Review by Tyrwhitt -- Who Told You That You Were Naked?
Posted: 13 May 2017, 05:41
[Following is a volunteer review of "Who Told You That You Were Naked?" by William Combs.]
3 out of 4 stars
Share This Review
Who told you that you were naked by William E. Combs
ISBN 978-1-945507-23-6
This is a non-fiction Christian bible study guide
I give this book three out of four stars
When I started the book I expected what the description offered, a different take on the bible. Perhaps foolishly, I hadn’t taken the logical next step of considering what groups of people would want to engage in this activity. My own interest comes with a fascination about how the written is always interpreted by the reader, and how these meanings can become entrenched in culture so “everyone” knows what a book says, when no-one has read it. Think about classics you’ve never read – no time, and you know the story – or do you?
The introduction was eight pages on my device, and the first five were taken up by anecdotes about the author’s background and youth, then explaining his “revelation” about how to read the old testament and have it fit in with the new. He invites the reader to join him in exploring the text of both testaments to see how sin and death entered the world. After the introduction I was keen to read on.
At first the chapters stick to looking at the language used in single books of the old testament. Here Mr Combs looks at specific words used to tease out meaning – suggesting alternate translations before selecting one, and then explaining why it was chosen. By this process he suggests the nature of God is unchangeable from the old to the new testaments of the bible – the difference is in how we have (as a culture) chosen to translate it. This I found interesting and thought provoking, the anecdotes continued for leaven and I felt the text did a good job of following the roadmap laid out in the introduction.
The only major disappointment in the first four chapters was the quality of the questions at the end of each chapter. Instead of encouraging further thought they were designed to check the reader had retained the author’s argument from the chapter just read. This is why I have described the book as a bible study guide, as this was the best explanation for the questions. Sadly, I felt they did not encourage the reader to joyfully question language in other parts of the old testament, but to accept, without question, the author’s conclusions.
Later chapters hopped around not only between different chapters, but also different books. This begs the question – who’s language are we reviewing? The bible was a part-work, written by multiple authors over centuries. Given the assumption that at some point the whole thing was translated from Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek into Greek by one person (unlikely as parts of the new testament was written in Greek and it’s doubtful those who wrote the new gospels spent the majority of their time hunting through possible translations for the old testament they were trying to supersede), or from a Greek patchwork into a single Latin or English version the possibilities for change of emphasis are legion and unlikely to be uniform in their effects on reaching back to the original text. Having got his ear in for the old testament, so to speak, it seemed odd Mr combs would then switch to the new, then back and for the from new to old in one argument – these books were written at different times, under different conditions, by different people. While I would feel it fair to say – this issue comes up in several places in the bible which shows it is important, it is probably less useful to lump all examples together as if they were exactly the same thing. So I found later chapters less convincing.
I also found the anecdotes increasingly distracting, they also displayed a belief system that I found incongruous with a more open reading of the bible, but that may well be a personal prejudice.
On the whole the book was well put together, arguments followed each other and were repeated for emphasis. I felt the earlier chapters were less embedded in a specific theological viewpoint and, for me, well worth reading.
I have not bought this book
******
Who Told You That You Were Naked?
View: on Bookshelves | on Amazon
Like Tyrwhitt's review? Post a comment saying so!
3 out of 4 stars
Share This Review
Who told you that you were naked by William E. Combs
ISBN 978-1-945507-23-6
This is a non-fiction Christian bible study guide
I give this book three out of four stars
When I started the book I expected what the description offered, a different take on the bible. Perhaps foolishly, I hadn’t taken the logical next step of considering what groups of people would want to engage in this activity. My own interest comes with a fascination about how the written is always interpreted by the reader, and how these meanings can become entrenched in culture so “everyone” knows what a book says, when no-one has read it. Think about classics you’ve never read – no time, and you know the story – or do you?
The introduction was eight pages on my device, and the first five were taken up by anecdotes about the author’s background and youth, then explaining his “revelation” about how to read the old testament and have it fit in with the new. He invites the reader to join him in exploring the text of both testaments to see how sin and death entered the world. After the introduction I was keen to read on.
At first the chapters stick to looking at the language used in single books of the old testament. Here Mr Combs looks at specific words used to tease out meaning – suggesting alternate translations before selecting one, and then explaining why it was chosen. By this process he suggests the nature of God is unchangeable from the old to the new testaments of the bible – the difference is in how we have (as a culture) chosen to translate it. This I found interesting and thought provoking, the anecdotes continued for leaven and I felt the text did a good job of following the roadmap laid out in the introduction.
The only major disappointment in the first four chapters was the quality of the questions at the end of each chapter. Instead of encouraging further thought they were designed to check the reader had retained the author’s argument from the chapter just read. This is why I have described the book as a bible study guide, as this was the best explanation for the questions. Sadly, I felt they did not encourage the reader to joyfully question language in other parts of the old testament, but to accept, without question, the author’s conclusions.
Later chapters hopped around not only between different chapters, but also different books. This begs the question – who’s language are we reviewing? The bible was a part-work, written by multiple authors over centuries. Given the assumption that at some point the whole thing was translated from Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek into Greek by one person (unlikely as parts of the new testament was written in Greek and it’s doubtful those who wrote the new gospels spent the majority of their time hunting through possible translations for the old testament they were trying to supersede), or from a Greek patchwork into a single Latin or English version the possibilities for change of emphasis are legion and unlikely to be uniform in their effects on reaching back to the original text. Having got his ear in for the old testament, so to speak, it seemed odd Mr combs would then switch to the new, then back and for the from new to old in one argument – these books were written at different times, under different conditions, by different people. While I would feel it fair to say – this issue comes up in several places in the bible which shows it is important, it is probably less useful to lump all examples together as if they were exactly the same thing. So I found later chapters less convincing.
I also found the anecdotes increasingly distracting, they also displayed a belief system that I found incongruous with a more open reading of the bible, but that may well be a personal prejudice.
On the whole the book was well put together, arguments followed each other and were repeated for emphasis. I felt the earlier chapters were less embedded in a specific theological viewpoint and, for me, well worth reading.
I have not bought this book
******
Who Told You That You Were Naked?
View: on Bookshelves | on Amazon
Like Tyrwhitt's review? Post a comment saying so!