What do you think?
Rate this book
Whose Bible Is It? A Short History of the Scriptures
Jaroslav Pelikan, widely regarded as one of the most distinguished historians of our day, now provides a clear and engaging account of the Bible’s journey from oral narrative to Hebrew and Greek text to today’s countless editions. Pelikan explores the evolution of the Jewish, Protestant, and Catholic versions and the development of the printing press and its effect on the Reformation, the translation into modern languages, and varying schools of critical scholarship. Whose Bible Is It? is a triumph of scholarship that is also a pleasure to read.
323 pages, Kindle Edition
First published August 4, 2005
82 people are currently reading
1279 people want to read
About the author
Jaroslav Pelikan
197 books131 followersJaroslav Jan Pelikan was born in Akron, Ohio, to a Slovak father and mother, Jaroslav Jan Pelikan Sr. and Anna Buzekova Pelikan. His father was pastor of Trinity Slovak Lutheran Church in Chicago, Illinois, and his paternal grandfather a bishop of the Synod of Evangelical Lutheran Churches then known as the Slovak Lutheran Church in America.
According to family members, Pelikan's mother taught him how to use a typewriter when he was three years old, as he could not yet hold a pen properly but wanted to write. A polyglot, Pelikan's facility with languages may be traced to his multilingual childhood and early training. That linguistic facility was to serve him in the career he ultimately chose (after contemplating becoming a concert pianist)--as a historian of Christian doctrine. He did not confine his studies to Roman Catholic and Protestant theological history, but also embraced that of the Christian East.
In 1946 when he was 22, he earned both a seminary degree from Concordia Seminary in Saint Louis, Missouri and a Ph.D. at the University of Chicago.
Pelikan wrote more than 30 books, including the five-volume The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine (1971–1989). Some of his later works attained crossover appeal, reaching beyond the scholarly sphere into the general reading public (notably, Mary Through the Centuries, Jesus Through the Centuries and Whose Bible Is It?).
His 1984 book The Vindication of Tradition gave rise to an often quoted one liner. In an interview in U.S. News & World Report (June 26, 1989), he said: "Tradition is the living faith of the dead; traditionalism is the dead faith of the living. Tradition lives in conversation with the past, while remembering where we are and when we are and that it is we who have to decide.
"Traditionalism supposes that nothing should ever be done for the first time, so all that is needed to solve any problem is to arrive at the supposedly unanimous testimony of this homogenized tradition."
According to family members, Pelikan's mother taught him how to use a typewriter when he was three years old, as he could not yet hold a pen properly but wanted to write. A polyglot, Pelikan's facility with languages may be traced to his multilingual childhood and early training. That linguistic facility was to serve him in the career he ultimately chose (after contemplating becoming a concert pianist)--as a historian of Christian doctrine. He did not confine his studies to Roman Catholic and Protestant theological history, but also embraced that of the Christian East.
In 1946 when he was 22, he earned both a seminary degree from Concordia Seminary in Saint Louis, Missouri and a Ph.D. at the University of Chicago.
Pelikan wrote more than 30 books, including the five-volume The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine (1971–1989). Some of his later works attained crossover appeal, reaching beyond the scholarly sphere into the general reading public (notably, Mary Through the Centuries, Jesus Through the Centuries and Whose Bible Is It?).
His 1984 book The Vindication of Tradition gave rise to an often quoted one liner. In an interview in U.S. News & World Report (June 26, 1989), he said: "Tradition is the living faith of the dead; traditionalism is the dead faith of the living. Tradition lives in conversation with the past, while remembering where we are and when we are and that it is we who have to decide.
"Traditionalism supposes that nothing should ever be done for the first time, so all that is needed to solve any problem is to arrive at the supposedly unanimous testimony of this homogenized tradition."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 100 reviews
November 7, 2021
Not Spake But Speaketh
Most Christians are biblically illiterate fools. Either captivated by the confident cadence of some self-aggrandising televangelist or desperate for acceptance within a comforting community of believers, they smugly think that they are being let in on the secrets of eternal life, or a prosperous life, or a life of better relationships, or that most sought after of all lives, a happy one. That the scriptural snake-oil they are being peddled has been poisoned just doesn’t occur to them.
Then there are a few Christians like Jaroslav Pelikan who emerge from the American evangelical heartland and dedicate themselves to understanding what the collection of myths, rumours, commands, and history called the Bible really has to say and how what it says has become a static, often oppressive, religious doctrine. For him, as for me, it is a book that doesn’t provide answers but provokes questions. Frankly I am mystified that someone like Pelikan maintains his beliefs while knowing what he knows about what fellow-Christians have done to and with their sacred documents. Nevertheless what he knows is worth sharing as widely as possible.
Whose Bible Is It? isn’t written primarily for Christians, but for Jews, and for that relatively small band of Christians who recognise that they are also Jews in everything but name. It is consequently an excellent introduction to profound biblical scholarship. Pelikan was a believer who understood the inevitably cultural matrix of his beliefs. He makes it clear that this culture is both inescapable and even more valuable than any particular beliefs it holds at any moment. For Pelikan, religion is clearly about a search rather than about a destination. Sharing in that search is an eye-opening joy.
For example, there is a wide-spread conceit among Christians (Mormons excepted) that divine revelation ended with the death of the last apostle. Such a claim is obviously arbitrary and fatuous. Pelikan rejects it while quoting Ralph Waldo Emerson, thus linking biblical with American culture:
In other words, Pelikan considers the Bible as inspirational rather than definitive. In this view its very ambiguity, imprecisions , and even contradictions become not matters of scorn but objects of interpretation. And of interpretation there is no end, which is perhaps the Bible’s greatest Emersonian feature (and not shared with the Book of Mormon). Both Jewish and Christian scriptures are inherently fluid. They float on a substrate of barely perceptible but mobile ‘truths,’ that poke through from time to time. Like water on a moving lava bed perhaps, the surface boils away momentarily to reveal something previously invisible. When this happens, it’s always a surprise; so one has to be prepared.
A good example is Pelikan’s exegesis of perhaps one of the most cosmic and well-known verses in the Christian Bible, the opening to John’s Gospel: “In the beginning was the Word” (Logos in the Greek of John). Clearly meant to mirror the opening of the Book of Genesis in which YHWH speaks the universe into existence, John’s gospel nevertheless often appears overtly anti-Semitic and has been used to justify the hatred of Jews throughout the Christian epoch. But Pelikan sheds some very needed light on the translation out of Greek:
So the presumption that ‘the Word’ refers to Jesus as co-eternal with God is at least questionable. And the alternative translation is not only plausible but sets an entirely different cultural tone to everything that follows. Suddenly the gospel becomes Jewish and implies what is much more likely than has been traditional, namely Jews talking to Jews and criticising each other.
