That was a respectful response to Boyd's critical review. I still believe this Study Bible was an incredibly bad idea and I think mixing the gospel with American nationalism does harm to the Gospel, not good, but I appreciate that Mr. Lee gave a reasonable response and I believe he had all the good intentions in the world.

I disagree with much of his understanding of American history though. Most of the founding fathers were, at best, cultural 'Christians', but theologically deists, heavily influenced by the Enlightenment. Jefferson even wrote his own Bible so his kids could learn about Jesus without all the miracles getting in the way. Franklin was a womanizer. The founding fathers were also heavily influenced by Greek democracy,the Roman senate, the Magna Carta, etc.

Thomas Paine was outspokenly against institutionalized religion (he was also a deist).

As an evangelical pastor, this Bible contributes to one of our greatest current problems--uncritically conflating the kingdom of heaven with the kingdom of this world (i.e. The United States of America). I would submit that there's no other Bible I know of that takes the approach of inserting questionable application of the text into the text to illuminate the text. On every level, this is at best an ill-advised indulgence, at worst overshadowing the gospel with an idol.

While I agree that Christianity and the bible have had a profound influence on the United States, I still feel the question needs to be asked: Is an edition of the bible an appropriate way to show this historical connection?

If anything, it should be the other way around: American texts with biblical commentary, not biblical texts juxtaposed with American documents—which in some cases take the scriptures out of context, or more often refer to general theological principles that are based on several scriptures.

The other question is this: What is patriotism, if not pride in one's country, and pride in our cultural ideals and accomplishments? And again, is it appropriate for any Christian to wrap the things of God with the things of pride and sell it for $39.99?

The response is at least a complete one. I think it lacks historical accuracy, but it fits the worldview Mr.Lee is espousing. That being said, US history negates much of what Mr. Lee professes. As Kenny indicates deism was the primary influence of the founding fathers not Christianity itself. In many cases there is a backlash against the conserative puritan communities that were based on theocratic christianity by an abandonment of the systems completely.
How much of this is a retelling of the American Narrative to resuscitate a dying evangelical movement in America? How much of this is a rallying of the troops who are quickly abandoning 'core principles of evangelicalism? Who knows but this iteration of the Bible is a window into the the crisis in the Church in America.

Maybe the "authors" of this work would have been wiser to create a "history" book with links to the Scriptures, rather than "creating" a Bible with links to our so-called Christian underpinnings.

When will be learn to leave well enough alone? Men's Bibles, Women's Bibles, Bibles for Poodle owners. Let's let the Word of God stand on it's own, and let the scholars continue their work as an extra supplement to the Bible.

Well, you gotta give it to him. Lee responded in a very reasonable way. I'll give him that. But that whole idea is way off base. Its like someone giving a practical, logic speech on why we should all start wearing shoes on our hands and speaking backwards... it makes no sense to begin with. It doesn't matter how reasonable a response he gives, its a faulty viewpoint to begin with.

I would say that I'm interested in hearing Greg Boyd's response, but I think I've already heard it--his book "Myth of a Christian Nation" is terrific.

This Bible is nothing short of vomit-inducing. How sad is it that publishers have come to this? How sad is it that Christianity in America has come to this?

I agree it was a reasonable and respectful response. But it doesn't address several central problems. 1) There is a clear picking and choosing of examples that fit their preconceptions, without any real balance. 2) There is no addressing of the issue of cultural Christiantity, yes, all 44 presidents used a bible to swear their oath on, but surely he is not suggesting that all 44 were Christians. This mix of cultural Christiantity and real Christianity is dangerous. 3) It also contributes, whether the publisher will admit to it or not, of a sense of the US being a "chosen" nation by God.

Adam, agree. Its respectful but he dodges all the substantiative issues Boyd raises.

Reading another unrelated blog post today by Shaun Groves I ran across these two quotes. I wonder if they are in the Patriot Bible. They are attributed to James Madison and Thomas Jefferson:

“Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man.”

“Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.”

The last two paragraphs exemplify the problem with this project. They are a mixed mess of nationalism and christianity.

