How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth - Fourth Edition

Outstanding book by Dr. Fee and Dr. Stuart. The fact that it is updated makes it even more helpful in reading and understanding all the various genres of the Bible as well as many other very crucial insights that the book provides

I have enjoyed reading and studying with this book helps me when I am teaching the Word of God. how to help others learn from its teachings.
Thank you for making this book available.
In His Service
Gloria

"How To Read The Bible for All It's Worth" is a primer for hermeneutics; the art and science of Bible interpretation. It's not heavy laden with theological terms but it presents the principles for interpreting Scripture. This is a good book to get your feet wet and your hands dirty. I ordered 3 more copies as gifts after I realized the ease and flow of the material.

We studied this book in our church. It was a very difficult read, which I would recommend if you have a college degree and want to have extensive background information about the traditions, customs, people, etc. which were in place when the Bible was written. It helps you get more out of your Bible study. Not a book that can be casually read....takes a great deal of concentration!

Having taken a seminary Hermeneutics course, I highly recommend this book as a quick reference for those who practice Hermeneutics regularly and for those new in the field. I plan to keep this book handy and carry it wherever I carry my Bible (print, kindle, any other format).

This was a great read and intriguing discourse into how one might interpret scripture. Stuart and Fee do a masterful job of providing the fundamental principals of scriptural exegesis and viewing the narrative through the proper lenses. I recommend this book for the scholarly learner who is looking to dig a little deeper to extract the true meaning and context of biblical scripture.

Well written and an excellent source of material for any student of God's Word, the Bible.

A bit technical at some points but overall very, very good. The authors get right into the heart of Biblical Exegesis and Interpretation, stressing the need to interpret the Bible first in the language and culture of the original author and audience before seeking application for today's hearers.

According to the authors, to get the most out of reading the Bible, one needs a good translation, a Bible dictionary that explains the historical and cultural background when a book or epistle or a particular gospel narrative was written, and a good commentary. A translation can tend to be more literal, more free or somewhere in the middle. In recommending a "good" translation, though I smell a bias toward NIV-TNIV considering Prof. Gordon Fee was heavily involved in those translations, I don't necessarily disagree with the NIV recommendation, but not the TNIV. I don't know about the TRSV that they also recommend since I never read it. I believe NIV, not TNIV is still a reasonably accurate translation. If the authors were to be fair, they ought to recommend the ESV as well, though admittedly ESV is probably the most literal translation in modern English which is not necessarily bad, but could be difficult to understand unless one is trained in biblical languages or has some good commentaries as a guide. The ESV itself is not without weaknesses. The fact there were two releases of ESV; in 2001 and the latter release where the ESV Bible Study is based on, gives an impression of a hasty release considering there are quite a number of translation differences between the two releases. The authors were mistaken when they write that a free translation is helpful to "stimulate your thinking about the possible meaning of the text" (p.42). It is the literal, not the free translations, that stimulate further thinking. Reading a free translation is like eating a food that has been chewed for you, so you just need to swallow and digest it, which means it has been translated according to what it is supposed to say to modern readers and find applications. There is less of a need for a commentary when reading free translations because the translation itself could easily serve as a commentary. A literal translation is like eating a raw food that needs to be chewed, sometimes agonizingly through a long exegetical process or with the help of Bible teachers or pastors or commentaries to get a better handle on the meaning of a text. The best approach in my view is to start with a free translation like NIV, not the extremely free one like "The Message," then as one is equipped more, for example, with the cultural study of biblical times or biblical languages, he or she could move on with the literal one with the aid of Greek NT and Hebrew OT. Again, despite one's educational training in the Bible, good commentaries are indispensable. Here is where the bias kicks in again. The authors give a list of recommended commentaries in the appendix. Though I agree with their assessment on some of them, I personally prefer the list of commentaries given by Keith Matheson of Ligonier ministries that the readers can easily find and access through an Internet search engine. So then, do you need to spend hundreds of dollars on Biblical resources? You should if you can, but you may not have to if you own the ESV Study Bible (ESVSB). The ESVSB is an all-in-one combo study Bible though I cannot consider their footnotes as commentaries. Nevertheless, it has a wealth of information one can learn much from.

After identifying two critical activities in reading the Bible; exegesis and hermeneutics, the authors move on with some examples by analyzing the main structure of the books of the Bible, consisting of the prophets, the wisdom books and the Law in the OT, and the gospels, the parables, the epistles, and Revelation in the NT. Though the authors' approach might be applicable to the epistles in general written by Paul, John, Peter, and Jude, a different approach needs to be taken to Hebrews and James since their structure is distinct from most epistles. In the OT sections, I appreciate the authors' tutelage on the wisdom books consisting of Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Job and the Canticles, which the authors classify as teaching proverbial wisdom (Proverbs) and speculative wisdom (Ecclesiastes, Job). An important note in this discussion is when they warn the readers of possible abuses of the wisdom books; some of which are treating them as legal guarantees from God, to support selfish behavior, or to support a crass, materialistic lifestyle (p. 241), an example of which can be seen in the prosperity gospel. I am puzzled about the authors' theological leaning. When analyzing Job, they sound like Arminians or even Opentheists as they seem to deny the exhaustive divine foreknowledge and omnipotence of God when they write, "It seems so natural to assume that if God is in control of the world, everything that happens must be his doing, according to his will. We must remember, however, that the Scripture does not teach us this. They teach rather that the world is fallen, corrupted by sin, and under the dominion of Satan (cf John 12:31), and that many things happen in life that are not as God wishes them to be" (p.241-242). So God is either not in control or only partially in control, and shares control with creatures, though this is not implicitly expressed. If this is the author's point, then I have to disagree. But on the other hand, in the discussion on the historical and literary context of Revelation, they write, "But this prophetic word is also one of encouragement, for God is in control of all things. Christ holds the keys to history, and he holds the churches in his hands" (p.258). And again, "[Christ is] the Lord of history and the Lord of the church. God has not lost control, despite present persecution, for Christ alone holds the key of death and Hades" (p.259). So is God in control or not? This is a binary question that only has Yes or No for possible answers. It can't be "yes and no" either since I suspect Arminians and Opentheists might lean toward this direction which is not uncommon. If God shares autonomy in how to run the universe with creatures, then He is not in control. If God is a continually evolving God as He gathers more information about the universe as what process theology teaches, then He is not in control. The kind of language the authors express in this regard is the kind of ambiguity that I dislike, which I suspect is an attempt to entertain the doctrine of human autonomy while simultaneously affirm the sovereignty of God. It does not work and never will. A better approach is to teach the exhaustive divine foreknowledge and sovereignty of God, I mean, the absolute sovereignty of God, and human responsibility, which is biblical.

Another point that I disagree with is the school of interpretation the authors hold on Revelation, though I don't disagree completely. It is not clear to me whether they hold to the A-mil, Pre-Mil, or Post-Mil view school of interpretation. They should have at least covered an introduction of most views on Revelation instead of just offering their view. I can accept the statements like, "The main themes are abundant clear: The church and the state are on a collision course; and initial victory will appear to belong to the state. He (referring to the apostle John) is greatly concerned that they do not capitulate in times of duress" (p.258). What I have a hard time agreeing is a constant pointer to Rome as the great city, Babylon as well as the Roman Empire (p. 256, 258, 260-263). Whether Rome refers to the Roman empire or the Vatican is unclear. Though it is true they are a subset of Babylon, but they do not solely represent Babylon. A text that I find useful in studying Revelation is William Hendriksen's "More Than Conquerors: An Interpretation of the Book of Revelation."

There are valuable counsels that the authors offer in this book, such as learning the structure of Hebrew poetry, getting a hold of a Bible encyclopedia, and the study on the structure and applications of the wisdom books. On the other hand, I would proceed with caution by studying and comparing with other evangelical views as well when assessing the authors' larger theological framework that can possibly be implied from their big picture interpretation on the themes of the books of the Bible.

If you want to read and study the Bible and truly understand it, then you have to get this book. It is clear, concise, and really directs the reader to a full understanding for your Bible study. I strongly recommend this book to anyone who wants to know what God is telling us through his Word.

I liked the beginning but got lost about halfway thru. My church had a group study on this, I missed it due to schedule, but they also agreed is hard to get thru with out the group study. Hope I can get into that study next time.

The title says it all. If you want to read the Bible for all its worth, you, not only read the book, but have to have your own copy. I borrowed the book from the library and started digging into it. There were many valuable Bible verses provided to illustrate and support the important points of the author's view. In order to gain the most from the book, I would need to go through all of these references. Since I did not have the time to do this at one time, I would like to keep a copy on my book shelf. In this case, I would be able to refer to it whenever I need to. So, I decided to purchase my own copy. If you are serious about understanding the Bible, I highly recommend this book to you.

Why Fee is rated high in some circles is beyond me, for IMO all of his works - while serviceable, I suppose - just lack something. I find him dull. Surely there is something better on the subject. Fee is unexciting and forgettable, even if orthodox and 'evangelical.'

If teaching disciples to read the Bible for themselves is the most important task pastors, teachers, churches can perform then I believe most have failed. I grew up in a conservative Southern Baptist church context that taught the innerancy and importance of reading Scripture daily and studying it corporately, but never once had a lesson in exegesis, hermeneutics, biblical theology, etc. I was fairly well-versed in theologically-rich works by John Piper and Jonathan Edwards in college, as well as apologetics, but still didn't understand how NOT to read my Bible, and how NOT to use commentaries (among other things). One shouldn't have to go to seminary to learn these things if reading the Bible is essential to the Christian life. It really wasn't until I started listening to expositional preachers and noticing the difference of how they handled Scripture and explaining how NOT to handle Scripture that I began to "get it." Too often I see well-known teachers in errors of redefinition and decontextualization, which simply recreates itself as disciples make disciples.

There's a reason why expositional preaching and biblical theology are at the forefront of the Nine Marks of a Healthy Church. The importance and practical application of proper exegesis and hermeneutics are what Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart teach in this book. I'm actually disturbed by who I haven't seen seen write reviews of this book on Goodreads and the store. Reading this book, and others like it which they recommend, is extremely important. This is basically a how-to guide made as simple as possible, providing some basic examples to get started in each genre of writing one encounters in Scripture.

The authors have since written a companion book that I hope to read (How to Read the Bible Book by Book) but I'll read D.A. Carson's Exegetical Fallacies, R.C. Sproul's Knowing Scripture, and James Sire's How to Read Slowly first. Fee is a Pentecostal who has differentiated himself from others in his denomination. He's also a fantastic NT scholar, having written well-regarded commentaries on Paul's epistles to the Corinthians. Stuart is an Old Testament and ancient languages scholar at Gordon-Conwell. The first edition of this text was put out in the 1970s and the latest revision was published in 2006. Below include my own thoughts, summaries of topics, and some of my highlights and notes edited slightly.

"Reading the Bible with an eye only to its meaning for us can lead to a great deal of nonsense as well as to every imaginable kind of error--because it lacks controls... we believe that God's Word for us today is first of all precisely what his Word was to them. Thus we have two tasks: First, our task is to find out what the text originally meant; this is called exegesis. Second, we must learn to hear that same meaning in the variety of new or different contexts of our own day; we call this second task hermeneutics...the original meaning of the text--as much as it is in our power to discern it--is the objective point of control...And this brings us back to our insistence that proper 'hermeneutics' begins with solid 'exegesis.'"

Scripture was written to be understood and interprets itself, but we have to pay attention and ask the right questions to get at the meanings. The authors walk through the different versions of literature found in Scripture and how to ask questions of the text. They disagree with each other on certain interpretations and hermeneutics, and are fairly plain about that. "Even the two authors of this book have some disagreements as to what certain texts 'plainly' mean. Yet all of us are reading the same Bible, and we all are trying to be obedient to what the text 'plainly' means.

"There are two basic kinds of questions one should ask of every biblical passage: those that relate to context and those that relate to content.The questions of context are also of two kinds: historical and literary...The most important contextual question you will ever ask--and it must be asked over and over of every sentence and every paragraph --is, 'What's the point?'...A text cannot mean what it never meant. Or to put it in a positive way, the true meaning of the biblical text for us is what God originally intended it to mean when it was first spoken. This is the starting point. How we work it out from that point is what this book is basically all about."

Most sections have a 10-20 point summary of the do's/do nots.

They begin with a brief look at textual criticism and the difficulties of Bible translation. They endorse the NIV and (then new) HCSB while comparing various translations. They examine the translation difficulties related to various texts. (Fee is controversial in believing that 1 Corinthians 14:33-35 as we know them were not written by Paul but were a marginal comment written by a scribe that was later copied into manuscripts as though written by Paul. He argues that it clearly contradicts 11:2-16.) While many trumpet the ESV's gender-literal translations, they point out the problems with saying "man" or "son" when the author was referring to women as well, or "pupils," etc. In short, approaching a text from multiple translations and understanding why they differ is important.

They discuss the importance of Bible dictionaries and external sources, particularly when looking at Old Testament history. They contain an appendix on what to look for in a good commentary and list a couple for each book, classified by the level of reading. Consulting a commentary should be "the last thing you do" in studying a text or a book.

