The Oxford Illustrated History of the Bible

Very dry reading. The author, I think, was writing for himself; not his audience. Not many pictures either.

Like The Bible itself, this volume is a library of `books'. It includes works of varying styles and topics, written by various authors, and collected under a single cover. This collection of 16 essays, by an assortment of writers, (in my opinion) makes for a patchwork approach. The articles vary wildly in quality and approach. The photographs, color plates, woodcuts, and engravings are absolutely spectacular, and complement the adjacent text. It's a pity they are not numbered, but they ARE indexed (by page number and T,B,L,C,R locations) in an addendum curiously titled `Acknowledgement of Sources'. The Oxford Illustrated History of the Bible is divided into four sections: (1) The Historical Background of the Making of the Bible; (2) Text and Translation of the Making of the Bible; (3) The Study and Use of the Bible; and (4) Contemporary Interpretation. My ratings of each subsection are: 5-star, 5-star, 4-star, and 1-star. Starting with the first two sections dealing with the Making of the Bible, don't miss the contributions of Philip Davies, `The Apocrypha,' David Parker's `The New Testament'; and Stanley E. Porter's `Modern Translations'. Be aware however that Porter is solely concerned with translation of the Bible into English... those expecting coverage of any other focus will be sadly disappointed. One `chapter' I had looked forward to reading was `The Bible in the Eastern Churches'. Bebawi's essay on this topic was a total disappointment. It was especially sad, since the next article (by Philip Alexander, see below) was so well done!Despite the fact that The Bible is 70 percent Old Testament and 30 percent New Testament, this book reflects a predictably disproportionate interest in Christianity. (Predictable because so many more people adhere to Christianity than to Judaism). Nonetheless, Philip Alexander's section, `The Bible in Judaism' is an excellent contribution. Geoffrey Khan's portion, `The Hebrew Bible' is also superb. I found the last section (Contemporary Interpretation) to be a waste of paper and ink. The four essays included are: Feminist Scholarship; Liberation Theology: Latin America; Liberation Theology: Africa and the Bible; and Liberation Theology: Europe. It boggled my mind to find (1) nothing about contemporary American fundamentalist interpretations of the Bible, (2) nothing about the technical problems of translation (like the problem of the shepherd/sheep analogy to island-dwelling fishermen who have never seen a sheep or any conception of why a shepherd would be involved with these creatures); (3) nothing about the relationship of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament to religions and sects indebted to them but not based on them (such as The Church of Latter Day Saints and Islam just to mention two!); (4) nothing about the Pentecostal movement, especially important in Latin America; (5) nothing about Biblical interpretations by `sects' (ranging from the Branch Davidians to the Jehovah's Witnesses -