I had such high hopes for this book. The title sounds so promising. Especially the subtitle - "Proof of the Bible's Divine Inspiration". I was excited to read it and find out what the proof was.
Instead, I found the book to be SAD.
It is a
S upercilious
A rrogant
D iatribe

If you like acronyms, then this is the book for you. It has 9 acronyms and subacronyms in which Hank gives his "proof of the Bible's divine inspiration." He also rants against Bart Ehrman, President Obama, Bill Maher, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, and others. Even when I agree with some of Hank's statements, I am appalled at how rude, unkind and judgemental his language is. When he attacks the people that he disagrees with, he also attacks their beliefs, most of which are shared by many other people. Hank is basically calling anyone who disagrees with his understanding of scripture "benighted" (p. 151) - which means " in a state of pitiful or contemptible intellectual or moral ignorance, typically owing to a lack of opportunity." Basically, if we don't see things the way he does, we are stupid and wrong and possibly heretically dangerous.

Hank especially hates Ehrman whom he accuses of "spiritual terrorism", misinterpretation, attempting to "make the language of scripture"walk on all fours" ", (I still have no idea what that is supposed to mean), setting up a "rigged game", "regurgitated sophistry, selling sensationalism and an unhealthy dose of Scriptortutre" and a lot more.

I did learn a few new things from Hank's book that I had not heard before that I found interesting, such as his deliniation between "predictive prophesy" and "typelogical prophesy". I understood the difference but had not seen them defined so nicely. I wish that Hank had explained where his understandings of prophesy and typology came from rather than just saying that "the student of Scripture well knows" these things. Hank documents thouroughly the words of those who he sees as his opposors which include an episode of the TV show "West Wing", but he does not document all of his Biblical "facts", rather saying that anyone who is a Biblical scholar should just know these things - intimating that if we don't just know that stuff, we are uneducated and stupid.

I liked Hank's MEALS acronym, but for the most part, I was disappointed by Hank's openly hostile attitude towards Bart Ehrman and anyone else who has views about the Bible that differ from his own views.

I received this book free to review from Booksneeze. ( )

In his book Has God Spoken?, accomplished author and radio host Hank Hanegraaff, has added another textbook to the library for modern-day apologetics.

This book is systematically laid out in four sections that are broken down into specific subject matter, all of which are identifiable with acronyms, that are easily understandable.

He uses picture images as page tabs, as well as, a repetitive style throughout to make his points, which give it the feel of a textbook. He takes a methodical approach to teaching the many facets used to determine the facts that lead conclusively to answer his question in the affirmative, while simultaneously debunking some of the more noteworthy myths surrounding the Bible. In his conclusion, he compels all readers to do their own thorough investigation using the methods he employs, which have been taught, used, and recommended by Bible academia for centuries.

Has God Spoken? I would say He has, and Hank Hanegraaf has shown us why.

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher through the BookSneeze®.com book review bloggers program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 : “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.” ( )

From the introduction: “This book counters such contentions and crafts a cumulative case for the absolute authority of the Bible. It answers the question, ‘Has God spoken?’ in the affirmative and demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that the Bible is divine rather than merely human in origin. Without such assurance, Christianity would not have any more authority for faith and practice than does Islam, Mormonism, or a host of other misguided movements.”

I offer the above quote to set the tone of the book. I had a hard time with this book merely because of Hanegraff’s style. Not that his writing isn’t good—it’s actually quite superb and fun to read—but because he’s so downright feisty! He takes on an apologetic role, zealously attacking Bart Ehrman, President Obama, Bill Maher, or Richard Dawkins on every other page. When he’s not dissin’ scholars, he’s dissin’ fellow religions.

He says, “It is as unlikely that Jews falsified the Exodus as it is that they fabricated the Holocaust. Archaeology provides a wholly plausible framework for Jewish contentions regarding their enslavement and emancipation. While archaeology has thoroughly discredited the Book of Mormon, internal evidence provides credence to the people, places, and particulars found in the biblical text.” Oh, wow. Need I say more? One thing archaeology can say for certain is that there were never two million people tromping around in the desert for forty years.

Nevertheless, the book does hold your attention! I definitely never grew bored. It’s a little like listening to a talk show host that drives you totally bonkers, but that you can’t shut off.

At times, Hanegraff’s apologetic stance left me bewildered. He had no trouble arguing for the historic reliability of the flood story in the Bible, while in the next breath ridiculing earlier versions of the flood myth, such as the Epic of Gilgamesh. Does he really not recognize that the Hebrew version of the story is just as fantastic as the others? He then waffles on the subject, suggesting that perhaps Genesis implies a local flood rather than a worldwide one, and thus totally misses the point of the myth: That the ark was necessary to sustain life on the earth, because God was going to destroy everything he had made.

If you can ignore the sermonizing, however, there is a lot of thought provoking conversation in the book. I particularly enjoyed Hanegraff’s discussion of typology. Was Isaiah thinking of Jesus as he wrote about a young maiden giving birth to the child Immanuel? No, not according to Hanegraff (and he’s surely right), Isaiah was writing about his own time period. Did Hosea have Jesus in mind when he wrote, “Out of Egypt I have called my son?” Of course not, he was writing about Israel, not Jesus. How about Jeremiah’s words, quoted by Matthew to highlight the slaughter of the innocents by Herod: “A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.” This quote highlights the utter silliness of imagining that Matthew was taking these prophesies as predictive; unquestionably, Matthew rightly understood this passage in Jeremiah to be a warning to the southern kingdom of Judah that they were about to experience what happened to Israel. These are not predictive prophecies, but typological prophecies. In this discussion, Hanegraff brings the Bible’s prophecies back to life in a believable and recognizable way. As Hanegraff explains, Matthew saw a historical pattern of events from the past that corresponded to present situations, and he saw them as quintessential fulfillments. The historical patterns reached a climax in the life of Jesus.

Other topics that I enjoyed were the discussion of archaeological finds, of the Abomination of Desolation (Hanegraff’s preterist tendencies subtly poke through here and there), and of figurative language in the Bible. Hanegraff writes a great book, he just gets a little too aggressive at times. ( )