I was just reading Maurice Casey’s “Some Anti-Semitic Assumptions in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,” NovT 41/3 (1999): 280-91 and in the first footnote he refers to James Barr’s The Semantics of Biblical Language. Seeing as how I just got a few books on the subject I went over the Amazon to see how much it went for and I decided to look at the reviews. One reviewer said:
For the average layman I would suggest a different book. I can’t recommend anyone else yet because I need to start over and find a decent book that can show me the cultural differences between the Hebrews and Greeks. This writer addressed his book to other professionals in this field who obviously would recognize his references. This author continually referenced authors by name throughout the book and if they are as boring as he was then I’ll never know what they wrote about.
This is a very boring book to read and I wouldn’t suggest anyone pay retail for it. If you can find it in a thrift store for about a dollar, then maybe. You wouldn’t feel so guilty when you throw it away.
That is seriously one of the worst book reviews I’ve ever read, and trust me, I’ve read a lot! It even drew a comment from our very own Brian Fulthorp who said: “this review misses the point of the book – would the jury please disregard this statement?” Yes Brian, we will disregard it, but I’m afraid that I’ll never be able to forget it! Seriously though, why on earth would someone buy a book entitled The Semantics of Biblical Language if they were looking for a book on the cultural differences between Hebrews and Greeks? Did the reviewer think the book would not be about, well, the semantics of Biblical language? Imagine criticizing a cook book because it doesn’t tell you anything about gardening! And if Barr didn’t reference authors by name then how would he refer to them? By their age, weight, height, hair or eye color? So yes, Brian must be right when he says that the review misses the book’s point. I can’t see any way for that assessment to be wrong. Oh, and in case anyone is interested in a good review of the book you’d do well to check out R. B. Y. Scott’s 1962 review in Theology Today. And note that when the book originally came out it cost $6.00 (!), and that from Oxford University Press!
B”H
yeah, it was pretty terrible!
By: brianfulthorp on November 10, 2009
at 2:33 pm
Brian: Yes it was!
By: Nick Norelli on November 10, 2009
at 2:51 pm
Nick, the fury has traveled all the way to Cali.
The guy lives in Minnesota. He wants to get to Cali, so he got himself a map on how to get to Florida, though he maintains it’s Cali he’s headed.
Perhaps it’s a detour. ;-)
By: T.C. R on November 10, 2009
at 5:22 pm
Worst? That’s gotta be one of the (unintentionally) best book reviews I’ve ever read!
By: poserorprophet on November 10, 2009
at 5:31 pm
TC: You lost me! Break that down in layman’s terms. ;-)
Dan: Explain!
By: Nick Norelli on November 10, 2009
at 5:33 pm
Haha!
I’m scared to write any reviews online in case Nick Norelli is on patrol… ;)
By: Mike S. on November 10, 2009
at 5:36 pm
I just mean that it’s hilarious.
By: poserorprophet on November 10, 2009
at 8:27 pm
Dan: That is was! I thought maybe you read the book and were saying that the guy was right, even if he didn’t really know it.
By: Nick Norelli on November 10, 2009
at 8:33 pm
The book in question actually does address the question of cultural differences between Greeks and Hebrews, so the reviewer is not quite as off as you might think. He/she probably saw this book referenced by someone discussing the difference between Greek and Hebrew culture, and was annoyed to find it debunking a lot of assumptions.
But, yes, it’s a pretty poor review.
By: John C. Poirier on November 10, 2009
at 10:09 pm
John: The reviewer seems mad that the book is not about that, so let me ask, is the book supposed to be about that or does it just address the issue in relation to its main thesis? Hurtado’s Lord Jesus Christ has a chapter on Q’s Christology but it’s not a book about Q’s Christology; see what I’m saying?
By: Nick Norelli on November 11, 2009
at 12:39 am
One of the book’s main points is that the once (still?) common idea of discerning the structure of the Hebrew mindset from the structure of the Hebrew language is wrong. That’s not necessarily its *main* thesis, but it is a big enough part of it that this book would be brought up in any discussion of that matter.
Of course, I think Barr is right, and the reviewer wrong.
By: John C. Poirier on November 11, 2009
at 6:30 am