I’m going to be honest: I don’t feel like I read as many good books this year as I did last year. My guess is that’s due largely to having a baby in April; less time = fewer books, unless you count Brown Bear, Brown Bear What Do You See. When I did this list last year, I had to think about how to narrow down my number to 5. This year, I’m pushing it to get to 5. Anyway, here goes. Like last year, books on this list may not have been published in 2009 (I don’t have time to keep that up-to-date), but that I first read it this year. Here we are, in no particular order:
The Epic of Eden, by Sandra Richter
Okay, I lied about the whole “no particular order” thing. This was my favorite new read of 2009. Simply put, this is the best book that I’ve read geared towards lay people that clearly explains the often foreign world of the Old Testament. As I said in my review, “One gets the sense that she’s explained these things in non-academic settings before.” My biggest complaint now is trying to find a way to fit it into an already jammed packed training school curriculum.
Introducing Paul, by Michael Bird
This is another book written by a biblical scholar but can be read by non-scholars. I mentioned Bird’s wit in my review, as well as in a video, and it helps liven up the book considerably. There are a million books out there on Paul, but few that lay out the issues so clearly as this one. Bird isn’t content to focus merely on academic debates, but can get practical as well. I look forward to what this young scholar will be offering down the road, and I hope he continues writing books on this level as well as his more in-depth academic treatments.
The Revelation of Saint John, by Ian Boxall
After reading this book, I finally felt like I had found a commentary on Revelation I could recommend to people in my church. Let me be clear, that doesn’t mean it’s always easy. By its very nature any commentary on Revelation will be a bit difficult to wade through. But time and time again I felt like Boxall took a position and explained it clearly and concisely. By the end of it I found myself wishing he had more space. One of Boxall’s strength is the use of Ezekiel in Revelation, which has inspired me to study Ezekiel more in-depth than I ever had before (I’m actually following through on what I wrote in my review of this book). At any rate, this is my favorite non-technical commentary on Revelation.
The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 1-24, by Daniel Block
Okay, I’m cheating a bit here. One, I haven’t actually finished this book. Two, it was published 12 years ago (hence my “not necessarily published in 2009” caveat above). Block’s 2-volume commentary has been regarded by many evangelical scholars as the best commentary on Ezekiel since it came out. As mentioned above, Boxall on Revelation inspired me to study Ezekiel more deeply, so I used some gift cards to get Block’s commentary. I’m so thankful I did, as it has been a reliable (and enjoyable) guide to this often confusing OT prophet.
We Become What We Worship, by Gregory Beale
I think I have to include this one, since I did a 5-Part book review of it. I had my disagreements with Beale’s exegesis at points, thinking that he stretched a bit to fit things under his thesis. But still, I came away with a stronger sense of the Bible’s teaching on idolatry and how it destroys our worship of our God. Tough reading at points, but worth the time and effort.
Honorable Mention
The Book of Basketball, by Bill Simmons
Okay, this is definitely cheating. But, this is Boston Bible Geeks, and Bill Simmons is known as the Boston Sports Guy. Maybe there aren’t that many people who would read a 700 page book on the NBA, and even fewer who would do it in a weekend, but I’m one of them. The problems with Simmons: juvenile humor and an overload of soon-to-be-outdated pop culture references (which I’m sure will be his excuse to update this book every 5-10 years to sell more copies). The upside: well, he writes about sports and entertains while he does it. I’m a sucker for sports history- comparing eras, taking on longheld myths, arguing about which players are the best and who’s overrated. Sure, Simmons is gimmicky and overplays his “I’m just an average fan” hand. (He brags about how he pays for his season tickets instead of using a press pass- big deal when you make a ton of money and have the time to go to all those games.) But, he does take the discussions that many of us “regular” fans have and turns them into columns and books, and manages to do it reasonably well. He isn’t for everybody, but for the younger generation of Boston sports fans, well, we’re obligated to read him.
How about you? I’d love to hear some thoughts from our reader(s) regarding what new reads they’d recommend for us.
