Christian Post: Clarity of New Chronological Bible at Question
Bible publishing giant Thomas Nelson is set to debut the Chronological Study Bible next month, marketing the book as the "only study Bible that presents the text of the New King James Version in chronological order."
In the edition, well-known books in the Bible like the Gospels, Psalms and the Epistles of Apostle Paul are chopped up and re-woven with other texts to fit the historical timeline. ...
...But some Christians see a dead end to this journey.
"It bothers me when bad historical criticism trumps narrative structure," writes one blogger by the name of Drew. "It’s primarily a set of theological texts that have historical significance, not a set of historical texts that have theological significance.”
Re-working the text "removes the significance of the authorship through that process of transmission," he added.
Some Christian bloggers are skeptical over the accuracy of the new format. Others criticize Thomas Nelson for re-hashing the Gospel message with financial motives. ...
I don't think the chronological Bible is that big of a deal as long as you know what you are reading. I once read the entire Bible using a chronological Bible and found it edifying. I tend to put things into chronological flow in my own mind. I was fully aware that some of the arrangement was rather arbitrary and that some works describing some events were actually much later than the materials with which they were interspersed. Still, the general sense of historical flow was useful in seeing an unfolding story.
I don't think anyone is promoting this biblical arrangement as replacement for the traditional bible, but as a supplemental lens used with the appropriate caveats I think it is just fine.
