June 30, 2008. Today Bill Gates retires from Microsoft. Today I retire from Master’s. He goes to improve the world. I go to improve myself. He goes to spend lots of money. I am going to spend lots of money. Microsoft will be different when he leaves. Master’s will be different when I return.
When I was in high school, my parents bought me the NIV Study Bible. I used it faithfully through college and have always regarded it as the best study Bible, even though I don’t usually carry it around because of its size. I like the translation, but what sets this study Bible apart are the notes, which are relevant and helpful. Some study Bibles have notes that don’t answer the questions that I have. This fall two new study Bibles are coming out, and you can compare the contributors of the notes in this handy chart at Rejoice Software. It won’t help much if you aren’t familiar with the scholars in the field. Another study Bible at the top of the class is the NET Bible, though this is more appreciated by those with some knowledge of Hebrew and Greek.
This blog will not become a political zone, but if I see articles I think are worth reading, I may mention them here. This column in the JPost tells some things about McCain that you may not know. This article in the Washington Post argues why a McCain win would be dangerous for the Supreme Court (but you can read it the other way).
I just bought the High School SS class I teach NIV study bibles (with church money). I thumbed through them a bit at the shop and have always heard about this study bible, but after I brought them home and looked at them more carefully I have to admit, I was a bit dissappointed. At many of the verses I looked at, the views were presented (some of which aren’t very strong to begin with), but hardly ever was a stance taken (which may be a good thing in some case I guess).
As far as the NET Bible is concerned, I like it for the translation notes–but I don’t like their translation (ironic I guess). I’ve disagreed with their translation decisions too many times.
All around, I think I like the ESV the best. It seems to me to have a good balance between readability and adherence to the original languages.
I’d concentrate on the German if I were you. So far I’ve only read a handful of articles in French (OK–so I did read a 500 page book too, but that was only 1), German, however hasn’t stopped tormenting me since I started my thesis.
I just finished a long day of studying so I guess I’m allowed to be negative… :-)
I should say I haven’t ever looked at the ESV Study Bible. After looking at the comparison chart, it be nice if you could mix and match the contributors from the three columns (ESV, NIV, NLT). You could call it “The Dream Team Study BIble.”
Benj – I don’t feel that giving a stance is always necessary with study Bibles. For instance, I’m curious how the ESVSB will handle texts that strongly support the dispensational view (given that many of the editors and contributors are non-disp). If they aren’t careful, they can lose a big segment of their intended audience.
I generally agree with you on NET – the translation can be awkward and too often requires the notes to make full sense.
ESV is good but it has a lot of examples where it is not good English (I could call it the BESV :-)). An interesting thing to do, if you have Libronix, is to compare translations. For instance, take the RSV and its two daughter translations, NRSV and ESV. You can easily see how much more the NRSV changed the RSV than did the ESV; many of those changes are for better readability. Granted, without having your attention drawn to these, many native English speakers won’t notice the awkward English grammar because we have a high degree of tolerance. I do think that the ESVSB will be outstanding given its features and contributors.
I’m choosing a dissertation topic that has only been written on in English :-)!
Todd – Yes, I have compared the ESV, RSV and NRSV (for several years now with Bible Works) and definitely prefer the ESV to the NRSV (here I’m talking about their translation of the original languages, not the aesthetics of the English). Look at Gen 1:1-2 as an example (more examples could be multiplied). “BESV” might be a bit of an overstatement, but in any case, if given a choice between fluidity of language and adherence to the original, I know which one I would choose. Many times the Greek and the Hebrew aren’t as smooth as we would like them to be.
Part of my frustration with the NIVSB is with the comments on the verses which support the dispensational view. In the verses I checked, the non-disp. view is presented, and then as if in an afterthought they say something to the effect of, “But some take these verses literally…” As far as not taking a stand on an issue, I agree that this is not always necessary, but take for example 1 Cor 15:29. Three options are presented as if they are equally plausible (one of which is that Paul was advocating baptism of the dead), and then the author concludes with the statement that the verse is a mystery. This is not helpful (especially for the average person who is shown this verse by Mormons who use it to support baptizing the dead).
I don’t want to overstate the point though. I’m not opposed to the NIVSB–just disappointed with SOME of the notes.
What a second – we’re not supposed to baptize the dead? I’ve believed that for a long time, probably since high school.
Don’t give up on the NIVSB yet. Lots of the notes are good. Those of you who prefer the NASB can now find the NIVSB notes with the NAS translation (http://tinyurl.com/62j6v2).
Todd,
Do you have any idea who wrote the notes for the TNIV study bible? Any opinion on those commentators? I see the editors listed on the Amazon page but can’t find any list for each individual book.
http://www.amazon.com/Zondervan-TNIV-Study-Bible-Personal/dp/0310934699
My guess seems to be confirmed by what I see online (I don’t have this Bible) – the notes are simply updated from the previous NIV Study Bible, which I like. One reviewer called them the “fourth edition” of these notes, which seems to match the history that I know. Writing study notes is a lot of work, so the publisher will get as much mileage out of them as they can.
Hi Todd! I am working at a Christian Bookstore here on Maui. We got a Chronological Study Bible done by Thomas Nelson a few weeks ago. I’ve been tempted to buy it and was wondering if you have any comments on it if you’ve heard of it. I mean, after Old Testament Archaeology, I should be able to decipher these things, but I’m afraid I don’t quite trust myself. Also, I appreciate your comments on the ESV Study Bible. I plan on picking one up in the hardcover. You’re blessed to have it in the calfskin! :) Hope you and the fam are doing well!
Paula – you’re “working” on “Maui” – is that possible? As for the Chronological Study Bible, I haven’t seen it, but from what I know, I have reason to believe that I would not like it.