Democracy has nothing to do with the true freedom to be found in Christ; and life in Christ cannot be reduced or compared to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

These comments really encourage me. I hope you're all young and God gives you a lot of years!

At least this bible could have included some negative examples in American history to illustrate failings. But I agree this would have been better handled in a history book.

I'm excited that in coming years Christians in America may be known more for acts of love than for its political leverage.

Woodrow Wilson also believed Birth of a Nation was a good film that contained "true" history. What our nation's leaders might have thought about the Bible when founding and leading the nation matters very little, because THEIR goal was to prosper a nation IN THEIR IMAGE, not the in the Kingdom of God's. This makes Scripture a utilitarian object that is used as means to contribute to other ends than the Good Book has in mind-- which is what the Patriot's Bible exactly represents.

The Bible's political theology is hence:

Psalm 2
1 Why do the nations conspire [a]
and the peoples plot in vain?

2 The kings of the earth rise up
and the rulers band together
against the LORD and against his anointed, saying,

3 "Let us break their chains
and throw off their shackles."

4 The One enthroned in heaven laughs;
the Lord scoffs at them.

5 He rebukes them in his anger
and terrifies them in his wrath, saying,

6 "I have installed my king
on Zion, my holy mountain."

7 I will proclaim the LORD's decree:
He said to me, "You are my son;
today I have become your father.

8 Ask me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance,
the ends of the earth your possession.

9 You will break them with a rod of iron [b];
you will dash them to pieces like pottery."

10 Therefore, you kings, be wise;
be warned, you rulers of the earth.

11 Serve the LORD with fear
and celebrate his rule with trembling.

12 Kiss his son, or he will be angry
and you and your ways will be destroyed,
for his wrath can flare up in a moment.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

"Americans have sought to follow the God of the Bible and what He has taught us through His Word. And the results are the obvious blessings He has provided, not only for us, but for all who seek "…life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.".."

Just ask Native Americans, African-Americans, the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the citizens of Iraq and Vietnam, and the American citizens taken into custody because they're Muslim.. I'm sure they'll all agree! USA #1!

This is the first I have heard of the "Patiot's Bible" and I have never heard of Richard Lee. I have read Greg Boyd's "The Myth of A Christian Nation" from cover to cover (finished about 8 weeks ago).

Having said that, I am eager to get a copy of this new Bible. While Greg Boyd makes some good statements in his book about excessive nationalism and folks who have used an affiliation with Christianity to further their own political ends, I find most of his tone here to be quite strident. He claims to be exposing myths on the one hand and then perpetuates his own favorite myths on the other. When Greg espouses Ghandi extensively in his book as a role model for Christians I am left to puzzle why he would so eagerly endorse a man who when asked if he was a Hindu would respond, "Yes I am. I am also a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist and a Jew." This makes it seem a bit disingenuous.

From the video on this Bible, it seems to me to mostly quote what many American leaders throughout our history have actually said about the Bible. What is so terrible about that? I can read what they said and I can actually read what the Bible itself actually says at the same time. How is that different from setting a history book next to my Bible on my desk and referencing back and forth? How is that different from reading the "Green Bible" that was promoted on this site a couple of months back? I can read those verses that have been highlighted in green and thus convince other Christians of why they should be more concerned about the environment? Is that wrong?

And if this gets patriotic people reading the Bible, cannot the book speak for itself? Doesn't the Bible say that "...the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." (I know that the Bible can get excessively militaristic in its analogys, but I didn't write it, I just quote it)

Thank you, Rev. Lee, for your heart-felt response to the criticism concerning this Bible. However, while I do not doubt the sincerity of your beliefs, they are not found in fact.

Three men known in evangelical circles as our best historians wrote an essential book on the Christian heritage of America. In The Search for Christian America, Mark Noll, Nathan Hatch, and George Marsden pops the balloon of the fallacies that are the basis of The American Patriot's Bible.