Some weaknesses and traits of the book that have probably kept it from wider scholarship and praise in recent years:
1. The authors are not Presbyterian or Southern Baptist.
2. They prefer the NIV as a translation and are somewhat critical of the ESV as an overreach into the unnecessarily literal.
3. The authors do not write about examining the themes that run through Scripture. They do mention analogies and caution the reader to avoid making analogies where Scripture does not. They demonstrate how Augustine over-analogized everything, much of what I marveled at in City of God (my review) was bad exegesis, and are probably eager for the reader not to turn common themes into unjustified analogies. But Wayne Grudem and others teach that finding themes is an important aspect of biblical theology.
4. The book does not discuss inerrancy, even though the authors are inerrantists. Inerrancy is assumed, I suppose, and the authors do not deal with bible difficulties.
5. Fee's views on 1 Corinthians (see above) and the role of women in the church put his hermeneutic outside most Reformed teachers.

The authors deal with the problematic uses of the OT in the new. Christians believe that the New Testament authors were inspired by the Holy Spirit and therefore able to write analogies between the Old Testament and the life of Jesus than we are able to today. For example, Paul's interpretation of Jesus as the "rock" in Exodus 17:

"To be sure, we modern readers are quite unlikely on our own to notice this analogy in the way that Paul described it. If Paul had never written these words, would we have made the identification of cloud and sea with baptism (v. 2) or the rock with Christ (v. 4)? In other words, would we, on our own, be able with any degree of certainty to determine the sensus plenior or secondary meaning? The answer is no. The Holy Spirit inspired Paul to write about this analogical connection between the Israelites in the desert and life in Christ without following the usual rules about context, intent, style, and wording..."

Similarly with Matthew noting Jesus' "fulfillment" of various prophecies, such as being the "son called out of Egypt."

Epistles:

"one must always keep in mind that they were not primarily written to expound Christian theology. It is always theology applied to or directed toward a particular need."
Were occasional from the reader's side and written for a specific or stated occasion. (Philemon, James, Romans, exceptions to epistles occassioned from reader's side).

OT Narratives, their proper use:

"In the biblical story God is the protagonist, Satan (or opposing people/powers) are the antagonists, and God’s people are the agonists. The basic “plot” of the biblical story is that the creator God has created a people for his name — in his own “image” — who as his image bearers were to be his stewards over the earth that he created for their benefit. But an enemy entered the picture who persuaded the people to bear his “image” instead, and thus to become God’s enemies. The plot resolution is the long story of 'redemption,' how God rescues his people from the enemy’s clutches, restores them back into his image, and (finally) will restore them 'in a new heaven and new earth.'”

"As you read the various narratives, be constantly on the lookout for how the inspired narrator discloses the point of view from which you are to understand the story."

What OT narratives are:
1. Not allegories or stories filled with hidden meanings. (Augustine made this error in City of God... everything was allegory.)
2. Not Intended to teach moral lessons
3. often illlustrations of what is taught explicitly elsewhere, like examples of what happens when people disobey the Ten Commandments.

Errors in interpretation of biblical narratives:
Allegorizing - relegating the text to merely reflecting another meaning beyond the text.
Decontextualization - ignoring the full historical and literay contexts and the individual narrative
Selectivity - picking & choosing specific words & phrases to concentrate on instead of listening to the whole.
Moralizing - looking for a moral in every story. Ignores that "narrativges were written to show the progress of God's history of redemption."
Personalizing - applying parts of the text to you or your group in a way not applicable to everyone else.
Misappropriation- Gideon's fleece, people try similar because Gideon did it.
False appropriation - form of decontextualization. Suggestions or ideas that come from contemporary culture, foreign to the narrator's purpose.
False combination - Pulling here and there even though elements not directly connected in the passage.
Redefinition - Example: 2 Chron 7:14-15

"so they tend to ignore the fact that God’s promise that he will “hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land” was about the only earthly land God’s people could ever claim as “theirs,” the Old Testament land of Israel. In the new covenant, God’s people have no earthly country that is “their land” — despite the tendency of some American Christians to think otherwise about the world. The country all believers now most truly belong to is a heavenly one (Heb 11:16). Perhaps the"

They offer ten principles of interpretation.

Acts:
Holy Spirit is the leading role in the narrative.
Church history was not Luke's goal per se. He wanted to explain how the Gospel got to Rome. Ignores Eastern churches, Jerusalem, Egypt, and more.

Fee and Stuart give an exegetical sampling of Acts 6 and 8.

"Not every sentence in every narrative or speech is necessarily trying to tell us something. But every sentence in every narrative or speech contributes to what God is trying to say as a whole through Acts."

"Unless Scripture explicitly tells us we must do something, what is only narrated or described does not function in a normative (i.e. obligatory) way — unless it can be demonstrated on other grounds that the author intended it to function in this way"

Trying to look at Acts and the epistles for "how to do church" is problematic.
Show how Baptism immersion is tricky (151-152).

"We would probably do well to follow this lead and not confuse normalcy with normativeness in the sense that all Christians must do a given thing or else they are disobedient to God’s Word."

The Gospels:
"the major hermeneutical difficulty lies with understanding 'the kingdom of God,'"

Authors shaped, and arranged his materials. Mark’s gospel, for example, is especially interested in explaining the nature of Jesus’ messiahship in light of Isaiah’s Fee claims “second exodus” motif.

pericopes.
"Think horizontally"

"To think horizontally means that when studying a pericope in any one gospel, it is usually helpful to be aware of the parallels in the other gospels. To be sure, this point must not be overdrawn, since none of the evangelists intended his gospel to be read in parallel with the others. Nonetheless, the fact that God has provided four gospels in the canon means that they cannot be read totally in isolation from one another."

why?
1. parallels give us an appreciation for the individual's distinctives.
2. help us be aware of different kinds of contexts.

The purpose of studying the Gospels in parallel is not to fill out the story in one gospel with details from the others. Usually such a reading of the Gospels tends to harmonize all the details and thus blur the very distinctives in each gospel that the Holy Spirit inspired.

The very best of these is edited by Kurt Aland, titled Synopsis of the Four Gospels (New York: United Bible Societies, 1975).

"Think vertically"
To think vertically means that when reading or studying a narrative or teaching in the Gospels, one should try to be aware of both historical contexts — that of Jesus and that of the evangelist.

There were three principles at work in the composition of the Gospels: selectivity, arrangement, and adaptation.

"One of the most noted of these, for example, is the cursing of the fig tree (Mark 11:12 – 14, 20 – 25; Matt 21:18 – 22). In Mark’s gospel the story is told for its symbolic theological significance. Note that between the cursing and the withering, Jesus pronounces a similar judgment on Judaism by his cleansing of the temple. However, the story of the fig tree had great meaning for the early church also because of the lesson on faith that concludes it. In Matthew’s gospel the lesson on faith is the sole interest of the story, so he relates the cursing and the withering together in order to emphasize this point. Remember, in each case this telling of the story is the work of the Holy Spirit, who inspired both evangelists."

Jesus' parables:
- point of parables was to illicit an immediate RESPONSE.
- identify the audience. Disciples? crowd? Pharisees? Scribe?
Some parables have no context.

The authors provide interesting interpretation in several places. "Let the dead bury their dead...," Jesus' refusal to settle dispute between brothers, etc. were admonishments that the kingdom of God is at hand, there are better things to concern oneself with.

Old Testament Law:
Six guidelines:
1. OT Law is a covenant.
The covenant format had six parts to it: preamble, prologue, stipulations, witnesses, sanctions, and document clause.
2. OT is not our Testament
"unless an Old Testament law is somehow restated or reinforced in the New Testament, it is no longer directly binding on God’s people (cf. Rom 6:14 – 15)."
3. Two kinds of old-covenant stipulations have clearly not been renewed in the new covenant . While a complete coverage of the categories of Old Testament law would take a book of its own, the portion of laws from the Pentateuch that no longer apply to Christians can be grouped conveniently into two categories: (1) the Israelite civil laws and (2) the Israelite ritual laws.
4. Part of the OT renewed in the new covenant. “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind”
5. All of the OT is still the word of God for us, even though it is not still God's command to us.
6. Only that which is explicitly renewed from the Old Testament law can be considered part of the New Testament “law of Christ” (cf. Gal 6:2).

There is an explanation of the apodictic laws and casuisitic laws.

12 dos and don'ts:
1. Do see the Old Testament law as God’s fully inspired word for you.
2. Don’t see the Old Testament law as God’s direct command to you.
...

OT Prophecy:
The prophets are not inspired to make any points or announce any doctrines that are not already contained in the Pentateuchal covenant.

Importance of understanding historical context.
"God spoke through his prophets to people in a given time and place and under given circumstances. Therefore, a knowledge of the date, audience, and situation, when these are known, contributes substantially to your ability to comprehend an oracle."

Stuart (I presume) walks the reader through Hosea 5:8-12.

Poetry and Psalms
The authors give certain aspects of poetry to look out for.

Psalms are poetry and need to be appreciated as such. A reader must be careful not to “overexegete” psalms by finding special meanings in specific words or phrases where the poet will have intended none.

wisdom literature (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes):
1. proverbs are not legal guarantees from God
2. Proverbs must be read as a collection
3. Proverbs are worded to be memorable, not theoretically accurate.
4. Some proverbs need to be "translated" to be appreciated.
Unless you think of these proverbs in terms of their true modern equivalents (i.e., carefully “translate” them into practices and institutions that exist today), their meaning may seem irrelevant or be lost to you altogether (cf. ch. 4).

Revelation
Revelation must have meant something to the original hearers. Is written as a form of literature (apocalypse).
"John clearly intends this apocalypse to be a prophetic word to the church. His book was not to be sealed for the future. It was a word from God for their present situation...What we must be careful not to do is to spend too much time speculating as to how any of our own contemporary events may be fitted into the pictures of Revelation."
"The fall of Rome in chapter 18 seems to appear as the first chapter in the final wrap-up, and many of the pictures of “temporal” judgment are interlaced with words or ideas that also imply the final end as a part of the picture. There seems to be no way one can deny the reality of this. The question is, what do we do with it? "

These are references given throughout the text that are not included in the Appendix:
Textual criticism. This you may find in convenient form in the articles by Bruce Waltke (old Testament) and Gordon Fee (new Testament) in volume 1 of The Expositor's Bible Community (ed. Frank Gaebelein [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979],

Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, 2d edition (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), pp. 373 – 546; Joachim Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus
read Robert H. Stein’s The Method and Message of Jesus’ Teaching

how to do hermeneutics in the Gospels: "highly recommend" George E. Ladd’s The Presence of the Future (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974).
Joachim Jeremias - Rediscovering the Parables [New York: Scribner, 1966], p. 181):

we recommend Bernhard Anderson with Steven Bishop, Out of the Depths: The Psalms Speak for Us Today, 3rd ed. (Louisville, Ky.:
or Tremper Longman III, How to Read the Psalms (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1988). These
The very best introduction to Revelation — how it “works” as a book, its basic point of view, and its theological contribution to the Bible — is by Richard Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993); for an “easy read” commentary intended for the lay reader, you may wish to look at Professor Fee’s Revelation in the New Covenant Commentary Series (2011),

The Appendix contains information on how to choose a commentary while offering suggestions for each book and some introductions to OT and NT.

I give this book 4.5 stars out of 5. I highly recommend it.

If you are serious about reading and understanding the Bible this book is a valuable tool. It helps you understand where the writer is coming from, what to look for, what questions to ask, and how to find the answers within scripture.

There is a lot of good information to be had here. For some it maybe too simple for others just right. For me I felt the information was good but a bit repetitive, however there is unique information in each chapter. I guess I would have loved a more condensed version without the repeating.

Pretty good product, as long as you understand this is NOT a normal CD. This is technically a "CD" (compact disc) however it is a data disc only that contains the MP3 files for download. This CANNOT be played in a CD player. There are steps inside the case that help walk you through how to get this audiobook onto your iPhone via iTunes.

I took a Biblical Interpretation College Class a few weeks ago and I can say that this book should be part of a serious Bible student's library. Very well written and very informative. It is definitely an useful tool for a person who has no prior denominational knowledge of the Scriptures.

Book was received very quickly in excellent cindition. Very pleased. The only reason didnt give review a 5 is because I havent really read much of the book yet but I am sure it is as wonderful as I have been told.

I debated for weeks about writing a review for this book. I recognize the need for good scholarship and I do think this book has some. Also with so many sold am I just off base for not giving this book at least 4 stars? Well, I am finally taking the plunge and writing a review.

First, some good. I am reading this book as one of many for a class Bible College. So I do respect scholarship, and this book demonstrates solid methods for understanding the Holy Bible that God gave to us. And they do acknowledge the scriptures as Holy. (Otherwise I would give this book a 1 star). As part of a group of books, this one has value. It adds insight.

Now for the "bad". It adds insight, but at times I have found it an example of what not to do. In fact my lectures point to this book a few times for that very purpose. Why?