Another example is in the first chapter of Paul’s letter to the Hebrews in which the Jewish Scriptures are quoted from the Psalms: “And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.” If this sounds somewhat inscrutable (like much of the Bible), one shouldn’t fret. It is the result of bad translation which after becoming official has embedded itself in the world as ‘biblical truth.’ Pelikan explains how:
Pelikan provides dozens of similar examples that would make any fundamentalist scream with a rage of unrequited expectations. But his general point is that an intelligent understanding of biblical material is simply not possible through listening to some crackpot preacher in a revival tent or on national television, or for that matter in almost any pulpit around the world. Christians are by and large simply unequipped for the task of spreading the word they consider sacred:
Just determining what constitutes the Word at all is a monumental task which is really never finished. Its meaning changes continuously every time it is spoken. It can therefore never be used to command, or judge, or justify but only to inspire. Inspire toward what end? Pelikan is not hesitant to say with the prophet Micah:
Most Christians are biblically illiterate fools. Either captivated by the confident cadence of some self-aggrandising televangelist or desperate for acceptance within a comforting community of believers, they smugly think that they are being let in on the secrets of eternal life, or a prosperous life, or a life of better relationships, or that most sought after of all lives, a happy one. That the scriptural snake-oil they are being peddled has been poisoned just doesn’t occur to them.
Then there are a few Christians like Jaroslav Pelikan who emerge from the American evangelical heartland and dedicate themselves to understanding what the collection of myths, rumours, commands, and history called the Bible really has to say and how what it says has become a static, often oppressive, religious doctrine. For him, as for me, it is a book that doesn’t provide answers but provokes questions. Frankly I am mystified that someone like Pelikan maintains his beliefs while knowing what he knows about what fellow-Christians have done to and with their sacred documents. Nevertheless what he knows is worth sharing as widely as possible.
Whose Bible Is It? isn’t written primarily for Christians, but for Jews, and for that relatively small band of Christians who recognise that they are also Jews in everything but name. It is consequently an excellent introduction to profound biblical scholarship. Pelikan was a believer who understood the inevitably cultural matrix of his beliefs. He makes it clear that this culture is both inescapable and even more valuable than any particular beliefs it holds at any moment. For Pelikan, religion is clearly about a search rather than about a destination. Sharing in that search is an eye-opening joy.
For example, there is a wide-spread conceit among Christians (Mormons excepted) that divine revelation ended with the death of the last apostle. Such a claim is obviously arbitrary and fatuous. Pelikan rejects it while quoting Ralph Waldo Emerson, thus linking biblical with American culture:
For “not spake but speaketh” aptly describes the ongoing revelation of the word of God that has come over and over again and that still continues to come now, not in some kind of high-flying independence from but, to the contrary, in a devout and persevering engagement with the pages of the Sacred Book.”
In other words, Pelikan considers the Bible as inspirational rather than definitive. In this view its very ambiguity, imprecisions , and even contradictions become not matters of scorn but objects of interpretation. And of interpretation there is no end, which is perhaps the Bible’s greatest Emersonian feature (and not shared with the Book of Mormon). Both Jewish and Christian scriptures are inherently fluid. They float on a substrate of barely perceptible but mobile ‘truths,’ that poke through from time to time. Like water on a moving lava bed perhaps, the surface boils away momentarily to reveal something previously invisible. When this happens, it’s always a surprise; so one has to be prepared.
A good example is Pelikan’s exegesis of perhaps one of the most cosmic and well-known verses in the Christian Bible, the opening to John’s Gospel: “In the beginning was the Word” (Logos in the Greek of John). Clearly meant to mirror the opening of the Book of Genesis in which YHWH speaks the universe into existence, John’s gospel nevertheless often appears overtly anti-Semitic and has been used to justify the hatred of Jews throughout the Christian epoch. But Pelikan sheds some very needed light on the translation out of Greek:
In addition to Word or Reason or Mind, ho Logos in John can mean Wisdom (Sophia), and this is what Sophia says about herself in the Septuagint version of the eighth chapter of the Book of Proverbs: “The Lord made me the beginning of his ways for his works. He established me before time was in the beginning before he made the earth. When he prepared the heaven, I was present with him. I was by him, suiting myself to him, I was that in which he took delight; and daily I rejoiced in his presence continually.”
So the presumption that ‘the Word’ refers to Jesus as co-eternal with God is at least questionable. And the alternative translation is not only plausible but sets an entirely different cultural tone to everything that follows. Suddenly the gospel becomes Jewish and implies what is much more likely than has been traditional, namely Jews talking to Jews and criticising each other.
Another example is in the first chapter of Paul’s letter to the Hebrews in which the Jewish Scriptures are quoted from the Psalms: “And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.” If this sounds somewhat inscrutable (like much of the Bible), one shouldn’t fret. It is the result of bad translation which after becoming official has embedded itself in the world as ‘biblical truth.’ Pelikan explains how:
Because the Greek word for a “messenger” of any kind was angelos and the word for “wind” could also mean “spirit,” the sentence in the Psalms “He makes the winds His messengers” comes out in the Greek translation as “He makes His angels spirits.” It is quoted that way in the New Testament as part of a discussion of the angels, as well as in Christian liturgies to this day, even though that is not what the Hebrew original is saying.
Pelikan provides dozens of similar examples that would make any fundamentalist scream with a rage of unrequited expectations. But his general point is that an intelligent understanding of biblical material is simply not possible through listening to some crackpot preacher in a revival tent or on national television, or for that matter in almost any pulpit around the world. Christians are by and large simply unequipped for the task of spreading the word they consider sacred:
…knowledge of the Hebrew original virtually disappeared from the church for a thousand years or more… even the earliest Latin translations of the books of the Tanakh [the Jewish Bible] (which we have now only in fragments) were based on it, being therefore translations-of-a-translation, in which the human mistakes or idiosyncracies of the seventy (or whoever they were) were compounded rather than corrected, as the words of the Bible made their tortuous way across the several major linguistic boundaries from Hebrew to Greek to Latin.
Just determining what constitutes the Word at all is a monumental task which is really never finished. Its meaning changes continuously every time it is spoken. It can therefore never be used to command, or judge, or justify but only to inspire. Inspire toward what end? Pelikan is not hesitant to say with the prophet Micah:
He has told you, O man, what is good, And what the LORD requires of you: Only to do justice And to love goodness, And to walk modestly with your God. That “only” has rightly been called “the biggest little word in the Bible.”Jesus said the same, as did his near contemporary Rabbi Akiva, and as did Marcus Aurelius, and after him Augustine. Really what else is there to say of any import? On the other hand, is there any limit to the number of interpretations possible, and required, for even this brief passage in daily life? Revelation occurs in these interpretations, or not at all.
January 3, 2024
Pelikan, I think did a wonderful job in this book by covering a wide amount of material in a way that was both engaging and informative. He starts off discussing the passing down of "the word" by the oral tradition of the Hebrew people and ends by discussing the way the humanists during the renaissance unintentionally led the way to biblical fundamentalism in modern day, USA. I never got the feeling that he was being particularly one-sided, and although I came into the book knowing his theological background, I wouldn't have been able to tell one way or another by reading this what theological background he claimed. He is very fair, I think, in his historical analysis. If you're curious about the history of scripture and the different views of scripture this is a great introduction to the topic, and will whet your initial appetite. I'm looking forward to reading Pelikan's Christian Tradition series on the development of doctrine within the church later this year.
