Tag Archives: biblical theology

Book Reviews, Church Chat [Ecclesiology]

The New Testament Church: The Challenge of Developing Ecclesiologies – Harrison/Dvorak (Review)

April 1, 2015 Dwight Gingrich 7 Comments

Harrison John, and James D. Dvorak, eds. The New Testament Church: The Challenge of Developing Ecclesiologies, McMaster Biblical Studies Series (Eugene, Oregon: Pickwick, 2012). 302pp. Publisher’s description. (Amazon list price: $29 paperback, $9.99 Kindle) [amazon template=add to cart1&asin=160899998X]

Are you hungry to cut through centuries of traditions and habits and investigate what the NT actually says about the church? Then this is exactly the kind of book you should read.

What kind of questions does The New Testament Church address? From the back cover:

Christian communities today face enormous challenges in the new contexts and teachings that try to redefine what churches should be. Christians look to the New Testament for a pattern for the church, but the New Testament does not present a totally uniform picture of the structure, leadership, and sacraments practiced by first-century congregations. There was a unity of the Christian communities centered on the teaching that Jesus is the Christ, whom God has raised from the dead and has enthroned as Lord, yet not every assembly did exactly the same thing and saw themselves in exactly the same way. Rather, in the New Testament we find a collage of rich theological insights into what it means to be the church. When leaders of today see this diversity, they can look for New Testament ecclesiologies that are most relevant to the social and cultural context in which their community lives. This volume of essays, written with the latest scholarship, highlights the uniqueness of individual ecclesiologies of the various New Testament documents and their core unifying themes.

The subtitle of this book is The Challenge of Developing Ecclesiologies. As I’ve described this book to others, I’ve been asked several times what is meant by “developing.” I’m not sure if editors Harrison and Dvorak ever answer this question directly, but I’ll hazard an answer. I think they are observing how difficult it can be to develop a good ecclesiology—a correct understanding of church. (In other words, I think “developing” is probably a verb, not an adjective.) Who finds it a challenge to develop an ecclesiology? I think the authors might answer “everyone”—the authors and original readers of the NT writings, and also us today. Finally, it is important to notice that “ecclesiologies” is plural; as noted above, a primary contention of the editors of this book is that the NT presents a diversity of pictures of the church.

The New Testament Church consists of an introduction by the editors and thirteen chapters by thirteen authors, as follows:

1. Matthew’s Vision for Jesus’ Community of Disciples—John P. Harrison

2. Ecclesiology in the Gospel of Mark—Mark Rapinchuk

3. The Church in Luke-Acts—George Goldman

4. The Church in the Gospel and Epistles of John—Thomas H. Olbricht

5. The Church in Romans and Galatians—Stanley E. Porter

6. The Community of the Followers of Jesus in 1 Corinthians—Eckhard J. Schabel

7. Heaven Can’t Wait: The Church in Ephesians and Colossians—Curt Niccum

8. “In the Churches of Macedonia”: Implicit Ecclesiology in Paul’s Letters to the Thessalonians and Philippians—Jeffrey Peterson

9. Ecclesiology in the Pastoral Epistles—Christopher R. Hutson

10. Left Behind? The Church in the Book of Hebrews—Cynthia Long Westfall

11. The Community of Believers in James—William R. Baker

12. Called to Be Holy: Ecclesiology in the Petrine Epistles—Allen Black

13. The Church in the Apocalypse of John—Olutola K. Peters

Those familiar with NT studies may recognize several “heavy-weight” names (such as Porter and Schnabel), but I found all authors helpful. A few of the essays deal with questions and assumptions that unschooled conservative readers may not recognize. (What kind of a church community was Matthew written to? Do the Pastoral Epistles “reflect an ecclesiological situation that has moved from the charismatic leadership of the first generation to a third or fourth generation focused on perpetuating a consolidated body of tradition”?) But none of these matters overpower any essay, and most of them are fruitful to consider, as lenses for new biblical insights.

