E
EphelDuath
Guest
People have told me that it is the best (Protestant) Study Bible, which has peaked my curiosity. Are any of the footnotes explicitly contradictory of the Catholic faith, or is it denominationally neutral?
- Status
M
Manfred
Guest
Look at it this way: the NIV itself is not “denominationally neutral”, for it omits the seven deutero-canonical books in its Old Testament, and it has a decidedly evangelical bias, as another poster has shown in the thread on the TNIV and its format. On a literary scale, it’s about as bland as the Catholic NAB.
While I’ve never owned the Zondervan volume of which you speak, I would suspect that it as well is decidedly evangelical and does nothing to highlight Catholic doctrine, since it was produced by a team very closely allied with the NIV’s translators.
I understand there is available somewhere a “Catholic edition” of the NIV New Testament only. Whoever gave it the (Catholic?) Nihil Obstat and/or Imprimatur should have his credentials revoked.
J
Joel_Tunnah
Guest
I’ve owned it for a year or so now, and I can’t recall seeing anything explicitly anti-catholic in it. Luke 1:28 for example, is not foot-noted as having an alternate to “Hail, favored one”. But then, this is also translated that way in several so-called “Catholic” translations.
The book intros are actually very informative, and balanced. There seems to be little or no editorializing - they just present all the common views about authorship, dates, locations, etc.
I actually like the NIV (and now the TNIV) a lot, but the best study bible is the Ignatius Study Bible (sold only in parts, and only the NT is done so far). You simply will not be led astray by any of its notes - whereas with these protestant commentaries, you need to keep the b.s. detector on at all times.
search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/results.asp?WRD=Ignatius+Study+Bible&z=y
The book intros are actually very informative, and balanced. There seems to be little or no editorializing - they just present all the common views about authorship, dates, locations, etc.
I actually like the NIV (and now the TNIV) a lot, but the best study bible is the Ignatius Study Bible (sold only in parts, and only the NT is done so far). You simply will not be led astray by any of its notes - whereas with these protestant commentaries, you need to keep the b.s. detector on at all times.
search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/results.asp?WRD=Ignatius+Study+Bible&z=y
J
Joel_Tunnah
Guest
Manfred, that is simply not true. I have compared both the NIV and NAB side-by-side, and I can tell you that the NIV is far more literary - especially in the psalms.
M
Manfred
Guest
Only if you mean the 1991 revised Psalms of the NAB; the 1970 version of the Psalms, originally published in 1955 as part of Volume II - Job to Sirach is by no means inferior to the NIV.
You should now that that the Vatican itself rejected the NAB 1991 Psalms for use in the liturgy because of inclusive language; the 1970 Psalms were by and large retained. I say “by and large” because the US Lectionary weenies managed to slip in a few inclusivisms anyway.
K
kentuckyliz
Guest
I got the NIV Archaeological Study Bible (cheap at Wal Mart) and it’s pretty good. It’s got interesting inset boxes and lots of pictures and things. Very interesting.
J
Joel_Tunnah
Guest
I’m not sure. I used the text from the USCCB website:
usccb.org/nab/bible/
It doesn’t seem to say what the version is.
F
FrankF
Guest
I have the NIV study bible, and I find it helpful.
Funny story…
About a year ago I decided to give my life to Christ, and I was reading and learning as much as I could. (Mere Christianity did it for me, and I knew I had no choice but to become a follower of Christ.)
I was reading everything I could, and I wasn’t partial. I read protestant and catholic books alike. I read books by the saints and from authors like John Stotts, etc. I watched EWTN and evangelical television. One day, I was watching Edward Sri on EWTN, and he was talking about the role of Mary.
(At the time I was completely ignorant to most of the issues dividing Catholics and Protestants. I really had no clue other than the fact that Catholics believe in transubstantiation, and Protestants didn’t.)
He was talking about how Genesis 3:15 was fulfilled in the New Testament, and how Mary was given to be the mother of all believers in John 19:26-27. I absolutely fell in love with this!! (He went on to say that John wrote his gospel the way he did so that everyone could identify themselves as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”… which was also important to my understanding).
Anyway… I immediately consulted my NIV study bible to read more about the fulfillment of Genesis 3:15 and the role of Mary… but there was nothing to be found!! I couldn’t understand it. It was so clear to me, but my study bible didn’t mention it all all!!
Since then, I’ve become much better schooled in the differences between protestants and catholics.
I also picked up a RSV-CE bible, but still consult my NIV study bible. It’s a good resource, but it’d definitely NOT the only resource I use.
-Ed
PS… I aslo have an NAB translation, and I must say… I prefer the NIV. But above both… I prefer the RSV.
PPS… I almost feel like it’s been a great blessing not to have been indoctrinated with any bias one way or the other toward protestant or catholic teaching. It’s made my journey kind of interesting in a sense. I started going to a very traditional UCC church (the average age on the congregation was about 80), and then I move to NC to go to grad school. I was going to mass at 7:30am and to a non-denominational church at 10:00am. Now, I simply go to mass on Sunday, and as often as I can to daily mass.
Funny story…
About a year ago I decided to give my life to Christ, and I was reading and learning as much as I could. (Mere Christianity did it for me, and I knew I had no choice but to become a follower of Christ.)
I was reading everything I could, and I wasn’t partial. I read protestant and catholic books alike. I read books by the saints and from authors like John Stotts, etc. I watched EWTN and evangelical television. One day, I was watching Edward Sri on EWTN, and he was talking about the role of Mary.
(At the time I was completely ignorant to most of the issues dividing Catholics and Protestants. I really had no clue other than the fact that Catholics believe in transubstantiation, and Protestants didn’t.)
He was talking about how Genesis 3:15 was fulfilled in the New Testament, and how Mary was given to be the mother of all believers in John 19:26-27. I absolutely fell in love with this!! (He went on to say that John wrote his gospel the way he did so that everyone could identify themselves as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”… which was also important to my understanding).
Anyway… I immediately consulted my NIV study bible to read more about the fulfillment of Genesis 3:15 and the role of Mary… but there was nothing to be found!! I couldn’t understand it. It was so clear to me, but my study bible didn’t mention it all all!!
Since then, I’ve become much better schooled in the differences between protestants and catholics.
I also picked up a RSV-CE bible, but still consult my NIV study bible. It’s a good resource, but it’d definitely NOT the only resource I use.
-Ed
PS… I aslo have an NAB translation, and I must say… I prefer the NIV. But above both… I prefer the RSV.
PPS… I almost feel like it’s been a great blessing not to have been indoctrinated with any bias one way or the other toward protestant or catholic teaching. It’s made my journey kind of interesting in a sense. I started going to a very traditional UCC church (the average age on the congregation was about 80), and then I move to NC to go to grad school. I was going to mass at 7:30am and to a non-denominational church at 10:00am. Now, I simply go to mass on Sunday, and as often as I can to daily mass.
M
Manfred
Guest
Joel,
The USCCB on its NAB page offers the 1986 revised NT and the 1991 revised Psalms, which is really unfortunate. The only way to get the earlier (non-inclusive) version of the 1970 NAB is through a used book dealer, I’m afraid, since the copyright holders of the NAB (yes, the USCCB) refuse to publish the older Psalms and NT, given that their “revised” versions are so superior, don’t you know?
- Status