March 7, 2024
A Concise History of the Bible
Unlike his rather daunting five-tome work The Christian Tradition, Jaroslav Pelikan’s Whose Bible Is it? is a comparatively short and easily readable history of the scriptures that eventually became part of the Bible in one way or other. Here, the author offers a summary of the changing relationships between Judaism and Christianity on account of different readings, translations, and compilations of Holy Scripture, starting with the oral tradition in Judaism and looking at the changing role of the Bible in the course of Church history.
Sometimes, Pelikan also gives a typical example of the four levels of Bible interpretation that stem from the Middle Ages, namely the literal, the allegorical, the moral (or tropological), and the eschatological (or anagogical) sense, when he applies these four levels to the meaning of the word “Jerusalem” in Biblical contexts. All in all, there were lots of details which, once again, made me wish I had a better memory, for example the mention of Robert Estienne, a Parisian printer, who was the first to print the New Testament divided into numbered verses.
As I am just now trying to read the Bible cover to cover, I found in this book a valuable source of background information giving me ample hints as to how to read the various Biblical texts, whose original languages are beyond my ken.
Unlike his rather daunting five-tome work The Christian Tradition, Jaroslav Pelikan’s Whose Bible Is it? is a comparatively short and easily readable history of the scriptures that eventually became part of the Bible in one way or other. Here, the author offers a summary of the changing relationships between Judaism and Christianity on account of different readings, translations, and compilations of Holy Scripture, starting with the oral tradition in Judaism and looking at the changing role of the Bible in the course of Church history.
Sometimes, Pelikan also gives a typical example of the four levels of Bible interpretation that stem from the Middle Ages, namely the literal, the allegorical, the moral (or tropological), and the eschatological (or anagogical) sense, when he applies these four levels to the meaning of the word “Jerusalem” in Biblical contexts. All in all, there were lots of details which, once again, made me wish I had a better memory, for example the mention of Robert Estienne, a Parisian printer, who was the first to print the New Testament divided into numbered verses.
As I am just now trying to read the Bible cover to cover, I found in this book a valuable source of background information giving me ample hints as to how to read the various Biblical texts, whose original languages are beyond my ken.
May 21, 2009
Pelikan can be so richly informative that I am given to read sentences multiple times over. This is the sort of author whose knowledge is so thorough that he is writing for an audience of peers where, in spots, his publisher may have tried to encourage Pelikan to "dumb it down" a bit for the rest of us gentiles. It is precisely for this reason that I find this material of extraordinary value and importance. This is not your typical argument for/against the influence of Constantine or the Catholic church or the Jewish followers of "The Way" on the Bible as we know it today, but a thoughtful and staunch examination of the Hebrew culture and Jewish faith as the driving context with which the entire bible both Tanakh and "Christian scriptures" must be read.
I have read much on how each individual book was selected (or why they may have been selected) for the modern KJV/NKJ/NIV/ESV/Catholic bibles and some on how the Tanakh was "established" but this book intends to consider more than Bible composition by emphasizing how we must approach it and what that means to believers of the three Abrahamic faiths. I checked it out from the library and am now buying it as it is one of those books which will prove to be a reference for other sub-sects of future study.
I have read much on how each individual book was selected (or why they may have been selected) for the modern KJV/NKJ/NIV/ESV/Catholic bibles and some on how the Tanakh was "established" but this book intends to consider more than Bible composition by emphasizing how we must approach it and what that means to believers of the three Abrahamic faiths. I checked it out from the library and am now buying it as it is one of those books which will prove to be a reference for other sub-sects of future study.
March 24, 2015
I have come to expect Jaroslav Pelikan to be erudite and somewhat dry, having first encountered him as an historian of Christian doctrine. This book isn't of that character. Rather, it approaches the personable, offering some sense of the character of its author.
If you are seeking a serious history of Jewish and Christian scriptures, however, this isn't it. While Pelikan does review scriptural traditions within Judaism, Catholicism and Protestantism (Eastern Orthodoxy and Islam are only briefly addressed), his review is neither thorough nor particularly deep. Instead, this is more of an impressionistic essay primarily concerned with interfaith dialog between Judaism and Christianity, seeing, as he does, the Talmud and the New Testament as being, both of them, commentaries on the Hebrew Scriptures.
Despite his rather scattershot and all-too-brief treatment of this enormous topic, I found Pelikan to offer the occasional fact new to me or insight worthy of consideration.
If you are seeking a serious history of Jewish and Christian scriptures, however, this isn't it. While Pelikan does review scriptural traditions within Judaism, Catholicism and Protestantism (Eastern Orthodoxy and Islam are only briefly addressed), his review is neither thorough nor particularly deep. Instead, this is more of an impressionistic essay primarily concerned with interfaith dialog between Judaism and Christianity, seeing, as he does, the Talmud and the New Testament as being, both of them, commentaries on the Hebrew Scriptures.
Despite his rather scattershot and all-too-brief treatment of this enormous topic, I found Pelikan to offer the occasional fact new to me or insight worthy of consideration.
April 16, 2011
Index
1. The Trouble With Kindle
2. Author's Funny Name
3. Opinion about Book
1. As of this writing (April 2011), the edition of this book available as a Kindle download is missing the text of Chapter 8 (“Back to the Sources”). I asked Kindle for a corrected copy. They told me to download the book again. I did so. The text of Chapter 8 was still missing. I told them so. They offered me a refund. I accepted their offer. The next time I connected my mobile device to the 'net, Amazon deleted my copy. Luckily, I had another. Lessons learned: (1) When you complain to Amazon about a mistake in a book, no one looks at the file of the book before telling you to download it again. (B) When you get an ebook from Amazon with a piece missing, read the rest of it before reporting the problem.
2. I know that the author was a talented, highly-educated, multi-lingual scholar, respected throughout the world, but I have to note that he had a slightly preposterous name. This is not a bad thing. Just saying his name to myself made me smile. Try it: “Jaroslav Pelikan, Jaroslav Pelikan...”. It is now my top pick for funniest name of actual published author ever, taking the prize previously held by P. V. Glob, whom I learned about from my friend Neil.
3. Oh, yeah, I almost forgot to mention: this is a interesting book. As a person who has suffered through hours of mind-numbing religious instruction and directionless Bible study, I found myself constantly thinking “Why didn't anybody tell me that about the Bible before?” Like: Christians and Jews use different translations of the Old Testament. I guess I was at the water cooler when that memo went around. What about Christians monkeying around with the translation to “prove” that the Old Testament foretold Christ's life and death? The nuns never mentioned that, either. Hmm, maybe they had some kind of agenda...
1. The Trouble With Kindle
2. Author's Funny Name
3. Opinion about Book
1. As of this writing (April 2011), the edition of this book available as a Kindle download is missing the text of Chapter 8 (“Back to the Sources”). I asked Kindle for a corrected copy. They told me to download the book again. I did so. The text of Chapter 8 was still missing. I told them so. They offered me a refund. I accepted their offer. The next time I connected my mobile device to the 'net, Amazon deleted my copy. Luckily, I had another. Lessons learned: (1) When you complain to Amazon about a mistake in a book, no one looks at the file of the book before telling you to download it again. (B) When you get an ebook from Amazon with a piece missing, read the rest of it before reporting the problem.
