Which Study Bible do you prefer?

[Bill Hamblin]

There are lots of study bibles available. Which ones have you found useful, and why? Here's some I have used:

Secular/Critical

New Oxford Annotated Bible

HarperCollins Study Bible (prepared by the Society for Biblical Literature).

Conservative/Evangelical

Zondervan New International Version Study Bible

English Standard Version Study Bible

Other

[Greek] Orthodox Study Bible

Jewish Study Bible

Catholic Study Bible

Should/could we produce a Mormon Study Bible?

[Anijen]

New Oxford Annotated Bible

I like it best because at this time it is the only study bible I have.

[Log]

One of the most useful versions I've seen was those few verses Hugh Nibley translated throughout his collected works. I wish someone would do a complete bible like that.

Fat chance, of course.

[maklelan]

There are lots of study bibles available. Which ones have you found useful, and why? Here's some I have used:

Secular/Critical

New Oxford Annotated Bible

HarperCollins Study Bible (prepared by the Society for Biblical Literature).

Conservative/Evangelical

Zondervan New International Version Study Bible

English Standard Version Study Bible

Other

[Greek] Orthodox Study Bible

Jewish Study Bible

Catholic Study Bible

Should/could we produce a Mormon Study Bible?

I hear talk that one is in a planning phase right now (and apart from the BYU NT commentary). I think it would be interesting, and I'd certainly be interested in taking part. Oh, and I don't use a study Bible, but if I did, it would probably be the New Oxford Annotated Bible. I had a big JW study Bible on my mission, but something happened to it.

[ebeddoulos]

In my collection of approximately 100 hard-copy English versions of the Bible, I have at least a half dozen or more volumes which tout themselves as "Study Bibles". Each have their merits. I personally think that the standard 1979 LDS Bible is about as good a study Bible as is on the market. The Topical Guide is easier to use than the Thompson Chain Reference (KJV). The Dictionary has more breadth and depth than the one included in the Promise Study Bible (CEV). Compare the LDS edition with the Living Insights Study Bible(NIV). Its Glossary of Doctrinal Terms and Concordance are nice but not near as helpful as the Dictionary or Topical Guide of the LDS edition. The same pretty much applies to the Promise Keepers Men's Study Bible (KJV), Scofield Study Bible and the New World Translation with References, etc.

Few of my study Bibles (the primary exception is the NET Bible) has as many insights into the original Hebrew and Greek texts with their associated idioms as does the LDS edition. I admit that the LDS edition lacks the cutesy little boxed commentary inserted willy-nilly but its maps and internal cross references are more than adequate, and the inclusion of the JST is definitely the cherry on top that the others will always lack. Bottom-line: I think the LDS already have an excellent study Bible.

What do you find lacking, Mr. Hamblin?

[kamenraider]

I kind of like Bullinger's The Companion Bible. LINK

[David Bokovoy]

Should/could we produce a Mormon Study Bible?

Absolutely! And in my mind, there's no question that the Jewish Study Bible is the best study Bible ever produced for the Hebrew Bible. I'll go with the HarperCollins for NT.

[Hashbaz]

My favorite is the Archaeology Study Bible (Zondervan NIV), primarily for the cultural context it provides but also for the readability of the translation. I really like the HarperCollins as well.

[David T]

I hear talk that one is in a planning phase right now (and apart from the BYU NT commentary). I think it would be interesting, and I'd certainly be interested in taking part.

Who is planning it?

[JonPHeretic]

Should/could we produce a Mormon Study Bible?

Yes and if I had any say in things, I

[David Bokovoy]

My favorite is the Archaeology Study Bible (Zondervan NIV), primarily for the cultural context it provides but also for the readability of the translation. I really like the HarperCollins as well.

You would say that you dirt digging dude! Don't you know texts, not artifacts are where it's at!

[JonPHeretic]

I also get a lot of use out of the Catholic's Jerome Commentary. Richard E. Brown and Joseph Fritzmyer bring a lot to the table.

[The_Monk]

I've used the NIV Study Bible and Jewish Study Bible. It's fun to contrast them with each other

I've abandoned the NIV and its notes for NT study, largely on the opinion of NT Wright found here.

http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2010/11/its-that-time-again/#comment-319722

I'm working through the NT with Stern's Jewish New Testament commentary at the moment. It's interesting, but I'm not sure I like the Christianity he converted to.

[Muc'ul Ajwalil]

The Latinoamericana (a Catholic translation) is rather interesting, seeing the commentaries by several priests...its rather interesting their take on 1 Corinthians 15:29.

[maklelan]

Who is planning it?

Some folks associated with BYU in different capacities are wondering about its viability.

[David T]

Some folks associated with BYU in different capacities are wondering about its viability.

As long as it actually engages current Biblical scholarship, and doesn't serve as a glorified CES manual encouraging and validating prooftexts, I'm all for it. I'd hate to see a textual version of the Messiah: Behold the Lamb of God 'documentary'. Talk about a blown opportunity.

Does anyone know anything about the current status of the BYU New Testament Rendition and Commentary? Such as, when the first volume is due to be released, and when a website or any other promotional material will begin to come available? I am highly interested in this project.

