This book is tragic. On the one hand it teaches many great truths, while it on the other hand includes serious erroneous teachings and highly problematic endorsements, while violating a number of times their very own rules they teach. The book plainly rejects the 10 commandments, endorses the Message Bible and books from Rick Warren, and teaches in great detail Lectio Divina, a practice straight from Catholic Mysticism. It could be a great book, but with those transgressions it cannot even be recommended and has to be considered rather highly problematic.
PROS
+ Great that they explained the methodology at the beginning of the book and give a preview.
+ Many great teachings.
+ Great to find some critique on Augustine (his erroneous interpretation of parables), which is rare in those days.
+ Most of the Old Testament's Interpretative Journey (chapters 18-22, except the chapter on Law) is great, especially the chapter on Job.
CONS
- The authors endorse several times the Message Bible as one of the translations 'to choose from'. This is very concerning, firstly for the total absence of any discernment or warning, and secondly for including it in the group of 'Bibles to choose from'.
- We all know of the Moral Law (10 Commandments) and of the 600+ Old Covenant Laws (2 main sets of laws). Now they apply a false dichotomy, by stating, just because some people add some sub-groups to those 600+ laws (Civil / Ceremonial / Sacrificial) and this is rightly said to be a human approach, now all subsets and suddenly even the main sets are invalid. This is a terrible abuse of the Bible and a violation of various of their own principles.
- They essentially state that the 10 commandments are not valid anymore, because everything needs to be read in the narrative, here specifically in the narrative of the Exodus story. What they ignore is their own rule to read the Bible in the overall context. If they would have followed their own rule, they would have noticed that the 10 commandments have originated with creation, as visible through countless passages starting with Genesis (why did Joseph not commit adultery?) and following Bible history for more than 4000 years, until solidified at Sinai.
- When they teach about the Interpretational Reflex, they once again commit the very mistake themselves when using the narrative of CHRISTOS' birth (as generally a good example), by erroneously calling it the 'Christmas Pageant story'. It is crazy that no one saw this rookie mistake in the now 4th edition. To add an extrabiblical Catholic feast ('Christmas' comes from 'Christ's mass') as title for CHRISTOS' birth, is the very definition of the error they try to teach against, of not adding our own cultural or religious interpretations.
- They plainly lied when stating that the Reformers rejected the Apocrypha. This is a very common assertion, but nothing could be further from the truth. Until the reformation never more than 7 apocryphal books had been used (by the Catholics) in a Bible. -ALL- reformers strongly increased the books printed in the Bibles to 11-15 books and the books remained for more than 400 years in our Bibles (and would there be today if it would not have proven to be cheaper in print without it)! THEOS does most probably not care if disguised as a separate section. He will judge all those who included, promoted and even those who did not speak against the inclusion of those books between the 2 covers of His Word.
- They claim that Ruth and Naomi traveled alone, which is nowhere said in the Bible and highly unlikely. They violate their own rules to not add own interpretations to the Bible if not specifically provided as such.
- They badly confuse adultery with fornication. They read into the verse "Mat 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." an application for singles and specifically mention premarital sex in their conclusion, which is a gross abuse of biblical exegesis. This verse speaks of adultery, meaning that it relates to married people, while there are many other much more suitable passages to teach against fornication. I have always wondered why so many authors stated the very same error in the past years, but now it has become clear where it (also) comes from.
- While they speak a lot about Word Studies, they just brush off Topical Studies with the reasoning of being in conflict with not taking Bible passages out of context. But the very same problem appears in every single Word study. This is a highly problematic counsel.
There is sadly not a single paragraph in the Bible sufficiently describing abortion, alcohol, baptism, clothing, fasting, food, free will, giving, marriage and divorce or especially sexual sin. We urgently need responsibly conducted studies on all those topics, but the advice of the authors just says no to it. This is a very tragic advice and explains in parts why pastors today struggle to teach those concepts properly, when being discouraged by academics like them.
- While it might be ok to use Sherlock Holmes as an example for explaining methods of Bible study, they definitely cross the red line when using the Wizard of Oz for such a purpose. You cannot mix evil with the holy.
- They state that a woman abandoned by an unbelieving husband can remarry. This is a false teaching. They can separate physically, but the Bible nowhere equates this with divorce, and they can therefore not remarry.
- The authors are at least favorable to Catholics. They consider Catholicism as a part of Christianity. They mention the Catholic Bible as just one more version, without any discernment on the evil nature of its religion. They go in one example even as far as to prioritize 'a Catholic blue collar worker' over 'a Protestant blue collar worker'.
- Introduced through the name of Eugene Peterson, they teach in detail all the steps of the heretical practice of Lectio Divina. This is plain Catholic Mysticism and they even specifically include Contemplation. Once again they violate their own rules they teach in the book, by endorsing a practice which teaches us to approach a Bible passage rather subjectively than objectively.
- They recommend Rick Warren's 'Personal Bible Study Methods'.
ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT
- They over and over endorse the Proto-Masoretic text (Hebrew OT), while widely ignoring the Greek OT which was the Scripture received by Early Christians, and hundreds of years before and after them. It gets comical when they state that Psalm 145 has 22 acrostic verses, although the Hebrew text clearly has only 21 of those, while only the Greek OT shows the 22 verses.
- The only time they even mention the Septuagint, is of course, to use it as a scape goat for the inclusion of the Apocrypha. This is very strange, because they correctly mentioned the writing dates of the Apocrypha and would have had only to look up the writing date of the Septuagint. Then they would have very quickly realized that it was written centuries earlier and could have therefore impossibly included the Apocrypha. It is tragic that this very same error is reflected in many subsequent books such as 'Evidence That Demands a Verdict' or 'Why I Trust the Bible' and the authors have to seriously repent for misleading others.
- They state that the ESV is a Word-for-Word translation, which is a highly misleading claim. I would rather call it the English simplified version, as it is one of the worst versions in regards of the immense amount of biblical text being cut out - whenever they think that it does not add to the sense (e.g. "and answering, He said" > He said). The version also ignores habitually grammar forms (Participle almost always, Subjunctive often, sometimes even the Passive) which are elsewhere deemed relevant in this book. Word-for-Word is definitely a gross exaggeration for this translation.
- They recommend the NIV 2011 for serious Bible study, which is ridiculous: "But for serious Bible study, we suggest the NASB, NRSV, the ESV, the HCSB, the NET and the New International Version (2011), depending on the audience and situation."
- When teaching from Revelation they speak of 3 waves, while ignoring the secret scroll which results clearly in 4 waves including the Thunder Judgments (Rev 10:1-4). Once again they violated their own principles, by following the common tradition of man rather than a straightforward reading of the text.