(“Let us make humankind in our image”),rnand its general tone and contentrnplace the Companion comfortablv withinrnthe modernist, skeptical mentality. Itrnproceeds consciously from the Enlightenmentrntradition, which, as the editorsrnremind the reader, dispensed once andrnfor all with the notion of the Bible asrn”God’s eternal, infallible, and completernword.” hi line with this presupposition,rnthe Companion’s bibliograph- lacks arnsingle representative from established orrnrecent conservative biblical scholarship,rnwhile the articles reach beyond such con-rnentional and expected subjects asrn”Eden,” “Judas,” “Frankincense,” andrn”Myrrh” to include such unusual andrnunexpected ones as “Ecologv,” “Jung,”rn”Freud,” and “Marx.” Obviously, therneditors’ pursuit of diversity took themrnplaces the lav reader could not have anticipated.rnThere is much in the Companion torncommend. It includes a fine set of mapsrnand a thorough index, and mam of thernarticles arc just the sort of thing onernlooks for in a Bible handbook. For instance,rnJacob Neusner’s contributions onrnthe Mishnah and Talmud are concisernand appropriate, and Professor Metzger’srnentry on the Bible itself is clear, factual,rnand impartial, while his “Curious Bibles”rnis a lively discussion of unusual formatsrnand oddities in printing and translatingrnthe Bible over the centuries, SUCIT as thernscandalous 1631 “Adulterous Bible” thatrninadvertently dropped the word “not”rnfrom the Seventh Commandment.rnMetzger’s articles are so finely turnedrnout that one wishes he had written thernentire volume.rnIn the end, however, the Companionrnfails as a study aid by its inappropriaterntone and diction, its trendy ievvs andrnmodernist bias, and its inexplicable in-rnFor Immediate ServicernCHRONICLESrnNEW SUBSCRIBERSrnTOLL FREE NUMBERrn1-800-877-5459rnelusions and exclusions. The tone is setrnfrom the start by the introduction, whichrnalerts the reader to the fact that the BiblernIS full of “many repetitions, inconsistencies,rnand contradictions,” and fewrnarticles miss an opportunity to reinforcernthis point. The authors’ language isrnoften polemical rather than scholarlyrnand therefore inappropriate for an encyclopedicrnhandbook. The entry underrnHagar, for one example among many,rnjudges St. Paul’s allegorical use ofrnthe Genesis story of Hagar to be “tendentious.”rnAnother problem for the generalrnreader is the Companion’s tolerancernof unintelligible academic jargon. Whatrnis the average student of the Bible tornmake of such insights as the fact thatrnhyssop was used “in ]3urificatory andrnapotropaic rituals” or, worse, thatrnwidespread literacy in ancient Israel isrnattributable to “the use of a limited acrophonicrnsystem of graphemic representation”?rnThe Companion’s contributorsrnoften use an annoying, private vocabularyrnthat renames the Crucifixion thern”Christ c’cnt,” the Resurrection thern”Easter event,” and the infant Churchrnthe “post-Easter communitv.” Of course,rnJesus never “expected an indiyidualrnresurrection for himself,” his disciplesrnmerely had post-Easter “revelatory encounters”rnwith him, and the empty tombrnis “an ambiguous fact.”rn”Fhe reader is also treated to an array ofrnfashionable topics, from “Homosexuality”rnto “Feminism and the Bible” torn”Structuralism.” Catering to current intellectualrnappetites, one contributor arguesrnthat the Apostle Paul condemnedrnthe homosexual act simply because itrntransgresses “hierarchical gender boundaries”rnand thereby allows women “torntranscend the passive, subordinate rolernaccorded to them by nature” and permitsrnmen to forfeit their “superordinate,rnactive role” and sink “to the level ofrnwomen.” Of course the word patriarchrnhas to be eliminated from our lexicon altogether.rnUnder “Patriarchs” the editorsrnoffer only a note explaining that thernCompanion uses “the more inclusivernterms ancestor(s) and ancestral for thernbiblical patriarchs and matriarchs.”rnSorry, Abraham. Other similar concessionsrnto fashion include the claim thatrnGenesis’s supposed obsession with procreationrn”reflects the vigorous pronatalistrnworidview” prominent when the OldrnTestament was written. And more thanrntwo double-column pages are devotedrnto “Structuralism,” initiating the readerrninto the occult world of “deep structures”rnand textual meanings lurkingrnbeneath “the surface of the empiricalrnmanifestations.” Employing this approach,rnthe article on women contemplatesrnthe Bible’s “unspoken political orrnrhetorical subtexts.” Entries of this sortrnguarantee that the Companion will soonrnbe dated and, one suspects, quickly becomernsomething of a curiosity gatheringrndust on the shelf.rnAdditionally, how the editors determinedrnwhat topics to include and excludernin the first place remains arnmstery. Among the longest entries inrnthe Companion are the articles on SigmundrnFreud, Carl Jung, and Kad Marx,rnto whom more space is devoted than torn”Forgiveness,” “Sacrifice,” or “Atonement.”rnAnd the inclusion of these modernrnprophets draws attention to the factrnthat other important thinkers are missingrnentirely. While venerating Sts. Sigmund.rnCad, and Kad, the editors conferrnno such honor on Augustine, Aquinas,rnLuther, Calvin, or Edwards, or any otherrnsignificant theologian for that matter.rnOne can only wonder what absurd criteriarnomitted these giants of biblical interpretation.rnThe enticing blurb on the Companion’srndust jacket heralds this handbook asrn”an ideal complement to the Bible, anrnessential volume for every home andrnlibrary, the hrst place to turn for informationrnon the central book of Westernrnculture.” But for anyone concerned withrnthe integrity of the Bible and with thernsurvival of the civilization built on thatrnrevelation, for anyone who wishes to keeprnmodernism and its deadly skepticism atrnbay, the Companion is the last place tornturn. It was largely written by and forrnpeople for whom the Bible holds little orrnno authority, by and for the kind of religiousrnmodernists who try to prove howrnmuch they know by how little they believe.rnThe contributors and editorsrnwould have done well to consider CarlrnJung’s own lament in 1959 that in thisrn”restless and crazy” age “our Christianrndoctrine has lost its grip to an appallingrnextent, chiefly because people don’t understandrnit any more.” Unhappily, ThernOxford Companion to the Bible only encouragesrnthis fatal detachment from thernBible and its claims upon us.rnRichard M. Gamble is a fellow of thernCenter for the Study of Public Choice atrnGeorge Mason University.rn38/CHRONICLESrnrnrn