Bibles Bible Studies Books

I have been using this Bible and its earlier form since 1996. When it first came out, it was called the Full Life Study Bible.

It has been adpoted by the Assemblies of God Bible Alliance and has been promoted for ministers and believers alike in other countries who will never have a chance to go to Bible College.

It is rich in organization, notes, references, word meanings, and topical studies.

One of the things that really impressed me was the amount of supporting Scripture in the commentary. They do not just say what they believe, but they say it with proof.

Here some examples of the near a 85 topical studies...

The Old Testament Law
The Nature of Idolatry
Effective Praying
Worship
Biblical Hope
Wine in the Old and New Testament
The Great Tribulation
False Teachers
The Judgement of Believers
Election and Predestination
The Inspiration and Authority of Scripture
Christ's Message to the Seven Churches

This Bible is set up for those who lean towards the things of the Holy Spirit (Baptism in the Holy Spirit, signs and wonders, gifts of the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, and healing of the sick).

It would be good for any believer!

I've been told it is equivalent to about 2 years of Bible College in information.

It comes in the KJV and NIV versions.

I believe that this is a wonderful study bible for anyone that is interested in learning more about the pentecostal faith. I have always thought study bibles are the best for personal use, and this was probably in my top 3 of bibles i have owned. As a Bible College Student, I have been able to use some of the notes and articles written as part of the essays I am required to write. You will learn more from this Bible than most Bibles.

I have about 8 Study Bibles in my library including John MacArthur's, but this one, really is a superb addition to anyone seeking a Charismatic/Pentecostal emphasis on the Holy Scriptures, without the nonsense of what goes on in these churches these days. The subject matter, such as the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, Individual Apostasy, Effective Praying, False teachers, Election and Predestination really are superb articles with a thoroughly Biblical grounding. I have come out of the Charismatic church during the last 5 years, but this Bible made me nostalgic for the purity of the New Testament church in spite of its early errors, the church then was enthusiastic and vital and ALIVE in Christ Jesus.
I would thoroughly recommend this study Bible to anyone, even of a non-Charismatic inclination, to buy one whilst they are still available!

This is by far the best study Bible in print. I am an Assemblies of God pastor and have been blessed with knowing the story of Donald Stamps. He was an Assemblies of God missionary to Brazil who was totally in love with the Lord and His Word. He saw that the pastors there needed a study Bible in their language, but also one with Pentecostal notes. Most of our pastors in other parts of the world don't have any kind of Christian resource library. For this reason Life Publishers and the Bible Alliance of the Assemblies of God is getting this Bible (an entire library in one Bible) into the hands of pastors around the world. One thing that stands out with this Bible is that it follows the rule that you take the Bible literal unless the Scriptures indicate otherwise. The other rule that it follows is that you take all doctrine from Scripture, taken in context, compares to other passages of Scripture. This is truly the Bible you want if you want to live a "Life in the Spirit."

This version is truely terrific for a lay person. The references, notes and articles included are illuminating. Bravo Zondervan!!!

This book is very interesting. It allows you to actually visualize the regions related to biblical times. The illustrations and maps are very informative. The book is easy to read and understand.

This is a more comprehensive summary than one would get in an encyclopedia. Nice for what it is.

This Illustrated Atlas did help me much to understand more about the Biblical Place. Looking to the pictures and reading at the same time felt like as if I was there. It is like visiting a holy place, because the picture says all.

Bought this for my husband. He forund this book interesting and enlightening.The quality is excellent.He read and reread several times.

This is a great book for history buffs, especially about the history of Christianity. Gives you a view of the old world versus the new world.

Overall, I enjoyed this book a lot. The author does have a bias, but supports his arguments well. The idea that the New Testament is reliable without having to rely on the 'every word is true' approach is refreshing.

This book is thoughtful, straightforward and well written. I'd recommend it.

It seems to me that the most often quoted resource on this subject (for works written for lay-readers, anyways) is "The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?" by F.F Bruce, which was recently reprinted. I have read both Bruce's book and this one, "Is the New Testament Reliable?: A Look at the Historical Evidence" by Paul Barnett. I think that while Bruce's book is well written and quite detailed, I prefer this book, by Barnett, because it is easier to read and contains all of the information I was looking for.

I especially found chapters 2 ("Did Jesus Exist? Early Non-Christian References") and 3 ("Fixing the Time-Frame") to be succinctly written and clear. I still reference material found in these chapters.

