As an experiment, I’ve added an “Open Thread” page (see link above) for general discussion, tips about interesting sites, etc. That’s not to say that discussion on regular comments threads must now stay ruthlessly on-topic – I’m always happy to watch a discussion about NT Wright’s theological failings slowly mutate into a study of squirrel migratory patterns – just that this is another venue for any random contributions you may wish to make.
As Tom points out, this book is generally pretty good. It’s based on Luke’s Gospel (which makes a pleasant change from the hundreds of equivalent books and courses based on Mark), and is a good, simple, Jesus-centred introduction to the Christian faith. But it also includes a classic example of the blind-spot most non-Augsburg evangelicals seem to have when it comes to reading Luke 20:19,20 and parallels. As Tom puts it:
Immediately after the account of the Last Supper and the Words of Institution, Dicko editorialises (sorry, but this is quoting from memory):
“The disciples were amazed. What did Jesus mean, when He said that this bread represented [sic] His body and this wine represented [sic] His blood?”
Yes, indeed, given that Jesus never actually said any such thing?
Quite. It’s amazing how ingrained the habit is of performing a mental “Replace Text While You Type” on the words of institution, turning the word “is” into “represents”. I know, because I did it myself for years. It’s like the Simpsons episode where Marge tries to order a coffee in an Australian pub, and the barman is literally incapable of hearing the word “coffee” and instead hears it every time as “beer”, even when she spells it out letter by letter…