I’d like to share with you excerpts from three chapters, to give you some more feel for the value of this book. First, the conclusion from Goldman’s essay on Luke-Acts:

Luke’s contribution to New Testament ecclesiology is unique in that he is the only writer to combine an account of Jesus’ life and ministry with an account of the church that followed thereafter. What is noteworthy in these two accounts is that the church that Luke describes in Acts looks like the Jesus that was described in the Gospel. The most important aspects of the ecclesiology of Acts can be traced back to Luke’s Gospel. Like Jesus, the church follows the leading of the Spirit, includes outcasts, helps the poor, and practices table fellowship. This is the best description of Luke’s vision of what the church should be. One searches in Luke’s narrative in vain for detailed descriptions of worship practices and church organization. Rather, Luke describes the church as a community of believers in Jesus who continue what Jesus “began” to do and to teach—God’s longtime kingdom purpose for human beings taking place on earth as it is in heaven. (p. 57, emphasis added)

Excellent insights! Goldman’s insights help answer a common question about Acts: Did Luke intend for us to imitate the church patterns that we find in this book? Well, if Luke intentionally portrayed his “Acts” church as imitating his “Luke” Jesus, then, yes, clearly we should imitate the Acts church in its imitation of Jesus.

My next excerpt is from Hutson’s essay on the Pastoral Epistles:

The Greek term ἐπίσκοπος (overseer) was used in both Jewish and Greek literature for various positions of responsibility and direction. in the PE, the overseer is analogous to a head of household (1 Tim 3:4-5, but we should not press that analogy too far, as if an overseer has the absolute authority of a Roman paterfamilias. On the contrary, the church in the PE is God’s household (1 Tim 3:15), and the “overseer” is a “steward” or “household manager” (οἰκονόμος, Titus 1:7). A household manager was a slave with management responsibility but was not himself the head of household.

…The qualities of a good overseer begin with “irreproachable” (1 Tim 3:2) and end with “a good testimony from outsiders” (3:7). These concepts bracket the paragraph… In this context, the rationale, “lest he fall into the condemnation and a snare of the slanderer” ( διάβολος, 3:6) seems to refer to a human critic rather than the devil.

…Like the overseer, the deacons (διακόνοι) must have an excellent reputation for conduct and character, but their duties are not spelled out. Elsewhere in the New Testament, the word root (διάκονος, “servant;” διακονἐω, “serve;” διακονία, “service”) is either literal, serving food (Acts 6:1,2; Luke 4:39; 12:37; Rom 15:31; etc.) or metaphorical, ministry of the word (Acts 6:4; 1Cor 3:5; Eph 3:7; etc.). The latter seems to be more in view here, in that deacons are to be grounded in “the mystery of the faith” (3:9) and Timothy himself will be a good διάκονος (1 Tim 4:6) precisely in his role as a teacher (cf. 2 Tim 4:5; 1Tim 1:12).

…The relationship between deacons and overseer is not specified, though deacons may have been assistants to the overseer, much as a synagogue was led by a “chief of synagogue” (…Acts 13:15; 18:8) who was assisted by a “minister” (…Luke 4:20; Acts 13:5…). In this capacity, it is worth comparing Timothy as a “server” to Paul in Acts 19:22. In any case, this is how Hippolytus understood the relationship in the third century. (pp. 179-80)

I like Hutson’s balanced observations about the authority of an overseer. This excerpt also provides examples of how a book like this can challenge our interpretive assumptions, giving us new ideas to test. Who is “the slanderer”? What was the role of a deacon? Other examples in this same essay: Did deacons include women? Are Timothy and Titus really examples of bishops? What was Paul really concerned about when he wrote “husband of one wife”? I don’t have to always agree with Hutson’s answers to benefit from his questions.

Westfall’s essay on the church in Hebrews helped me see a theme I have mostly missed in that book:

Pastoral Care in a Time of Crisis

The call to the believers to growth is part of one of the three major themes in Hebrews… The commands are: “Let us enter the rest” (4:1, 11), “Let us press on to maturity” (6:1), “Let us consider how to stimulate each other to love and good works” (10:25), and “Let us run the race” (12:1). However, pastoral care is manifested in concern for every believer as the church moves forward spiritually—this insistence that all members exercise pastoral care is the most dominant ecclesial theme in Hebrews. This is particularly interesting in view of the pervasive individualism in North American Christianity. We may tend to read the passages about goals individualistically, particularly since the author does not hesitate to use imagery drawn from athletic competition.