The only problem I found was that many of the references for further reading at the end of the chapters are now out of print and/or hard to find. If you want more details on a specific subject, you may need to search out a dedicated source on that subject.

My only previous knowledge of this subject matter was from Lee Strobel's excellent "Case for Christ", and my purpose for buying this book was that I wanted to know more details about the historicity and accuracy of the Bible. I found what I was looking for here, and this is a simply terrific book which I recommend wholeheartedly.

Is the New Testament an historically reliable source of information about Jesus and the early church?

According to a number of contemporary scholars, the answer to that question is no. For example, Robert Funk and the members of the Jesus Seminar argue that Jesus did not say or perform a majority of the words and actions attributed to him in the Gospels. Elaine Pagels and Bart Ehrman argue that multiple versions of Christianity competed for the allegiance of the faithful in the early centuries of the church. The books of the New Testament - and the history and theology they communicate - are simply the documents of that competition's winners, who went on to forcibly suppress alternative Christianities. Even popular media debunk the New Testament. Last year, just in time for Christmas, both Time and Newsweek ran cover stories that expressed skepticism about the veracity of details of Jesus' birth.

But these voices represent only one side an ongoing debate. Paul Barnett's Is the New Testament Reliable? is a representative of the other, affirmative side. Barnett is a churchman and a scholar - the former Anglican bishop of North Sydney, Australia, and currently a teaching fellow at Regent College in Vancouver, Canada, and a visiting fellow in ancient history at Macquarie University in Australia. He is the author of Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity and Jesus and the Logic of History, among other books. The first volume of his trilogy, The Birth of Christianity: The First Twenty Years will be published in April by Eerdmans.

Four Questions
In Is the New Testament Reliable? Barnett argues that "Jesus and the first Christians are genuine figures of history and that they are faithfully and truthfully written about in the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles." To bolster this conclusion, Barnett asks and answers a number of questions.

First, "Did Jesus in fact live?" Barnett cites several early Roman and Jewish writers and texts that confirm both his existence of the spread of Jesus-worship from Judea to Rome by the mid-First-Century A.D.

Second, "Can we know the time frame in which the New Testament was written?" The latest date that the New Testament books could have been written is approximately A.D. 95, when patristic writers began to cite them in their own works. The earliest date they could have been written was A.D. 33, which is the date Barnett offers for the crucifixion of Jesus. (He notes that most scholars date Christ's death to A.D. 30.) Based on internal evidence, Paul began to write his letters around A.D. 50, and the last of his letters was written in the early 60s. Most scholars date the Gospels and Acts in the 60s to 80s. What this means is that the books of the New Testament were written within a generation of two of Jesus' death. By contrast, "our major sources [for the life of Tiberius, 42 B.C.-A.D.37] are considerably later-Tacitus about A.D. 110, Suetonius about A.D. 120 and Dio Cassius about A.D. 220." If we can be reasonably sure of the historical reliability of our late sources in reconstructing the life of Tiberius, we can be reasonably sure of the reliability of our much earlier sources for a life of Jesus.

Third, "Can we be confident about transmission of the manuscripts from those times to the present?" Once again, yes. "There are more than five hundred manuscripts or manuscript fragments [of New Testament books] in Greek that have survived from the early centuries," Barnett writes. By contrast, "there are only nine complete manuscripts [of Jewish Wars by the first-century author Josephus], the oldest of which is a fifth-century Latin translation. There are only two manuscripts of the Annals of Imperial Rome by Tacitus, neither of which "is earlier than the Middle Ages." If we can be reasonably confident of the accuracy of Josephus's and Tacitus's texts, we can be reasonably confident of the New Testament's textual accuracy.

Fourth, "can we know that what we read of Jesus is a true account?" Obviously, this is the most important question. Barnett answers it by revealing the multiple, independent sources that underlie the Gospels. We tend to think that there are four primary historical sources for the life of Jesus: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. But that is not actually the case. A cursory reading of Matthew, Mark, and Luke reveals that they are similar to one another in both the arrangement and wording of their material. The majority of New Testament scholars have concluded that Mark is our oldest Gospel and further that Matthew and Luke used him as one of their sources. Noting that Matthew and Luke have material in common that is not shared with Mark, scholars have also concluded that those two Gospels employed a source, which they refer to as Q (from the German word Quelle, or "source.") But Matthew and Luke also present material unique to them. Scholars refer to this unique material as M and L, respectively. Finally, because the Gospel of John is so unlike Matthew, Mark, and Luke, many scholars believe that he represents another source of historical information about the life of Jesus. So, instead of the four Gospels, we have at least five historical sources: Mark, Q, M, L, and John. We might add to this the independent traditions of information about Jesus culled from the New Testament epistles. Although there are differences between these sources - including some conflicts that are hard to resolve - the basic picture of Jesus they present is largely consistent and, I might add, theologically traditional.