2. I know that the author was a talented, highly-educated, multi-lingual scholar, respected throughout the world, but I have to note that he had a slightly preposterous name. This is not a bad thing. Just saying his name to myself made me smile. Try it: “Jaroslav Pelikan, Jaroslav Pelikan...”. It is now my top pick for funniest name of actual published author ever, taking the prize previously held by P. V. Glob, whom I learned about from my friend Neil.
3. Oh, yeah, I almost forgot to mention: this is a interesting book. As a person who has suffered through hours of mind-numbing religious instruction and directionless Bible study, I found myself constantly thinking “Why didn't anybody tell me that about the Bible before?” Like: Christians and Jews use different translations of the Old Testament. I guess I was at the water cooler when that memo went around. What about Christians monkeying around with the translation to “prove” that the Old Testament foretold Christ's life and death? The nuns never mentioned that, either. Hmm, maybe they had some kind of agenda...
July 18, 2015
This is a very readable, short introduction to the history of the Bible. There is much good information here, and yet, by intent, little to which anyone in the major denominations of Christianity (or Judaism, for that matter) would object. Despite my respect for Pelikan as a scholar, I was a bit disappointed in the style. In a desire to be ecumenical, Pelikan's writing felt rather generic to me. I was hoping for something more penetrating, especially in the historical areas of controversy. Still, this is a solid all-around overview of the history of the Bible that should please most lay inquirers and stimulate further investigation.
July 23, 2020
When I was early in my Orthodox journey, I became aware of - and read- a few of Professor Pelikan's writings and knew that he came into the church prior to his death.
This one had been sitting on my shelf for awhile - I think I may have purchased it for my oldest when he was a teen. What I really loved about it was the way that he discussed the Bible as a book and how important writing and reading was to the way that it impacted the English speaking world and Protestantism, among other ideas.
This one had been sitting on my shelf for awhile - I think I may have purchased it for my oldest when he was a teen. What I really loved about it was the way that he discussed the Bible as a book and how important writing and reading was to the way that it impacted the English speaking world and Protestantism, among other ideas.
March 2, 2012
While the book as a whole was quite impressive (mainly because of its brevity in covering a very broad and historically deep topic and its simplicity in presenting this overview), I was greatly disappointed with his section covering the Reformation, entitled "The Bible Only." His classification of Sola Scriptura as such, shows some carelessness as to the precision of representing fairly this historical period, in its non-Anabaptist (Radical Reformation) representation (i.e. the Lutherans and Reformed). Sola Scriptura does not mean "The Bible only" as it is often misunderstood today, but it meant and still means "By Scripture alone"--meaning, the Bible gets the last word; it has final authority. It does not mean that all Protestants need is the Bible. Other than this, as a whole I highly recommend this book if you are looking to understand better how we have received the Scriptures from our past. It is also quite surprising to see in this book wonderful observations such as: "God speaking," the "covenants" throughout Scripture and "the covenant community"(though I do not endorse everything he wrote pertaining to this discussion), the essence/energies distinction (or Creator/creature or archetypal/ectypal distinction in Protestant Reformed), as well as others.
December 23, 2018
In this incredibly well-written book, Pelican provides a study of how the Bible evolved from its early "incarnation" as oral tradition to its modern appearance in several different configurations and a multitude of languages and translations for many different audiences. Beginning with the earliest Hebrew texts and following the New Testament's appearance in Greek and then the earliest translations in Latin, Pelican traces the development of the Jewish and Christian Bibles. Pelican also explores the canonization of different Bibles and why certain books were adopted by different religions and sects, as well as the development of the printing press, the Bible's translation into modern languages and the varying schools of critical scholarship. Whether you have ever looked at the Bible from these points of view or not, it is a readable book that is incredibly fascinating. I HIGHLY recommend it.
November 2, 2010
Okay, it took forever for me to finish this book! I wish I had read it through quickly b/c each chapter builds on information from the previous chapter; it's chronological. If you have interest in how the bible came to be in the form it is today (Protestant, Catholic, and Hebrew), this book is a great symopsis. Pelikan, is from the Eastern Orthodox tradition, so he comes at the bible from a slightly different perspective than a Protestant or Catholic would, but he is certainly a Christian. He approaches the scriptures as a believer, so his goal is not to tear down faith, but to explain what changes the bible has gone through since it's earliest origins in the verbal tradition to the translations in almost every language existing today.
January 13, 2014
I enjoyed Whose Bible Is It?: A History of the Scriptures Through the Ages, learning a lot and having things I have read in other books confirmed. I suspect that Pelikan writes as he speaks, with many lengthy parenthetical phrases. Sometimes I found them distracting from the point being made. The book is decidedly from a Christian perspective, showing that the Tanakh was co-opted by early Christians as part of their Bible. I disagree with the Christian perspective, but it is good to try to understand different perspectives. Understanding does not equal agreement.
February 9, 2021
Important, powerful, and fundamental, but could have been written better
Important and powerful and fundamental book on the history of the scriptures and how Jews, Catholics, and Protestants have canonized, translated (and mis-translated), interpreted (and mis-interpreted) them throughout history and into today. The writing isn’t as accessible to the masses as it could be, but still enjoyable read, mainly because of the subject matter.
Important and powerful and fundamental book on the history of the scriptures and how Jews, Catholics, and Protestants have canonized, translated (and mis-translated), interpreted (and mis-interpreted) them throughout history and into today. The writing isn’t as accessible to the masses as it could be, but still enjoyable read, mainly because of the subject matter.
October 20, 2020
This was probably a bit over my head to start. However it ultimately was a nice overview of how the Bible came to have its current format.
The book did not go in depth into how any one book or section was used and eventually made it to standardized versions of the Bible, but it was a nice introduction, if, like me, you have never studied the origin of the written Bible.
The book did not go in depth into how any one book or section was used and eventually made it to standardized versions of the Bible, but it was a nice introduction, if, like me, you have never studied the origin of the written Bible.
March 21, 2020
A 30,000 foot overview of the history of the Bible that primarily relies on secondary sources. If you are coming at this topic with no prior knowledge, the book should kindle further study. Otherwise, read for the factual tidbits.
December 19, 2013
Excellent book by the best modern Church historian.
May 13, 2018
Good as an introduction. Not necessarily for theology majors or Biblical historians, but definitely excellent as an overview of the basics.
May 22, 2021
I’ve been discussing issues of the biblical canon and translation history with an evangelical friend, so I picked up this book to get a better sense of the terrain. While I’ve heard a lot of the material before in lectures, it’s nice to get a more systematic and detailed exposition of this stuff in book form, no less from a former Yale history professor and Lutheran turned Orthodox.
Pelikan works from the oral tradition into Hebrew, providing context on how oral traditions functioned in that time, and then giving an overview of the Tanakh. This stuff is very common material in online lectures so it was not the most interesting part. But he eventually gets to the question of the Hebrew ‘canon’ which I did find interesting. There is a theory that suggests Torah, Nevi’im, and Kethuvim represent stages of canonization, though this is debated. According to Pelikan, authoritative collections of books existed for a long time, but the Jewish ‘canon’ as such did not quite surface until about 90 to 100 CE in Jamnia under Rabbi Akiba. Before then books like Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes remained in doubt. However the book of Daniel was still being disputed at the time of this formative period in Jamnia.
