23 replies to this topic

[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.

Edited by Anijen, 08 December 2010 - 12:47 AM.

[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]

Bill Hamblin, on 08 December 2010 - 12:26 AM, said:

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]

Bill Hamblin, on 08 December 2010 - 12:26 AM, said:

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]

maklelan, on 08 December 2010 - 02:05 AM, said:

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]

Bill Hamblin, on 08 December 2010 - 12:26 AM, said:

Should/could we produce a Mormon Study Bible?

Yes and if I had any say in things, I’d have BYU Publish an original translation of the Hebrew Canon and New Testament, independent of the KJV. I envision it being 4 books:



First is the Bible itself, commentary is minimal and limited to pointing out significant alternate renderings from different manuscripts and fragments available, or making note when the meaning of a word is uncertain. Words are keyed like Strong’s (see 4^th book) and references to other Standard works is also included.



Second, Would be a complete commentary of the First book, focusing mainly on the current scholarship, here the translators justify (if need be) why they translated a passage a certain way. Full length essays introducing each book as seen in Harpers or Oxford, clearly written introductions to concepts like the Documentary Hypothesis are provided, archeology in the Ancient Near East is discussed and it’s impact explained.



Third. Would be yet another complete commentary, but this one would focus mainly on pastoral and spiritual topics. Works by GAs past and present are imported in, with lessons and material suitable for Institute and Gospel Doctrine classes. This work would ignore scholarly exposition that was obsessively done in the second volume and would focus practical exegesis for application in everyday life of the Saints.



The Fourth installment would be the icing on the cake, all the words that appear in the OT and NT are indexed here in their Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek form, coded by a number for easy location. Each word is explained similar to how Brown, Driver and Briggs does it. There would be an extensive topical guide, full color maps, a full index of the previous 3 works and essays about major agreements and overlaps with other faiths, such as Islam and Judaism, so Saints could have something meaningful to say about their own and other's faith when given the chance without the need to conduct much research on their own. Have a new muslim co-worker but don't know how to broach the subject of religion in a respectful and positive way?  Just open this book.



?

?

But I’m dreaming here.....

Edited by JonPHeretic, 08 December 2010 - 10:58 AM.

[David Bokovoy]

Hashbaz, on 08 December 2010 - 10:49 AM, said:

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://timesandseaso...#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]

nackhadlow, on 08 December 2010 - 10:51 AM, said:

Who is planning it?

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

[David T]

maklelan, on 08 December 2010 - 11:59 AM, said:

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]

ebeddoulos, on 08 December 2010 - 03:48 AM, said:

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?

Edited by BookofMormonLuvr, 08 December 2010 - 03:25 PM.

[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