[Bill Hamblin]

In my collection of approximately 100 hard-copy English versions of the Bible, I have at least a half dozen or more volumes which tout themselves as "Study Bibles". Each have their merits. I personally think that the standard 1979 LDS Bible is about as good a study Bible as is on the market. The Topical Guide is easier to use than the Thompson Chain Reference (KJV). The Dictionary has more breadth and depth than the one included in the Promise Study Bible (CEV). Compare the LDS edition with the Living Insights Study Bible(NIV). Its Glossary of Doctrinal Terms and Concordance are nice but not near as helpful as the Dictionary or Topical Guide of the LDS edition. The same pretty much applies to the Promise Keepers Men's Study Bible (KJV), Scofield Study Bible and the New World Translation with References, etc.

Few of my study Bibles (the primary exception is the NET Bible) has as many insights into the original Hebrew and Greek texts with their associated idioms as does the LDS edition. I admit that the LDS edition lacks the cutesy little boxed commentary inserted willy-nilly but its maps and internal cross references are more than adequate, and the inclusion of the JST is definitely the cherry on top that the others will always lack. Bottom-line: I think the LDS already have an excellent study Bible.

What do you find lacking, Mr. Hamblin?

The LDS edition is not a study bible. The notes and topical guide are essentially doctrinal in nature. It lacks literary, historical, archaeological insights, etc. It also doesn't take into consideration contemporary archaeological and textual discoveries. No explanatory essays. No literary outlines. No intertextual references, etc. No commentary either. So, its really not a study Bible.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

The problem I have with study Bibles is the degree of Calvinism I will find within the interpretations and commentaries. A edition by Arminian leaning scholars would be more to my liking... any ideas?

[phaedrus ut]

The Harper Collins Study Bible is what I've used most often but I also tend to go to Throckmorton's Gospel Parallels specifically for the synoptic gospels which I believe also uses the NRSV.

I'm having a hard time imagining a LDS version making it past correlation.

Phaedrus

[mnn727]

My wife and I use the TNIV at home as its actually understandable

[Mortal Man]

The LDS edition is not a study bible. The notes and topical guide are essentially doctrinal in nature. It lacks literary, historical, archaeological insights, etc. It also doesn't take into consideration contemporary archaeological and textual discoveries. No explanatory essays. No literary outlines. No intertextual references, etc. No commentary either. So, its really not a study Bible.

How very true. And neither is the LDS edition of the BoM a study BoM. The notes are essentially all doctrinal in nature. It lacks literary, historical, archaeological insights etc. At least the LDS bible has maps. I think a study BoM should show the journeys of Ammon et al.

[volgadon]

Absolutely! And in my mind, there's no question that the Jewish Study Bible is the best study Bible ever produced for the Hebrew Bible. I'll go with the HarperCollins for NT.

Is the JSB the one published with the JPS? If so, I checked it out from the library recently. Great stuff, can't say I agree with all of the commentary, but it presents interesting and challenging POVs, not to mention the superb appendices. My personal favourite is the Mikraot Gedolot, perhaps the most influential study Bible of them all.

[ebeddoulos]

The LDS edition is not a study bible. The notes and topical guide are essentially doctrinal in nature. It lacks literary, historical, archaeological insights, etc. It also doesn't take into consideration contemporary archaeological and textual discoveries. No explanatory essays. No literary outlines. No intertextual references, etc. No commentary either. So, its really not a study Bible.

I beg to differ. I am unsure where you obtained your description of a study Bible. That is OK because in researching your description I found that a precise definition of what constitutes a Study Bible is difficult to come by. However, the one provided by Wikipedia seems somewhat adequate. The notes in red are my insertions.

"A study Bible usually contains an extensive apparatus, which may contain such features as:

• Annotations explaining difficult passages or points of theology and doctrine See Dictionary -'Spirit' pg. 776-777
  
• References to indicate where one passage of the text relates to others See Bible footnotes pg. 771 for examples
  
• A concordance, a word index that indicates where various keywords are used in the Bible See Topical Guide
  
• Variant translations or interpretations of certain debatable passages, or possible textual emendations (i.e. alterations of the original Hebrew or Greek) See Bible footnotes pg. 1193 Matthew 5:22a, b, c, d, e for examples
  
• Introductions and historical notes for each book of the Bible See Dictionary pg. 754-755 for examples
  
• Short biographies of Biblical people and places See Dictionary pg. 727 for examples of each
  
• Maps that illustrate the Holy Land during Biblical times See Map section
  
• Harmonies of the Gospels, pointing out parallel incidents in the life of Jesus See Dictionary pg. 684-696
  
• Timelines of Bible history that relate it to world history" See Chronological Tables pg. 635-645
  

By that definition, I contend that the LDS edition of the Bible is an excellent Study Bible and equal or superior to such great Study Bibles as Thompson or Scofield.

[David Bokovoy]

Is the JSB the one published with the JPS? If so, I checked it out from the library recently. Great stuff, can't say I agree with all of the commentary, but it presents interesting and challenging POVs, not to mention the superb appendices. My personal favourite is the Mikraot Gedolot, perhaps the most influential study Bible of them all.

Yes, one in the same. It was edited by my long-time professor.