…In 3:7, the author applies a command in Psalm 95 directly to the readers: “Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion!” But when the author further applies it to the church, the focus is placed on concern for others:

Watch out, brothers and sisters, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God, But encourage one another daily as long as it is called “Today,” so that none of you will be hardened by sin’s deception. (3:12-13)

Again, in the face of crisis, the people are called primarily to pay close attention to each other’s spiritual state…

Similarly, at the conclusion of the unit, the congregation is supposed to be terrified at the prospect of losing anyone as the community responds as a group to God’s voice and moves forward: “Therefore, let us be afraid, that since the promise of entering his rest is open, any one of you might seem to come short of it” (4:1). Based on Israel’s example and the parallels between their situations, there is a good chance that some of them may not make it. However, there is no theology of moving with the movers or looking for a few good men. No one can be left behind. (pp. 201-02, emphasis added)

Hopefully these excerpts are enough to make some of you decide to read this book. The essays are short and sometimes only identify insights for further exploration. And I recommend pairing this kind of a book with one that surveys all the NT data. (For example, see Everett Ferguson’s [amazon text=The Church of Christ: A Biblical Ecclesiology for Today&asin=0802841899], which I was happy to see Harrison and Dvorak recommend, since it is already waiting on my shelf!) But it is good to read a book like this which “zooms in close” to the NT data, for it sharpens our eyesight when we later step back to ponder the big picture of the church in the NT.

This book accomplishes its goals well and will be helpful for students of the church in the NT.
I give it 5 out of 5 stars.

What did you learn from this review? What books on the church have you found helpful? What book would you like me to review? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Thinking Theology Aloud [Random]

What I Learned at AIC 2015 about How To Use the Bible

March 16, 2015 Dwight Gingrich 22 Comments

This past weekend I was blessed to attend most of the Anabaptist Identity Conference, held this year near Napannee, Indiana. This was the 10th AIC, and it lived up to its reputation as an event which gathers a provocative diversity of speakers and listeners.

We heard an Amish speaker (David Kline) explain the benefits of organic farming, and during one meal I sat across the table from a retired Goshen College history professor (Theron Schlabach). David Bercot shared with surprising candor his experience of how hard it is for most non-Anabaptists to ever join an Anabaptist church, given our cultural additives and our reluctance to let “outsiders” have a meaningful voice in shaping our churches. In contrast, Matthias Overholt, dressed in a plain brown suit and sporting a massive beard, animatedly preached the importance of “visible reminders that we are not a part of the world’s culture.” Beachy, Hutterite, Charity, Holdeman, MCUSA, Old Order Amish, New Order Amish, first-generation Anabaptists, unidentified plain Mennonites, and more–we all mingled without bickering for a few days and enjoyed GMO-free meals together. Some even traveled all the way from Down Under just to learn more about the Kingdom that turned the world upside down. Organized by the hippy-Anabaptist Overholt brothers, it was an earthy little bit of heaven on earth.

I don’t plan to give a detailed report of the weekend. The talks should soon be posted online here so you can listen and ponder for yourself. [Edit: See also the reviews by Rich Preheim and Theron Schlabach at the Mennonite World Review.] It would be interesting to discuss John D. Martin’s remarks about participatory church meetings and observance of the Lord’s Supper (we need more of both) and Chester Weaver’s observations about how we have been shaped by Fundamentalism (some pro, mostly con). Suffice it to say that throughout the entire weekend I sometimes said “Amen,” I sometimes shook my head and agonized over error, and I always enjoyed the immersion education experience.

So, keeping things fairly general and naming names judiciously, here are some things I learned at AIC 2015 about how to use or not use the Bible in our preaching and teaching.