Two quick quotes:

"The God of the founding fathers was a benevolent deity, not far removed from the God of the eighteenth-century Deists or nineteenth-century Unitarians… They were not, in any traditional sense, Christian. What historian Daniel Boorstin, now Librarian of Congress, once wrote about Jefferson and his friends applies to most of the founders: they had found in God what they most admired in men." (pp. 72-74)

"Here then is the historical error: It is historically incorrect to regard the founding of America and the formulation of the founding documents as being Christian in their origins. Yet this error is one of the most powerful ideas of our day." (pp. 124-126)

Melody,

While I think there are some severe issues with the Bible itself, I think the problem is more that this particular study Bible is a symptom of a much larger problem -- which is what Boyd and others are responding to.

The issue is that many Christians, especially those from the conservative, evangelical, and fundamentalist traditions tend to mix American nationalism with the Gospel. Just last Sunday my church was showing videos of tanks and bombs as part of their memorial day service. Well, I understand the patriotism many Christians feel -- what does that have to do with the Gospel? Nothing. And we should stop confusing the two.

The danger is two-fold. One, our particular brand of American Christianity can be unappealing to those outside our tradiion, and two, we, as Christians, can start to mistake the actions of our nation as compatible with our faith -- because we're essentially making them equals. So now we can praise the defeat of our national enemies in church, while seemingly ignoring Jesus' words to loving our enemies, blessed are the peacemakers, and turning the other cheek. I'm not necessarily advocating pacifism, but we must be careful.

I'm glad somebody mentioned Mark Noll. Then again, if you've bought the "Wall Builders" progaganda of Barton, et. al. you'll think this "bible" is awesome.

Whenever I see the phrased "America is blessed by God" I shudder. What blessing do you mean--I see people every day who would disagree that they've been "blessed."
Also, does losing half your assets in the Stock Market crash mean we've been "cursed" by God?
no matter what justification this editor gives to the project--I think it's very wrong--both for the church and for the country.

I second Bob Robinson's endorsement of "The search for Christian America" by Noll, Hatch and Marsden as the most authoritative scrutinization (from a Biblical, evangelical perspective) of the claim that America is a "Christian nation." Another helpful book is Leonard Verduin's "Anatomy of a hybrid: a study in church-state relationships" which provides a more extended historical overview (going back to Constantine) of the dangers of the intertwining of nationalistic and Christian agendas. It's not a quick, light read but it is eye-opening.

At the end of the day, though, it seems the Patriot's Bible is perhaps just one of the more egregious examples of a market-driven approach to selling Scripture. The dependent measure of its success (or failure) will be expressed in dollars, not Kingdom impact. The Bible is transcendent, timeless and unchanging whereas marketing is all about niche, urgency and temporal faddishness.

Then here's a question for you Rev Lee:

If indeed "Americans have sought to follow the God of the Bible and what He has taught us through His Word. And the results are the obvious blessings He has provided, not only for us, but for all who seek "…life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

THen why is it that Rome, after adopting Christianity in 313AD (or at least agreeing to tolerate it) falls just a short 100 yrs later in the sack of Rome in 410?

If God indeed blesses the nation who follows Him, then how do you explain the short-lived history of "Christian Rome"?

I also think it's somewhat presumptuous for you to say: ""Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord," (Psalm 33:12) that means any nation of people who will follow after Him would be blessed by Him. That truth is the reasoning behind sending American Christian missionaries around the world with the Gospel, so that other nations may know the God who has so richly blessed us."

So we send Christian missionaries to lobby national gov'ts? Then China must be a huge failure in your book; for its 100 million + Christians have not succeeding in changing the gov'ts athiest stance. And by the way, America's great, but lately missionaries have been coming from all over the world, places like Korea, South America.

Careful how you use this idea of American missionaries advancing political schemes because it smacks of imperialism.

"The religion that permeates America is Christianity given to us in the Holy Bible."

Now, you did mention scholars, am I correct?
Did your scholars happen to mention that yea, technically, the term "Christian" in polls is used as a self identification to a particular social grouping, but when it actually comes to being a Christian the numbers seem to drop, a lot?