Miracles
The greatest challenge to the historical reliability of these sources is the presence of miracles within them, miracles such as Christ's virginal conception, his healing of the sick, and his own resurrection from the dead. Barnett points out multiple sources attest to the reality of all three. The birth of Christ is described in the two very different accounts of M and L, which nonetheless agree at significant points. Similarly, all the New Testament sources of our information about Jesus (Mark, Q, M, L, John) present him as a miracle worker, and several extrabiblical historical sources (Josephus, the rabbis) confirm this impression. Whatever else may be said about the historical Jesus, first-century writers believed that Jesus had the power to perform miracles.

The greatest miracle, of course, is Jesus' own resurrection from the dead. Christian apologists sometimes defend the reality of miracles on philosophical grounds. (Consider Miracles by C.S. Lewis, for example.) Barnett argues for the reality of Jesus' resurrection on historical grounds, however.

We know from Paul's letters that the resurrection of Jesus played a significant role in the faith of the early Christians. To quote Paul, "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born" (1 Cor. 15.3-8 [TNIV]). To Paul, the resurrection of Jesus was a fact confirmed by eyewitnesses. And it had spiritual importance: "And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith" (1 Cor. 15.14 [TNIV]).

How should we account for this faith in Christ's resurrection? Barnett considers and rejects "alternative explanations" for the belief, such as (1) "the resurrection was a hoax," (2) "another man was crucified," (3) "Jesus did not actually die on the cross," (4) "the body was removed from the tomb," (5) "the women returned to the wrong tomb," (6) "the resurrection stories are legends," and (7) "the resurrection stories originated in the Osiris myth." The historical sources underlying the Gospels provide no credence to any of these explanations. And some of them are absurd. If Jesus' body was removed from the tomb by the disciples, for example, then they died for a belief they knew to be false. If it was taken by the authorities - whether Jewish or Roman - then simply producing the body would have ended Christianity at its beginning. If the women returned to the wrong tomb and thought Jesus had risen from the dead, a quick visit to the right tomb would have dispelled their illusion. Belief in Jesus' resurrection appears too early for it to be a legend, for legends take long periods of time to develop.

What emerges from Barnett's discussion of the resurrection is that the best historical explanation of belief in Jesus' resurrection is Jesus' resurrection itself. This explanation accounts for the early disciples' belief in what neither Jews or Greeks thought possible or desirable. Jews taught the resurrection of all the dead at the end of time, not the resurrection of one man to eternal life while those around him still died. And Greeks desired the immortality of their souls, not the resurrection of their bodies. Christian belief in Jesus' resurrection was unique to them, attested by multiple sources, and confirmed by the change in the lives of members of the early church.

So What!
Does Barnett's case for the basic historical reliability of the New Testament make any difference in our spiritual lives? Yes, for if the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles are reliable sources of information about Jesus and the early church, then we ought to confess and practice the faith of the early church. If the New Testament picture of Jesus as the divine Son of God, crucified for our sins, and raised that we might have eternal life is correct, then we must seek eternal salvation in him. History, you see, impels us to act - or rather, to believe. If Jesus lived, died, and rose again, he is the Lord, and we must follow him. If not, then whatever respect we may have for Jesus as a teacher of morality, we need not pay any more attention to him than we pay to Socrates, St. Francis, or Dr. Phil.

In this little review, I have tried to communicate the gist of Paul Barnett's argument for the historical reliability of the New Testament, as well as its relevance. But read the book for yourself. And draw your own conclusions.

This books is an incredible resource for anyone interested in taking a serious, objective look at the background information behind the NT. It does not simply assert it's truth, as many opposing views of the Bible do, but calmly weaves many seemless arguments which, to this author's knowledge, have gone unchallenged thus far in Christianity.

Even as a holder of a Master of Divinity degree from a prestigious theological school, I'm often stumped by complex passages of the Bible. When I'm looking for a quick answer, I first turn to this book. I keep next to my Bibles for easy access. From there I'll pursue other resources. One of the refreshing aspects of this book is that it presents a few possible interpretations. Some seem more plausible than others, but it's good to have all the options. This is a great addition to any teacher's library.

