Study Bibles
- Thread starter KayCee
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
- Status
Thanks for clarifying those other issues for me, charisenexcelsis. My initial post failed to get across the following views that I'll now attempt to clarify:
1. Since Luther's German Bible preceded the KJV by some 80 years, the literary content (ie - the poetry and linguistic majesty) of the former fell short of the latter due to several factors. Although the different languages in which they wrote their Bible translations played a role, Martin Luther, a contemporary of William Tyndale (both were ordained Catholic priests), was no match for Tyndale's masterful linguistic and translator skills. In addition, the German Bible was the opus of only one man who didn't have the advantage (albeit in the next century) of a collective multi-year effort involving scores of scholars and theologians.
2. Yes, I agree with you that the Geneva Bible was one of the translations referred to in the translation of the KJV. I don't know to what extent the Geneva can be given credit for the 1611 end item. However, I'm led to believe that most of the New Testament of the 1611 KJV emanated from earlier Herculean efforts by Tyndale - accomplished during the decade preceding his 1536 martyrdom. (At this point, a brief aside: hopefully, some day, we Christians will eventually recognize the enormous debt that we owe to this talented man: master linguist/translator/interpreter, brilliant scholar, and devout Christian.) Much of the NT of the 1611 KJV was "lifted" from Tyndale's NT English translation effort - not from the Geneva. Accordingly, the GB can't really be credited with significantly influencing either Tyndale's NT or the 1611 KJV. Absence of GB a priori influence on Tyndale's NT Masterpiece - and subsequently its literary child - the NT of the 1611 KJV is notably evident. In fact, the King himself (James I) viewed the Geneva Bible with relative distaste and suspicion. (Something to do with His Majesty's dislike for end-notes and commentaries.) See Alister McGrath's "In the Beginning" (Subtitle: The Story of the King James Bible and How It Changed a Nation, a Language, and a Culture).
3. So here's my final point and re-stated question: The Lutheran and Geneva Bibles, having been on the "wrong" (i.e. - the early) side of 1611, have "missed out" on the linguistic beauty and poetry that is the essence of the KJV. Re the Reformists here in the US, what Bible texts - of the many KJ iterations currently available - are being used to fill this void? What Study Bibles - and commentators do they (Lutheran and Geneva Bible aficionados) feel the most comfortable with?
As I stated in my initial post, in reviewing various Study Bibles online, I've become especially impressed with the ESV Reformation Study Bible. Format, notes, and commentary appear to be very well thought out. It seems to me that whoever put this SB together really knew what they were doing. I'm going to look into this a little more before I decide to buy one. The MacArthur Study Bible (NASB Update) also looks very good. Any comments that you may have concerning these two SBs (and others as well) would be most welcome.
1. Since Luther's German Bible preceded the KJV by some 80 years, the literary content (ie - the poetry and linguistic majesty) of the former fell short of the latter due to several factors. Although the different languages in which they wrote their Bible translations played a role, Martin Luther, a contemporary of William Tyndale (both were ordained Catholic priests), was no match for Tyndale's masterful linguistic and translator skills. In addition, the German Bible was the opus of only one man who didn't have the advantage (albeit in the next century) of a collective multi-year effort involving scores of scholars and theologians.
2. Yes, I agree with you that the Geneva Bible was one of the translations referred to in the translation of the KJV. I don't know to what extent the Geneva can be given credit for the 1611 end item. However, I'm led to believe that most of the New Testament of the 1611 KJV emanated from earlier Herculean efforts by Tyndale - accomplished during the decade preceding his 1536 martyrdom. (At this point, a brief aside: hopefully, some day, we Christians will eventually recognize the enormous debt that we owe to this talented man: master linguist/translator/interpreter, brilliant scholar, and devout Christian.) Much of the NT of the 1611 KJV was "lifted" from Tyndale's NT English translation effort - not from the Geneva. Accordingly, the GB can't really be credited with significantly influencing either Tyndale's NT or the 1611 KJV. Absence of GB a priori influence on Tyndale's NT Masterpiece - and subsequently its literary child - the NT of the 1611 KJV is notably evident. In fact, the King himself (James I) viewed the Geneva Bible with relative distaste and suspicion. (Something to do with His Majesty's dislike for end-notes and commentaries.) See Alister McGrath's "In the Beginning" (Subtitle: The Story of the King James Bible and How It Changed a Nation, a Language, and a Culture).