"Are there other religions in America? Should persons of other religious faiths enjoy the same rights of worship and assembly?"

Really, how magnanimous of you to recognize "other religions." How bout our own house though, I'm still curious as to how you get to being from a cultural identification to being an a numerically superior faith?

"but from our nation’s beginnings Christianity has been the one prevailing religious faith."

Which brings us back to your "scholars." Are you really willing to lay your reputation on the line with this statement?
Perhaps it's time for you sir, to finally become what you often cite as an appeal to authority, and educate yourself so that you don't repeat these same mistakes.
Starting with the prime sources.
Yes, prime sources, which would be historical documents such as newspapers, bulletins, and...wait for it....diaries.
Me thinks that once you've perused the prime sources you will disabuse yourself of this statement...

"Evidence of this fact abounds..."

There is one thing I've learned from my studies and that is this: Just because someone says they're a good person doesn't mean they're a good person, which flips to just because someone says they're a Christian doesn't mean they're a Christian.
Actions always trumps words, every time.

Lee states "Our great nation has not used the Bible to form some system of "nationalism" and "superior isolationism,""

This is in fact EXACTLY what America has done with religion. We use religion as the pretext for justifying ourselves all the time. Be it for war, patriotism, polical issues, etc.

This "Bible" follows in that same vein: The Civil Religion of America, aka, watered down Jesus.

"America still stands as a beacon of hope and freedom in a hurting world. People, who yearn to be free, regardless of their religion, their differing views, or even their anti-God philosophies can still find the light of freedom and the open door of liberty in our great Land. This is the heart and theme of The American Patriot’s Bible from beginning to end."

Wow, that about sums it up. And it makes me shudder. To wrap Scripture up in an American flag is as blasphemous as placing flags on the altar table and even in our churches.

All I can hear is St. John the Divine's constant plea to the churches immersed in Rome's culture and nationalism to, "Come out!"

The assertion that all nations have religion as their founding principal is provably false and patently absurd.

Barb:
Do you disagree with the statement that America has been blessed? If so, you need to get out more, turn the cell phone off and see some of the beauty of God's creation that is within our borders. We are blessed indeed, and I'm not ashamed to say so.

And yes, I have heard pastors (most recently Henry Blackaby at the Moody Pastor's Conference)attribute our current financial crisis to God's judgement upon the US.

Mark,
So the litmus test of God's blessing is natural beauty? As one who has been in Singapore, China, Thailand, Hong Kong, the Middle East, and many parts of Europe I can say that there is beauty all over. By your logic, they are just as blessed as America. Yet, I suspect you would argue that a "pagan" land like China can't be blessed like "Christian" America, right?

Dr. Lee's reply is polite but never engages the points of Dr. Boyd's criticism.

This study Bible is an abomination. It should be removed from our stores and warehouses and tucked away in an isolated cave so we might forget it soon. To link in such strident nationalism, proof-texting, and misuse of history with the Scriptures intended for all mankind is deplorable.

We truly have allowed the bramble to rule us. (cf. Judges 9:7-14)

I'll look forward to seeing CT cover this in a forthcoming issue (it'll sell like hotcakes too!)

You are the Church!
R.A.

i'm coming in late on this one, but I must agree this was a horrendous release.

It bolsters the reality that, "the dominant scripting in our society is a script of technological, therapeutic, consumer militarism that socializes us all, liberal and conservative."

Prayers that we can disembed the Kingdom gospel from the American "dream"

Disclaimer: I only read about the first dozen or so comments.

Can we get some truth on this whole "the founders were a bunch of Deists" claim that keeps getting thrown around?

I learned in college that Deism posits that

A) God (or some "deity") exists, and that this deity created the universe.

B) After "the deity" created the universe, (he, she, it) had no more dealings with it - no interactions, no interference, no miracles, etc., etc. He/She/It wound it up like a clock and let it work itself out according to naturalist mechanisms.

Now, if the above is true, and the Founders were primarily Deists, then I am at a loss to understand their myriad comments, which are directly opposed to the description of Deism above.