This book offers a great scholarly look at some of the sayings that seem difficult to us who live in the 21st century -- far removed from the cultural setting and lingo in which the Bible was written. The work is pretty thick consisting of several hundred pages. I like this though, because (usually) more thickness means more substance, and fortunately I do indeed find it to be the case here. The book is also good because it addresses considerations from opposing camps that the authors do not necessarily agree with. Thus there is a sense of objectivity.

Now, on a defensive note, I've seen the objection from at least one other certain person that the book, hence the length, is essentially one convoluted mess of rationalizations attempting to fight a losing battle. As the work has also been described as 'cumulative rationalizations' and a work of torturous logic. These kind of statements come exceptionally close to the logical fallacy that long and complex arguements or statements imply that said statements are 'patch-work' for a failing viewpoint, paradigm, or what have you. This is a non-sequitur, because it does not follow that a work of great breadth and sophistication is a result of torturous rationalizations. Afterall, no one would suggest encyclopedia writers/publishers are in denial about reality! Indeed, even skeptics produce heavy works, but don't look for these same skeptics to apply such logic there!

In the end, could it be that the great amount of work put into this book, other than to satisfy all the relevant data possible, is to respond to the likewise "exhausting" and even sometimes "torturous" criticism that the Bible so often receives? Quite so, anyone who produces an extravagant criticism of the Bible offers the opportunity to have the favor fully returned to them likewise. And that is what this book so wonderfully does: If you want a scholarly handle of the supposed difficulties, and sometimes so-called 'contradictions', in the Bible then this work will provide you with the plentiful data to deal with them.

My recent purchase of the book "Hard Sayings of the Bible",
has been a great investment for me. Upon viewing the contents,
I found that the author explains in detail scripture verses
of the bible that I have read often,
but have understood little, even when using other
reference material. An example of this is the explanation of the
"red heifer" and the word "scapegoat". I recommend this book to anyone
wanting to understand in greater detail the meaning of verses and
words that may not be fully explained in other reference material.

I often like to engage people in real time debates on the internet. As a Christian, I find that one of the main challenges in such a situation is countering the many supposed Bible "contradictions" that the non-Christian is able to cut and paste into the conversation.

No matter how much you read, at some point they will present to you a supposed "contradiction" that you've never heard, and in some less civil discussions, such a situation would be seen as a victory for person who is "hurling the elephant."

This book presents well written articles on all sorts of "Hard" passages, and provides explanations from a Christian perspective. It's a great quick reference guide if you need a prompt answer, but it is also deep enough to act as a springboard into further study on any of the covered issues!

This is a great book that I would recommend to any Christian!

I think this book was really good. However, I think the apolegetics could've been done a little better. They mostly deal with some of the hard verses in the bible. Not a bad job.

Petersen gives a really good basic introduction to the Prophets and a great help in understanding the nature of prophetic literature. He also gives a basic overview of the major issues in each of the prophetic books (Isaiah thru Malachi). A very good reference.

Petersen has written an interesting guide to the prophetic literature of the Hebrew Bible. The emphasis of this work, as the title clearly indicates, is on literature rather than the prophets themselves. A general overview of each prophetic book is provided but the author's major focus is upon literary units. With an emphasis on literature comes a de-emphasis on the author. Petersen's stress is upon genre, especially prose versus poetry. Literary analysis is used to determine suggestions about setting (e.g. laments), authorship, and message.

The author mentions key findings from critical schools in his discussion of each biblical book. The weight is given to form criticism followed by redaction criticism, tradition history and social-science criticism, all methodologies that result in the segmentation of the text. Though quite conversant with rhetorical features of the text the author places much less emphasis upon methods that often promote a greater textual unity like rhetorical criticism or canon criticism. For Petersen the focus of each book (Zion in Isaiah, lament in Jeremiah; glory in Ezekiel and the Day of the Lord as an emphasis in The Book of the Twelve) helps with the analysis of smaller units in a text that developed over time.

I recommend this book for any serious student of the prophets. It provides insight into current scholarly concerns about the growth of the Old Testament literature. The strength of the book is its focus on various genres in the prophets while much less will be gleaned about the prophets themselves. Petersen is very conversant with current scholarly trends and provides helpful summaries along the way.