Within their chapter on how bible translations are made and the different types, they can't help but defend their favorite type (Dynamic Equivalence) and version (the TNIV) to the point of reminding me how KJV only people defend the "Authorized version". If you read this book only, you will likely become biased also and not get a chance to understand the strengths and reasons for highly regarding other translations. Yes, it is true, I prefer the more formal equivalent type of translation. I would rather see the original and use commentaries or a second bible to help me understand difficult passages instead of an interpretation of the original, trusting they got it right. However, it doesn't bother me if someone else prefers Dynamic Equivalent translations. My point is this - Let me decide based on a description of pro's and con's. Don't treat me like someone that doesn't have enough years of school to be able to understand enough to choose my preference. And that's how I felt treated after reading Fee & Stuart.

The other 3 star review with the highest rating made a good point about how Fee & Stuart couldn't stop promoting their view on cessation. No reason for me to repeat it, read theirs.

Basically, my reaction to this book is this. Reading a book about the Bible is a lot like watching someone else play a video game. You can learn some things but you can't have the experience until you do it yourself. And you can't get good at it until you just dive in. You can't really understand the Bible until you read it - a few times. Fee & Stuart seem to promote the scholarship of how to read the Bible ahead of the ability of the Bible to speak to readers of all abilities. I felt like they were saying until I read their book and maybe even a few others that I should not start reading the Bible for fear I might get something wrong.

That scholarship focus can set up a dangerous mindset that knowledge is the point of the Bible. When actually it is to get out and share the saving grace of Jesus with the world.

Yes study the Bible, but don't forget that studying is just a step, a tool. You must let the Bible be your food as well and then after being strengthened, share it's message, or else the point of the great commission is lost in the mind of the scholar.

The book I like the most in my class is by Virkler, title Hermeneutics. The title isn't as catchy, but it taught me more and made me more confident in my ability to read the Bible for myself - and apply it to my and others lives.

Jesus, Please forgive all my sins and be my Lord. Amen.

I really like this book, even I didn't read it yet, because one of the writers is my teacher. but I think I should buy the whole set, so I return this one and decide to order the whole set . How to read the bible!

Very scholarly and probably good for a seminary student; for the average Bible student, it's a bit esoteric, although the principles are sound. I do believe the principles could have been imparted in an easier to understand and certainly shorter fashion.

This is a fairly good book. Fee & Stuart set forth some excellent concepts for studying the Bible. But you have to wade through their prejudices to find the concepts. As pointed out by a former reviewer, they really push the TNIV and NIV translations of the Bible. It's a fine translation, and I use the NIV as a tool for studying, but Fee & Stuart's book begins to read like an NIV commercial ... which gets very old - quick. This does not come as much of a surprise since Gordon Fee (according to Wikipedia) was a "member of the editorial board" for the NIV. So, it's my guess that he pushes the NIV for reasons other than scholarly ones.

All in all I would recommend the book for its fine insights as long you keep in mind the prejudices that they push.

If you are very familiar with the Bible, this is thought-provoking at the very least. After reading it, sitting through shallow sermons on Sunday mornings or Bible studies that consist of religious clichés and little else, becomes intolerable. That said, if you have to look up every Bible reference that Fee makes the reading is tedious indeed. One of the more-academic young women in my study group remarked that it took her three hours to get through a chapter. In short, the material is great, but not if you are looking for a quick study. I have been told that there is a book designed for youth groups, but I haven't looked at it.

Introduction

Originally published in 1981 and now in its third edition, Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart's How to Read the Bible for All its Worth asserts that the Bible is meant to be read by everyone and not simply scholars, seminarians, and professional clergy. Rather, the Bible is accessible to scholar and layperson alike who would seek to spend time in the Scriptures and comprehend their meaning. This readable book focuses on understanding the genre a particular part of Scripture is part of as the basis of understanding the intended meaning. The book addresses everything from the need to interpret and good Bible translations to the historicity of the Book of Acts and the multiple views of the Gospels and even the Book of Revelation. As an appendix, a very useful evaluation and use of commentaries is included.

Dr. Fee is the author of many books and is Professor Emeritus of New Testament Studies at Regent College in Vancouver, Canada. Fee, who received his Ph.D. from the University of Southern California, comes from a Pentecostal background. Fee is a strong supporter of gender equality in biblical translation and serves on the Board of Reference of Christians for Biblical Equality. Dr. Stuart is currently Professor of Old Testament at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary where he has served since 1971. Dr. Stuart attended Yale Divinity School before graduating with the Ph.D. from Harvard University. Stuart is also one of two pastors of serving Linebrook Church in Ipswich, MA handling most of the preaching duties. The two men served on the faculty of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary together until Fee's departure for Regent College in 1986.

Summary
Fee and Stuart begin simply enough by describing the need for biblical interpretation stating that the aim of good interpretation is not uniqueness. Rather, good interpretation should get at the plain meaning of the text. Of course, there is more to this than simply reading the words contained in Scripture. The nature of scripture and the reader as an interpreter both serve to complicate what Fee and Stuart acknowledge should be simple. To consider interpretation simple they state is both naïve and unrealistic. The importance of understanding how the Scriptures were understood by those who originally heard them cannot be overstated. Closely related to this is the literary context of Scripture. The authors rightly state that the starting point of interpretation is exegesis followed by hermeneutics going so far as to state that hermeneutics must be controlled by proper exegesis.

Fee and Stuart follow their opening chapter with a lengthy discussion of the importance of a good translation of the Bible from the best available manuscripts. On full display is their enthusiastic endorsement of the use of dynamic equivalence in biblical translation over formal equivalence. The authors firmly state that in situations where something is unclear in the receptor language from the original language, clarity in the receptor language should take priority as this is precisely the point of translating in the first place. Fee and Stuart do state that more than one translation should be used for Bible study and acknowledge value in both formal equivalence and free translations such as The Message in assisting in the basic understanding of Scripture. Having made a sort of affirmative statement concerning other biblical translation methods, the vast majority of the twenty pages in this chapter are seemingly intended to make a strong case for dynamic equivalence in general and for the use of the New International Version (NIV), Today's New International Version (TNIV), and the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) specifically.

To emphasize the importance of understanding Scripture in context, Fee and Stuart go on to spend most of the book discussing the various literary genres such as the epistles, narratives, poetry, history, prophesy, and even apocalyptic. The emphasis on genre serves the authors and their readers well. For example, to simply read a Pauline epistle without understanding that the letter is conditioned by the first century setting in which it was written can lead the reader to either assume there is nothing relevant to the modern day Christian therein or something much worse, an incorrect understanding of the meaning of many of those passages.

Narratives are stories that retell historical events and are meant to provide meaning to people in the present. The authors point out that in the case of biblical narratives, rather than telling a general story, these portions of the Bible are telling God's story becoming ours as God "writes: us into it. Fee and Stuart are clear in stating that narratives are not to be confused with allegory. Narrative is often told in a way in which the teller of the story and those hearing it share the same presuppositions. Thus the details the narrator may have taken for granted in telling the story are precisely the details interpreters should seek to discover. The job of the interpreter is to read out of the narrative rather than read into it.

In the case of biblical poetry, Fee and Stuart remind their readers that Hebrew poetry is intentionally emotive and warn against finding special meaning where none was intended by the authors. The writers of Hebrew poetry also were intentional in their use of metaphors in their writing. As such, it is important to make this distinction and not take the meaning of those metaphors literally. With prophetic writings, Fee and Stuart point out that from the viewpoint of the ancient Israelites, the prophets were pointing to events yet to come but for the modern reader those events have already come to pass.

Critique
Dr. Fee's service as the editor of the New International Commentary series and on the NIV review committee is on full display in How to Read the Bible for All its Worth. Considering his work in these areas, there is little surprise in his strong support of dynamic equivalence and the Bible translations that result from this method of translation. While endorsing the TNIV, NIV, and NRSV specifically, Fee and Stuart state that the use of a good formal equivalence translation as a second source for study is useful to give the reader confidence as to what the original Hebrew and Greek looked like. This seems to contradict the assertion concerning the superiority of dynamic equivalence. If Fee and Stuart truly find formal equivalence translations useful, their support should be more evident than a passing sentence or two. This also begs the question: why would someone employing a dynamic equivalence translation such as those preferred by the authors need to be reassured as to what the original Hebrew and Greek looked like?

The authors' discussion of the Apostle Paul's use of Old Testament passages metaphorically in 1 Corinthians 10:4 revealing a second meaning of Exodus 17:1-7 and Numbers 20:1-13 labors to stop short of bemoaning Paul's use of passages in a way other than the plain meaning they find abundantly clear in the original contexts. It is as if Fee and Stuart are forced to concede that the Holy Spirit may use Scripture in any manner which He might see fit disregarding the rules of men.
While acknowledging, albeit begrudgingly, the existence of this sensus plenior, Fee and Stuart then go to great lengths to explain that while the Holy Spirit may use Scripture in this manner, it is inappropriate for men to do the same. It would seem interpreting the Old Testament with the New Testament in mind is something Fee and Stuart are quite uncomfortable with. It would also seem that Fee and Stuart would prefer to use textual criticism to explain away part of the biblical text with which they find fault yet are unable to do so.
Conclusion

Fee and Stuart are certainly well qualified to present a guide to biblical interpretation. Now in its third edition, How to Read the Bible for All its Worth is beneficial to the readers who seek to deepen their understanding of biblical hermeneutics. The approach taken by Fee and Stuart is both thorough and comprehensive; so much so that this is not a book for one new to biblical hermeneutics. Fee and Stuart seemingly approach their work with the assumption that the reader has had some experience with biblical interpretation. Given the audience that may acquire such a book, this is not surprising and should in no way be a negative reflection upon the authors.

How to Read the Bible for All its Worth is profitable for study by men and women of all denominational and theological backgrounds. That said caveat emptor! The reader should understand the theological leanings of the authors before determining whether or not to use their book. Dr. Fee and Dr. Stuart approach their work from a more liberal point of view than certainly this seminarian is accustomed to. Still, understanding differing approaches to hermeneutics is a good thing both for the student and cause for Christ.

This book seemed to be more of a pitch to buy their translation of the Bible. Also, I disagree with some of their hermeneutical applications. I'm not a King James only kind of guy, but I feel like they didn't treat it properly in their critique of it. They criticize that the translators took some freedom, yet they turn around and say it's OK in certain aspects...

I've been looking for a book to use in an adult sunday school class on biblical interpretation and have read half a dozen books on the subject within the past six months, all targeting the layman. This is the best of the lot so far, but that is faint praise.
Fee and Stuart focus on the different types of literature that make up the canon and the different ways in which they must be approached. Many of their insights are very helpful and useful. Generally, the chapters written by Stuart (those dealing with the Old Testament) are markedly superior in quality to those written by Fee.
Some significant things are missing entirely. The first is any discussion of basic exegetical skills apart from application to a specific type of literature. Fee directs the reader to Sproul's Knowing Scripture and a few other books for this sort of thing. Also, any discussion of a redemptive historical approach to interpretation is missing. This is a crucial omission in that later books of the Bible develop themes and reuse imagery introduced in earlier books.
A chapter on selecting a translation is provided. Sadly, Fee is very committed to the dynamic equivalence method of translation. A student following his advice will to a large degree be held hostage to the prejudices of interpreters masquerading as translators.
Some specific comments on the books treatment of the various types of literature:
1. Epistles
Fee wisely emphasises the occasional nature of the epistles, and that the text cannot mean something that it did not mean to its original recipients. However, he makes much of cultural relativity (e.g. arguing that 2 Tim 2:11-12 are culturally relative, ignoring the context of verses 13-15). Fee is also a committed non-cessationist and rides this hobby horse till it falls over and dies. Almost every example of alleged poor exegesis is tied to cessationism.
2.Gospels
Fee offers some good advice on reading each Gospel both in the context of the parallels in the other gospels and conversely in light of its own particular audience and themes. His treatment of the Sermon on the Mount is exceptionally poor, however. On page 130, he implicitly says that the Old Testament law was capable of justifying. One hopes that this is due to sloppy phrasing.
His treatment of the parables is fairly conventional in that it treats the parables as a unified genre, which to my mind they are not. The parables in many cases are just as occasional as the epistles. The rules for interpreting them are not completely uniform (for instance, the parable of the sower comes very close to allegory, while the parables describing the Father's joy over repentant sinners in Luke 15 much more closely follow the pattern of communicating one central thought. The interpretive approach is often indicated by the question or situation that occasions the parable, and this goes overlooked.
3.Law
Stuart's treatment of the law in terms of exegesis is pretty good. He gives the student a good guide to understanding the difference between apodictic law and case law and to understanding the law in the context of the antithesis between the Israelites and the people they were to displace. He does not do so well in giving guidelines to the modern believer to apply the Law. He says for instance (p. 163) - "don't see the Old Testament law as binding on Christians in the New Covenant except where specifically renewed". As North has pointed out, this is not a sound guide, because there is no New Testament renewal of the prohibition on bestiality, for instance.
Stuart also omits any discussion of the division of the law into moral, civil, and ceremonial law. The above problem is perhaps an outgrowth of that.
4. The Prophets
This section is pretty good. Stuart points out that the prophets must be read as the enforcers (prosecutors would have been a more accurate analogy) of the covenant. This section would have been especially helped by a discussion of the redemptive-historical aspect of biblical prophecy.
5. The Psalms
This is the best chapter in the book. Stuart gives very solid advice for understanding Hebrew poetry. A couple of pages are devoted to the imprecatory psalms (e.g. Ps 137)
6. Wisdom literature
Stuart very astutely observes that the wisdom corpus of the Bible includes James, but then he ignores it. His treatment of Ecclesiastes is appalling. He suggests that the purpose of Ecclesiastes is to *contradict* the rest of the Bible, and that only two verses properly coincide with the biblical message (pg 214). This is tantamount to a denial of the infallibility of a portion of scripture. One hopes that Dr. Stuart will do a little hard work on this before the next edition.