Pelikan also later gets into the fact that the oral tradition and the Tanakh were intimately connected mostly because the original Hebrew texts had neither vowels nor punctuation, or even word divisions. I think John McWhorter mentioned this regarding his time learning Hebrew, and he only could read Hebrew when ‘vowel points’ were supplied. While the oral tradition did keep the deciphering of the text relatively stable, there were divergences in the way the monolithic string of consonants were read. Pelikan brings up an example of the Massoretes (sixth to tenth century CE) supplied vowel points to the Hebrew text differently than the way some Septuagint translators were, at least in certain sections. For example, following the famous verse Jesus cries out from the Psalms (my God, my God why have you forsaken me), there is a verse that the Septuagint interprets as “they have pierced my hands and feet”, versus the Massorete rendering: “Like lions [they maul] my hands and feet.” With respect to notions of ‘divine inspiration’, Pelikan raises interesting questions about to what extent do different traditions specify inspiration, down to the resolution of vowels, word spaces, and the overall process of translation.
The story of the Septuagint that Pelikan tells is quite fascinating. It was originally not focused on making the scriptures more accessible to Gentiles, but for Diasporic Jews who could no longer read Hebrew. The translation process took at least a century or two, maybe more. He of course mentions the famous ‘parthenos’ passage in Isaiah that became the major touchstone point with the RSV. Even though the RSV had some of the most reputable and dedicated translation scholars behind it, it was accused of being a ‘communist’ translation. The ESV is actually a conservative version worked on from the RSV as its basis, but supposedly corrects all the ‘liberal bias’ that the RSV translators squeezed in (which was taken even farther with the NRSV). And most famously the ESV still renders the word for young woman in Isaiah as ‘virgin’, because of the Septuagint translation, even though the original Hebrew does not have the specific word for ‘virgin’ in that passage in Isaiah.
There’s a lot more stuff in here, including stuff on the history of English translations, historical criticism (of course), Haskalah and the Enlightenment, contemporary translation issues and missionary endeavours, as well as canonical issues more broadly. I was already mostly familiar with the so-called 'New Testament' canon taking a few centuries to stabilize, but it was interesting to read about it in more detail. I'll finish with an excerpt on this issue:
"Also from Rome, and also apparently from the second century, comes the oldest extant list of New Testament writings, the Muratorian fragment... It contains the names of the books that were being read in the church at Rome in about 200 CE. By about that time, as the writings of early Christian authors from Lyons, Carthage, and Alexandria also suggest, the Gospels, the Epistles of Paul, and some other Epistles were being used as Scripture. From these sources we may gather a list of books on which they all seem to have been agreed. That list would include the following, given in the order now employed in the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and 1 John.
From these same sources we may also assemble a list of those books that were disputed but that eventually were included in the canon of the New Testament. The Epistle to the Hebrews belongs in this category. It seems to have been accepted in the Eastern section of the church but disputed in the West, for it does not appear in the Muratorian canon and is also questioned by other writers. The Epistle of James was in doubt among even more writers. Although 1 Peter is almost universally acknowledged, it is not listed in the preceding paragraph because of its absence from the Muratorian catalog. Second Peter, on the other hand, was questioned by many early Christian writers who accepted 1 Peter. The Epistle of Jude appears in the Muratorian canon but was rejected elsewhere. Second John and 3 John sometimes were included with 1 John as one book, but they did not receive the universal support that it did. The Book of Revelation probably was the object of more antagonism than any other of the books eventually canonized, partly because apocalypticism acquired a bad name through its association with heretical and schismatic movements very early in Christian history and partly because some did not believe that the same man who had written the Gospel of John was also the author of Revelation.
...The writings of Eusebius and of his contemporary, Athanasius of Alexandria, make it evident that agreement on the disputed books was approaching by the middle of the fourth century and that the canon of the New Testament which now appears in Christian Bibles was gaining general, if not quite universal, acceptance. That canon appears for the first time in a letter of Athanasius issued in 367 CE.
After that letter other traditions held their own for a time. Thus the scholars and theologians of Antioch in general accepted only three Catholic Epistles—James, 1 Peter, and 1 John—while one of its most illustrious representatives, Theodore of Mopsuestia, rejected the whole of this section of the canon. The West followed the lead of Athanasius. In 382 a synod was held at Rome under Pope Damasus, at which the influence of Jerome secured the adoption of a list of books answering to that of Athanasius. This was ratified by Pope Gelasius at the end of the fifth century. The same list was confirmed independently for the province of Africa at Hippo Regius in 393 and at Carthage in 397 and 419 under the leadership of Augustine of Hippo. The second canon of the Second Trullan Council of 692, known to canon lawyers as the Quinisext, may be taken to have formally closed the process of the formation of the New Testament canon for East and West. This stands in sharp contrast to the status of the Old Testament canon within the church, which was not acted upon by an “ecumenical” church council until the Council of Trent in 1546 and then in a way that has gone on being disputed because of the status of the Apocrypha."
Pelikan works from the oral tradition into Hebrew, providing context on how oral traditions functioned in that time, and then giving an overview of the Tanakh. This stuff is very common material in online lectures so it was not the most interesting part. But he eventually gets to the question of the Hebrew ‘canon’ which I did find interesting. There is a theory that suggests Torah, Nevi’im, and Kethuvim represent stages of canonization, though this is debated. According to Pelikan, authoritative collections of books existed for a long time, but the Jewish ‘canon’ as such did not quite surface until about 90 to 100 CE in Jamnia under Rabbi Akiba. Before then books like Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes remained in doubt. However the book of Daniel was still being disputed at the time of this formative period in Jamnia.
Pelikan also later gets into the fact that the oral tradition and the Tanakh were intimately connected mostly because the original Hebrew texts had neither vowels nor punctuation, or even word divisions. I think John McWhorter mentioned this regarding his time learning Hebrew, and he only could read Hebrew when ‘vowel points’ were supplied. While the oral tradition did keep the deciphering of the text relatively stable, there were divergences in the way the monolithic string of consonants were read. Pelikan brings up an example of the Massoretes (sixth to tenth century CE) supplied vowel points to the Hebrew text differently than the way some Septuagint translators were, at least in certain sections. For example, following the famous verse Jesus cries out from the Psalms (my God, my God why have you forsaken me), there is a verse that the Septuagint interprets as “they have pierced my hands and feet”, versus the Massorete rendering: “Like lions [they maul] my hands and feet.” With respect to notions of ‘divine inspiration’, Pelikan raises interesting questions about to what extent do different traditions specify inspiration, down to the resolution of vowels, word spaces, and the overall process of translation.
