Old Testament
BookReview
Peter Gentry and Stephen Wellum’s book, God’s Kingdom through God’s Covenants: A Concise Biblical Theology.
Students will submit a 1,250—1,500-word critical book review of Peter Gentry and Stephen
Wellum’s book, God’s Kingdom through God’s Covenants: A Concise Biblical Theology. In 12-
point Times New Roman font and double-spaced with one-inch margins, this will typically
produce 4-5 pages of text (not including the title page). For a sample title page, refer to the
“Critical Book Review
Title Page
Example” document.
The following comments should assist students in thinking through how to conduct the book
review.
————————————-
This style of a book review is essentially a modified form of the style for a normal research
paper. When paginating, page 1 should begin with the first page of the body of the review (not
with the title page). Ideally, the page number for 1 is centered at the bottom, and subsequent
pages are in the top right corner. If this becomes problematic, students may place all page
numbers centered at the bottom. In the following, we will address only those unique features in
which the book review differs from research paper style.
Title Page
The title on the title page is simply the title of the book italicized in ALL CAPS. No
bibliographic information should be given on the title page.
Bibliographic Information on the First Page of Text
Provide a full bibliographic reference to the book on the first page of text (this replaces the title
of a research paper). Consult the “Formatting Guide” document for proper bibliographic form.
Follow the bibliographic reference with the number of pages and the price of the book. For
example:
Marcos, Natalio Fernández. The Septuagint in Context:
Introduction
to the Greek Version of
the Bible. Translated by Wilfred G.E. Watson. Leiden: Brill, 2000. 394 pp. $49.99.
This bibliographic reference should be placed in the same location where one would normally
place the title of a research paper—on the first page of text (two inches from the top of the
page)—but it is not centered, nor does it appear in all CAPS. Leave two single blank lines
between the bibliographic reference and the body of the review.
References
It is customary, and advisable, to refer to pages in the book being reviewed as the contents are
being discussed. One should cite the reviewed book by including only the page number in
parentheses in the body of the review, rather than by footnotes at the bottom of each page.
Author’s names need not be cited, since it is assumed that the book being reviewed is being
referenced. For example: Fernandez-Marcos proposes a bold new thesis in this work (14). As a
general rule, the book review should deal only with the work under review; thus, other works
should not need to be referenced. If necessary, students may refer to other works in their reviews
by using standard footnote form (again, if necessary, consult Turabian and/or The SBL Handbook
of Style for the proper footnote/citation format). A bibliography will not normally be necessary.
Divisions of a Book Review
Introduction
Begin the review with a section that briefly introduces the book and the book’s author.
Biographical information about the author (education, training, experiences, etc.) should be
included only as it demonstrates the author’s competency to write the book. Within the context of
the paper, do not use titles (Dr., Rev., etc.).
In most 3 -5 pages reviews, introduction will likely need to be limited to one paragraph.
The introduction should in all cases be a maximum of one-third page in length.
Summary
The purpose of a critical book review is only minimally to provide a summary of the book.
Address first of all the author’s purpose and the primary thesis he or she is presenting. Relate that
purpose or thesis to the work of others in the field (is the author contradicting, supporting, or
building off the work of others?) Follow this up with a summary of the main points by which the
author argues the thesis or accomplishes the book’s purpose. Overall, the summary should
extend to no more than one and a half pages (for a three-page review) and no more than three
pages (for a five-page review).
Critical Evaluation
“Critical” does not necessarily mean saying something negative about the book. Rather, it
implies a careful weighing of the claims and the arguments used to support those claims. On the
one hand, students should avoid bland endorsements, such as, “This is a good book that should
be recommended reading for everyone.” Avoid blanket dismissals as well, such as, “This is a
lousy book not worth reading.”
On the other hand, avoid trivial criticisms, such as pointing out irrelevant factual errors or
typographical mistakes. [Note: when writing a review for a journal that the author and others
may actually read, such criticisms might be appropriate if given with a spirit of gentleness to
provide helpful suggestions for future editions, or otherwise to demonstrate a general lack of
carefulness that renders the work of low quality.] Instead, engage the main points that relate to
the author’s argument.
Questions to ask include:
1. Are the claims and arguments well supported?
-Are there factual errors among the author’s main contentions?