Do call each other to passionately follow Jesus. Dean Taylor’s favorite question is so helpful: “What if Jesus really meant every word he said?” We need to hear more, not less, about following in Jesus’ steps, obeying his call to radical discipleship. The AIC always does well at this, and for that I am grateful.
Don’t pit Jesus against Paul. I overheard one of the speakers in conversation, suggesting that it might be wise to place less emphasis on Paul’s writings. I believe he was suggesting that focusing on Paul’s writings tends to increase church conflict and distract us from following Jesus. I think this is a sad misunderstanding. I’ve written at length about this in my essay “Red Letter Reductionism,” which you can find here.
Do emphasize that obedience is crucial. Head knowledge without obedience is useless. Preach the Sermon on the Mount! Keep James in the canon, for sure! And don’t hide disobedience behind either theological sophistication or a plain suit and cape dress. Again, AIC generally does very well on this point.
Don’t say theology is unimportant. I heard one AIC speaker say “We are not theologians.” Another speaker (David Bercot) had a book on display entitled Will the Theologians Please Sit Down? (Full disclosure: I have not read the book through, so I may be wrong; but my sense from the title, excerpts, and some reports is that the book is not as well-balanced as some of Bercot’s other books. At minimum, I sense some readers are using it to bolster an unhealthy whole-sale rejection of theology.) Ironically, every one of the AIC speakers is obviously a theologian himself! This was evident by the multiple explanations (sometimes generalizations) of how Anabaptist soteriology (theology of salvation) and ecclesiology (theology of church) is different from that of Protestants. Theology is inescapable and essential.
Do learn from historical examples of interpreting and obeying the Bible. One of AIC’s greatest strengths is its emphasis on history. Chester Weaver’s talks on Russian Mennonites were fascinating! AIC always includes such historical talks. Incidentally, the discipline of studying how the church in the past has understood and obeyed the Scriptures is called historical theology–more evidence that AIC is full of theology, despite some protests to the contrary.
Don’t rely more on history than on the Scriptures. One of AIC’s greatest weaknesses is its emphasis on history. (No, I am not contradicting myself.) AIC speakers are very concerned with statistics about how few Anabaptist children have remained in the churches of their parents. They trace the patterns of the past and issue warnings about the future. Make no mistake: I definitely share some of their concerns. But I am even more concerned when I hear almost no appeal to Scripture during a panel discussion on how cultural traditions affect our ability to pass on the faith and integrate non-Anabaptists. (I raised my hand too slowly to add my question: How should 1 Corinthians 9:19-23 affect both our approach as witnesses and also our goals for the kind of self-identity that we want our disciples to adopt?) Some AIC talks referenced much Scripture faithfully and effectively. Others, not so much.
Do shape your sermons around Scripture. One of the best AIC talks this year was one by Ernest Strubhar, where he traced through the whole Bible the big story of the war of Satan against God. This is theology–biblical theology! Some of Strubhar’s Bible texts are notoriously difficult to interpret, and I quibbled with a handful of details in his sermon. But the big picture that he painted was faithful and powerful, providing a real hopeful foundation for radical discipleship.
Don’t pull Scripture out of context to bolster your own claims. Unfortunately, another sermon this past weekend did not use Scripture so faithfully. By his own admission, the speaker’s key text was used out of context, with key words being interpreted differently than what they actually meant. This text was used to structure the speaker’s entire sermon. In this way, the speaker brought an aura of Scriptural authority to his own ideas, using God’s word to make his own words sound more convincing. This is very dangerous indeed. Ironically, the real meaning of the speaker’s text, when read in context, actually undermines (in my estimation) one of the speaker’s main claims!
Do invite others to critique your Bible teaching. This is another strength of AIC. After each talk there is a brief Q and A session. The Overholt brothers do a good job as moderators, allowing and encouraging honest feedback and questioning. The speakers also welcome this, evidencing grace and humility. Mutual critique is also built into the roster of speakers, since they represent a variety of backgrounds. It would be good to see more of this feedback encouraged in our regular church meetings!
Don’t pit the Scriptures against Christ. Several times at AIC 2015 there was an evident tension between the Written Word and the Living Word. Several times questioners felt a need to ask a speaker to clarify himself on this point. But it is irrational to try to know a person while downplaying his words. The liberal modernists of a century ago claimed that we could follow the Christ of faith even if it was impossible to gain certainty about the Jesus of history. They believed that the Scriptural accounts of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection could not be trusted, yet they tried to salvage a mystical Christian faith. Today we can see where “Christ” without Scripture has led the churches that embraced this liberal modernism. I think all the AIC speakers would eagerly affirm the trustworthiness of Scripture. But true trust involves more than affirming that Scripture is true; it also involves drawing our own conceptions of Christ and his kingdom from the full Scriptural witness. Some of the AIC speakers do this very well. Others didn’t always display as much functional reliance on Scripture as I would have liked.
Do call each other to passionately follow Jesus. Okay, this is a repeat of my first point, but worth repeating. This is AIC’s greatest strength, and it is the very best way that you can use the Bible in your own preaching and teaching.

I came away from AIC 2015 with multiple blessings, including a renewed desire to live among a body of believers that listens well to the Written Word as a vital witness to the Living Word. I wouldn’t feel at home in every church group represented at AIC. But I am thankful to all the speakers for honestly sharing their hearts and prodding us to better follow Jesus.