7. Revelation
This chapter is worth skipping. Fee gives some good advice in the 5 principles he outlines, but his examples turn out to mostly be examples of how not to apply those principles.
I would recommend this book cautiously to individual readers, but I won't be using it for my class.

Gordon Fee along with with Douglas Stuart are giants when it comes to biblical interpetation. If you are looking for a solid beginning to biblical exegisis and hermeneutics, this book is a great place to start.

Several Kindle books that I have purchased over the years have the same problem that this book has - no table of contents. This is not significant when reading a novel but when trying to read a weightier book it becomes a significant disadvantage. A table of contents provides the reader with the basic structure of the book which reveals how the author intends to present his/her ideas. When that framework (the table of contents) is absent it is impossible for the reader to see the big picture and hence how the material fits in the big picture. Until the Kindle version of this book includes a table of contents you would be better served to buy the print version!!!

This is one of my favorite books so naturally I wanted to have the updated version on my Kindle. To my surprise, after downloading the Kindle version, I realized it was the 2nd edition, even though the 3rd edition has been out for quite some time.

I guess I should have looked closer, but I would think the store would provide the most recent edition for the Kindle.

There is very good information that one can use for learning, studying and understanding scripture. However, the authors' bias on the TNIV is most disappointing. There are much better versions and translations of the Bible available that are closer to the original inspired manuscripts than the much criticized TNIV.

Not a Fan of this book, It's overly complicated to read and will not help the average bible reader, it also puts way too much emphasis on historical context and external readings other than the bible. Heres a pro tip just get a good commentary and use youtube or sermon audio to pull up sermons on anything that confuses you about the bible, you don't need some unnecessary formula to understand God's word, it was written by the Holy Spirit and made for ALL to understand.

The problem with "How to Read the Bible . . . " is that it is educated without the benefit of judgment. Messrs. Fee and Stuart, like many academic writers on the Bible, do not understand their own subjectivity and the danger of disregarding the Bible's claim of inspiration in favor of human logic. Much of what they write is correct in the short view, and informative, but the basics of hermeneutics is well-traveled territory.

Their modernist-influenced relegation of much of the Pauline epistles to the dustbin of the "cultural" has an hidden element of eisegetic subjectivity that they naively ignore. And their examples of "good" and "bad" Bible translations are simple nonsense; again, they prefer translations which impose meaning - meaning that they agree with - rather than attempt to reproduce the actual meaning that one might get from a more accurate translation.

The sorry state of hermeneutical teaching in universities and seminaries is reflected in the ongoing shrinkage of mainline Protestant denominations. If you want to understand why certain churches are losing 1-2% of their membership every year, this book would be a pretty good starting point.

This book reads more like an exposition as to why they feel the NIV is the best translation of the Bible rather than being an introduction to hermeneutics. Another major issue I had with the book is that the authors never put a single reference or source for their ideas. I don't have an issue with this theory but it's difficult to understand why two men, who are both professors and hold PhD's, could think that a single reference isn't necessary.

I bought this book because it was the required reading for a twelve-week course I was enrolled in, and even though my reading felt like a race to the finish toward the end of the course, I’m so glad to have it in my possession. This book seems to cover it all, and then some.

The class and this book were eye-opening confirmation that justified much of my uneasiness with people who say, “it’s in there; you’re just not spiritual enough to find it,” or “trust me, everyone thinks XYZ passage means this, but God showed me [and only me] what it really means.”

In one of the first sections, right there on page 23, it says, “Interpretation that aims at, or thrives on, uniqueness can usually be attributed to pride . . . a false understanding of spirituality . . . or vested interests.” Instead, interpretation should be done with careful examination of what's actually authoritative (rather than simply an example mentioned), taking into consideration the word meanings at the time of the authors, the historical context, and the literary context.

I knew to read in context, and that many people take a single verse for their purposes without considering what’s around it for interpretation, but yet I was guilty of shallow examination of verses I thought I knew—the “easy” ones that seemed pretty clear-cut.

I think one of the things that’s shifted so much of my thinking is that everything— everything—deserves closer examination. Just because a particular passage doesn’t seem troublesome doesn’t mean it is as straightforward as I might think it is. I think we all probably have our “pet” verses, and we desperately want them to mean what helps us to feel better.

Something I enjoyed in the reading was that there was not one single Bible translation that was held up as the ONLY valid one to read. Each version is broken down into categories from literal translation (word for word) to dynamic equivalent (phrase for phrase) all the way to free translation (concept for concept). The idea that more than a handful of translations are useful to attack a passage from various angles allowed me to see how each one could be a study aid in its own way.

I appreciated that the book broke down the various genres, and outlined the necessary factors in how to interpret what they’re saying. Even though I knew Song of Solomon and the Psalms were poetry, I never thought about the fact that their imagery was similar to how we’d write song lyrics. Duh. Of course they would be. But somehow, when we see the word “Bible,” the normal rules fly out the window and we seem to feel that different rules should apply, because it’s not the common man’s poetry.

I felt that gave a good guideline for being able to pull a meaning for me, today, out of something that was spoken to someone else long ago, and to apply it properly. The book focused heavily on exegesis and doing it well.

Even the appendix is so thorough that its commentary recommendations take into consideration what may be better for the general reader in comparison to the advanced student, which is so helpful when trying to figure out which books may be over my head, or just right for me.

Overall, this book was so chock-full of information that I plan on rereading it as soon as I can manage it.

Disclaimer: I borrowed an audio version of this text, perhaps a written format would have made a better impression. Also, I listened to the text a few months prior to writing this review, so I can only offer my most memorable impressions. Also, my example on genre may not accurately reflect the content; I think it's close and it represents my most memorable dissapointment.

In fairness, I like Fee. I have appreciated his interpretive insight in scholarly works, but I feel this text is just too light for it’s title. This book was evidently written to be an introductory overview for someone unfamiliar with biblical hermeneutics, and it is well written for that purpose: it’s a palatable appetizer, but the book's title implies a full-course meal.

Fee's, "How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth," isn't nearly detailed enough to teach interpretive skill, it only explains the concepts of sound interpretation and value of knowing them. The instruction doesn’t go very deep on any particular interpretive tool and it offers little knowledge-resource for actually doing interpretation, leaving the impression that these are simple concepts with limited applications.

For example, the section on genre explains the only most common groups of biblical genre, such as the rhetorical writing of Paul and the historical narrative of 1 Kings. However it doesn't inform the reader about all the various sub-genres of rhetoric, or how to identify the differences, or the significance of one genre verses an other for interpretation. The reader may learn that rhetoric is intended to persuade, but may not understand the interpretive distinctions between a pastoral letter, and a legal indictment.

I recommend, "Introduction to Biblical Interpretation," by Klein, Blomberg & Hubbard for a comprehensive introduction to hermeneutics and an ongoing resource for in-depth study within a single, seminary quality textbook. Fee is a valuable resource to the community of believers and this text is well done. For someone unfamiliar to academic biblical study, this text by Fee is a good introduction to the concepts of biblical interpretation. He is now publishing companion books and it seems one would have to purchase the entire series to get a full picture of biblical interpretation. So far Fee's other, "All Its Worth," books are titled like single chapters in the Klein et al. text.

The book is now in it's 4th edition and has been greatly expanded and improved since it first appeared in 1982. When I read the first edition 35 years ago I was greatly impacted by the practical approach the authors give to reading scripture to understand the intent of the original author. Now that I have finished reading the latest edition I am again impressed with how much helpful information is packed into this little volume. This is certainly not the last word on understanding the Bible but by utilizing the guidelines contained within it's pages, one is well on their way to reading and interpreting the Bible in a responsible manner.

I taught hermeneutics (Bible Interpretation) in a classical academy prior to entering pastoral ministry. We used this textbook. Personally, I don't think there is a better introduction to hermeneutics. That is not to say that I agree with all of the writers' conclusions, but part of the joy of hermeneutics is "showing the math" (if you will) of how you get to your conclusions. They do a great and accessible job of introducing the different types of biblical literature and the approach one would take to understand the various types. Again, this is an introduction and one that will suit most anyone. For more academic types, you can then move on to other works (personally Goldsworthy's "Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics" is a must-have!). I think every Christian should read this book as a helpful tool for diving more into the Scriptures.

Bible Baffled?

Have you ever wanted to read the Bible like a pro but were baffled by terms like exegesis or hermeneutics?
This is a book about the Book for you. A small book, detailed packed that looks at the analytical tools needed to analyse scripture. Exegesis requires us understand history, literary styles, and content.
Hermeneutics includes exegesis to interpret scripture... here it is used the "here and now" of scripture.
Most of us lack the academic tools to do good hermeneutics so we are lead to good references and Bible translations. The reading list here is extensive.
This book uses hermeneutics and exegesis to analyse the types of literature found in the Bible. Does the Bible always speak to us in this time or is it contextual? Cults do not use good analytical reasoning and thus spread heresy. A more thorough study of cult errors could have been used to illustrate the principles in this book. Exegesis is abscent from cult reasoning.
It all ends with Revelations and the statement that The Four Horsemen are merely unknown imagery. The Horsemen get resurrected shortly after on page 241 as symbols of Conquest, War, Famine and Death!
In general, this is a good starting point for a layperson who wants to study the Bible more thoroughly.

I had wanted to write a longer review but was pleasantly surprised at the number of detailed and accurate reviews already contributed here. So, in short I would say this is a great book that exactly befits the title. It rescues one from the endemic of biblical illiteracy due not so much to not reading the bible per se as reading it poorly. There is a widespread habit of flattening out the rich diversity of the biblical materials, due in part to a dubious 'fortune cookies' approach that seeks to hear a verse from God for the day. While not denying that God can write straight even with a crooked stick, this 'devotional' practice tends to militate against a proper reading of the ancient text. Fee and Stuart introduce readers to the all-important term called 'genre', showing that the bible is not a flat book of propositional statements lined up side by side each other to be read in a uniform manner but a richly textured literature made up of poetry, narrative, laws, letters, apocalypse, ancient biographies, prophetic oracles, proverbs, parables and so on and each genre demands a different set of interpretative considerations/rules.

It may be helpful to point out that the authors' recommendation of certain methods (mainly critical historical approach) and translations (eg TNIV whereas one can reasonably argue for others such as the NRSV for greater accuracy) is not without its flaws or limitations especially for advanced students, but one should note that it is always a risk an author has to take when making specific recommendations of currently available and accessible tools . On balance, as a book that has as its aims to educate the general reader to start *reading* (as different from doing an indepth study of) the bible in a manner proper to its nature and that honors the intents and context of the inspired writers, it has achieved its goals beyond the mark of excellence.

This is a no-nonsense, conservative approach to interpreting the Bible, focusing on what the Bible meant to the ancient audience as a springboard to what it means now. We have a tendency, at least I do, to do hermeneutics (what the Bible means to us) prior to exegesis (what the Bible meant originally). This book makes it clear that we are being copied on ancient literature, and that we have to be sure of what we are reading. Also, some of it is not even meant for direct application, like the book of Acts; even though many first time events took place then, it is not meant to be normative for the church of all time. In a word, the book appeals to a much less self-absorbed approach to studying the Bible.

The book is written in a dry, textbook, academic fashion. I was slightly bothered by that, but got over it when I saw all the good information it contained. It vaguely reminded me of a book by F.F. Bruce called 'The Canon of Scripture': not much fun, but very informative. It was a little like attending a college class taught by a professor who never smiles!

The important thing, however, is the valuable information presented. Even though I've been reading the Bible a long time, I learned some basic principles that I will start using right away. For that reason, it is a worthy study.

An older revision of this was one of my Bible College textbooks in the early 1980's. It's way better now...and it was very good then. For example, Fee gives clear minded, thoughtful approaches to every type of literature (genre) in the bible.

So many times as a pastor I hear someone make a statement about the meaning of a bible passage which is not what the passage is really about..only what they think it means. Fee basically helps people think through what the author of the passage meant for the readers it was actually written to...before we try to discern principles that apply to us.