There are innumerable sources that indicate that the founders prayed for God's divine protection, for divine intervention in national and personal affairs, they thanked God for answering their prayers, and they taught others to pray and seek His protection, etc.

Either they were Deists, or they were not. Which is it?

Chuck, I think there are multiple answers to your question. So I would recommend reading Mark Noll's book mentioned above.

But short answer: There were lots of founders and some of them were real Christians. There was also a natural cultural language of Christianity that did not mean the same things that those words would mean now. At the same time, we live in a different cultural world that wants to go back and read our Christianity on previous generations. That doesn't really work either.

It is clear that some of our founding fathers were Christians, some were Diests and some were just culturally Christian. Much the same as we are today.

My issue is that too often Christians don't want a distinction, they want to assert everyone used to be a Christian and therefore our country is going to hell now. There is some good research that indicates that church attendance at different point in US history wasn't much different than now. The story is complicated and bibles like this one try to simplify it in a way that make it not only untrue, but actually confuses our Christianity as well as our history.

Dr. Lee's reply is polite and smoothly written, but it utterly fails to address the substantive issues raised in Boyd's critique. When it comess to American history, Lee mistakes Judaeo-Christian influece for biblical/divine endorsement, and all his fallacious arguments flow from this flawed premise.

Chad:

Not at all-you're reading into my post more than I intended. Americans are blessed by God's creation, as are many others. That's all I'm sayin'. To say that America is not blessed is either just plain silly, and as I stated, anyone who hasn't felt blessed by the natural wonders of the US probably needs to get out more.

Mark,
That's fine. But as I read your response to Barb, you are mistaking what she is getting at, I think. Like her, I also cringe when I hear people say, "America is blessed by God." Such a statement is generally made to the exclusion of all other nations. Of course America has been blessed. All that we have is from God. And of course, other nations and peoples are blessed. All the nations are blessed by God.

When I read the title "The American Patriot's Bible" I was horrified. Who gets to define who a patriot is? It seems to be a much debated category in your country.

I can't think of many other nation-states in the world where such a product (make no mistake - this study bible is a product intended to make money) could be produced. In Australia, where I live, it simply would not be produced because few would buy it. Our national tradition doesn't have an intrinsic link to the ideologies being espoused in this product. Doesn't make us better, but I think we're less likely to travel to the extremes observed in some discourse coming from the US.

My concern, and I haven't seen the product, is that the ideologies get projected onto the Word of God. The comments above me demonstrate that there is a clash of ideological positions about what Christianity in America is, and what America is. Surely an honest appraisal of both is necessary in order to go forward.

I posted a reflection on the strange relationship between American patriotism and Christianity. You can read it at the link below.

http://ministryintheuk.blogspot.com/2009/05/shot-over-bow.html

"The religion that permeates America is Christianity given to us in the Holy Bible."

What Lee is failing to see here, is that Christianity (If by "Christianity" he is referring to the movement of those radically sold out for the wild Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth) in no way permeates our society. Furthermore, a good historian would point out that it never has.

And what about Confession and Repentance? Are these Christian virtues? Yet in such a "Patriot's Bible" we find no such confessing that America has done much evil in the name of Jesus, and no hint of repentance as a signpost that we will leave those old genocidal, war-making, slave-holding, money-worshiping, poor-neglecting ways behind.

Lastly, I would suppose that Christians would be a little more cautious about what they refer to as "Great" (i.e. "Our Great Nation") It seems to me that Jesus redefined the world when he came announcing his new Kingdom (a Kingdom that was by nature set against Satan's kingdoms - the kingdoms of this world - Luke 4). In his redefining the world, he says the poor inherit the kingdom of God, the mournful will be comforted, the merciful will receive mercy, those that makes peace (as opposed to those who make war) will be called God's children, and that the gentle and meek (NOT the powerful and mighty) will inherit the earth. These are the promises citizens of the Kingdom of God stand in.