Book Review: The Revelation of Saint John by Ian Boxall
Posted in book review, Revelation, tagged commentaries, Ian Boxall on Saturday, May 16, 2009| 3 Comments »
Special thanks to Kathy of Hendrickson Publishers for a review copy of this book. I should note that paperback volumes of the Black’s series will be released in the relatively near future. I have a hardcover copy.
As for Ian Boxall, a quick Google search lets you know that he’s a young Oxford scholar who has previously published on Revelation (or a personal fitness trainer, but I’m guessing it wasn’t him that wrote this book). It wasn’t until relatively recently when I read a positive review of this commentary that I decided I’d check it out. I’ve searched for a commentary to recommend to students without the requisite Greek knowledge to keep up with Beale and the like. I own Ben Witherington’s commentary, which fits this category, but am not in love with it.
I have a second confession to make. I was an idiot for passing over this a couple years ago. Throughout the commentary I found myself impressed with Boxall’s interpretations (even when I disagreed) and thankful for his, at times unique, insights.
For instance, in the introduction alone I encountered three things I had not fully considered previously. First, is the importance of Revelation as a visionary text. Boxall does not deny “that the Apocalypse is also a carefully crafted document” (p4), but he does suggest that perhaps John’s “conscious intention cannot be the determining factor at every points” (p5). A provocative suggestion, indeed. I actually felt that Boxall could have explored the importance of the visionary experience in more depth. What about the majesty of the throne room vision in chapter 4? How ought this impact the reader? I can’t help but wonder if, in the search for the meaning of little details, we lose sight of the sheer force of the imagery and its intended effect on the reader/listener.
Second, Boxall attempts to illustrate the importance of the John’s location: Patmos. True, most interpreters note the importance of his exile (Bauckham being a notable exception) and the location of his readers, but Boxall is just as concerned with Patmos as the location of that exile. He argues that the visual pagan imagery of Patmos may show up periodically in Revelation (specifically Artemis and Apollo).
Third is the importance of the call not to compromise in Revelation. Boxall doesn’t discount the threat of persecution for John’s readers, but argues that not enough attention has been given to the threat of compromise. I’ve already written about this here, so I won’t go any further down that road.
There are, to be sure, some things I disagreed with here and there. I don’t agree with the contention that the 7 Spirits of 1:4 are angels rather than the Holy Spirit. I’m confused why he thinks this view “may too readily assume a developed trinitarianism” (p31), yet he can frequently refer to the “Eucharistic” setting of Revelation. It seems to me that assuming a Eucharistic liturgy is more anachronistic than a developed trinitarian theology. I’m not at all convinced that the scroll John ingests in chapter 10 is the same scroll from chapter 5. And so on.
I found myself nodding in agreement more often than not. The 144,000 of chapter 7 are not only ethnic Jews, but to be understood by the vision of the multi-ethnic multitude. The angel of chapter 10 is not to be identified with Jesus. The 2 witnesses of chapter 11 are “representative figures of the prophetic ministry of the Church” (p164). Throughout the commentary I was grateful for his demonstation of the importance of Ezekiel for John’s vision, especially in the final two chapters. Boxall even includes a helpful chart on page 255. In fact, Boxall has convinced me of my need to beef up the Ezekiel portion of my library. When you combine this with Beale’s emphasis on Daniel, I begin to wonder how I can understand Revelation without some working knowledge of these two OT books.
(Note: I’m intentionally leaving out reference to his interpretation of the millennium in this review, because in my experience this is the first place students look in determining the worth of a Revelation commentary. Believe it or not, there is more to the book than 20:1-6)
This is one of the better non-technical commentaries on Revelation, alongside Witherington and Keener. For those who have a long interest in Revelation, there is enough insight in here to be of great help- he packs a lot into a short space. For those looking for a reliable guide as they learn the book, Boxall will prove to play the role well. In my opinion, what the church needs in its books on Revelation is clarity, not cleverness. Boxall’s commentary is remarkably clear and penetrating without trying to force anything. And let us remember that there are excellent commentaries out there not written by men with names like Fee, Moo, Carson, Beale etc. I hope to read more of Boxall’s work in the years to come.
Read Full Post »