This is great for people who often say...'I feel it means'...because he gives sound common sense principles for understanding the bible. It should be required reading for church leaders and pastors. I also recommend it's companion, How to read the bible book by book. It's excellent as well....showing how to apply the principles from this book in every book of the bible. Finally, another book in this field worth reading is "Let The Reader Understand" by Clayton/McCartney

If you write sermons, check out NT Exegesis by Fee.

I hope you get this one and carefully read it and apply it to your life. You will be blessed if you do!

Enlightening, thorough, not written at some deep scholarly level.

The authors did a good job describing the technical details of how our English translations came to be in an easy to understand fashion, while not understating how difficult the task is to make any translation from an ancient language into our modern English.

The first few chapters laid the solid foundation for the book's thesis.

The only annoyance was the bias of Gordon Fee without letting the reader know he may be biased. It is obvious he prefers the work of the NIV, TNIV (and one would presume NIV2011). I have no problem with people stating what they believe and why - and he supports his position very well. This is my preferred translation as well. The author's do not state which wrote chapter 2 so I would assume it was a collaborative effort. HOWEVER, Gordon neglects to tell us that he was also on the committee that translated the NIV, TNIV & NIV2011.

When someone invests a major portion of their life and efforts to an endeavor like this it is commendable to be sure. However, I believe it is his obligation as he steers the reader to particular translations for study that he make it clear to the reader that he may be very biased. He's in the ethical dilemma of endorsing one's own product. This would weight anyone's bias and I feel should be clearly stated... as the uninformed reader may simply believe it's a scholarly opinion when it is indeed much more than that - it's a personal investment of considerable time, effort and certainly prayer. A simple statement such as, "I was intimately involved in the translation of the NIV and here are my justifications as to why we felt it is a good balance of translation philosophies and usage of the best and most reliable manuscripts", would go a long way in ensuring there is no appearance of "patting ones own back".

You see my five stars. This book was well-written and well-deserving of the updates it has received over the years.

My only criticism of this book is its occasional reference to the 2nd Edition for more information on certain topics. Why not just put the information in this edition as well so we do not have to locate the out-of-print 2nd edition? It does not happen often, a handful of times in the book.

Some reviews of this book heavily criticize the second chapter on Bible translations. Three things should be said about the second chapter:

1) The authors do make valid points that apply to ALL Bible translations.

2) The authors do advocate a certain translation, but even if you disagree with that conclusion, there's still much to be learned from this chapter. EVERY Christian should read this chapter, or a chapter like this, to gain a better understanding of the science and art of Bible translation.

3) Some reviewers here obviously did not read beyond this chapter before putting the book down.

The other chapters in this book contain some of the most valuable information I've ever read about the Bible, outside of the Bible itself.

Decent book. More like a guide on how to get the most out of reading the Bible. The book has lots of information packed into it. I think it would have been challenging to read a physical book or an ebook rather than listen to it. Didn't love it, didn't hate it. Could be used for a Bible Study class.

I read this book when i was 18. I am 33 now and can say that this book is foundational for the way i read, interpret, and understand scripture. It opened my eyes to reading it as it would have been read by its original audience. This is one of maybe 5 (if that) life-changing books i've ever read - pillars of my thinking. The basic premise is that the Bible cannot mean what it never meant. Thus, understanding the Bible's literary, historical & cultural context is critically important to applying & meditating on the Bible's message. It takes hard work to understand the original authors, and no one should ever shy away from this work who wishes to rightly know & live the Bible.

If i could give this 100 stars, i would. I also strongly recommend reading Mortimer Adler's "How to Read a Book," which is referred to in Fee's & Stuart's book here.

I read the first edition twice and the third edition once. My wife read the second edition. Reading this book was a key factor that influenced me to go to Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, where Fee and Stuart were both professors (Stuart still is, but Fee later left for Regent).

This book will not clear up all of your questions about the Bible. But it provides a basic understanding that we can't interpret the Psalms the same way we interpret a letter, or historical narrative the same way we interpret apocalyptic literature, etc. Without understanding the concepts in this book, a Bible reader is open to many opportunities for misinterpretation. Every reader on the Bible needs to understand the concepts in this book. Unfortunately, these concepts are not articulated in most of the popular Bible interpretation books, so that makes this book all the more valuable. All scholars, from conservative to liberal, from Baptist to Catholic, accept the general precepts in this volume, so these are foundational to interpretation, not some clever system that Fee and Stuart came up with. They just happen to be fantastic presenters of this valuable information.

This is easy reading with good examples. I've recommended this to people for over 20 years.

I got really bored, for people who like very literally thinking and to be educated about the different translations of the Bible, this book is for you. I just don't have the attention span for this one.

Fee, G.D. Stuart, D. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003. 287 pages.

This is the toolbox I'd like to place in the hands of every seminary student. It's a through guide to exegesis with sensitivity to the dynamics of the various genres of literature, noting the distinguishing characteristics of the epistles, the Old Testament narratives, Acts, the Gospels, the parables in particular, the Law, the Prophets, the Psalms, Wisdom literature and Revelation. For each, the authors tell the student of Scripture what to look for and what to avoid for interpretation and application.

The first two chapters seem to be an overbearing advertisement for Today's New International Version of the Bible, which sparked controversy among some right-wing Christians by updating the gender specific language of humanity. However, these authors seem to almost unilaterally think that the interpretation of TNIV was more intellectually sound.

That out of the way, they proceed to take us through the various genres of Scripture, looking first at the historical and literary contexts of each, and then walk us through the hermeneutical questions of application. They define a number of subtle missteps we could take, overextending our application to the text to situations that are not exactly parallel in another culture. We run the risk of: allegorizing, decontextualizing, selectivity, moralizing, personalizing, misappropriation (using the text for purposes other than what the text says), false appropriation (reading current issues into the text), false combination (finding points from combining separate texts), and redefinition (applying a text to a modern situation to make it more exciting) (p. 102-3). The two key rules to keep in mind are that 1) the text cannot mean other than what it meant to the original author and hearers, and 2) comparable modern particulars bear application of that specific text (p. 74-5).

Of particular interest were a few random gems. The do's and don'ts of interpreting Old Testament Law on p. 180 should be distributed during any sermon on the subject. I've never seen the clear division of types of utterance in the Prophetic literature: the lawsuit, the woe, the promise, the enactment prophecy, the messenger speech, the poet (p. 195-7). I take issue with the claim that the Old Testament narratives were not intended to teach moral lessons (p. 92). I think this flies in the face of exactly what story-telling does. What the authors do particularly well is to break into subtle distinctions the activity of hermeneutics and the categories of the text. Such analysis creates a healthy structure from which to work.

The only problem with the text is that it is so thorough that I found some of it to be an overstatement of the obvious. Their caution about application of the book of Acts and Revelation seemed geared to a conservative, charismatic audience, and maybe even to views that would be held by the uneducated, who probably won't read a book like this anyway. It presumes an intellectual interest in interpreting Scripture but does not assume a moderate level of common sense on the reader's part. Thus, perhaps, there's really just too much information here. A more critical modern reader might also raise questions about this modernist approach to interpretation in the wake of deconstruction. Consequently, though I like the book, I would have to be selective about to whom I recommended it.

Some people will get very upset with the title, because after all, for the true believer, all you need is the Bible itself, right?

Well, no. For one thing the Bible itself tells you that you need the Holy Spirit to help understand, so there is that.

But you also need to study to show yourself approved, meditate and approach it in a humble matter. The Bible was written over 2,000 years ago and in some portions even far longer. It is possible, just possible mind you, that there have been changes in language and culture that require some work on the reader's part to understand what is being said the same way a hearer of that message would have understood it in their day.

That is where this book comes into play. This is both a good introductory text for the student who wants to enter into the realms of textual, historical, redactive, literary etc criticism. It is also written to be at the level of the average layman who wants to understand more for their own study and growth.

Evangelical Christians often get very nervous about this type of book. They see much that has served to diminish the Bible over the years as coming from the "liberal" religious, academic camps as seeking to diminish what the Bible plainly says.

As delicately as I can state it ...... Evangelicals need to get over it and enter the field themselves. If the Bible is true, it must be true enough to stand tough scrutiny. The opinion of this reviewer is that it does stand that scrutiny, but as a student of the Bible you must expect over time that your understanding will change and grow. That is called discipleship and growth. It's a good thing!

This book, better than most, comes to the Bible and maintains an attitude of respect toward the text itself consistent with what Evangelicals believe with regard to inspiration while introducing the student or curious Christian as to how to study the Bible and get more out of it that you ever did before.

Where great commentaries give you fish, this book teaches you how to fish and feed yourself intellectually and spiritually from the Bible.

Don't be threatened by it. It is a good thing!

This is very worthwhile book for those who see the Bible as spiritually unique and also helpful for the student who simply wants to know how to understand it better.

The Pontifical Biblical Commission said that "scripture is inerrant in what it intends to teach", i.e. those things necessary to salvation. It is the word of God in the words of men. But for that word to be properly received, we have to know what kind of writing it is. The Bible has many, many different types of writing, and they cannot all be read the same way--if they are, the result is nonsense and not edification.
The book of Proverbs is full of pithy and memorable sayings, but theological completeness is not their primary virtue--you can't read them as though they were the Epistle to the Romans, which is careful theology but much less memorable.
The stories of the Prodigal Son and Mary of Bethany's anointing Christ with nard are both affecting and personal, but one is a made-up story and one is something more like reportage. It is reasonable to look for second meanings in parables, but doing that in oral history leads to finding mares' nests.
Fee and Stuart have written an accessible and sensible introduction to the intelligent reading of Scripture, without the sort of a priori reasoning that has brought biblical criticism into ill repute with ordinary Christians.
This book can prevent most of the worst absurdities many of us fall into when we are learning Biblical exegesis. It certainly helped me.
For more advanced reading, have a look at Auerbach's "Mimesis" and Adler & Van Doren's "How to Read A Book".

Strangely, the authors do not consider godly biblical characters as having been provided as examples for us today. I was shocked to read the following on page 86:

"Joseph's lifestyle, personal qualities, or actions do not tell us anything from which general moral principles may be derived. If you think you have found any, you are finding what you want to find in the text. You are not interpreting the text."

So presumably, we are not to read anything into Joseph's forgiveness of his brothers, as if we should take that as a moral principle for ourselves. Notice also the haughty tone in which we are scolded for taking lessons from the Bible in a way that the authors do not approve!

The problem is that the authors approach Scripture from a literalistic perspective. This means they want to read the Bible's stories in an impassive, unemotional way. When a literalist finally arrives at a specific command that specifically says, "Forgive others," that is when he has an "Aha" moment and thinks, "That is something I ought to do!" This, however, is not how God and the inspired authors intended us to read the Bible.

Repeatedly, the authors tell us there are no allegories in the Bible (p. 81, 138). However, if you read the Bible without bringing your own agenda to it, you definitely will see (or have seen) allegories.

I don't recall reading anything in this book about finding Christ in the Old Testament. However, anyone who starts out by rejecting allegories will naturally have difficulty doing so.

The book is murky on the topic of whether or not Christians are still under the Law. On p. 153, we are told that certain laws are a continuing obligation for Christians.

Strangely, the book tells us we would have a better chance of being able to obey the Law by trying to follow the letter rather than the spirit of the Law. In fact, the New Testament tells us to do the opposite. As Jesus taught us, the spirit of the Law starts with love for God and neighbor. God will condescend to help any person who sincerely wants to obey in accordance with the spirit of the Law.
Aside from these serious shortcomings, the book does offer some good principles.

Instead of letting us interpret Revelation for ourselves, the authors can't resist telling us that the harlot is Rome (p. 237). They do not tell you this is a highly controversial interpretation since many argue that the harlot or "great city" is Jerusalem (see Rev. 11:8 for example).

Authors Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart have provided the evangelical community with a salient and veridical overview of hermeneutical principles that, when applied, are of great import to the study of Scripture. How to Read the Bible for All It's Worth is replete with concepts applicable to every believer, regardless of their level of theological acumen. Layman and seasoned theologians alike will find this book to be one that has lasting value as they exegete God's Word. In the current theological milieu, a conspectus of the proper application of hermeneutics is sorely needed and in this regard, Fee and Stuart have answered the call.

The main purpose of this book is providing the interpreter with a compendium of concepts on how to properly interpret Scripture through the dual concepts of exegesis and hermeneutics. Of particular relevance is the authors' assertion that "one does not have to be an expert to learn to do the basic tasks of exegesis." This statement ameliorates the perception that hermeneutics is a task solely for the clergy thus providing an impetus for all believers to engage this discipline. Prior to delving into the intricacies of hermeneutics proper, Fee and Stuart provide copious reasons for the pursuit of the interpretation of Scripture. This foundational understanding is essential as it provides a synopsis of the role of the interpreter and the numerous challenges they will face when attempting to mine the depths of Scripture. Fee and Stuart make no illusions that establishing generally accepted guidelines for interpretation is difficult and unlikely. The reality that various interpretations will dominate the theological landscape is clearly addressed.

