by Eugene H. Peterson

See this item in the bookstore...

review by Christine Schneider

EUGENE H. PETERSON'S Eat This Book is a celebration of God's Word and words. Peterson clearly loves both language and the Bible, even going so far as to say “language is the primary way in which God works” (p. 61). Every page resonates with his conviction that God is present in Scripture to change lives.

Personally, I wish Peterson had spent more time discussing his reasons for his implicit trust in the Bible. But he makes it clear early on that the topic of Eat This Book is application and appreciation, not apologetics. The reader should then bear in mind that this book presents a case for what believers should do, given that the Bible is authoritative in all its words, for all of life.

That said, Eat This Book is not a to-do list of “how to be changed by the Bible.” What Peterson actively repudiates—both in this book and in his other teachings—is hand-me-down faith. Threadbare, borrowed religion has a strong tendency toward faddism, with people hungering for the next neat box to put God in, the next fashionable faith principle to make part of our lives but not of ourselves. As a consequence, one potential critique of Eat This Book is that it does not give enough practical advice on how to absorb the Bible into one's being. Study and application methods and meditation techniques (like what Richard Foster suggests in Celebration of Discipline) would not have been out of place here, but Peterson avoids them.

Instead, he advocates “spiritual reading”—that is, reading “formatively, reading in order to live” (p. xi). Eat This Book is about an internal attitude with which to approach the Bible. Peterson wants more Christians to come to their devotions trustingly, like children, with the assumption that we are less than this text.

Peterson believes strongly in the doctrine of perspicuity: the belief that the Bible, at its heart, is eminently understandable to everyone who reads it. It is a book written to you. He balances this belief, however, with the idea that exegesis (critical interpretation of the text) is necessary for complete understanding. While the Bible is written for us, “none of us is the leading character in the story of our life” (p. 43), and we share this Book with many Christians who have gone before us. To Peterson, exegesis is “an act of sustained humility” before God and other believers (p. 57). He advocates giving the Bible both childlike faith and scientific inquiry. To that end, he does a fine job of making some dry, dusty archaeological finds seem fresh and even applicable to spiritual life. He also endorses commentaries, many of which reveal how people have applied Scripture to life throughout centuries past.

At first I felt confused by the paradox I perceived between perspicuity and the need for exegesis. After all, if the Bible is ready to be read, why do I need to study other sources to understand it? But the doctrine of perspicuity and the need for exegesis are the answers to two different spiritual questions. If my question is: “Is the Bible too lofty for me? Do I need others to interpret this text for me?” The answer is no; the temple veil has been torn, and Christ dwells among his people. If, however, I approach the Bible with the blasé attitude that I can have complete understanding without study, without the help of other believers, then I am mistaken.

The ultimate goal of Bible study is not intellectual understanding or assent, but “eating the Book.” That is, absorbing it into one's person, so that it patterns one's speech, builds one's character, changes one's mind.

Unconsciously.

This is where Peterson's love of language comes into play: He believes “it is the very nature of language to form rather than inform” (p. 24). Through a word the world came to be, and through words a person can come to be renewed. This book is about reading the Bible submissively, reading it “on its own terms, as God's revelation” (p. xi). Peterson holds that words have the power to change our minds, and hence, our realities.

The book ends with Peterson's own story, an autobiographical account of how he came to write The Message. This I found interesting, but quite a change of pace from the more educational tone of the rest of the book. What stood out most to me was his defense of paraphrase, which changed my outlook on paraphrases. Before reading Eat This Book, I considered paraphrases to be unnecessary at best, shameless merchandizing at worst. But Peterson loves paraphrases, and considers them to be most capable of speaking to us in our heart's language, thereby most accurately preserving the original meaning of the text. After reading Peterson's case for these sub-translations, I began rereading my old childhood copy of the Today's English Version—complete with illustrations—this time without the inclination to turn my nose up at a version “beneath my reading level.”

Overall, I found Eat This Book to be enjoyable and insightful, and I loved the love Peterson put into it.

Have you read this book? Add your comments below.