The size (692 pages; the bibliography and the indexes are not included) tells us about the terseness of the commentary but not the lack of clarity. Every paragraph is straight to the point without diffusion. Every discussion has significance, not only serving the purpose of delivering information. I enjoyed much of reading this form of presentation: terse yet unambiguous.

This is also not a commentary of commentaries, hence the brevity. However, he does well in quoting others, such that the commentary is neither mostly a pile of arguments about others' opinion nor only a gathering of others' view. The way he summarizes other's argument is well balanced. He is really writing a commentary on the Gospel of Matthew. This work is brief yet comprehensive.

The other concern in writing a commentary of the Gospels is that we have to treat each Gospel in its own right, which means that we are not supposed to do a synoptic comparison in order to gain the whole picture. I believe that the author has done it well. But sometimes such comparison is justified, because the differences will show us the uniqueness of each Gospel. In this point, I found out that the author tends to do only the first part, but offers no explanation of the differences so as to highlight its distinctiveness. (see, for instance, p. 108 about the difference of Matthew 3:3, compared with the other Gospels, in quoting the OT; others like pp.124, 129 etc.)

When commenting on a verb, the author emphasizes the implication of the Greek tense, which makes me a little uneasy about it. (Surprisingly, this is rarely found at the second half or even the last two third of the commentary) For instance, in commenting on 3:5-6 (p. 109) he writes, "The imperfect verbs exeporeueto (were going out) and ebaptizonto (were being baptized) indicate that this response was widespread and regular." (I omit the Greek words) I am wondering, does "imperfect" indicate the widespread and regularity of the verbs or is it the context that requires so? In another sense, I will agree with some of the conclusions, but not the reason. I may have such an understanding due to the fact that I am more influenced by the Aspect Theory rather than traditional grammatical analysis. But for sure, the latter approach is still a common practice. This, however, won't affect me in appreciating this commentary due to many other strengths.

Tom Wright (aka N T Wright)is the most insightful and unique conservative scholar to come along. He has shared with us his great gift of, not only his theology, but his whimsical writing, anectdotes, story telling and of course the most important of all correct interpretation and translation of the text itself. Wright is not only a theologian, but is as much a historian. I recommend the entire everyone series from him. You will not regret buying these easy to read, entertaining, and remarkably insightful books.

Wright gets Paul and this work on 2 Corinthians is proof of it. There is much here to commend, but let me just talk about on insightful aspect of this book In 2 Corinthians 4:13 Paul quotes from Psalm 116:10 a simple little line of "I believe and therefore I spoke." Wright sees behind this quote a text that Paul had personally been ministered to from. It is this Psalm that carried him though when he felt in chapter 1 that he had the death sentence passed upon him. Wright takes the time to quote the entire Psalm and show briefly how Paul worked it in. The only problem with the Everyone Commentary series is that they leave you wanting Wright to explore even deeper with you the ramification of something like this in Paul.

This commentary is a brief read that will leave you with a greater grasp on the life of Paul and on 2 Corinthians.

I read commentaries. I read many different types of books but I actually sit down and read commentaries. But this little book and all the others Wright has written in his series is a shear delight to read. If you are looking for something to replace the old Barclay commentaries you have found it. Wright is one of the brightest Biblical scholars on the planet. I often read his sholarly writings. So it is really something to find these small but profound, entertaining and enlighting books. His personal translation of the the verses he is commenting on is better than any present version I have read. I hope the publisher decides to give us a Wright translation of the NT!!! Purchase them all - you will not regret one of them.

N.T. Wright is among the very best Biblical scholars in the world. His genius is evident in how clearly he brings Paul's letters alive for us today. Remember, this stuff isn't rocket science. The enduring truth of Paul's theology and counsel has always been meant for EVERYONE.

Vague genuflections to things in nature like inertia, plate tectonics, species diversity, internal morality and crediting these to God does not make a book about God anymore than saying these are caused by fairies would make a book about fairies.

At times they seem to try to be too scientific when the purpose of the book is to indoctrinate kids into this myth. They need to keep it simpler.

Some of the pictures are downright creepy. The little girl being given tea looks like a zombie, and the lack of pupils in some pictures are offputting. Some of the messages are a little odd like those stars are millions of miles away when the closest of them is, I suppose, 25,000 million miles away, and the suggestion of mountains decaying strongly suggests that all mountains just decay and glosses over most plate tectonics when it shouldn't even bring it up.