The historical and eternal aspects of Scripture are duly noted in the opening chapter of the text, with particular attention given to the methodology utilized by God to communicate to mankind. The need for the interpreter to have a lucid understanding of the characters in Scripture and the geographical and cultural milieu in which they lived is brilliantly outlined. Additionally, the necessity to utilize Bible dictionaries and encyclopedias to understand historical context is given some consideration by the authors with additional discourse on biblical commentaries provided in the appendix.

Discussion of the various translations was perhaps one of the more turbid and opinion laced elements of this work. The seeming dismissal of the New American Standard Bible (NASB) and the comment that if one "regularly reads only the NASB/NASU, then you are committed to an interpretation of the text that may not be what Paul intended" was parochial and dubious. Such comments give the impression as an effort to promote one particular translation of Scripture over another as evidenced by the statement the "TNIV reflects the best exegetical option." Such conjecture, while hardly deleterious to the work en bloc, could have been omitted in favor of a discussion of the purpose and reasoning behind the various major translations and the inherent benefits and pitfalls subsumed therein. If brevity was a concern, the reader could have been directed to scholarly works such as F.F. Bruce's The Canon of Scripture or Norman Geisler's From God to Us for additional insight on the history and purpose of translations.

Fee and Stuart conclude their prolegomena with a substantive overview of language and the issue of historical distance. The importance of addressing these issues cannot be overstated and the authors' treatment of difficulties such as euphemisms, word plays and elements of grammar/syntax abound with relevant examples. The continued effort at promoting the NIV in lieu of providing the reader with meaningful commentary on hermeneutical methodology was overreaching and biased contributing little to the topic.

The discussion of genre dominates the book. Fee and Stuart expend considerable effort, and rightfully so, discussing the epistles, the Old Testament narrative, the book of Acts, the Gospels, the Parables, the Law, the Prophets, the Psalms, Wisdom literature and the book of Revelation. Particular attention is given to hermeneutical issues surrounding the epistles. The inherent pitfalls involved in interpreting the genre of the epistles are clearly addressed in the statement "the ease of interpreting the epistles can be quite deceptive."

Fee and Stuart coherently emphasize the need for contextualization when studying the epistles. The tendency to misconstrue metaphors and first century cultural issues necessitates the need for an understanding of historical context before engaging in the interpretation of specific elements of a pericope. In this regard, Fee and Stuart appropriately aver that difficult passages should be approached holistically as it is the "big view that counts." Indicative of this approach is the integration and application of issues relevant to the first century church to current theological conundrums. The extent the authors elucidate techniques of interpreting misinterpreted passages in the epistles is commendable and one of the highlights of their work.

Hebrew narrative as revealed in the Old Testament is the next topic broached by Fee and Stuart. This rather lengthy discussion is necessitated by the prevailing "failure to understand both the reason for and the character of Hebrew narrative." Indicative of this failure is the propensity to treat large sections of Old Testament narrative as allegory resulting in forced interpretations and rejection of the historically accurate nature of the Scripture. While Fee and Stuart's treatment of Old Testament narrative is not as thorough as that provided in works such as "Introduction to Biblical Interpretation" by Klein, Blomberg and Hubbard, it is nevertheless a commonsensical and worthwhile approach. Of particular note is the authors' contention that "narratives are precious to us because they so vividly demonstrate God's involvement in the world and illustrate his principles and calling." This statement articulates, perhaps even more than the discussion of the intricacies of narrative, the need for interpreters to properly evaluate historical genre.

While the same pattern used for the exegesis of Old Testament is applicable to the study of Acts, the authors provide a separate treatment of this book since the majority of believers acknowledge that Acts serves as the "pattern for Christian behavior or church life." The hermeneutical analysis of Acts shares similarities with the analysis of the epistles, especially in the area of modern application of first century issues and concerns. The relevancy of actions taken by the early church fathers to the modern church has often overstepped the bounds of scriptural exposition leading to misinterpretation of Luke's intended purpose. While Fee and Stuart provide copious principles for interpreting Acts, their exposition of Acts can be encapsulated in their following assertion:

"Unless Scripture explicitly tells us we must do something, what is only narrated or described does not function in a normative (i.e. obligatory) way - unless it can be demonstrated on other grounds that the author intended it to function in this way."

This evinces the overall pattern and approach for interpreting Scripture that should be utilized by all interpreters. Even though this statement was included in a discussion of Acts, it is nevertheless representative of the approach necessary for interpreting all Scriptural genres.

The importance of a lucid perspicacity of the gospels, particularly in relation to the parables of Jesus, is addressed next by Fee and Stuart. The discussion of vertical and horizontal thinking was interesting, yet was mired in comparative word counting and percentages of agreement. A redeeming aspect was the treatment of the conceptualization of the understanding of the "kingdom of God" as both a present and future event; an oft overlooked foundational element of the gospel accounts. While Fee and Stuart's treatment of this topic pales in comparison to that of George Eldon Ladd's A Theology of the New Testament, their cursory overview is nevertheless constructive and informative. The importance of understanding the "kingdom of God" cannot be overemphasized and its inclusion in this book is commendedable.

The parables are some of the most beloved portions of Scripture and also perhaps among the most misunderstood and misinterpreted. This is explicated in the statement "parables are not allegories - even if at times they have what appear to us to be allegorical features." This statement is at the crux of how to exegete parables. Fee and Stuart accurately identify that the hermeneutical task in reference to parables lies in recapturing the "punch of the parables in our own times and our own settings." All elements of the exegesis of parables are subsumed within this concept. The ability of Fee and Stuart to provide a terse yet substantive overview of the benefits and methods of interpreting parables is commendable.

Contemporary application of the books of the Law has, for many, been absent from their spiritual repertoire. Formulating an understanding of the complexity and sheer number of religious laws outlined in the Torah is difficult and elusive to most believers. This is unfortunate, as the books of the Law possess considerable relevance to the holistic study and understanding of Scripture. As noted by the Fee and Stuart, "even though the Old Testament laws are not our law, it would be a mistake to conclude that the Law is no longer a valuable part of the Bible." It is from this standpoint that Fee and Stuart engage the understanding and application of interpreting Old Testament law. A systematic understanding of the intent of the Law will illuminate the necessity of the discussions between Jesus and the Pharisees revealed in the gospel accounts. Fee and Stuart substantively examine the historical context of the law, in particular, the comparison of the Law of Moses to that of the Code of Hammurabi and other ancient codes of conduct. An awareness of the intention and influence the law had on ancient Israel will only enhance the understanding of the Biblical narrative; a position which Fee and Stuart repeatedly asseverate.

One of the more intriguing sections is that addressed to the study of prophetic genre. Emphasis on the necessity of engaging historical context is again provided by Fee and Stuart as the initial means by which to approach the message of the prophetic books. While the discussion of the types of prophetic oracles is noteworthy, the statement that secondary meaning or sensus plenior "is a function of inspiration, not illumination" is the fulcrum upon which exegesis of prophecy rests. The tendency to search for double meanings in prophecy has resulted in far reaching interpretations unintended by either the author or God.

The Psalms are not commonly thought of as containing exegetical difficulties. However, they are a "special kind of literature" and "require special care in reading and interpreting." They are best understood as a collective outpouring of communication with God much akin to that found in a diary. Combined with a view of the historical context of ancient Israel, exegesis of the Psalms can provide the reader with an invaluable perspective in dealing with the vacillation of life. The literary and functional aspects of the Psalms are covered in great detail by Fee and Stuart resulting in a comprehensive evaluation and dissection of this genre.

Proverbs, Job and Ecclesiastes, better known as wisdom literature, contain teaching that when "taken out of context can sound profound and seem practical, which often results in misapplication." Interpretation of these texts must be accomplished in the same comprehensive manner as any other pericope; a point duly noted by Fee and Stuart. While the books of wisdom are replete with inveterate insight, the overall context of wisdom literature should never be overlooked. Fee and Stuart provide a reasoned argument for a holistic understanding of wisdom texts. The multifarious aspects of Proverbs are adequately discussed including practical guidelines for understanding "proverbial wisdom" ; however, only a cursory overview is provided for Job and Ecclesiastes; two books whose messages are exponentially more difficult to assess. A one page assessment of Job and Ecclesiastes is wholly insufficient. Conversely, the commentary provided for the Song of Solomon, though terse, sufficiently addressed the significance of the necessity of fidelity and faithfulness in marriage.

Apocalyptic literature is satiated with symbolism and approaching such texts should not commence without a "proper degree of humility." Revelation, perhaps more than any other book in Scripture, presents a bevy of challenges for the interpreter. Fee and Stuart do a venerable job of outlining apocalyptic genre without pursuing any particular interpretive agenda. Additionally, they avoid theological interludes in favor of focusing on the methodology of interpreting apocalyptic works. Their statement that "John's larger concern is that, despite present appearances, God is in control of history and the church" is the capstone of this section. While interpretation of Revelation may continue to be elusive for the reader, Fee and Stuart remind the interpreter of the overarching approach to difficult pericope in Scripture: "If there are some ambiguities for us as to how all the details are to work out, there is no ambiguity as to the certainty that God will work it all out."

How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth is a concise enchiridion of the dynamic nature of hermeneutics. Ultimately, the intent of this work is to present the interpreter with the hermeneutical tools by which to discern "between good and not-so-good interpretations - and to know what makes them one or the other." Though other works of this genre are more comprehensive in scope, Fee and Stuart have written a lucid and intellectually remunerative guide to interpretation. Their extensive treatment of the genres of Scripture is beneficial to all believers, regardless of their level of theological acumen. This book avoids turbid theological meanderings in favor of providing the reader with basic hermeneutical tools necessary to understanding Scripture. In the sphere of hermeneutical discourse, its brevity is admirable, however, in terms of comprehensiveness, there are better works available. For the lay theologian, this book is more than adequate, but for the more seasoned theologian, it is merely a supplement to more voluminous expositions.

This book should be in every theologian's (from novice to expert) library. The helpful reminders of how to do good exegesis will have lasting effects on the reader and their uses of biblical texts.

Fee and Stuart have set the standard for basic books on biblical exegesis. Their emphasis to get to original meaning is key and should always be remembered in biblical studies. Yes, there might be more than original meaning (i.e. second narratives) but remembering those original meanings will help all readers to do go good exegesis with respect toward the biblical texts.

This book also provides a basic survey of the biblical texts and their genres. These are helpful to remind the readers what the different books of the Bible are in relation to writing styles.

Everyone who reads this book will remember the value of sound exegesis and proper respect toward the biblical texts.

All entry level theologians have to read it, but the "expert" theologians should also have it on their shelf as a good reminder of the basic steps toward understanding biblical texts.

Although a lot of individuals may feel they do not require any hermeneutical training, I think a cursory read of a book like this should be a requisite for all Christians serious about studying Scripture. I think the rules and guidelines established in this book are excellent and are some of the best developed for the purpose of understanding and interpreting Scripture.
Epistles: When it comes to New Testament Epistles I think Fee gives some excellent advice when he says these books should be treated like letters. That means an individual should read through the text several times as they would any letter from a friend or correspondance and then begin breaking it down to understand it. Moreover, the concept that these texts could not mean something they did not mean to their original audience is crucial to grasp. A reader cannot be overly subjective and begin applying various Scripture passages to his or her life, when a particular passage does not mean what they think it means.
Historical books: I think Fee and Stuart make some great points when it comes to understanding the historical books of the Old and New Testaments. First, they argue that we should read these books to see God's activities in the affairs of Israel and His Church. Therefore, these texts are better understood when broken up into smaller sections and read as a progressive accout of salvation history. In addition, the authors warn against decontextualizing and allegorizing passages which is always a temptation when reading a historial narrative that doesn't seem to have much theological or spiritual significance.
The Gospels: Fee makes some great points when it comes to understanding the gospels. First, he argues that familiarity with the historical context is crucial and vitally important. If one is not remotely familiar with 1st century Mediterranean culture then they are at a disadvantage. Second, reading similar gospel accounts side by side and analyzing the minor differences can also shed light on which audience the gospel was intended and what message the author is attempting to convey in that instance. Also, established as a rule throughout is that one should read and think in paragraphs as a helpful guide to understanding these books.
The Laws: I like Stuart's treatement of the Hebrew legal books. First, he argues that these laws were given to Israel to benefit them and therefore must be understood as applying to the kingdom of Israel and not us, since we are not Israel. Although, this is a valid point I think the argument that unless a specific teaching of the law wasn't reiterated in the New Testament, then it isn't binding on us today is not a good argument. What about the laws condemning bestiality, homosexuality, incest, and rape? None of these were specifically mentioned by Jesus, but I don't think anyone would argue that they are no longer binding upon us today.
The books closes by dealing with the Psalms, Wisdom literature, and Revelation. Again, nothing new or groudbreaking here, just solid and sound advice with a few minor points of contention. Although, not as good as it could be, I think this book is the best out there as a guide to reading and understanding Scripture.