The ironic thing about Mr. Lee's Patriots Bible is that the kingdom he espouses and uplifts therein is, as Paul says in I Corinthians, "Coming to nothing" with all the other Kingdoms of this world. So you can declare your allegiance to these kingdoms, but you must know one prophetic thing - those kingdom's will fall. America is no different.

"My first allegiance is not to a flag, a country, or a man. It's to a King and Kingdom." - Derek Webb

"You cannot serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will love the one and despise the other..." - Jesus.

Rev. Lee, the Psalm you quote in relation to "blessed is the nation whose God is Lord," is about Israel! It has nothing to do with the idea of a modern-nation state founded on enlightenment principles.

Why did you not just go ahead and use the version of the Bible, our chief founding father used, Jefferson. I suspect you will find quite a different Bible, sir.

Jesus and the earliest Christians were hardly trying to make Rome Christian. They were themselves trying to be Christian and opened themselves up to any who would follow Jesus of Nazareth.

Rev. Lee you need to be disabused of the mythical history of the U.S. that you hold. You are straining at nats and swallowing a goat!

How on earth can this be considered a response to Boyd's review in any meaningful sense? Lee just pontificates about why he believes in his idolatrous little project and never responds to any of the substantive critiques Boyd made.

Seriously, this is the most pathetic thing I've ever seen for a response to any critical writing that I can think of.

To all the commenters, nice work. I usually hate reading comments because people become incredibly arrogant, self-righteous and ignorant. For the most part, your statements and questions are reasonable and polite (and even positive about Dr. Lee in spite of feeling he avoided Boyd's criticisms). Good show!

Sam Andress, you stole my thought! Psalm 33 is clearly written within the context of Israel. Plus, it's poetry so to take it literally would be standing on very unstable ground. I would hesitate to suggest that God will bless nations because that can mean different things. The land? The people on the land? The political structures? The artistic culture? God offers his love to people, not bureaucracy. Missionaries go out to care for people and show them God's love, not to bring nations under God. That would be impossible. Besides all that, nation-states are a human invention, not God's ordained plan.

America blessed by God?

What other developed country ties more closely things like health care, justice, education and political influence to the size of a person's income?

Our economy is 180 degrees opposed to the teachings of Jesus.

We worship gold in this nation, not God. A real American Patriot's Bible would have a dollar bill on each page, nothing more.

What is this Judeo-Christian religion of which you speak? Why the Judeo? Explain.

There are many historical facts wrong with this response. Among them are the fact you don't have to (and usually aren't asked) to put your hand on the Bible in court. Not every President has placed their hand on the Bible, and it's certainly not required by the Constitution or any Federal code.

And this statement is just plain wrong for so many reasons:

"'Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord,' (Psalm 33:12) that means any nation of people who will follow after Him would be blessed by Him. That truth is the reasoning behind sending American Christian missionaries around the world with the Gospel, so that other nations may know the God who has so richly blessed us."

We don't send Missionaries out to extol the virtues of America. They are out there to present the Gospel of Peace, which our Lord Jesus brought to the world. They're not "American Christian Missionaries" (or I hope not), they're just Christian Missionaries (some of them from America).

Sad fact is many countries are sending missionaries to the USA because we're so lost. And missionaries who leave the States for mission are more often than not joined by Missionaries from other countries as well.

This response to Boyd only bolsters his critique that this "Patriot's Bible" is really to espouse an American brand of Christianity, not the catholic Christianity we confess in the Apostle's Creed.

Facts:

Teddy Roosevelt did not swear in on the Bible in 1901.

Hoover didn't "swear" his oath, he instead "affirmed" it.

John Q. Adams swore in on "a book of laws, instead of the more traditional Bible, in order to preserve the separation of church and state."

Notice that all defenders of this God-forsaken book want to talk about principles, and virtues, and knowledge DERIVED from the Bible. They have given us the wheat and let the chaff scatter in the wind. The chaff is the particularity of the God that we have come to know in Jesus Christ. A God who takes the way of the cross, who empties oneself of power will always be fundamentally at odds with a nation-state whose primary purpose is self-preservation. America has prospered because God has blessed us? Well what does the holy book say about prosperity? It rots like Caesar, like Rome, like America. God's power is not that type of power. Which country is the only country to kill countless civilians with an atomic bomb? Yes, this nation that we are worshipping in this Bible is that righteous land.