I bought this book for my 16 month old to begin to teach her about god and to start to develope her spirituality. She loves to sit and read it every night with us. The text is a tad lenghly on some pages for a 16 month old and sometimes she gets anxious to see the other pages before we are finished reading one. However the illustrations are beautiful and they hold her attention alone. I like the way the author has incorperated children of different races into to illustrations as well. This is deffinatly a keepsake because of the gentle /sweet message of gods creatons and his love and kindness. In addition to the beautiful pictures.

I enjoyed the Golden Books as child, 66 years ago and am happy they're still around for my great-grandchildren. They are just right for little hands. I remember some of the pictures to this day. I'm looking for a Nursery Rhyme Songbook. I can't recall the cover of the book but I remember many of the pages. The first page was "Lavender's Blue Dilly-Dilly" and the top of the next page was "London Bridge" I think the next page was "Where Have You been Billy Boy?" I thought the children in the pictures wore such pretty clothes. My mother, who is now deceased, sang these songs to my sister and me and I've sung them to my 10 grandchildren. Would like to have the book. My 9 month old great-granddaughter's favorite is "Are You Sleeping?" It was on a left hand page and "Row, Row,Row Your Boat" was right above it. Thank you if you can direct me to that speial beloved book.

ISBN 0307203123 - I'm a huge fan of Golden Books, and not a fan at all of religion, so I was curious to see how the two would go together. I'm surprised to say they work together nicely here. Sturdy board book pages are nice and the medium size of the book is good for small hands. The illustrations by Eloise Wilkin are mostly pleasant, kind of boring, although some are stand-out excellent.

From "God is Good", through to "God is Love", this small book attempts to introduce your child to the higher power you, presumably, believe in and wish to share. It explains, in a basic sense, who and what God is, in terms simple enough for young children.

While religious parents will enjoy the idea of sharing this little gem with their children, you should know that if you're a strict believer in the bible and the "created in seven days" idea, this book may contradict your beliefs with "Think of the snow-capped mountains. Those peaks were crumbling away with age before the first people lived on earth." For those whose religious beliefs are more open, this really is a nice book that's pretty basic. The text is too long for most of the intended audience of most board books (toddlers) and might be more appropriate for older kids who wouldn't want to be caught with a "baby book".

- AnnaLovesBooks

This book is a sweet story and a good introduction to God's creations. The wording is a little antiquated but my daughter enjoys the sentiment and the pictures.

This commentary on Genesis is a very helpful beginner commentary on the book. It is deep enough for Bible Students but it is written in a way that any new believer could follow along! I highly recommend it!

Bruce Waltke's commentary was useful as a resource for the recent Adult Sunday School class I taught on Genesis 11-50. It doesn't go into as much technical detail as Gordon Wehnam's (Word biblical commentary section), which makes it suited for use by interested laymen who aren't doing advanced study.

Waltke makes good use of David Dorsey's structural outlines (usually chiastic) (from The literary structure of the Old Testament, which are helpful in pointing the reader to compare and contrast one section of the text with another, possibly non-obvious section of text.

For each portion of Genesis Waltke covers includes literary analysis, exegetical details, and theological reflections, which are generally Reformed in tenor. I liked how Waltke referenced God changing his mind about humanity in the flood: "The unchanging God is always pained by sin. Moreover, because he is immutable, he will always change his plans to do good if people persist in their sin: "If it [a nation] does evil in my sight, and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good that I had intended to do for it" (Jer 18:10, ...) God's change of mind about the human race at the time of the flood, is entirely consistent with his unchanging character. God is not fickle, he does not change his mind, including his mind to reconsider. People can count on God always to reconsider his original intention to do good or evil according to the human response."

Waltke follows the usual "majority report" on the impropriety of deception in Genesis, seeing Abraham and Jacob as solely negative examples. Interestingly, and in a very well-argued section, he shows how Tamar is a model of gentile faithfulness in her actions to gain her rightful offspring from fallen Judah.

Waltke's commentary doesn't deal in any great detail with archaeological or scientific difficulties that Genesis presents, though he has reflections (tending to support historical validity) for some of them, such as the alleged anachronism of camels, or the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by fire.

A unique contribution is his highlighting of areas of the narrative that contain "blanks" or "gaps". For Waltke, "blanks" are inconsequential omissions from what we might think we would like to know for a full account of a story, and "gaps" are intentional omissions that have narrative weight. Waltke frequently draws attention to these aspects of the text. Waltke cites the lack of a "these are the generations of Isaac" sectional head as another aspect of the narratives criticism of the character of Isaac.

