…"(2Co 5:11 ASV). " And our motivation in serving the Lord will not always be our emotional happiness in Him: Having therefore these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. "(2Co 7:1 ASV) Not, "perfecting holiness in the happiness you have in God". 

 I am NOT against Christians being happy, I just don't see the biblical proof that we're necessarily sinning if we are not in that particular state.  If he had presented it from the standpoint of the many reasons Christians have to be happy in the Lord and used material that he has presented in sections of this book like, "Ways to Cultivate Happiness", "Happiness Comes From Meditating on God's Word," and "Happiness Through Confession, Repentance and Forgiveness." I would have liked it much better.   A lot, and I truly mean a LOT, of good points were made in this book, I just didn't like how Alcorn presented the concept of happiness as an obligatory state for Christians to be in, and I wasn't convinced of the exegetical necessity for all of the Greek and Hebrew words dealt with in the book as needing to be translated as 'happy'. 

 

Many thanks to Tyndale House Publishers for sending me a complimentary review copy of this book (My review did not have to be favorable)

Readings in Baptist History - Joseph Early Jr.

Readings in Baptist History: Four Centuries of Selected Documents by Joseph Early Jr.  is a very different (at least for me)way of learning about Baptist history, or any history.  Instead of reading about events, one reads documents from those events in generally the order they were written.  This book is, as it says on the back cover, "An Entire Library in One Book", though it should be noted that several of the documents given in this book are abridged.  It is more of an overview of Baptist history rather than a deep dive into it, but it is an interesting overview.  It contains evidence of good and bad theology(including the bizarre) down through the centuries, and interesting perspectives on various theological controversies amongst the Baptists  themselves and between them and other denominations.   

The concern of many Baptists in regards to making sure they keep holding to the Bible and not man's opinions, the fight against accepting whatever spirit of the age in which they lived, was encouraging to see, and a good encouragement for us to remember to be on the lookout for attacks on the truth in our day.  The statement keeps coming up in the documents is that that the Bible is "the only rule of faith and practice", as one document states: "If it be allowed that reason or sanctified common sense shall determine in matters of faith and practice, it shall still be an open question as to whose reason and sanctified common sense shall make the decision.  If reason or common sense shall be the rule of any part of faith and practice then it is certain that we shall see division, contention, strife.  Le the Bible be the rule of faith and practice and our only difficulty shall be understanding our rule."

It was intriguing too to see various controversies connected with various historical events.  For instance, there is a document from the time of the American Revolution where Baptists are critiquing the paedobaptists because they were imposing a tax on Baptists and yet were complaining about the British Government taxing Americans without representation: "And now dear countrymen, we beseech you seriously to consider these things.  The great  importance of a general union through this country in order to the preservation of our liberties, has often been pleaded for with propriety.  But how can such a union be expected so long as that dearest of all rights, equal liberty of conscience is not allowed? ….You have lately been accused with being disorderly and rebellious, by men in power, who profess a great regard for order and public good.  Why don't you believe them, and rest easy under their administration?  You tell us that you cannot, because you are taxed where you are not represented.  Is it not so with us?......And as the present contest between America and great Britain is not so much about the greatness of taxes already laid, as about a submission to their taxing power.  So (though what we have already suffered is far from being a trifle yet) our greatest difficulty at present concerns the submitting to a taxing power in ecclesiastical affairs…"  

Overall, I think that it is a pretty interesting overview, oh, and I liked that the language of the documents was updated in some places for easier reading.  My only big complaint is that some of the documents seemed too short and I wanted to know more about that time period, or what was going on…(like in Russian Baptist history) which is probably the curiosity that the book is meant to produce, inducing an active desire for more information on Baptist history, so people will go out and research on their own. 

I'll end with a quote which I liked from a 1611 declaration of faith and which I found particularly interesting (though I didn't agree with the whole confession as I didn't think it held completely to the Rule of faith and practice): "That the members of every Church or Congregation should know one another so that they may perform all the duties of love one towards another both to soul and body.  Matthew 18:15.  1 Thessalonians 5:14. 1 Corinthians 12:25.  And especially the elders should know the whole flock, of which the Holy Ghost has made them overseers.  Acts 20:28. 1 Peter 5:2, 3.  and therefore a Church should not consist of such a multitude that they cannot have particular knowledge of one another."

 

Many thanks to the folks at B&H Academic who sent me a free review copy in exchange for my review (which did not have to be favorable).

 

This book may be purchased at Amazon.com and directly from the publisher (and also from other bookstores)