Do you have anything to add to this list? What would it look like if you made a similar list based on how the Bible is used in your church pulpit? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

Book Reviews

NIV Proclamation Bible (Book Review)

March 3, 2015 Dwight Gingrich 3 Comments

Note: This review is of a book I was received for free because I joined BookLook Bloggers. If I decide to continue, you may see one review like this every month or so.

Introduction: The NIV Proclamation Bible (NIVPB) is aimed at Bible teachers of all kinds. The subtitle clarifies the goal of this Bible: [amazon template=thumbnail11&asin=0310437954]”Correctly Handling the Word of Truth.” NIVPB consists of the NIV text, about 50 pages of introductory essays about interpreting and applying the Bible, brief introductions to each book, and some standard helps (table of weights and measures, a concordance, and maps). The NIVPB contributors are mostly British Anglicans, but the theological perspective is broadly evangelical.

Since the most unique element of this Bible is the introductory essays, I will list them here:

What is the Bible? (Mark D. Thompson)
A Bible Overview (Vaughan Roberts)
The historical reliability of the Bible (Dirk Jongkind)
Finding the “melodic line” of the Bible (Tim Ward)
From text to doctrine: the Bible and theology (Peter Adam)
From text to life: applying the Old Testament (David Jackman)
From text to life: applying the New Testament (Charlie Skrine)
From text to sermon: preaching the Bible (Christopher Ash)
From text to study: small groups and one-to-ones (Leonie Mason)
Biblical interpretation: a short history (Gerald Bray)

Observations: Unfortunately, the worst thing about this Bible is the first thing you see on the cover: Tim Keller’s claim that “There are many Study Bibles, but none better.” In fact, this is not a study Bible at all, in my estimation. There are no commentary notes throughout the Bible text, and the book introductions range from only about 1 to 1-1/2 pages short.

[Update: Blah. This morning I received an email from Faithlife (affiliated with Logos Bible Software). The email subject line was “Tim Keller endorses new Bible.” And the image that leaps at you from inside the email prominently displays the Keller quote. This kind of marketing is tiring. Did Keller see the full manuscript before giving his endorsement? Did the marketing team take his statement out of context, cutting some qualifiers off the end of his sentence? Someone somewhere is being less than fully truthful. Moral: Double-check celebrity endorsements, even if they come from celebrities you trust.]

If you want a good study Bible, I suggest either the excellent ESV Study Bible or the very promising forthcoming NIV Zondervan Study Bible. (Update: See my long review of the NIV Zondervan Study Bible. It is indeed good!) That said, the NIVPB is useful for what it is: An attractive dual-column, cross-referenced, hardcover NIV Bible with some basic helps for faithful proclamation.

The introductory essays rightly focus on helping readers glimpse the “big picture” of the story and unfolding themes of Scripture–biblical theology. These essays will coach you about how to teach and preach Scripture, not merely your own pet ideas imposed on the text. Given the unified focus, some content is repeated throughout. Given the short lengths, some essays (especially the last) feel like a movie trailer. Thankfully, each essay end with 3 book recommendations for further study. Here are some favorite quotes from the essays, with introductions only as needed:

By itself, “teaching the Bible” does not ensure theology. It is possible to expound a book of the Bible, but avoid its theology. We may give good practical teaching, or encourage greater experiences of God, but not tackle its theology. This produces people who conform to Christian practice without knowing why. The shortcut is not helpful. It produces deadening legalism in believers and teaches legalism to others. It is below the standard of the Bible itself. (Adam, A38)

There is a popular idea that all we need is the Bible. That is the minimum that is required, but not the maximum that God has provided. And it reflects two unhelpful assumptions of our age: our individualism and our reductionism. Individualism assumes that I must function in isolation. Reductionism asks, “What is the minimum needed?” not “What is the maximum God has provided?” We need help, insights, encouragements and challenges from others in our preparation. In this activity, as John Calvin wrote, “Solitude provides too much liberty”… (Adam, A39-40)