– What are the strengths and weaknesses in the author’s argumentation?
Where applicable, students may include in their assessment an evaluation
of the arguments biblically and theologically.
2) .Does the author approach the subject with any overall perspectives that influence or
condition his or her conclusions?
These may be theological, experiential, philosophical,
denominational, or cultural perspectives.
– Do these perspectives limit the value of the
work or its applicability (in certain cultures, certain settings, etc.)?
3). How does the author’s presentation fare when compared to other work done in the field?
-How successful and significant is this work when evaluated within its own field?
-To what extent does work done in other fields affirm or question the author’s claims?
Throughout the critique, be specific in the evaluation. Do not just tell the reader about the book;
tell and show the reader with concrete examples from the book. As previously suggested,
include page numbers when making specific reference to the book.
Conclusion
In a final paragraph, give an overall evaluation of the book. In light of its strengths and
weaknesses, students should state the value of the work for their own research, general
knowledge, or ministry. Conclude with a brief comment about the author’s achievement.
FORMATTING GUIDE
CHRI 3301 | Old Testament Theology
WEB TOOLS
Citation Generators: www.easybib.com www.citationmachine.net/turabian
Free software that automatically generates footnotes and bibliography: www.zotero.org/
BASIC FORMAT
First occurrence in footnotes:
Give full information, as explained below.
Subsequent occurrence in footnotes:
Give short information (author, short title, page), if not used immediately before:
18 Talbert, Reading John, 127. Or 18O’Brien, “Church,” 125–32.
If the previous footnote has the same citation (but different pages), you can use ibid. (“the
same”):
16 Ibid., 127.
BOOK BY A SINGLE AUTHOR
First occurrence in footnotes:
15 Charles H. Talbert, Reading John: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Fourth
Gospel and the Johannine Epistles (New York: Crossroad, 1992), 127.
Bibliography:
Talbert, Charles H. Reading John: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Fourth
Gospel and the Johannine Epistles. New York: Crossroad, 1992.
ESSAY/ARTICLE IN AN EDITED VOLUME
First occurrence in footnotes:
3 Harold W. Attridge, “Jewish Historiography,” in Early Judaism and Its Modern Interpreters
(ed. R. A. Kraft and G. W. E. Nickelsburg; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), 311–43.
Bibliography:
Attridge, Harold A. “Jewish Historiography.” Pages 311–43 in Early Judaism and Its Modern
Interpreters. Edited by R. A. Kraft and G. W. E. Nickelsburg. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986.
DICTIONARY ARTICLE (E.g., use this for IVP Dictionary articles)
** Dictionary articles almost always have an individual author (in addition to the editor)!
First occurrence in footnotes:
33 P.T. O’Brien, “Church,” in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne, et
al. (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1993), 125-26.
Bibliography:
O’Brien, P.T. “Church.” Pages 125-32 in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Edited by Gerald
F. Hawthorne, et al. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1993.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
CHRI 3301 | Old Testament Theology Page 1 of 1
Critical Book Review Rubric
CHRI 3301: Old Testament Theology
Student:
Criteria Points Possible
Points
Earned
Instructor’s
Comments
Fulfillment of
Assignment
Requirements
(90 points total)
Adequately and accurately
summarized work
• No factual inaccuracies
• Did not misrepresent or
misunderstand author’s
position
• Did not miss the major points
• Focused on the major,
significant points
60
Offered critical evaluation of
the theory
• Offered positive feedback
• Offered negative feedback
• Personal comments were
relevant to the purpose and
theory of the work
30
Effectiveness of
Argumentation
and Style
(60 points total)
Conformity to appropriate
style requirements
(Turabian/SBL/Chicago)
• Title page
• Page numbers
• Proper quotations
20
Grammar and clarity of
expression
• Wrote in third person
• Author quotations are used
sparingly
• Contractions are avoided
• Subject and verb agreement
• Proper punctuation,
especially with quotations
20
Coherence and cogency of
argument
20
Total: 150
__________________
Presented to
Dr. Phillip S. Marshall
Houston Baptist University
__________________
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for CHRI 3301
__________________
by
Charlie Brown
December 12, 2016