Waltke's commentary is a fine addition or even starting point for anyone dealing with a detailed or literary study of Genesis, and will find good theological insight as well.

As a final note, I can see the point of one of the 2 star reviewers, that the book reads like class notes, which is what they developed from. I didn't find that as offputting, but I can see it as a flaw in some respects. I'm also not as perturbed by the kinds of literary analysis that seems "from left field", though I can see that someone new to it would need some hand-holding. James B. Jordan's Through New Eyes would be excellent in that regard.

I bought this commentary to use as an aid in my Bible study group. I find it hard to read. The format is very confusing. It was not a good purchase.

I am working on my thesis for my masters degree on a passage in Genesis, so I have had opportunity to read portions of about 30 Genesis commentaries so far. As a result, I would put Waltke's commentary in the bottom third of the Genesis commentaries I have read. I read it cover to cover for a seminary course, and I was able to obtain a complete understanding of what he was saying. Since Waltke is a big name, I was very surprised at what I found.
Structure of the book: This is not at all a good cover-to-cover read. He divides the Genesis account into Books, Acts, and Scenes. For instance, Book 8, Act 2, Scene 3 is titled "Jacob Betrothed to Rachel." His outlining convention is fine, but rather than make reference to the biblical stories again in later "scenes" he will refer to Jacob's deception in Act 1 scene 4, which is not at all helpful. He gives the structure of each story, keywords, and makes comments on what the author omitted. There are short references made to many important terms and phrases in the passage being developed, followed by theological reflections and literary analysis. He draws out many interesting comparisons and contrasts throughout the book and has some thought provoking comments on literary structure of the passages.
The preface explains how these are class notes converted into a commentary. It certainly comes across that way. That is one of the biggest negatives of the book.
The thing that most readers will find frustrating is that Waltke's speculations about various texts are so intertwined with his historical/grammatical comments that it is frequently hard to tell what are purely opinions, and what is based on scripture. His theological presuppositions (which I am not entirely in oppostion to) influence greatly his understandings of many texts. The informed reader will find himself asking "Where did he get that from?" Where the novice will have trouble distinguishing the good from the bad.
Here is one of several examples that left me shaking my head (p. 591): "Interetingly the factorization of the life spans of the patriarchs follows a distinct pattern: Abraham 175 = 5x5x7; Isaac 180=6x6x5; Jacob 147=7x7x3." He goes on to quote Sarna who sees this as exhibition of God's grand design. The commentary has several other strange conclusions and interjections such as this that will leave you scratching your head.
The remaining information in the book is marginally helpful. If you are on a budget for your book buying, it would be better to look elsewhere for material that is more helpful.

I had read various reviews from different sources and thought this might be a great addition to my library on Genesis. Boy was I wrong! I have Waltke's work in NICOT on Proverbs and it is excellent but I was sadly disappointed with this commentary. It is very brief for Genesis and it's internal layout with the various 'acts' and scenes were not helpful. I immediately sold my copy on ebay at a loss. I then purchased Kenneth Matthews in the NAC and was EXTREMELY pleased! It is a 2 volume work that does Genesis justice in every way. I also have Ross's 'Creation & Blessing' which is also good but Matthews is fantastic. Let someone else spend their money on Waltke's Genesis (or try ebay, you might get a deal)and go with the NAC instead. It's MORE than worth the extra money.

I could not follow this book. I guess I need to do more studying and come back to it later because it bored me out of my mind at the time I tried to go through it. It's on the shelf for a date well in the future unless I decide to sell it first.

Then buy this book! I've had this book (and Jensen's Survey of the New Testament) for over 15 years. I have used them both to help guide me in my study of dozens of Bible books, and they have been a huge help in my spiritual growth. I love them so much I am now going through the Gospel of John with my teenage boys, using Jensen's New Testament book as a guide. Both the boys and I are loving it. In fact, I ordered them each their own copy to help them start their own Christian libraries.

In your study of a Bible book, Jensen will guide you first through an overview of the entire book so you can see the big picture, of the book itself, and of the book's place in the entire Bible. This has been very helpful in demystifying the Old Testament for me. Then he takes you through several main topics within the book, so you can focus on the details. He also has very insightful ideas for application and further study.

I give it my highest recommendation.