OnlineBookClub.org

One of the outstanding things about I Will Make of Thee a Great Nation by Val D. Greenwood is that he made reference to The Holy Bible in all but two of the chapters. Particularly, a reference was made from The Book of Moses in chapter four.

Do you see this as a conflict of interest?

Should he have referenced only one source?

Which source do you think is more authentic?

I don't have a problem with referencing other sources as long as they are cross-referenced with the Bible. I believe the Bible is the most authentic.

I think it’s great. In fact, I would have liked to have seen more references to a variety of other texts. It’s a more modern approach.

I think using other reference material is good. This book is about the historical stories portrayed in the Old Testament. Certainly there are other books that show the history of the same time period and tell the same stories. It's good to see a different perspective.

I think it's worth using many references, according to me this only helped writer delivering the book with different opinions.

When you are in an unknown place like a foreign country, and you need directions, or you need to know which train to take. Always ask three different people, and if two say the same thing, that is likely to be the right answer. Long way round to say different sources will eventually support each other or the ones that do not will be discarded. So I am for different sources.

Abacus wrote: ↑03 Aug 2019, 11:07 When you are in an unknown place like a foreign country, and you need directions, or you need to know which train to take. Always ask three different people, and if two say the same thing, that is likely to be the right answer. Long way round to say different sources will eventually support each other or the ones that do not will be discarded. So I am for different sources.

Great observation!

Abacus wrote: ↑03 Aug 2019, 11:07 When you are in an unknown place like a foreign country, and you need directions, or you need to know which train to take. Always ask three different people, and if two say the same thing, that is likely to be the right answer. Long way round to say different sources will eventually support each other or the ones that do not will be discarded. So I am for different sources.

Kudos to your reply!

I think it's nice to have cross-referencing text for the old testament. It really diversifies the book.

I’m only about 9% into the book thus far, but I do believe that using many sources is a great choice. This is what I love about mythology from around the world, that the stories are so similar. Take the Great Flood, for example: Many cultures have a tale about the flood, and there are quite a few Ark versions. How cool is it that so many divergent paths start at the same point and frequently cross?
More sources giving similar information makes that information more believable.

Abacus wrote: ↑03 Aug 2019, 11:07 When you are in an unknown place like a foreign country, and you need directions, or you need to know which train to take. Always ask three different people, and if two say the same thing, that is likely to be the right answer. Long way round to say different sources will eventually support each other or the ones that do not will be discarded. So I am for different sources.

Excellent analogy! This is a good premise to follow when doing research; it helps to find multiple sources that supports a researcher's idea(s) to give it more credibility.

I have no issues with the author making reference to other books.I believe that by making the references, it helped the author to deliver the themes in a way that the readers could easily understand. Further, as a Christian, I am glad that the author made reference to the Bible which I am convinced is authentic.

B Creech wrote: ↑02 Aug 2019, 17:24 I don't have a problem with referencing other sources as long as they are cross-referenced with the Bible. I believe the Bible is the most authentic.

I agree with you that the Bible is the most authentic.

OliviaLouise wrote: ↑02 Aug 2019, 19:10 I think it’s great. In fact, I would have liked to have seen more references to a variety of other texts. It’s a more modern approach.

Yeah, he referenced an unknown source in the latter chapters. Though multiple referencing is a modern way, do you think that thought changes when you bring it into religious setups?

I've followed and studied religious setups for some time now. There's this rift that exists among different Christian religious beliefs about when it comes to the book that actually captured these stories better. Will this affect the overall acceptance of this book among core religious folks?