The story of the Septuagint that Pelikan tells is quite fascinating. It was originally not focused on making the scriptures more accessible to Gentiles, but for Diasporic Jews who could no longer read Hebrew. The translation process took at least a century or two, maybe more. He of course mentions the famous ‘parthenos’ passage in Isaiah that became the major touchstone point with the RSV. Even though the RSV had some of the most reputable and dedicated translation scholars behind it, it was accused of being a ‘communist’ translation. The ESV is actually a conservative version worked on from the RSV as its basis, but supposedly corrects all the ‘liberal bias’ that the RSV translators squeezed in (which was taken even farther with the NRSV). And most famously the ESV still renders the word for young woman in Isaiah as ‘virgin’, because of the Septuagint translation, even though the original Hebrew does not have the specific word for ‘virgin’ in that passage in Isaiah.
There’s a lot more stuff in here, including stuff on the history of English translations, historical criticism (of course), Haskalah and the Enlightenment, contemporary translation issues and missionary endeavours, as well as canonical issues more broadly. I was already mostly familiar with the so-called 'New Testament' canon taking a few centuries to stabilize, but it was interesting to read about it in more detail. I'll finish with an excerpt on this issue:
"Also from Rome, and also apparently from the second century, comes the oldest extant list of New Testament writings, the Muratorian fragment... It contains the names of the books that were being read in the church at Rome in about 200 CE. By about that time, as the writings of early Christian authors from Lyons, Carthage, and Alexandria also suggest, the Gospels, the Epistles of Paul, and some other Epistles were being used as Scripture. From these sources we may gather a list of books on which they all seem to have been agreed. That list would include the following, given in the order now employed in the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and 1 John.
From these same sources we may also assemble a list of those books that were disputed but that eventually were included in the canon of the New Testament. The Epistle to the Hebrews belongs in this category. It seems to have been accepted in the Eastern section of the church but disputed in the West, for it does not appear in the Muratorian canon and is also questioned by other writers. The Epistle of James was in doubt among even more writers. Although 1 Peter is almost universally acknowledged, it is not listed in the preceding paragraph because of its absence from the Muratorian catalog. Second Peter, on the other hand, was questioned by many early Christian writers who accepted 1 Peter. The Epistle of Jude appears in the Muratorian canon but was rejected elsewhere. Second John and 3 John sometimes were included with 1 John as one book, but they did not receive the universal support that it did. The Book of Revelation probably was the object of more antagonism than any other of the books eventually canonized, partly because apocalypticism acquired a bad name through its association with heretical and schismatic movements very early in Christian history and partly because some did not believe that the same man who had written the Gospel of John was also the author of Revelation.
...The writings of Eusebius and of his contemporary, Athanasius of Alexandria, make it evident that agreement on the disputed books was approaching by the middle of the fourth century and that the canon of the New Testament which now appears in Christian Bibles was gaining general, if not quite universal, acceptance. That canon appears for the first time in a letter of Athanasius issued in 367 CE.
After that letter other traditions held their own for a time. Thus the scholars and theologians of Antioch in general accepted only three Catholic Epistles—James, 1 Peter, and 1 John—while one of its most illustrious representatives, Theodore of Mopsuestia, rejected the whole of this section of the canon. The West followed the lead of Athanasius. In 382 a synod was held at Rome under Pope Damasus, at which the influence of Jerome secured the adoption of a list of books answering to that of Athanasius. This was ratified by Pope Gelasius at the end of the fifth century. The same list was confirmed independently for the province of Africa at Hippo Regius in 393 and at Carthage in 397 and 419 under the leadership of Augustine of Hippo. The second canon of the Second Trullan Council of 692, known to canon lawyers as the Quinisext, may be taken to have formally closed the process of the formation of the New Testament canon for East and West. This stands in sharp contrast to the status of the Old Testament canon within the church, which was not acted upon by an “ecumenical” church council until the Council of Trent in 1546 and then in a way that has gone on being disputed because of the status of the Apocrypha."
May 3, 2018
No kenen se sitten on? Pelikan ei vastaa suoraan, vaan kuvaa Raamatun historian vuosituhansia eri puolilla maailmaa. Vastaus tuntuu olevan samaan aikaan, että se on vähän kaikkien ja vähän ei-kenenkään kirja. Jokainen yhteisö on paininut sen kanssa omalla tavallaan.
Tämä vastaus tyydyttää ehkä historioitsijan, mutta ei minua teologina. Viisi tähteä Pelikanin valtavasta tietomäärästä (joka on kuitenkin downgreidattu tässä yleisöä varten eli positiivisessa mielessä kaiketikin asia on popularisoitu). Yksi miinus siitä, että en siltikään vakuuttunut tästä Raamatun itsensä aikahistorian esityksestä. Toinen miinus siitä hölmistyksestä, että jos ~ neljä vuosikymmentä tutkii (Raamatun) historiaa ammatikseen, niin voiko lopputulos olla näin pliisu. Muutamalla mittarilla mitattuna, jostakin muualta olen saanut paljon enemmän ja melkein sellainen olo, että itsekin voisi löytää enemmän substanssia.
Tämä vastaus tyydyttää ehkä historioitsijan, mutta ei minua teologina. Viisi tähteä Pelikanin valtavasta tietomäärästä (joka on kuitenkin downgreidattu tässä yleisöä varten eli positiivisessa mielessä kaiketikin asia on popularisoitu). Yksi miinus siitä, että en siltikään vakuuttunut tästä Raamatun itsensä aikahistorian esityksestä. Toinen miinus siitä hölmistyksestä, että jos ~ neljä vuosikymmentä tutkii (Raamatun) historiaa ammatikseen, niin voiko lopputulos olla näin pliisu. Muutamalla mittarilla mitattuna, jostakin muualta olen saanut paljon enemmän ja melkein sellainen olo, että itsekin voisi löytää enemmän substanssia.
September 15, 2016
There is an obvious answer to the question proposed by the title of this book. Whose Bible is it? God's Bible. Fortunately, this is the answer that the book comes to, although it only comes in the afterword, and those readers who are not patient enough to read through 200 pages or so of seeming praise to higher criticism [1] are likely to read enough to get the author's belated answer to the question he poses. Even after reading the answer, there are likely to be more than a few readers who will not view this work charitably on account of their suspicions of the author's lack of faith in the inerrancy of scripture, or for his occasional comments about Isaiah writing only the first 39 chapters of the book under his name. Indeed, this book is a prime example of a work in which one's opinion depends on one's willingness to give the author the benefit of the doubt. Giving a fair amount of benefit of the doubt, this book ends up coming up on the positive end, but with a different amount of generosity of spirit, the decision could easily go the other way, and a reader of this book needs to be aware of that fact before deciding to tackle its contents.
This book begins in a way that will likely alienate some readers and amuse others, by pointing out that the distinction between the books included in the Hebrew scriptures and Roman Catholic and Protestant bibles is likely to be obvious based on a fairly casual look at the table of contents and is far from a matter of arcane interest only to biblical scholars. The book then winds its way through eleven more chapters dealing with ideas about the orality of scripture, the distinction between the way the Bible reads in Hebrew as opposed to Greek, the continuing revelation of the Hebrew Scriptures in both the Talmud as well the New Testament and the fulfillment of prophecies in Jesus Christ, a discussion of the relationship of Islam to the other religions of "the book," which avoids a discussion of the hadiths [2], and then winds its way through the pushing of biblical scholarship back to the sources, the rise of solo scriptura among Protestants, the troubles between faith and reason in the Enlightenment and the problems of higher criticism, and then the book ends on a solid note with a discussion of the way the Bible serves as a message for the whole human race, forcing us to examine our own presuppositions in what the Bible means that come from our cultural background and heritage, and the way that the strangeness of the Bible forces us to come to terms with what it is that God actually wants from us in terms of belief and practice.
