Design and Structure
The Design of the book follows the format of other books in the series. It’s colorful, has nice photography, legible font at a nice readable type size, large bold headings letting you know exactly where you are. They know how to move the eye.

And the information on the page is no different. Each Psalm is split into several sections listed as:

• Theme: the main idea of the Psalm
• Type: the literary form of the Psalm (lament, praise, royal, etc)
• Author: who wrote it or musical notations
• Backgorund: self-explanatory
• Structure: how the stanzas are grouped with a sketch of the thought-flow.
• Special Notes: some commentary on words or images in the Psalm.
• Reflection: or Application to us today.

For example, you can open up to say Psalm 45 and see the theme of God blessing the king; that the type is a Royal psalm; that it is a maskil of the Sons of Korah to the tune of “Lilies”; that the Psalm is divided into an address to the King, then the grandeur to the King, then a description of the Bride. The Special Notes section describes this imagery pointing to areas of trade in the ancient world and some other details (like maskil may mean “skillful” or “making prudent”) The application shows us that the themes for marriage appear in other places in Scripture and that marriage applies to all marriages.

Likewise, Psalm 137 (one I touched on here in the Bible Archive) gives us the historical background of the Psalm (Judah has been sacked by Nebuchadnezzar; Edom is ransacking and pillaging Jerusalem) and then points to other passages where punishment oracles are leveled against Babylon (cf. Isaiah 13-14; Jeremiah 50-41; Hab 2).

Language and Readership
The writing in the book is concise, not making citations for further reading, focused on the Biblical resource available to believers, and written in a way that could come alongside a morning devotional. Even the earliest section of the book which focuses on explaining the types of literature (lament, royal, etc) or focusing on the poetic structure isn’t so much an integral part of the book as much as offering an explanation for the language that comes later in the book.

So when you get to the chart that divvies up the Psalms into categories, you’ve already been exposed to the language that is being used, and the idea of meditating on the Psalms in our everyday situation. In the words of the authors

“To own thee expressions as ours, we not only shape their words with our mouths, but we must let our spirits be guided by their wisdom. So we copy the psalmists, changing out our particular situation for theirs, yet follow their lead in approaching God.

Its self-evident then that the book is aimed as an informative guide to what is fundamental, or basic, in each of these Psalms so that the Christian can sit and think on them on their day to day.

Some nitpicks.
It’s beyond the scope of the book, so I can’t fault them for not doing what I proceed to suggest, but I would like it if there were (a) references for some deeper studies and (b) more application on how it ties to Christ—like a Christological section. I think the book is helpful, yes, but those would have made the book perfect for me.

Concluding thought
In fact, I would recommend the book as a joiner with anyone who does morning devotionals, is interesting in doing devotions, or anyone who hasn’t read the Psalms and want to start. This breaks it down without being overbearing, it’s easy to process the information, and it accomplishes exactly what it sets out to do: give you the essentials.

More reviews here.

Technorati Tags: book review, essential bible companion, psalms, zondervan

I placed them in order of publishing since that is my preferred order of reading (even if I don’t adhere to that as a hard rule).

Stendahl, K. (1976). Paul among Jews and Gentiles, and other essays. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Sanders, E. P. (1977). Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A comparison of patterns of religion. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Wright, N. T. (1980). The Messiah and the People of God: A study in Pauline theology with particular reference to the argument of the Epistle to the Romans. University of Oxford.

Sanders, E. P. (1985). Paul, the law, and the Jewish people. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Raisanen, H. (1986). Paul and the law. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Dunn, J. D. G. (1988). Romans. 1-8. Word biblical commentary, v. 38A. Dallas, Tex: Word Books.

Dunn, J. D. G. (1988). Romans. 9-16. Word biblical commentary, v. 38B. Dallas, Tex: Word Books.

Dunn, J. D. G. (1990). Jesus, Paul, and the law: Studies in Mark and Galatians. Louisville, Ky: Westminster/John Knox Press.

Wright, N. T. (1993). The climax of the covenant: Christ and the law in Pauline theology. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

Wright, N. T. (1997). What Saint Paul really said: Was Paul of Tarsus the real founder of Christianity? Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub.

Dunn, J. D. G. (1998). The theology of Paul the Apostle. Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub.

Wall, R. W., Wall, R. W., Wright, N. T., & Sampley, J. P. (2001). The New interpreter’s Bible. Volume 10, The Acts of the Apostles, introduction to epistolary literature, the letter to the Romans, the first letter to the Corinthians. Nashville, Tenn: Abingdon.

Carson, D. A., O’Brien, P. T., & Seifrid, M. A. (2001). Justification and variegated nomism. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 140-[181]. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

Kim, S., & Kim, S. (2001). Paul and the new perspective: Second thoughts on The origin of Paul’s gospel. Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans.

