Scan barcode
ptothelo's review against another edition
4.0
I learned a ton of things, mostly about how the Bible (and various versions of it) was put together over time and also how people read it. Apparently the literal reading was a relatively recent thing; I'd assumed it had always been that way.
seppeds's review against another edition
Introductie voor het lezen van de Bijbel. Beknopt historisch overzicht - een biografie - van bijbelinterpretatie van de oudheid tot 20ste eeuw. Niet op een apologetische, maar op een kritische wijze.
sahdia's review against another edition
challenging
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
spitzig's review against another edition
4.0
I'm a big fan of Armstrong. This isn't her best, but that's not saying a lot. This tells about the history of the Bible. How it was developed, from the beginning of its history in Judaism to recent history. The recent history is more about interpretation, but events in Israel are connected to Christian fundamentalism and are discussed. History like Gutenberg's translation and printing of the Bible are discussed.
pattydsf's review against another edition
2.0
I think this was the wrong book at the wrong time for me. When I pick up a book from Armstrong, I expect to learn some new things about religion and faith. In this case, however, I just couldn't keep my attention on the book.
If you want an overview of the Bible from both Christian and Jewish perspectives, I would start here. There is plenty of information.
If you want an overview of the Bible from both Christian and Jewish perspectives, I would start here. There is plenty of information.
erikars's review against another edition
5.0
Armstrong is quickly becoming one of my favorite non-fiction authors. This is because, in addition to writing about interesting topics, she is a truly superb story teller. In this book, Armstrong weaves together history, the revelations of Biblical scholarship, and the Bible itself to form the story of the Bible's writing and canonization and the different ways it has been perceived throughout history.
At a high level, all of the content in this book is in textbook introductions to the Bible, but this book is a much more interesting read. It also has a different balance. Where textbooks focus on the origins and content of the Biblical texts and spend little time on the process of canonization and the subsequent history of the Bible, Armstrong spends time on all of those things. Overall, Armstrong's book was a quick, entertaining, and educational read. If you read only one book about the Bible, I recommend this one.
The limitation of Armstrong's style is that it does not allow for much detail. She limits herself to the most generally agreed on claims of Biblical scholarship and does not spend time discussing different theories or their merits. When there are legitimate differences of opinion within the scholarly community, she limits herself to the common kernel (e.g., when discussing books with a disputed date of composition, she limits her claims of composition date to a general period). To get those sorts of details, you are going to need a textbook.
One of the most useful things I got out of this book was the overview of Jewish thought, especially how it evolved after the Hebrew canon was closed. I think that people who have not been educated otherwise often assume that Jewish thought stopped after what was recorded in the Bible. I know that people who use the New Testament as their main reference on Jewish thought at the time of Jesus have an unfairly negative view of the Jews of the time. Learning a little about the actual history of Jewish thought shows how many of the tenants of Christianity which people now claim were novel innovations actually followed quite directly from the thoughts of the Jewish contemporaries of Jesus and his followers.
At a high level, all of the content in this book is in textbook introductions to the Bible, but this book is a much more interesting read. It also has a different balance. Where textbooks focus on the origins and content of the Biblical texts and spend little time on the process of canonization and the subsequent history of the Bible, Armstrong spends time on all of those things. Overall, Armstrong's book was a quick, entertaining, and educational read. If you read only one book about the Bible, I recommend this one.
The limitation of Armstrong's style is that it does not allow for much detail. She limits herself to the most generally agreed on claims of Biblical scholarship and does not spend time discussing different theories or their merits. When there are legitimate differences of opinion within the scholarly community, she limits herself to the common kernel (e.g., when discussing books with a disputed date of composition, she limits her claims of composition date to a general period). To get those sorts of details, you are going to need a textbook.
One of the most useful things I got out of this book was the overview of Jewish thought, especially how it evolved after the Hebrew canon was closed. I think that people who have not been educated otherwise often assume that Jewish thought stopped after what was recorded in the Bible. I know that people who use the New Testament as their main reference on Jewish thought at the time of Jesus have an unfairly negative view of the Jews of the time. Learning a little about the actual history of Jewish thought shows how many of the tenants of Christianity which people now claim were novel innovations actually followed quite directly from the thoughts of the Jewish contemporaries of Jesus and his followers.
amb3rlina's review against another edition
3.0
This was a tough book for me to get through despite it's slim size. A good portion of it went over my head - not sure if it was the way she approached the subject or if I just didn't have my head in the game. What I did take away was a greater appreciation for the different ways people have related to the bible over it's history and how attitudes have varied so widely with respect to how to interpret it.
After seeing the author on Bill Moyers I was very impressed with her and was hoping to read several of her books, but now I'm not sure.
After seeing the author on Bill Moyers I was very impressed with her and was hoping to read several of her books, but now I'm not sure.
dave_daines's review against another edition
3.0
Two complaints about this book:
1) She's essentially taking 500+ pages of information and distilling it down into a 230 page book. I would guess one of her goals with this book was to make it very readable and non-intimidating.
2) There is little to no explanation for where she is getting her information. Perhaps it is common knowledge among bible scholars, but to me, hearing about the origins of the books of the Old Testament is mostly new information. I would be very interested to hear how they came to these conclusions. Perhaps item #1 is the reason why she doesn't go into it.
Overall I liked the book and found it to be very interesting. It focused more on the history of exegesis (critical explanation of the Bible) than on the origins of the Bible than I was expecting, but still it was very readable and thought provoking.
1) She's essentially taking 500+ pages of information and distilling it down into a 230 page book. I would guess one of her goals with this book was to make it very readable and non-intimidating.
2) There is little to no explanation for where she is getting her information. Perhaps it is common knowledge among bible scholars, but to me, hearing about the origins of the books of the Old Testament is mostly new information. I would be very interested to hear how they came to these conclusions. Perhaps item #1 is the reason why she doesn't go into it.
Overall I liked the book and found it to be very interesting. It focused more on the history of exegesis (critical explanation of the Bible) than on the origins of the Bible than I was expecting, but still it was very readable and thought provoking.
countingstarsbycandlelight's review against another edition
3.0
meh. it felt overly abridged. parts were interesting, but i would have preferred more detail.