I just used MacArthur's notes as an example since it's the one I engaged this morning. My questions concern study Bibles in general. I was reading a passage in John today, and for some reason looked it up in the MacArthur Study Bible. I agree completely with MacArthur’s notes, but the passage is in no way self-defining (there are other interpretations). If someone is using these study notes, however, is there a danger of merely “taking a pastor’s word for it”? Can this be elevating the pastor’s notes to the place of Scripture? I don’t always agree with the interpretations in the notes, and sometimes they are a minority interpretation with little evidence. My problem is that the MacArthur study Bible, and other study Bibles I’ve seen, simply present their views as being the right view. They do not, typically, explain why they believe their interpretation to be superior….and indeed, they do not even present the other positions. I have no issues with good commentaries, but the commentary of a study Bible is not good commentary (even if they come to the right conclusion, they don’t explain how you arrived at that conclusion). It seems to me that study Bibles short-cut the learning process and the reader is left with a belief that they don’t really understand (they cannot base their view on Scripture because they merely accepted the explanation of another).