Outstanding book on hermanutics by a great author!
I highly recommend this book for any new believer or vetrean Bible student!
Gordon Fee is well respected biblical scholar. He gives great insight on how to interpret the Bible (and how not to) -- mistakes people make, etc.
Which Bible versions to use for which purposes, & which not to!
He's got some great insight too, such as:
"Historicly the Church has understood the nature of Scripture much the same as it has understood the person of Christ--The Bible is at the same time both human and divine"
well said!
If you like this book, and want a more technical book on hermanutics, I would recommend "Biblical Interpretation" by TATE
This book goes further in depth into areas such as: Form Criticism, Source Criticism, Redactional Criticism, author-centered, text centered and reader-centered interpretation.
He also has some outstanding insight on interpratation!
I would recommend both, Fee first, and then Tate if you want more indepth study on hermanutics (although don't mistake me for saying Fee is shallow, he is VERY deep, just does not get as technical as TATE)
Eric

An extremely readable book about how to read the Book. This gem is usable from anyone in any stage of growth in Christian life, from 'just started Bible reading' to seminary student. It is also useful for almost any Christian faith tradition, whether evangelical, main-line, conservative or liberal. Whether the reader believes in biblical inerrancy or that the Bible is an inspired work, "How to Read.." will help them get more out of the Bible.
The authors explain how to watch out for basic exegetial fallicies, reading things into the Bible instead of out of it. Then they discuss different translation philosophies with examples of each. The bulk of the book is a description of the different genres of literature that make up the Bible, and specific ways to deal with each. The book concludes with recomendations for commentaries on specific books of the Bible, and all through the text are recommendations for further reading and good biblical reference materials.
The one point I want to reemphasise, this is a very readable book, accessible to anyone. It will enhance your Bible reading.

This is a wonderful book for both seasoned and new students of the bible. Written for the Christian, certainly useful to a Jewish student. He explains the necessary task of discovering what the original meaning of the text meant to the writer and first readers - hermeneutics - (to the best of our ability), and how to apply it to our lives today - exegesis. Why do we think "Love your neighbor as yourself" applies to us in 1997, but "Do not mingle cotton and linen" should stay back in the first centuries? What principles allow us to make this choice? They come from the same text. Far from shaking your faith, it will give you tools to discover and explain WHY you believe what you believe. This is often a more valuable step in witnessing to friends than telling them why THEY should believe it. A thin book, easily read, but will engage the serious scholar as well as the novice.

When I first became a Christian in 1999, I had met a guy who did lot of open air street preaching at Santa Monica 3rd street.( Which he still does today 2006) He got this book for me as a new Christian. It was my first book on hermenutics and I was blessed by it. Years later having had the book destroyed, I have got myself the new edition.

For thoses who know the authors of this book, they have what it takes to do this job. The book helps Christians read the bible better. Some people depending on your understanding of the bible and Christian theology you have this ideal that the bible is written for you. So many Christian read a verse out of it's intended context and not only dishonor God's word but might end up applying wrong thus come to really bad conclusions. If you don't understand what I mean look at groups who are considered non Christian's cults like Jehovah Witnesses, the Mormon Church or the Untied Pentecostal church ( Oneness). They interpret scripture wrongly by avoiding intent meanings, not understanding context, historical background and the authors worldview and grammar. This book help the lay person understand what to look for and what types of questions to ask of the biblical text. Not seeking to prove your own theological presuppositions but to understand the theology and grammar of the author who penned the Word of God. Make no mistake that while this book goes into understanding each book of the bible by looking at what type of writing it is, and all the things that most Christian would not consider "Spiritual" but more academic, the authors hold to the inerrancy and infallibility of the bible as the Word of God.

Remember the bible was written for US NOT written to US.

This is a great book for those who want to study the bible for all it's worth.

This is a well orchestrated effort between two Bible scholars of commendable expertise in their areas of biblical exegesis. Written in a remarkably warm and passionate style, this book should be in the hands of every Christian - scholar or layperson, pastor or member.
Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart embarks on a journey inviting the reader to share their insights and adventure into the literary world of the Bible. With a no holds barred approach to writing, they immediately set the tone of the quest - to explore the wide variety of literary styles in the Bible and the characteristics of each. The objective is to enable the believer to understand the various genre in the Bible and thus to be able to interpret the various texts of Scripture better in the light of the respective genres.
Included in the book is an invaluable chapter on bible translations, and how the translation process itself is a form of intrepretation.
What makes this book a landmark work is that it is a book of its kind that sets to explore the different kinds of genre in the Bible in a specialized manner that no other writer(s) can. Other books on hermeneutics may touch on this topic skimpily, but still prefer to touch on main and broader topics like the basic rules of interpretation, sermon construction, and the like.
Another feature is the incredible easy-to-understand way in which the book is written so that even those who have no interest at all in those "dry and stodgy" theological works will be spellbound within its pages! As compared to Kaiser's "Toward An Exegetical Theology" (truly another good book!), this book is so easy to understand, minus all the in-house jargon and professor talk.
I recommend this book to all who love God's Word!

If I were to make up a list of the top 10 most important books for every Christian to read, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth would be in that top 10 list. Since the Bible is the foundation to everything having to do with Christianity there really is not a more important exercise than to learn how to read the Bible with accuracy and vibrance. A Christian's relationship with God will suffer if he/she does not have an accurate ability with the word of God.

Although this book is not the most comprehensive work on the subject of biblical interpretation, it definitely is the most accessible, readable, and delightful. Fee and Stuart seem to have this ability to communicate complicated truths in a very simple manner. They offer many interpretive tips and discuss many common interpretive misconceptions in a down-to-earth, straightforward way.

There were a few parts of the book that jumped out at me:

1. Fee's discussion on the Kingdom of God (pg's 145-148) was 'out of this world' (no pun intended). I am still blown away by the amount of content he fit into those three small pages. His explanation of the already/not yet tension was extremely helpful. These three pages would be reason enough to buy the book.

2. Fee's discussion on the book of Revelation (pgs. 249-264) was quite fascinating as well. He seems to take some sort of a partial-preterist view of the book of Revelation, which is quite refreshing considering the fact that you hardly ever hear a partial-preterist view of the book of Revelation, much less with exegetical insight and eloquence.

Especially good was the following quote:

"Apocalypses in general, and the Revelation in particular, seldom intend to give a detailed chronological account of the future. Their message tends to transcend this kind of concern. John's larger concern is that, despite present appearances, God is in control of history and the church. And even though the church will experience suffering and death, it will be triumphant in Christ, who will judge his enemies and save his people. All the visions must be seen in terms of this greater concern." (pg 257)

3. Fee and Stuart put great stress on the usefulness of the TNIV translation. They unashamedly say, "We would venture to say that the TNIV is as good a translation as you will get" (pg. 52). I am not really sure what to think of this. I see their position to a point. Their concern is that oftentimes clarity is sacrificed on the altar of accuracy. What good is the most theologically sound sermon preached in the most technical language known to man if it is preached to people who do not speak that language? The point is that it is oftentimes 'worth it' to risk a certain degree of accuracy for the sake of accessibility. The challenge in finding a good translation is to find one which bridges the gap between accuracy and readability.

Here is how they explain it,

"Our view is that the best theory of translation is the one that remains as faithful as possible to both the original and receptor languages, but that when something has to 'give,' it should be in favor of the receptor language--without losing the meaning of the original language, of course--since the very reason for translation is to make these ancient texts accessible to the English-speaking person who does not know the original languages." (pg. 42)

Fee and Stuart also applaud the TNIV's careful use of gender inclusive language. For example, although Paul, in Colossians 1:1, literally said, "To the saints and faithful brothers in Colossea" (Colossians 1:1; ESV), the TNIV translates Colossians 1:1 as such; "To God's holy people in Colossae, the faithful brothers and sisters in Christ." Some flip out over the addition of "and sisters" because they consider it a case of putting words into Paul's mouth. However, the goal of Bible translation ought to be to carry over the original intention of the author to the receptor language. I have actually had more than one female come up to me asking; "Jimmy, is this letter by Paul only meant for men? After all, he does only address the 'brothers.'" I have had multiple women ask me this same genuine question. I generally point them to the TNIV's rendering of the passage and explain to them that "brothers" was Paul's way of referring to all the people, men and women, in the church. This, of course, does not even begin to scratch the surface of the gender inclusive language debate.

I spend a bit of time on this issue because I know that most everyone who reads my blog would take issue with Fee and Stuart at this point. I must say that I do see the validity of the reasoning behind their preference of the TNIV. Without a doubt, there will always be differences among believers when it comes to translations, and this is definitely not a hill to die upon (at least in regard to the TNIV translation--although I would fight tooth and nail to rule out using Eugene Peterson's, The Message, as a primary translation).

4. Douglas Stuart does an excellent job at exposing many of the application-based abuses of the Old Testament. He says in a refreshingly straightforward way;

"Individual Old Testament narratives are not intended to teach moral lessons. The purpose of the various individual narratives is to tell what God did in the history of Israel, not to offer moral examples of right or wrong behavior." (pg. 92)

He then goes on to illustrate what he is telling us not to do;

"Very often you will hear people say, 'What can we learn from this story is that we are not do [or say] ...' But unless the biblical narrator makes that point, on what grounds do we make it?" (pg. 92)

I am sure that we have all, at the very least, heard someone else (if not ourselves--I too am guilty) come away from the David and Goliath story believing that God's primary purpose in giving us that story is to teach us that we can 'face the giants' in our own lives. But this is hardly God's primary purpose for handing this story down to us in the Bible. The David and Goliath story is more descriptive (God giving evidence of his loving and sovereign redemptive/historical plan) than prescriptive (God telling us how to live our lives). Stuart does explain that we can learn practical lessons from these Old Testament stories, but he clarifies that any lesson which can be derived from an Old Testament narrative (if the author does not connect the ethical dots for us) must be implicitly taught through what the Scriptures teach explicitly elsewhere. He explains,

"even though the Old Testament narratives do not necessarily teach direcly, they often illustrate what is taught explicitly and categorically elsewhere. This represents an implicit kind of teaching by illustrating the corresponding explicit teachings of Scripture." (pg. 92-93)

Conclusion

Without a doubt, I would consider this work by Fee and Stuart to be a must-read by every believer, no matter how long you have been a Christian. I would normally rate a book on a scale of 1-5 (as does the store.com), but I hate to even attempt a rating for this book. Without a doubt, I would rate it a 5. However, this is one of those books that should not even be rated, it should be considered a must-read. This book needs no stars, it just needs to be consumed and applied by all of God's people. And yet I must say that this book will only be as useful as it is put to practice. If you read this book and yet do not frequent the Scriptures, you will not find this book all that helpful. Before reading this book you need to ask yourself, "What is the point of reading a book that teaches me How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth?" The question should answer itself.

This is the foundational understanding that everyone should know before studying the Bible. Although it is written in an easy to understand style it is still full of very valuable information. For example, people often ask why there are so many different translations of the Bible. The authors do an excellent job of showing the complications and difficulties of translating and how different versions of a verse could each be just as viable as an accurate translation.
The authors also deal with the problems of interpretation, exegesis, historical and cultural context and literary conventions of the time. They look at the narrative style of the Old Testament and its function as well as Acts, the various parables, prophets, psalms, wisdom literature, and the revelation. You may not agree with every aspect of their treatment of the various books and literary styles, but this is the best treatment of the problems of translation and interpretation that I have come across to date. "How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth" is highly recommend for anyone interested in Bible translation or interpretation.

I've only begun to use this book, but it has already proved to be a solid guide into right interpretation of Biblical texts. Stuart and Fee provide necessary rules for exegesis (drawing out the original meaning) rooted in the author's and audience's context and, more uniquely, the literary style (e.g. narrative, poetry, epistle, gospel, etc.).

My cons: (1) Fee and Stuart strongly endorse the TNIV and NIV as their top translations, with the NRSV and NASB next. While the NIV and and TNIV are more readable and tend to bridge contexts well, they don't allow as much access to the original text as does the NASB, ESV, or even the NRSV. The authors even endorse the NAB and GNT, the latter of which is heavily paraphrased to near uselessness for any serious Bible student. I wonder if this may be because Zondervan (who owns the rights to the NIV and TNIV) also publishes this book. (2) No other how-to's of exegesis are given, such as how to trace the author's flow of thought or how to gain some access the original languages in interpretation. For information on these, please check out John Piper's pamphlet on "Biblical Exegesis" and Kay Arthur's "How to Study Your Bible".

An excellent explanation of the different styles of writing in the Bible, and how understanding each type is important for the reader to get the intended meaning of the text. I have used this book for personal study, as well as for group study. The clear presentation of general principles for studying the Bible is also well done, and should help prevent readers of the Bible from either "cherry-picking" or missing the point entirely!

It is hard to read because they constantly make assumptions such as "obviously a scribe made this error" etc. They like the Alexandrian text type better than the Majority text type and seem to be more involved in eisegesis rather than exegesis. Textual criticism (which I think they also like) seems to allow too much room for personal insertion and imagination. We do best in using Hebrew and Greek dictionaries and also reading a verse in 2 or 3 translations. The NKJV is the easiest to read and I trust its' basis (textus receptous) and it is nice it tells you when the Alexandrian text type differs. Ravi Zacharias recommends this book but that is a huge error-the only value I see comes from seeing how liberals examine the Bible.