This book is wrong on so many levels I wouldn't know where to start.

But I bet it sells...

Of course it sells! But so does all sorts of bad crap that we are told is good and right for us.

I'm sure the response was well thought out, but there was absolutely no attempt there to engage with anything Greg Boyd put forth in his critique. Judging by the length of the so-called response above, Mr. Lee had the time to engage with at least some of the major, problematic points raised by Mr. Boyd. But, alas, there was an obvious evasion. Sad.

I stopped reading at "China has the religion of Atheism." Can't say I'm surprised to find out the editor of this shameful tome is a crackpot.

I'm amazed at how many have responded that Dr. Lee didn't confront the issues Greg Boyd brought up. Who says he has to? Lee gave a concise explanation as to why he edited this, and what the purpose for it is. Period. I believe he wasn't called out and into the stadium to fight the reigning bull in the arena. He was asked to explain the reasoning, and he did that well.

You may disagree with his logic, might not understand the purpose, but carrying this into accusations of blatant idolatry, national theocracy, etc; is going way too far.

It's like television. You don't like the program, turn it off. You don't like this bible or the comments, hey, don't buy it!

I've read Boyd's 'Myth.." and thought he was way off base on several things, but I didn't write a book review attacking him. I just choose to toss the book.

Dave,

I've heard this sentiment of yours at other places where this book is being discussed, and this is the first time i've responded to it.

The reason that I am upset about this publication is not that I disagree with it, it's that it is offensive to me. Taking the word of God, the Holy Scriptures, and blending them with any national ideology is offensive. From what I have seen of this book, it misrepresents the spirit (or is that The Spirit) of the Scriptures in order to make America look better than it does (and in order to make a profit.)

No book or TV program would generate a similar response in me, but when you are using the very word of God, that gets my attention.

Sorry, i forgot my second point. You said:

"I'm amazed at how many have responded that Dr. Lee didn't confront the issues Greg Boyd brought up. Who says he has to? Lee gave a concise explanation as to why he edited this, and what the purpose for it is. Period. I believe he wasn't called out and into the stadium to fight the reigning bull in the arena. He was asked to explain the reasoning, and he did that well."

However, his task, at least according to the editor's note at the top of the page, was to reply to Boyd's review. Dr. Lee wasn't writing a forward to his book, it was supposed to be a response to something, but he failed to respond. I think there may be some good arguments to be made that rebut Boyd's points, but I don't know what they are until someone makes them.

I wish Lee would have made more of an effort to rebut Boyd on a point by point basis. Instead of giving a general response by citing historical facts to which I doubt Boyd would disagree, he should have answered the underlying criticism of whether or not it's appropriate to celebrate Christ and nationalism in the same breath. In my opinion, Boyd offers a great criticism of the content of the American Patriot's Bible. I just wish that more Christians would find this type of thing troubling. I'm left scratching my head.

i don't know which is more offensive, lee's ignorance of commonly known american history, or his infantile assuredness in what isn't so. my bible (kjv) tells me that to God, the nations are nothing, vanities, specks in the balance, and that jesus said clearly his kingdom was not of this world. no doubt, lee finds some way to argue that the 2nd amendment was really the 11th commandment. that this idiot, "doesn't know whether jimmy carter is a christian", and doesn't think the president is a patriot says all that needs to be said about him. all the demons and evils he rails against aren't nearly as scary as this misguided fool.

I didn't read all the comments, but we are doing such a great job by leaving Christ out of country, why not try reading the Bible and praying? The Jewish people would be very surprised to learn that have survived as a religion because it isn't possible. The first thing a real Christian learns is we are all sinners and fall short. The second thing I have learned, is that without God's hand, there was no way that the States could unite and defeat the best army in the world in 1776.