There will likely be few people who agree with everything in this book. For one, the author disregards the evidence for the early reduction of the biblical account into writing even in the pre-Mosaic period [3] and tends to have too high an opinion of the desirability of flattering the egos of ungodly and uninspired biblical critics, both past and present. Even so, it is clear that this author is taking the Bible seriously, and coming at it from the perspective of someone who is aware of the various faith traditions in how they deal with scripture, in matters of textual understanding and the interpretation of hints and implications and foreshadowing, this book is a worthwhile one for those scholars who are willing to overlook the flaws of the book and to look at the Bible with fresh eyes, from the point of view of different perspectives at the same time. And that is a worthwhile accomplishment, in encouraging readers to take others' viewpoints better.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
[2] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
[3] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
This book begins in a way that will likely alienate some readers and amuse others, by pointing out that the distinction between the books included in the Hebrew scriptures and Roman Catholic and Protestant bibles is likely to be obvious based on a fairly casual look at the table of contents and is far from a matter of arcane interest only to biblical scholars. The book then winds its way through eleven more chapters dealing with ideas about the orality of scripture, the distinction between the way the Bible reads in Hebrew as opposed to Greek, the continuing revelation of the Hebrew Scriptures in both the Talmud as well the New Testament and the fulfillment of prophecies in Jesus Christ, a discussion of the relationship of Islam to the other religions of "the book," which avoids a discussion of the hadiths [2], and then winds its way through the pushing of biblical scholarship back to the sources, the rise of solo scriptura among Protestants, the troubles between faith and reason in the Enlightenment and the problems of higher criticism, and then the book ends on a solid note with a discussion of the way the Bible serves as a message for the whole human race, forcing us to examine our own presuppositions in what the Bible means that come from our cultural background and heritage, and the way that the strangeness of the Bible forces us to come to terms with what it is that God actually wants from us in terms of belief and practice.
There will likely be few people who agree with everything in this book. For one, the author disregards the evidence for the early reduction of the biblical account into writing even in the pre-Mosaic period [3] and tends to have too high an opinion of the desirability of flattering the egos of ungodly and uninspired biblical critics, both past and present. Even so, it is clear that this author is taking the Bible seriously, and coming at it from the perspective of someone who is aware of the various faith traditions in how they deal with scripture, in matters of textual understanding and the interpretation of hints and implications and foreshadowing, this book is a worthwhile one for those scholars who are willing to overlook the flaws of the book and to look at the Bible with fresh eyes, from the point of view of different perspectives at the same time. And that is a worthwhile accomplishment, in encouraging readers to take others' viewpoints better.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
[2] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
[3] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.wordpress...
October 24, 2021
Approachable, interesting, dynamic and empathetic.
Pelikan gives the reader an absolutely wonderful resource here into understanding what the Bible is and how it's been used throughout history. In a relatively short book, he raises an array of conceptual issues and a wealth of historical detail on the formation and then use of the First and Second Testament.
It's very generously written with no approach being dismissed or ridiculed. This is essential reading for religious and irreligious alike if they want an informed view on the formation and use of the Bible.
Pelikan gives the reader an absolutely wonderful resource here into understanding what the Bible is and how it's been used throughout history. In a relatively short book, he raises an array of conceptual issues and a wealth of historical detail on the formation and then use of the First and Second Testament.
It's very generously written with no approach being dismissed or ridiculed. This is essential reading for religious and irreligious alike if they want an informed view on the formation and use of the Bible.
August 16, 2013
I know that a lot of folks who know me will assume that if I read a book about the Bible it must be saying something negative. Not true here. The author was (he's passed away) a Christian all his life. I got that feeling early, although he never really did much editorializing until the final chapter, and even then I still thought he had some interesting and valuable things to say, and a few things I disagreed with completely. But I dig that, what fun would it be to read a book that just tells me what I was already thinking?
Anywho, this book isn't so much about the content and meaning of the Bible (although that certainly comes up often enough and I think the author had some intersting insights) as it is about the history of the Bible. It covers things like what's known about the Bible's many authors, how and why it was translated from one language to another and sometimes back again, who did the translations, how the invention of the printing press changed the way the Bible was distributed, and so on. If you consider the content within the Bible to be a literal historical account from start to finish then I suppose this book might get your dander up from time to time. But if you're interested in learning about how the Bible reached it's current form and what preceded that, and just history in general, then I don't think it matters if you're a believer or not, this is a fascinating read. So as you might guess I'd recommend the book to anybody interested in the Bible, whether a believer or not.
Lastly, a quote from the slightly more editorial final chapter that stood out to me, especailly after reading (well, listening to) the Bible just weeks ago: “The very familiarity of the Bible after all these centuries can dull its sharp edges and obscure its central function, which is not only to comfort the afflicted but to afflict the comfortable, including the comfortable who are sitting in the pews of their synagogue or church as they listen to its words.”
Anywho, this book isn't so much about the content and meaning of the Bible (although that certainly comes up often enough and I think the author had some intersting insights) as it is about the history of the Bible. It covers things like what's known about the Bible's many authors, how and why it was translated from one language to another and sometimes back again, who did the translations, how the invention of the printing press changed the way the Bible was distributed, and so on. If you consider the content within the Bible to be a literal historical account from start to finish then I suppose this book might get your dander up from time to time. But if you're interested in learning about how the Bible reached it's current form and what preceded that, and just history in general, then I don't think it matters if you're a believer or not, this is a fascinating read. So as you might guess I'd recommend the book to anybody interested in the Bible, whether a believer or not.
Lastly, a quote from the slightly more editorial final chapter that stood out to me, especailly after reading (well, listening to) the Bible just weeks ago: “The very familiarity of the Bible after all these centuries can dull its sharp edges and obscure its central function, which is not only to comfort the afflicted but to afflict the comfortable, including the comfortable who are sitting in the pews of their synagogue or church as they listen to its words.”
November 14, 2020
Jaroslav isn’t the most entertaining read. His books are more like oxford professors of old giving long lectures from their notes, but his subject matter is always great. If you’re looking for a general overview from the most balanced historian of Christian in human history, then this is your guy. Basically if you read anything by Jaroslav Pelikan you can know you’re not getting a biased opinion. Which in some cases is a downside because his history can be unsettling and he’s not there to hold your hand.
Jaroslav was the son of a Lutheran pastor, and himself was a lutheran pastor of sorts, though most of his life was spent in academia. He converted to eastern Orthodoxy towards the end of his life and wrote several appreciative works about Catholicism. So he's the most ecumenical elite historian who also holds deeply orthodox views.
But his wide knowledge of subjects can make a casual reader feel like he's being assaulted by relativism. He'll point out the inadequacies of the modern critical historians and then turn around and point out the inadequacies of sola scriptura. And then point out the inadequacies of the magesterium or the etnocentrism and the Orthodox. Most lay people are disturbed when they find out there are a bazzillion different views on some subject in the Bible. And Jaroslav gives you all bazzillion at the same time and doesn't do the comforting thing most polemical historians do by going "this is the correct view." He's more than happy to stand back and let you decide, or feel overwhelmed.