I was introduced to this book in my first seminary biblical exegesis class. My opening thought was "with its title this the book is going to be a joke." Boy was I wrong. First off, nothing by Gordan Fee is a joke. Second, this small book is one of the best sources on biblical interpretation in the world right now. Third, it is an easy to understand book, yet it does not skimp on the details of biblical exegesis. After my first time through "How to Read the Bible ..." I realized that this was a book that I could recommend to anyone wanting to know more about how to read the Bible and understand every word. The book is not condescending to scholars but is still understandable to those that do not have a theological background. I was a "title snob" and this book proved me wrong.

I read this book in the Fall of 2012 as part of my Biblical Interpretation class at Houghton College for my Biblical Studies Undergraduate degree. It is a book that anyone can get alot out of,Even if you are not majoring in Biblical Studies. Fee and Stuart go through each genre of the Bible and give the reader well founded suggestions on how to read and interpret that specific genre. If you are looking for something that goes book by book then that would be Fee and Stuart's other volume, How to Read the Bible Book by Book. I haven't yet read that one but plan to soon because of the valuable content in this book.

This is a great book for helping you understand the bible. I love the section on the "Need to intrepret." He helps you understand the importance of historical interpretation of bible.

The section on bible translation is horrible. It is confusing to say to least. It needs to be rewritten.

Overall, this is a great book. I recommend it along with, Grasping the Word by Dr. Duvall.

This book is a wonderful guide to studying the Bible from a solidly evangelical perspective. Fee and Stuart give step by step instructions, explain common stumbling blocks and emphasize the need for informed interpretation, which the evangelical Church desperately needs.

The discussion/comparison of translations is especially helpful for the reader who doesn't know where to start. The recommended commentaries in the back are another invaluable guide.

A word about the TNIV. Please ignore all the alarmist talk about feminist influence...there were a number of known complementarians on the board. The TNIV, as the authors claim, is as trustworthy and solid a version that you will find. It is a shame that this translation has been blacklisted for no substantive reason.

I hate it when people preach their corrections or reiterate things that were said. This is a great read for those who want to get glimpse on how to study the bible further. Going through the SBS in YWAM I completely pick up what Gordon writes,without that training however I think I would have gotten a little lost on then on where to begin and how to start. Also the reads get to be quite long since I wouldn't want to come back to a chapter, which is understandable because the amount of content he covers within the 20 some page chapters is very impressive.

This is a very solid book that aids in your ability to read the Bible within it's proper context. This book is simple enough for the lay person and has enough meat for the experience Bible scholar. I would recommend to a friend and probably would be a good option for every church library.

This book is a wonderful introduction to reading the Bible beyond the devotional level. Many Christian colleges and seminaries use this book as an introductory textbook for biblical exegesis courses, which is a testimony to both its substance and readability. Fee and Stuart do a fine job here of writing a book that is scholarly yet easily digestable. I highly recommend this book for anyone is seeking to become more than a casual Bible reader.

This is a book on interpreting the Bible and applying it to your life. My seven-member Bible study group (from an Evangelical Free church) did a 13-week study/discussion of this book. Thirteen weeks may sound like a long time, but it worked well for us for two reasons: First, the book is not light reading. You need time to read, struggle, re-read, and come to grips with each chapter. Second, the authors often ask the reader to read large portions of scripture as part of studying a particular chapter in their book. In their chapter on the epistles, for example, the authors ask the reader to read through all of I Corinthians in one sitting, then study it *again* using techniques that they teach in the book.
We believe that this book is not a "basic primer"--it is not a book for beginning students of the Bible. For new Christians, let me suggest a book recommended by the authors themselves: "Knowing Scripture," by R. C. Sproul.
OUR FAVORITE THINGS ABOUT THE BOOK: 1) The book is written by two seminary professors who tell us, in the book's preface, that they are "believers, who think we should obey the biblical texts, not merely read or study them." 2) The emphasis of the book is on helping readers struggle with the questions of applying the Bible to their own lives. 3) The book eases the reader into the subject matter by giving some general principles of interpretation and by discussing the relative strengths of different Bible translations. 4) The book then divides the Bible into different types of literature (e.g., parables, law, epistles, prophets, and so forth); this approach helps to clarify the "rules of the road" in interpretation. As one example, the authors lay down some rules for understanding proverbial wisdom, and from these rules, we understand that Proverbs are not legal guarantees from God.
OUR NOT-SO-FAVORITE THINGS ABOUT THE BOOK: 1) Even in the most recently printed version, there are some curious typographical errors. 2) A couple of members of our Bible study felt the book was "difficult reading" in some places. 3) If you want exposure to *several* viewpoints about how Old Testament Law does or does not apply (or applies in part) to New Testament Christians, you'll need to look elsewhere.
FINAL THOUGHT: If you are looking for more than a basic primer on reading and applying the Bible to your life, we commend this book to you. This book changed the way we study scripture--for the better. All members of my Bible study group rated the book at 4.5 stars or higher.

I hate it when people submit "reviews" to get a high4-5 star rating & they're either flat out lying,misleading,people or simply haven't read the book nor understand it. This is the case with this book. I was assigned this book in my Biblical Hermeneutics class in seminary. I already have a masters degree in education,so I'd consider myself literate. I've been in deep inductive bible study/exegesis for 16 years. I say all that so you know what I'm about to say isn't careless or without reference. This book was torturous to read. I had to read the entire book in order to write a critical review essay, and frankly I'd have paid money to get out of it! I will avoid anything by Fee and Stuart, and it's scary to think these to gentlemen are out there writing more possibly. To be fair, they either did not have a book editor, or the editor was clueless. The mishmash layout, organization, the common sense outline style of the book was missing. It seems they've written a fourth edition because they a pressed to provide more clarity. The book was originally written in 1981 and that in itself is not a problem of course, but it's like they've spent 30+ years keeping a pretty bad read alive by life support. It's not a pretty bad read, it will teach most readers nothing. There's a couple pages about bible translation that's ok, but the rest of the book of 300 pages is a waste. I'll say I'm 100% real and honest here, and I can easily see a very large number of so-called reviewers didn't actually read the book. If you must read it for an assignment, you'll not enjoy the experience. I'll bank on that.

I have used this book as a textbook for several years as a great source for teaching Hermeneutics. I did 13 week course covering the definitions and rules and then we went to the Epistles as a genre. The only complain that I received, consistantly was that the course should have been longer to cover the other genres, escpecially Acts. The only lacking part is the the book could have used several charts to show the connections and relationships between exergesis and hermeneutics. This is a must own; must read; must teach; must .....

Numbers don't tell the whole story, but the fact that _How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth_ has sold more than half a million copies and is now in its third edition should say something about its utility to neophyte Bible students. I sure could have used this book five years ago when I first began reading the Bible in order to understand it. No use crying over spilt milk though. A late arrival is better than a no-show!

The significance of co-authorship on this book is simply due to the fact that Drs. Douglas Stuart (Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary) and Gordon Fee (Regent College) specialize in Old and New Testament studies respectively. If the label evangelical has any meaning left today, then Stuart and Fee fall under that rubric. This is implicitly evident from their stance on the nature of Scripture (2003, pp. 21-3), which they affirm as God's word spoken through human words in history.

The title of the book leaves little ambiguity as to what it is; it's a how-to book on understanding the Bible. Surely anyone with an inkling of interest in the Bible has experienced the inherent difficulty in understanding the Bible. Stuart and Fee work to minimize this - both the experience and the associated frustration.

_How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth_ is written with the layperson in mind. At every turn, Stuart and Fee make sure and define their terms, thus making for an informative yet pleasurable read. They deal with every major section of Scripture such as the Pentateuch, the Prophets, the Wisdom Literature, the Gospels, the Epistles, and the Revelation. The approach taken to each section is more or less the same. The focus is first on exegesis and then on hermeneutics. Exegesis has to do with the "then and there," of the Bible's content. Hermeneutics, as Stuart and Fee use the term, has to do with the "here and now," of the Bible's message. Stuart and Fee explain their dual approach at the outset:

...we have two tasks: First, our task is to find out what the text originally meant; this is called exegesis. Second, we must learn to hear that same meaning in the variety of new or different context of our own day; we call this second task hermeneutics. In its classical usage, the term "hermeneutics" covers both tasks, but in this book we consistently use it only in this narrower sense. (2003, p. 15)

One of the keywords in _How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth_ is guidelines. In their book, Stuart and Fee are not setting out to promulgate a partisan approach to understanding the Bible that requires specialized assumptions within evangelicalism. Instead, they come across as having a genuine concern for the beginning Bible student and seek to point him or her in the right direction with general guidelines. They freely admit on more than one occasion that they do not expect every reader to agree with their particular take on a given point.

As someone with a couple years of serious Bible study under my belt, I think it is worth pointing out a couple of chapters, which I found immensely helpful: (1) Acts: The Question of Historical Precedent, (2) The Parables: Do You Get the Point?, and (3) The Law(s): Covenant Stipulations for Israel. The chapter on historical precedent put into words something that I have been ruminating over for some time now, that is, the caveat that a practice as described in a narrative is not ipso facto normative and, therefore, binding. The chapter on parables forever settled an issue that I was confused about, namely, the nature of Jesus' parables. They may be semi-allegorical at times, but never pure allegory. Lastly, the chapter on the Law is so informative! Stuart gives the big picture of the Old Testament in such a helpful way.

I'm sure there are many helpful books out there on how to read the Bible in a fruitful way. All I will say here is that, provided you are a conservative Christians, you won't go wrong with this book. (I consider that an understatement, by the way.) There is a lot of content to be digested, however. Commit yourself to read this book a few times over.

PS: If you haven't a clue what commentary to purchase when studying one of the books of the Bible, you'll find the appendix handy. A list of recommended commentaries is offered on every single book of the Bible.

In my opinion, academic scholars who write books for a lay audience do a great favor for the greater Christian community; they translating and apply the knowledge from the ivory towers of the academy is not accessible for most audiences into useful resources for the edification of the saints. In essence, they are translators, but not of the Bible, but of biblical knowledge. How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth is such a resource, written by two renowned seminary professors; it provides a good introduction to exegesis and hermeneutics for the everyday Christian.
The greatest strength and main emphasis of the book is clearly laid out in the structure of the book. The Bible is composed of many different books that are of different genres. Understanding how to interpret each genre is crucial for exegesis of particular texts. The genres that are dealt with in particular include epistles, narratives, gospels, parables, acts, laws, prophets, psalms, wisdom, revelation, etc. There is also a discussion of translations as well as an appendix of suggested commentaries.
As a whole, the book accomplishes well its purpose of exposing Christians to the literary generic nature of Scripture. However, on both the greater macro-scale as well as the detailed micro-scale, there is room for improvement.
While it is important to see the Bible as composed on different genres, there are also many other hermeneutics principles that are not addressed. For example, the authors could expound more on how to interpret this text as the Word of God with the help of the Holy Spirit. Or even more importantly, what is the whole Bible about as a whole and the unity of the entirety of scripture from a historical-redemptive purpose. What are principles of exegesis in general? What are presuppositions that we bring and must submit as we approach Scripture? While I am aware that a small limited volume could not cover everything, an introduction to hermeneutics should explore not only the genres but more general principles of Biblical hermeneutics, presuppositions, and grand Biblical theological themes and unities the whole of Scripture.
On the particulars, Fee and Stuart boldly addresses many controversial issues - such as the place of women in ministry, whether the Holy Spirit still works in miracles today, or the place of the Old Testament law in our modern (perhaps post-modern) word. While I applaud their engagement of these texts and issues, a primer on hermeneutics does not provide enough room for detailed examination of these texts and the resulting interpretations are often one-sided. Perhaps because I differ from the authors in these issues, I see these sections seem to be soap-boxes for the authors to present their view (as I myself get off my own soap-box). Many of these issues are not simple exegetic or hermeneutic issues; scholars with careful scrutiny of these texts have continued to differ about the correct interpretation of these passages. However, Drs. Fee and Staurt seem to suggest that if one get the right context and generic background, all the problems are solved and there is a clear stance on these issues. This book is not the magic bullet for Biblical interpretation as it presents itself. Perhaps the authors should have examined and used as examples texts that are often misunderstood and not as controversial. Nonetheless, I am sure if they followed my advice, they will be criticized for avoiding the controversial passages. However, it is important to note that this book is read by many without much knowledge and training in the Scriptures and would easily just buy any of the arguments presented in the book without much critical thought (since they do not present any of the arguments on the other side).
As a whole, I would recommend this book to new believers, perhaps along with Knowing Scripture by RC Sproul (or Longman's excellent introduction). I personally have given this book as a gift and will continue to do so. However, it is important to note that teaching about the doctrine of Scripture will be much benefit to accompany this book.