3. So here's my final point and re-stated question: The Lutheran and Geneva Bibles, having been on the "wrong" (i.e. - the early) side of 1611, have "missed out" on the linguistic beauty and poetry that is the essence of the KJV. Re the Reformists here in the US, what Bible texts - of the many KJ iterations currently available - are being used to fill this void? What Study Bibles - and commentators do they (Lutheran and Geneva Bible aficionados) feel the most comfortable with?
As I stated in my initial post, in reviewing various Study Bibles online, I've become especially impressed with the ESV Reformation Study Bible. Format, notes, and commentary appear to be very well thought out. It seems to me that whoever put this SB together really knew what they were doing. I'm going to look into this a little more before I decide to buy one. The MacArthur Study Bible (NASB Update) also looks very good. Any comments that you may have concerning these two SBs (and others as well) would be most welcome.
C
First of all, I would like to recommend that you build a small library to use for your own research. You appear to be very serious in your approach and you might want to try figuring it out yourself and then refering to study Bibles.
Regarding Tyndale, the problem is just that little extra time English was in such flux that there are greater difficulties in readability. I will have to check out your source material for the history of the English Bilbe as it sounds like she has some interesting things to say.
In terms of text, the emphasis on the technical side of translation makes it difficult to produce a poetic version. I prefer the NASB and have found it very accurate in the Greek. My Hebrew is less acute.
I think that the two you are looking at are fine. R.L. Sproul is the primary source of the ESV Reformation Study Bible. He is Presbyterian, a definite Calvinist but I don't think he is a dispensationalist. McArthur is both a Calvinist and a dispensationalist, of the next generation from Sproul and a leader in the "emergent church" movement.
Regarding Tyndale, the problem is just that little extra time English was in such flux that there are greater difficulties in readability. I will have to check out your source material for the history of the English Bilbe as it sounds like she has some interesting things to say.
In terms of text, the emphasis on the technical side of translation makes it difficult to produce a poetic version. I prefer the NASB and have found it very accurate in the Greek. My Hebrew is less acute.
I think that the two you are looking at are fine. R.L. Sproul is the primary source of the ESV Reformation Study Bible. He is Presbyterian, a definite Calvinist but I don't think he is a dispensationalist. McArthur is both a Calvinist and a dispensationalist, of the next generation from Sproul and a leader in the "emergent church" movement.
G
I have also heard that the other Bible you mention, KJB thompson chain Large print, study Bible is more for a newbie...
I'm inquiring here because yesterday I almost ordered the Dake Bible. Now I'm undecided as I do not want to make a mistake. I currently have the NIV Disciples Study Bible which was purchased about 10 years ago.
I'm inquiring here because yesterday I almost ordered the Dake Bible. Now I'm undecided as I do not want to make a mistake. I currently have the NIV Disciples Study Bible which was purchased about 10 years ago.
AS long as your stable in your beliefs and you feel you understand the WORD of GOD any KJV BIBLE is acceptable. BUT, if your looking for something that makes you think and can also guide you in points that sometimes are harder to find then yes a great REFERENCE KJV BIBLE is what your searching for. I AM NOT completely dis-appointed with the DAKES. I ALSO understand that ANY REFERENCE KJV BIBLE will have areas that have been specificly opinionated by the creator.
yeah we all need 200 commentaries and 150 differenct versions of the Bible and 1400 hundred study bibles and don't forget the hebrew and greek manuscripts along with a strong's concordance. in order to understand what God was saying in John 3:16, wow!!
just find you a good study bible, and see how serious you do get before you invest in a small Library.
C
What I would recommend is a Bible Handbook such as Halley's, a Bible Almanac and a good English dictionary to begin with. I wouldn't recommend that you start with commentaries, but begin with the Bible and then research using the other helps. If you are truly unsure, then compare what you are coming up with to a good study Bible or commentary. A good concordance will also help when you are looking for a particular scripture or doing an English word study.
G
All these different versions..this one says "I like this one" another says "I like that one"
maybe it comes down to brown bread or white bread....perhaps whole wheat bread....what about home baked bread...or I prefer that baker over this baker.
Does it really matter?..after all they all nourish....but don't eat the one which comes with directions on how to eat it, in other words...get a Bible that has no commentary?
maybe it comes down to brown bread or white bread....perhaps whole wheat bread....what about home baked bread...or I prefer that baker over this baker.
Does it really matter?..after all they all nourish....but don't eat the one which comes with directions on how to eat it, in other words...get a Bible that has no commentary?
- Status