Das, A. A. (2003). Paul and the Jews. Library of Pauline studies. Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson.

Westerholm, S. (2004). Perspectives old and new on Paul: The “Lutheran” Paul and his critics. Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans.

Wright, N. T. (2004). Paul for everyone: Galatians and Thessalonians. London: SPCK.

Carson, D. A. (2004). Justification and variegated nomism 2 The paradoxes of Paul. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck [u.a.].

Spence, A. (2004). A Unified Theory of the Atonement. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY. 6 (4), 404-420.

Watson, F. (2004). Paul and the hermeneutics of faith. London: T & T Clark International.

Piper, J. (2007). The future of justification: A response to N.T. Wright. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Books. (Also at DesiringGod.com for free)

Dunn, J. D. G. (2008). The new perspective on Paul. Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans Pub.

London Symposium on the Theology of Atonement, Chalke, S., Tidball, D., Hilborn, D., & Thacker, J. (2008). The atonement debate: Papers from the London Symposium on the Theology of Atonement. Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan.

Visscher, G. H. (2009). Romans 4 and the new perspective on Paul: Faith embraces the promise. New York: Peter Lang.

Wright, N. T. (2009). Justification: God’s plan & Paul’s vision. Downers Grove, Ill: IVP Academic.

Wright, N. T. (2009). Paul: In fresh perspective. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

Wallace, D. (2009).Δικαιοσύνη Θεοu and N. T. Wright BIBLE.ORG

Technorati Tags: books, new perspective, wright

I have a feeling Obama will win but not on substance, rather on quick verbal skills and the mutant ability to turn self into rubber and others into glue.

As for the Bailout, all Obama is going to do is say how the Reps were denying the additions to the bailout package that would benefit a wider category than the rich companies with the deep pockets and the bad fiscal responsibility. Probably will use it as a starting point for some renewed (and likely potentially dangerous) renewed regulation. Let’s see how close I was:

During the Debate

1. First Factual error: we’re not going through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Maybe since World War 2. Deregulation has begun since the late 70′s early 80s–not the Bush era.
2. Isn’t money put at risk a real risk if you don’t know you might get it back?
3. Good job of McCain of ignoring the swipe and focusing on the real problems that are occurring. I wish he focused more on the question rather than the head nods at how awesome it is they’re all working together.
4. McCain shouldn’t say “sure” to wave off questions from the panel. That just comes off real bad in print especially if it later on it comes out that the bailout package is really bad.
5. McCains humor comes out very dry. The man has a problem with delivery but you get a sense of sincerity as he speaks.
6. McCain’s tax plan is pretty annoying with the breaks on the higher tax bracket. That bit about doing it to keep companies in America doesn’t hold water when its not only the Business Tax that sends business out East. Cost of labor, corporate oversight…yadda yadda.
7. Be that as it may, Obama’s tax plan sounds like a fairy tale: lowered taxes for everyone, increases in spending and none of it coming from taxes…just by closing loopholes. Every time I’ve tried to read and understand his tax plan I’m just left scratching my head. At least he specified who he won’t tax.
8. This Energy Independence plan of Obama effectively does nothing. It’s just more money to research options with no incentive to move towards those options. How is he going to build a new electric grid without the alternate energy in place? I really don’t get that.
9. Too funny, Obama outright says that his hunt for alternate energy may have parts that they can’t do! At least he’s honest about it….
10. . I seriously don’t get that “Obama admits that the economy slowing down will effect [sic] tax revenue. Does he think that doubling the taxes on employers is going to speed it up?” (Quoting ApoloJedi). If anything it sounds like motivation for more job cuts.
11. . Man, McCain does really well when dealing with the war. Not surprising, just saying. Probably anyone will look schooled when they have this veteran saying “you don’t know the difference between strategy and tactics.”
12. . Was it scary that McCain just told the truth but it was a crazy scary truth?

    “If you’re gonna do that you don’t say that out loud…You do what you gotta do…erm…you work with the Pakistanis….”

13. . EEP! Obama should NOT have just said that about him wanting to attack Pakistan! We definitely have a problem there but my WORD the stuff he’s saying is like raising the crusade banners for the world to see!
14. . I actually like both of their sincerity in dealing with the war. I gotta say that McCain is owning house when it comes to this topic.
15. . I can’t believe that McCain just pointing out the KGB in Putten’s eyes.
16. . Obama turns it back to a subject he thinks he’s strong on. But his alternate energy plan sounded really shaky earlier.
17. . McCain’s offshore drilling will not help the costs in the short run. It still takes time, albeit not as long as discovering new alternate fuel.
18. . Obama clarifies supporting Nuclear energy by saying “okay with nuclear waste as long as we have safe storage”. Nuclear energy, though powerful, scares me. The Waste stays around a loooong time.
19. . So far Obama’s said he’d attack Pakistan, talk with Iran, have a cold war against China and deal sternly with Russia. Wow.
20. . Good debate, both of them were very sincere with their topics. I think McCain did better when dealing with the war and they were both even when dealing with the economy.