Often I think I have understood a passage right up until the point where I have to put something into words. I am going to use a non-Bible example initially so that we can agree on the principle even if you do not like my specific exegesis. Let’s imagine this is the theme of a piece of writing we are wanting to apply: Theme: Brussels sprouts taste disgusting. Once we have worked out the theme, we also need to ask what the author’s aim was. Even with our trivial example you could think of saying the same truth for many different reasons. Perhaps this is a book intending to help young boys make life hard for their older sisters, so the aim would be, “Get Brussels sprouts into as many meals as possible; pulp them and hide them inside donuts and cakes.” Or perhaps this is a book intending to make everyone’s mealtimes full of nice-tasting food, so the aim would be, “Don’t eat Brussels sprouts.” The same truth could be intended to achieve opposite effects by different authors… Let’s say, in our food example, that we are reading the book with this aim… Aim: Don’t eat them. …We have not yet thought about how this theme and aim will apply differently to different specific people… For the Sunday school we might want to spend lots of time passing on useful strategies for sprout avoidance: the plastic bag in your pocket, good use of the family dog, even hiding food under a well-placed knife and fork. For the parents you might spend some time in repentance for leading others into sprout-eating in the past, and some time working on how to fight the peer pressure at Christmas time. If you had in your business breakfast a woman who was a national buyer for a supermarket, or a man who was head of agricultural investment at a pension fund, then you could apply in ways that would make a difference across the whole country. Still at every stage the driving force is, “What has God said to these people?” not “What would I say if I were God?” (Skrine, A50-51)

Two more quotes that suggest the importance and potential dangers of topical sermons:

For most people, ourselves included, life is made up of facing daily topics rather than continually expounding the Bible! Much of our ministry of apologetics, evangelism and encouragement with unbelievers and other believers is discussing daily issues that are always theological issues. We need to teach topics of daily life to help people think biblically and theologically. (Adam, A41)

A common danger for preachers is this: I read a Bible passage, for example about prayer. This makes me think of all the thing I know… about the Bible’s teaching on prayer. This framework helps me understand my particular passage. But I can end up preaching a topical sermon that pretty much unloads on my hearers everything the Bible teaches about prayer. I preach my framework rather than this particular text. I need to remember that this particular passage contributes something unique; without it, the Bible would be a deficient book. So I ask myself, “What distinctively does this passage teach?” Although my preaching will be controlled by my overall framework of understanding, I want my hearers to go away with this particular passage ringing in their ears and resounding in their hearts… What is the tone of the passage? If you set it to music, would it be joyful, plaintive, perplexed, confident, or what? In our preaching, we will want to try to reflect and convey something of this tone. (Ash, A55)

The book introductions are generally good, but too short to offer much help. My inner editor kicked into gear as I surveyed these. Philemon gets just over one page—exactly the same as Genesis, the second-longest book in the Bible. Some one-sentence book summaries describe historical content, while others focus on Christian application (Joshua: “God gave the land he promised and Israel took it [11:23; 21:43-45].” Numbers: “God has saved us and, as we travel through the wilderness of this world, we need to go on exercising faith to enter the inheritance Christ has secured for us.”). Book outlines vary without reason in structure (an unpredictable mix of letters, Arabic numerals, Roman numerals, typefaces, or paragraph descriptions), kind (content or preaching points), and length (the outline for 1 and 2 Chronicles combined–65 chapters–is only 4 lines long, while the outline for 1 John–5 chapters–is over 21 lines long). Despite these quirks, the actual content is, again, generally good. Each book introduction helpfully ends with a list of three suggested commentaries of varying depth. Most suggestions look reasonable, although I did notice that the technical commentary suggested for Galatians is rather old, overlooking strong recent offerings.

Conclusion: Since I’ve recovered from my dashed expectations (see Keller), my impressions of this Bible have improved. I think the NIV is one of the most useful translations for reading and comparison. The special content of this NIVPB is generally sound and insightful. I do wonder, though, how many people will choose this edition over either a smaller Bible for reading or a true study Bible, which would contain much of the special content found here plus much more (the NIVPB is just under 1500 pages; the forthcoming [amazon text=NIV Zondervan Study Bible&asin=0310438330] has over 2900 pages!).

I think the NIVPB achieves most of its goals.
I give it 4 out of 5 stars.

Does this Bible sound like one you would use? Do the essay excerpts above make you hungry for more? Or do you have another favorite Bible to suggest? Do you use study Bibles? (I rarely do!) Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher through the BookLook Bloggers <http://booklookbloggers.com> book review bloggers program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 <http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/16cfr255_03.html> : “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”