Review by ronef -- Who Told You That You Were Naked?
-
ronef
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 28 May 2018, 11:36
- Currently Reading:
- Bookshelf Size: 0
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-ronef.html
- Latest Review: Who Told You That You Were Naked? by William Combs
Review by ronef -- Who Told You That You Were Naked?
[Following is a volunteer review of "Who Told You That You Were Naked?" by William Combs.]
3 out of 4 stars
Share This Review
I recently had the pleasure of reading <i>Who Told You That You Were Naked? A Refreshing Reexamination of the Garden of Eden</i> by William E. Combs.
In summary, the author attempts to redefine sin in terms of “the knowledge of good and evil” based on his personal interpretation of the Scriptural account of original sin in the first few chapters of Genesis. He presents “the knowledge of good and evil” as an intellectual knowledge of the differences between two individuals or groups, or between an individual and God. He illustrates this in various ways (e.g., lack of shame/self-consciousness when undressing in view of a pet as opposed to undressing elsewhere; also, a child’s lack of self-consciousness of their nakedness). The author attempts to reframe the telling of the Gospel in a more “user friendly” manner. For instance, he indicates that an interpretation of sin as a list of offenses (page 51), misdeeds (pages 63 and 92), or errant acts (page 189 and the back cover) might lead people to believe they are “good enough” if they avoid certain “sins” or, at least, commit them less often than others. It can be assumed the author also believes some people might give up if they are not “good enough”.
The author’s position is a contemporary interpretation of sin "the knowledge of good and evil" and salvation as release from the overwhelming burden of such knowledge. One aspect of the author’s position is that this knowledge is the root of wanting what others have, whether that is a "better" body or more money or a whatever-fill-in-the-blank and that God frees us from such negative thinking with a question that begins with, "Who told you..."
I have decided to rate this book <B>3 out of 4 stars</B>. A 3 because, even though the author and I differ significantly in our theology, it was an enjoyable read overall. I could not, however, give it 4 stars because of serious problems with the formatting of the text. For example, the Introduction was 11 point, Times New Roman font with about 1.5 spacing. The first chapter switched to 11 point, non-serif (Calibri?) font with a much smaller spacing (close to single spacing) but switched back to the larger 1.5 spacing (still non-serif) after a couple pages and switch to almost double spacing a few pages later, then back to Times New Roman with double spacing a few pages later, switching back to the non-serif font the next page. Sound confusing? It's even worse.
At first, I thought the author was attempting to use different fonts for effect (e.g., the author’s narrative examples or Biblical quotations), but there is not a discernable pattern or rationale that I can find. These inconsistencies continue throughout the work. In addition, wider than expected margins, indenting the first line on most paragraphs but not all, and hyphenating words that should never be hyphenated (e.g., Ad-am on page 5) present a less than professional appearance to the work.
In addition, though the editing of the text was adequate, there were a few paragraphs that I needed to re-read a couple times to understand. Some examples:
• The third sentence of the second paragraph on the first page of the introduction.
• The sentence that begins “Like mischievous children…” at the top of page 152.
• The first sentence under the heading <I>God’s Rest for Us Who Believe</I>, on page 163.
The author violates one of my pet peeves by repeatedly using “may” (which indicates permission") where “might” (indicating possibility) should be used instead. Some examples: “the ewe may have sacrificed her life for his” (page 2); “this action may well mean…” (page 44); “My memory of the Lord’s warning may not be accurate” (page 62); “…and may take extra notice of your condition” (page 73); “…we may want the Lord to resolve our situation…” (page 77), are just a few examples where “might” should replace “may”. There are a couple dozen more instances peppered throughout this work.
What I liked most about this book is the comfortable, personal style the author uses to present his material. Interspersing his text with personal stories makes it easy to read and understand (if you can ignore the formatting issues). If the author were to visit me personally (for a chat over dinner, for instance), I imagine he would speak the same way he writes. This is a very effective way to present a deep, theological topic to a non-theological audience.
What I disliked most (outside of the formatting issues) was the list of questions at the end of every chapter. It appears the author wants to guide his reading audience into thinking through the issues more carefully. Frankly, more than half of the questions simply fall short. I read through every question, and though a few were good, most were simply not acceptable. I recommend the author work with someone else to re-work these questions or take them out altogether.
A final note: I do not see pastors, casual church goers, or Bible college/seminary students as an appropriate audience for this book. Nor (with few exceptions), do I see “the unchurched” as the audience. Instead, I see this as something that might be of interest to some church small groups. Thus, a leader’s guide (possibly in an appendix) would be helpful.
