What would Jolie do?
There’s a new Bible that’s part Life, part Vogue, part National Geographic. Illuminated World, a Swedish publishing company, just released the English version of The Book: New Testament, a 280-page Bible in magazine form. Echoing the medieval tradition of illustrating sacred texts, The Book illuminates the text with photography and art—including portraits of Angelina Jolie, Bono and Princess Di for the passage about God sending a messenger to prepare His way.
Newsweek said it makes the text “maybe a bit less holy” and Christianity Today called some of the photos “sexually charged,” but I got a review copy and mostly liked it. While there’s no question that it intertwines Scripture and politics too breezily—there’s a photographic tribute to the U.N.’s Millennium Development Goals, and the destruction in Revelation seems to be ecological—the photos are provocative and moving. They draw attention to global suffering, along with Christianity’s call to love and level cultural barriers.
Illuminated World says the goal is to “drive an emotional reaction,” and I wonder if that’s not a good thing sometimes. The Bible’s themes—suffering, justice, love and grace—should move people, Christians and non-Christians alike. And while the pictures may indicate a loose interpretation of the text (Illuminated World makes it very clear that they’re not tied to any faith), the text is still there for people to read—unabridged, in the Good News Translation.




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!








Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top12 Comments to “What would Jolie do?”
Sounds…different.
I’m sure there are a lot of conservatives who will make a fuss over this, but the best way to voice your disapproval is to not buy it.
Report comment to moderator
Hmmm… The thing that worries me is that a lot of the events in the Bible are about things that can’t be photographed. Angels, Satan, Heaven, Hell, ancient Egypt and Israel, God, Jesus, etc. By illuminating it with things only with modern things that have been around since the invention of the camera, one might have a limiting effect on it.
Report comment to moderator
This was lunched in Sweden last year –
Many want to re-write the Word of God to suit their beliefs. They feel that the ancient manuscripts and translation don’t match todays beliefs – adding pictures which have nothing to do with GOD’s Word, something to entertain those who aren’t able to accept the truth from HIS Word.
We are warned in Scripture:
Report comment to moderator
“This was lunched in Sweden last year – ”
How was it served? Curly fries and tartar sauce?
Report comment to moderator
I had a look at the book, the photography is beautiful and compelling. Perhaps for people who don’t have the ability to have the “movie in their minds”, images that provoke thought, and thought around the biblical passage associated with it is a good thing. Perhaps the use of modern images will help people to see the relevance in modern life.
Report comment to moderator
Is it compromised and pluralistic and trite? Yes. Would I buy one for my daughter? No. Do I believe God is sovereign, and that His Word that goes forth from His mouth will not return to Him void but will accomplish the purpose He has ordained for it, no matter whether pictures of Angelina Jolie are involved? YES and YES!
This isn’t the first Silly Bible(TM) and it won’t be the last. Not much to get worked up over.
Report comment to moderator
#4 roflmao!
Report comment to moderator
#4,
Well if it was in Sweden, it certainly wasn’t served up with Fire and Brimstone now was it?
Report comment to moderator
I had a friend from Switzerland, and all the children there were given ‘School Bibles’. They had interpretive guides explaining everything in leftist terms. However I guess they couldn’t explain away Revelation, that book was left out completely, the Bibles ended at Jude.
Report comment to moderator
Any Bible is a translation unless it is in the original Hebrew or Greek. The big problem has been translations which distort the original meaning, or make a doubtful reading certain. A lesser problem has been Bibles with footnotes which promote only a chosen interpretation, and ignore equally probable ones. By comparison illustrations probably do little harm to an otherwise faithful translation, even if they could be better chosen; and they may enrich the experience of those who read. My wife’s Bible has numerous pictures I generally ignore, but the oversized text is easy on my eyes. If an edition makes it easier for some people to read the books, that should be enough justification for printing it.
Report comment to moderator
Victoriaadding pictures which have nothing to do with GOD’s Word
Yeah, he really never would have wanted that. He wasn’t into communicating with and attracting new believers. And beauty of any kind threatens the worship of him.
Report comment to moderator
How come this post shows up correctly in Firefox but not in Internet Explorer?
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!