Study Bibles: which do you use?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bpd_stl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bpd_stl

Guest
Because of my curiosity:

For those of us who rely on English-language Study Bibles regularly, which do you rely on and why? I qualify “Study Bibles” as those that have extensive explanatory notes/annotations provided by recognized, reputable scholars.

I have several different ones, but the ones that I regularly consult are as follows, in order of precedence of use:
  1. The Didache Bible (NAB-RE). The translation itself is what it is (depending upon your opinion of the long saga of the NAB translation). However, the annotations provided are immensely helpful, particularly how they apply the CCC and Church teaching.
  2. Oxford Study Bible (RSV with DC books) of 1977. An old classic. Still reliable. Arguably the only “true” ecumenical English translation of the Scriptures, based upon claims made in the Forward as being received by both Catholics & Orthodox.
    ( I include the RSV-CE of 1965/66 with this, which I also have)
  3. Orthodox Study Bible. Mainly because it provides a modern translation of the LXX, along with annotations of the entire Bible from an Orthodox perspective.
  4. ESV Study Bible. Provides a conservative Protestant perspective (many editors are old-school Lutheran & Reformed, with evangelicals mixed in).
  5. NIV Zondervan Study Bible. Provides an evangelical Protestant perspective.
  6. Not really 6th, but all the time: the TANAKH (JPS translation). A respected English translation of the Jewish Scriptures by Jews. Provides a needed different perspective when studying the OT.
 
Last edited:
I use the ESV Study Bible. It’s quite huge. I agree with a lot of the theology in the commentary. It’s got many maps and other cool stuff, such as an image of the priestly garments in the days of Aaron and his sons. Overall, it’s a must have for evangelicals 😀
 
Last edited:
StudentMI said:
40.png
bpd_stl:
The Didache Bible (NAB-RE).
Click to expand...
Um the Didache Bible I have is the RSV-CE Second Edition.
Click to expand...
Either/or…the Didache annotations are what are important, in my mind. I use the NAB simply because it is the most commonly used Catholic translation in use in the USA…for better or worse.
 
Gotcha.

I like the DR Challoner edition that I have. Sparse notes but insightful ones. Didache is good. The original Jerusalem Bible is awesome too.
 
StudentMI said:
Gotcha.

I like the DR Challoner edition that I have. Sparse notes but insightful ones. Didache is good. The original Jerusalem Bible is awesome too.
Click to expand...
There’s a new 2019 edition of JB…haven’t got it yet. Used to have both the original JB and the revised edition. Revised edition also had great notes.
 
drac16 said:
I use the ESV Study Bible. It’s quite huge. I agree with a lot of the theology in the commentary. It’s got many maps and other cool stuff, such as an image of the priestly garments in the days of Aaron and his sons. Overall, it’s a must have for evangelicals 😀
Click to expand...
I largely agree. The ESV is a solid translation. There are Catholic editions of it out there. It’s basically the Protestant version of the RSV-CE 2nd edition. More of a rebuttal to the NRSV. As a Catholic, I disagree with some of the annotator’s comments (as I encountered them) in regards to theological interpretation. But their notes on archaeological/cultural issues are good.
 
Last edited:
Does Verbum count as a study bible? 😉

I have both the Oxford NABRE and Didache RSV-2CE, as well as the 19 volume English translation of the Navarre Bible. While great resource when needed (especially the Catechism commentary in the Didache Bible), 95% of the time when reading for study I’m using Verbum with multiple Bible translations, Greek and Hebrew interliners, commentaries and expositions all opened and synced across resources.
 
You can probably compare biblical verses in several versions.
 
bpd_stl said:
I largely agree. The ESV is a solid translation. There are Catholic editions of it out there. It’s basically the Protestant version of the RSV-CE 2nd edition. More of a rebuttal to the NRSV. As a Catholic, I disagree with some of the annotator’s comments (as I encountered them) in regards to theological interpretation. But their notes on archaeological/cultural issues are good.
Click to expand...
Thank you for giving your perspective. I really like the ESV translation, and I’ve been looking at the Study Bible.
 
puer.dei said:
40.png
bpd_stl:
I largely agree. The ESV is a solid translation. There are Catholic editions of it out there. It’s basically the Protestant version of the RSV-CE 2nd edition. More of a rebuttal to the NRSV. As a Catholic, I disagree with some of the annotator’s comments (as I encountered them) in regards to theological interpretation. But their notes on archaeological/cultural issues are good.
Click to expand...
Thank you for giving your perspective. I really like the ESV translation, and I’ve been looking at the Study Bible.
Click to expand...
I’ve come to like the ESV translation. I use in conjunction with the Didache Bible’s annotations when in comes to the theological interpretations for comparison.
 
Usige said:
Does Verbum count as a study bible? 😉

I have both the Oxford NABRE and Didache RSV-2CE, as well as the 19 volume English translation of the Navarre Bible. While great resource when needed (especially the Catechism commentary in the Didache Bible), 95% of the time when reading for study I’m using Verbum with multiple Bible translations, Greek and Hebrew interliners, commentaries and expositions all opened and synced across resources.
Click to expand...
I also refer to interlinears myself. I studied Greek way back in college & used it in seminary…but that was years ago. Never was “fluent,” but can limp along with lexicons. The interlinears help me retain what little I have retained.

Although not a “Study Bible”…I also compare to the 29-volume Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture published by IVP. Provides handy patristic commentary.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top