Jaroslav was the son of a Lutheran pastor, and himself was a lutheran pastor of sorts, though most of his life was spent in academia. He converted to eastern Orthodoxy towards the end of his life and wrote several appreciative works about Catholicism. So he's the most ecumenical elite historian who also holds deeply orthodox views.
But his wide knowledge of subjects can make a casual reader feel like he's being assaulted by relativism. He'll point out the inadequacies of the modern critical historians and then turn around and point out the inadequacies of sola scriptura. And then point out the inadequacies of the magesterium or the etnocentrism and the Orthodox. Most lay people are disturbed when they find out there are a bazzillion different views on some subject in the Bible. And Jaroslav gives you all bazzillion at the same time and doesn't do the comforting thing most polemical historians do by going "this is the correct view." He's more than happy to stand back and let you decide, or feel overwhelmed.
July 13, 2018
The Bible has many versions. We have King James Version, Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, Jerusalem Bible and a lot more others. Pelikan asked, what if a person want to buy the Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible? Which one he should purchase.
To answer this question, Pelikan brought the readers back to the ancient time, to understand where does it all began, how it evolved and ended up as what we have today.
He started by introducing readers to the God who speaks. This is a crucial fact that the scriptures were based on spoken words, long before it was written down. This was a natural way even for us as human, as a child, we learn how to speak first, before we learn how to write. Pelikan cited the famous thinker Socrates, he was well known but never written any book. All of Socrates wisdom were spoken words, which later recalled and written by his disciples. This, Pelikan argues, is also true about Jesus. He speaks but never writes anything. His deeds were written “at least three or four decades” later.
Overall I think I can grasp what the author wants to convey, although sometimes I was lost in the sea of biblical terminologies. I am amazed by how Pelikan needs to return back to the Koran when he composed his argument, although the book supposed to be about the Bibles.
To answer this question, Pelikan brought the readers back to the ancient time, to understand where does it all began, how it evolved and ended up as what we have today.
He started by introducing readers to the God who speaks. This is a crucial fact that the scriptures were based on spoken words, long before it was written down. This was a natural way even for us as human, as a child, we learn how to speak first, before we learn how to write. Pelikan cited the famous thinker Socrates, he was well known but never written any book. All of Socrates wisdom were spoken words, which later recalled and written by his disciples. This, Pelikan argues, is also true about Jesus. He speaks but never writes anything. His deeds were written “at least three or four decades” later.
Overall I think I can grasp what the author wants to convey, although sometimes I was lost in the sea of biblical terminologies. I am amazed by how Pelikan needs to return back to the Koran when he composed his argument, although the book supposed to be about the Bibles.
January 4, 2020
It might better be titled, Which Bible Is It. I picked this up with an interest in understanding a bit better the historical evolution of what we generically call (and call from our own perspective) “The Bible”. Pelikan did not disappoint. He is learned and graceful and most often objective. Certainly, his faith colors his writing to some extent but, with the exception of the ending, I never found it to get in the way of his scholarship
A reader will be reminded that what many consider to be the exact spoken words of a single deity are the translations, the translations of translations, the rewriting and reinterpreting of continually older texts.
I appreciated gaining a better understanding of the Jewish scriptures and how their use had to be adopted by those in the diaspora without the language skills to read the earliest writings. I was reminded how important to the Renaissance was the arrival of Greek texts of the Christian scriptures and the Jewish Tanakh in Hebrew
All in all, a fine read
A reader will be reminded that what many consider to be the exact spoken words of a single deity are the translations, the translations of translations, the rewriting and reinterpreting of continually older texts.
I appreciated gaining a better understanding of the Jewish scriptures and how their use had to be adopted by those in the diaspora without the language skills to read the earliest writings. I was reminded how important to the Renaissance was the arrival of Greek texts of the Christian scriptures and the Jewish Tanakh in Hebrew
All in all, a fine read
November 11, 2011
I loved this book. Pelikan's approach is brilliant. He sets the Jewish and Christian views of the Bible side by side through all their long history (and with an appropriate nod to Islam and how it interacts with the other major monotheistic faiths). Pelikan's knowledge of the subjects in question is obviously encyclopedic, but this is a very accessible book. He gives the reader an opportunity to look at the Bible from various historical and religious points of view, and see how different views and interpretations of it have shaped history and thought. This book is obviously a labor of love by a scholar whose passion for the Bible is intellectual (and faultlessly methodical), but also literary, and also deeply spiritual.
June 15, 2017
--solid, thorough introduction to the history of the Hebrew Bible and the Christian New Testament
--addresses the development of the canon, the close yet also adversarial relationship between Judaism and Christianity, the issues and problems of translation, the impact of the Renaissance and Reformation, and modern critical biblical scholarship
--suitable for the general public, but anyone with a more than casual interest in biblical studies will likely find little that is new here
--minor problem: the prose is a bit clunky throughout, with convoluted sentences containing too many subordinate and dependent clauses
--the overall presentation is ecumenical and classically liberal yet still tinged with Christian piety
--addresses the development of the canon, the close yet also adversarial relationship between Judaism and Christianity, the issues and problems of translation, the impact of the Renaissance and Reformation, and modern critical biblical scholarship
--suitable for the general public, but anyone with a more than casual interest in biblical studies will likely find little that is new here
--minor problem: the prose is a bit clunky throughout, with convoluted sentences containing too many subordinate and dependent clauses
--the overall presentation is ecumenical and classically liberal yet still tinged with Christian piety
January 10, 2016
Last book of 2015! Props to Pelikan for helping me gain a much better general understanding of the history of the Bible, as well as greater insight into orality, the Talmud/New Testament as competing ways to interpret the Tanakh, the East/West church divide, what the hell the Septuagint actually is (and why it's important), the arguments surrounding sola scriptura, the importance of the Bible within the Catholic Reformation, and the Calvinist Hebraicist Johann Buxtorf and three generations of his family in Reformed Basel as "the greatest of all Protestant scholars of rabbinic literature" (p. 186). So cool!
August 11, 2021
Pelikan's is a history of the Bible, good for a general overview. He writes in an objective manner, not so much advocating one perspective as describing different perspectives. Whose Bible Is It? largely addresses the Jewish Tanakh and the Greek New Testament, their comparison, and their uses. The chapters start as topical, then eventually become based on historical periods, specifically the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the seventeenth-eighteenth centuries and higher criticism. The book ends with a chapter that restores something of a sense of divinity after the higher criticism, speaking of the Bible’s special place.
April 26, 2021
In some early portions of the book, the "bare basics" outline of what was in the Bible made me think the book was going to be entirely too basic, but this turned out not at all to be the case. The title of the book truly encompasses the content, up to and including the present. The book is well-written, balanced, worthwhile, and furnishes fascinating and pertinent details that I'd never before encountered. Modern issues of Biblical interpretation are handled well. I hope to read more of Pelikan, and may return to a re-read of this particular book as well.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 100 reviews