The Bible in order - it is about time - thanks IBS

I received a copy of a Bible from the good folks at The International Bible Society today (not sure who put me on the list, the letter was generic so if the sender reads this - thanks so much).

I am thrilled about this Bible. It is called The Books Of The Bible. It arranges the books of the Bible in order of the First Testament and in the Second Testament it is arranged by type. So it starts with Luke-Acts and then the books that go with that perspective, Paul's letters. Then Mark with the letters of Peter, then Matthew and like books then John with all the John books.

As my friend Thom just said, "This is a great idea, why didn't they do this in the first edition?"

I guess to someone it made sense to arrange Bible books by their length.

I have been hoping for and advocating for a Bible like this for years.

And, it is in the TNIV version which is my translation of choice.

And, IBS sells them for like $7.99 each.

Way to go IBS.

Comments

[Progression of Faith]

I think it would be much better to have it arranged in the order it was written. The authentic letters of Paul should be first then the mythical stories about Paul (acts) that shift the ideas away from Jesus' message and toward the idea of building a religion and power structure. Then the mythical stories about Jesus (gospels) which bring life to Paul's ideas through metaphor. Then the books written in the name of Paul which reinforce ancient ideas about bigotry, imperialism, and slavery. I'd leave out Revelation unless we could include a more detailed biography of Nero so people would realize the book was really about him.

But that is just my 2 cents.

[kay]

I just ordered a copy. I'm psyched!

[David]

I am amazed and excited by this project.

Hey Bob, I don't see those kind of "this is the right way to do it" ideas being expressed in that way on their website. To me it seems to be more of a nod to the fact that we really need to check some stuff that has been really messing up how we approach this book. I see future editions continuing to shift and rework things.

And I also don't see it as a continuance of a protestant refusal of the apocrypha. The emphasis is not on church fathers denying the apocrypha, the emphasis is on the fact that the Jews of the "first" testament did not acknowledge apocryphal writing as being on par with their scripture. I think including the apocrypha would be very dishonest to the Jewish scripture tradition that has been ressurected here with the new/old book order.

[Jonathan Brink]

Gene Edwards (author of Tale of Three Kings, Divine Romance) talked about this twenty years ago. It's about time.

[Sarah Chia]

I'm also a fan of the chronological Bible. Imagine reading the Bible in the order that the history happened. What a novel concept! ;)

[Bob Brown]

I think that this project is generally fabulous - the removal of chapter and verse number, and the subject headings are awesome - it is what The Message was supposed to look like, but the publisher wasn't trying to hear that.

The one thing that bugs me, is that it works off of the gnostic concept of getting it right with the right knowledge: now we will understand the Bible because we have the "right" order.

Also, on the book's promotional website, they feature a timeline to demonstrate how authentic and perfect their book order is. This timeline completely neglects 14 books that were part of the Bible for about 1500 years - the Apocrypha.
http://thebooksofthebible.info/main.php

The upsetting thing about this time line is that the only things they put on the timeline are facts that support their presentation of “the books of the bible” in the “original” order. This continues the protestant myth that the Apocrypha was considered “dubious” in origin even to the early church fathers. The removal of these books is a mess that the protestants have swept under the rug – and most protestants (including myself until 2 years ago) have no idea what the Apocrypha is – and that founders of the church considered it part of the “Written Word.”

The IBS has already discredited the Apocrypha and buried that issue – never to be looked at again. That is why it isn’t in the time line. It is consistent with many Christians’ practices of only presenting the facts that support their thesis, and dismissing any conjecture as “un-Biblical.”

[Wayne Leman]

I just got my copy, also, and I agree that this format is something we should have had long ago. We've blogged about this new format on the TNIV Truth blog.

[Makeesha]

doug, you're writing! yee haw (usually just see pics from you here) :) That sounds really cool. I also like my chronological bible a lot...got that one for free for getting on some person's prayer list or something (wow, that sounded really bad, it was a while ago and I can't remember). I like the TNIV as well.

[Daniel]

Wow, sounds good. I'll have to get a copy. Thanks for posting about it. Also, they have a decent website explaining more at:

http://thebooksofthebible.info/