Closing thoughts: Good debate, both of them were very sincere with their topics. I think McCain did better when dealing with the war and they were both even when dealing with the economy.

McCain surprised me on how well he spoke in dealing with all the issues. Obama did a really great job of actually putting down some very solid points on his position.

All in all, good debate: both of them brought their positions pretty ably to the table. I personally think McCain did somewhat better and specifically because Obama didn’t push as hard in some things and in other areas (security) McCain’s history brought in some serious weight.

I’m surprised they didn’t deal as much with the bailout package and both did a slicky job at avoiding it early on. The Debate was good and it surprised me.

One closing bullet: I think its unfortunate that people are complaining that there wasn’t more talk about education when the topic for this debate has long been stated as being focused on foreign policy.

Technorati Tags: debate

REVIEW SUMMARY: Decent overview in very easy language.

MY RATING: [rating:4]

OVERVIEW: A basic overview of church history in readable English, good to read and helpful but only a primer on a very complicated subject. Definitely pick it up if you’re looking to do research or plan to teach and need some refreshers.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Perfect introduction to church history, easily accessible with plenty of references to introduce the reader to further study.

MY REVIEW:
THE GOOD: The strength of the book is summed up in the cover: it’s written in plain, easy to read English. That is not to say that other books on this very complicated subject don’t approach it in “plain English”, but it is to say that whereas more involved volumes get into many aspects of church history and embroiled in several of the controversies and terminology, this book either glosses over them explaining the fundamental issues or mentions them in passing. Much to be applauded this book then is geared at the person who wants to start looking into Church history but is overwhelmed by the breadth of information available. What’s also good is that there’s plenty of footnotes to have a reader go off and do some (necessarily) deeper studying and where to look. These two things make the book a definite must read (and must buy) for anyone starting to look into Church History or anyone who wants to find a way to paint in the broad strokes of the church’s history without being embroiled in a morass of sometimes overburdening details. One of the best details in the book is by closing with the church in developing countries after wading through years of church conflict and so forth. Really great.

THE BAD: I read the first edition so my comment has to be limited to that and I also must say that this is a very minor, nitpicky comment. Some of the later sections of the book got a little clunky for my taste and I can attribute that to the fact that so much of the current era is documented. The author then finds himself spending several pages on political developments (necessarily so since history can’t be separated from the political upheavals of the era). But whereas political problems are painted in very broad strokes in earlier chapters (even during the Reformation era) when the author gets to our own time he winds up getting stuck in some places and perhaps spending more times than he needs there.

THE UGLY: The book jacket for the first edition was unremarkably plain with a cheesy enhancement on the PLAIN type. Thankfully, they redesigned the jacket with a very good looking piece in the 2nd Edition.

Technorati Tags: bruce shelley, church history

MY RATING: [rating:5]

OVERVIEW: Roy Zuck follows his classic Teaching as Jesus Taught with a focus on St. Paul (Teach ing as Paul Taught). Zuck makes sure to focus on Scripture and from there draw any and all conclusions.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Biblically focused to draw any conclusions about Paul’s teaching, the book is an excellent resource and deserves a place on a teacher’s shelf if he/she needs Paul’s teaching labeled and categorized. Otherwise, the long lists might make some weary in reading. Definitely recommended, but know what you’re buying.

MY REVIEW:
THE GOOD: Completely focused on Scripture. If Zuck points out that Paul uses Questions as a teaching method he’ll cite two hundred and fifty verses, in a numbered list, and quoting the question. If he wants to expose the reader to Paul’s Diatribes he’ll feature a table with references , preceding premises, false conclusions, initial brief responses and then the subsequent reason for the rejection: this method is excellent. You’re not going to come out of this book thinking Paul’s teaching style was something you can confine to a school of thought.

THE BAD: Although helpful to have these lists, they are very much like a concordance: long and dry. Now that can be negative to a certain type of reader who automatically looks at long lists as mere reference.

THE UGLY: The original book jacket is pretty ugly but the newer softcover jacket is nie with an excellent painting on the cover. The font is easy to read and the use of footnotes was done in a manner equal to any scholarly commentary.

Technorati Tags: book review, roy zuck