******
Who Told You That You Were Naked?
View: on Bookshelves | on Amazon
Like ronef's review? Post a comment saying so!
3 out of 4 stars
Share This Review
I recently had the pleasure of reading <i>Who Told You That You Were Naked? A Refreshing Reexamination of the Garden of Eden</i> by William E. Combs.
In summary, the author attempts to redefine sin in terms of “the knowledge of good and evil” based on his personal interpretation of the Scriptural account of original sin in the first few chapters of Genesis. He presents “the knowledge of good and evil” as an intellectual knowledge of the differences between two individuals or groups, or between an individual and God. He illustrates this in various ways (e.g., lack of shame/self-consciousness when undressing in view of a pet as opposed to undressing elsewhere; also, a child’s lack of self-consciousness of their nakedness). The author attempts to reframe the telling of the Gospel in a more “user friendly” manner. For instance, he indicates that an interpretation of sin as a list of offenses (page 51), misdeeds (pages 63 and 92), or errant acts (page 189 and the back cover) might lead people to believe they are “good enough” if they avoid certain “sins” or, at least, commit them less often than others. It can be assumed the author also believes some people might give up if they are not “good enough”.
The author’s position is a contemporary interpretation of sin "the knowledge of good and evil" and salvation as release from the overwhelming burden of such knowledge. One aspect of the author’s position is that this knowledge is the root of wanting what others have, whether that is a "better" body or more money or a whatever-fill-in-the-blank and that God frees us from such negative thinking with a question that begins with, "Who told you..."
I have decided to rate this book <B>3 out of 4 stars</B>. A 3 because, even though the author and I differ significantly in our theology, it was an enjoyable read overall. I could not, however, give it 4 stars because of serious problems with the formatting of the text. For example, the Introduction was 11 point, Times New Roman font with about 1.5 spacing. The first chapter switched to 11 point, non-serif (Calibri?) font with a much smaller spacing (close to single spacing) but switched back to the larger 1.5 spacing (still non-serif) after a couple pages and switch to almost double spacing a few pages later, then back to Times New Roman with double spacing a few pages later, switching back to the non-serif font the next page. Sound confusing? It's even worse.
At first, I thought the author was attempting to use different fonts for effect (e.g., the author’s narrative examples or Biblical quotations), but there is not a discernable pattern or rationale that I can find. These inconsistencies continue throughout the work. In addition, wider than expected margins, indenting the first line on most paragraphs but not all, and hyphenating words that should never be hyphenated (e.g., Ad-am on page 5) present a less than professional appearance to the work.
In addition, though the editing of the text was adequate, there were a few paragraphs that I needed to re-read a couple times to understand. Some examples:
• The third sentence of the second paragraph on the first page of the introduction.
• The sentence that begins “Like mischievous children…” at the top of page 152.
• The first sentence under the heading <I>God’s Rest for Us Who Believe</I>, on page 163.
The author violates one of my pet peeves by repeatedly using “may” (which indicates permission") where “might” (indicating possibility) should be used instead. Some examples: “the ewe may have sacrificed her life for his” (page 2); “this action may well mean…” (page 44); “My memory of the Lord’s warning may not be accurate” (page 62); “…and may take extra notice of your condition” (page 73); “…we may want the Lord to resolve our situation…” (page 77), are just a few examples where “might” should replace “may”. There are a couple dozen more instances peppered throughout this work.
What I liked most about this book is the comfortable, personal style the author uses to present his material. Interspersing his text with personal stories makes it easy to read and understand (if you can ignore the formatting issues). If the author were to visit me personally (for a chat over dinner, for instance), I imagine he would speak the same way he writes. This is a very effective way to present a deep, theological topic to a non-theological audience.
What I disliked most (outside of the formatting issues) was the list of questions at the end of every chapter. It appears the author wants to guide his reading audience into thinking through the issues more carefully. Frankly, more than half of the questions simply fall short. I read through every question, and though a few were good, most were simply not acceptable. I recommend the author work with someone else to re-work these questions or take them out altogether.
A final note: I do not see pastors, casual church goers, or Bible college/seminary students as an appropriate audience for this book. Nor (with few exceptions), do I see “the unchurched” as the audience. Instead, I see this as something that might be of interest to some church small groups. Thus, a leader’s guide (possibly in an appendix) would be helpful.
******
Who Told You That You Were Naked?
View: on Bookshelves | on Amazon
Like ronef's review? Post a comment saying so!
Latest Review: Who Told You That You Were Naked? by William Combs
