Study Bible Versions

I think it's better to study the Bible without a Study Bible. Study material should not be in the text except in footnotes and a concordance in my estimation.

I do admit using the NET Bible online, but that's as far as I would go.

Go to sources that are not wrapped up in the text. Dig in for yourself.

 

Hi DMorgan, thanks for the question.

Let me assume by "study bible" you mean one with lots of notes such as the Life Application Bible, or the Ryrie Study Bible, or the ESV study bible.

Sometimes the study notes are basically reproduced in more than one version.

The study notes that I like best are the Zondervan study notes.

Now as far as bible versions, the best study version is the NASB95. It does the best job of providing a literal translation of the words and grammar of the underlying Critical text.

Now if you want to go with the Byzantine text, I think you should stick with the NKJV, but compare it with the WEB online, as the NKJV contains several corruptions not found in the WEB.

In both these versions (NASB and NKJV) you will find some words in italics which the translators thought needed to be added to make the translation read more smoothly. I read these verses (with italic words) skipping those added words, and if the translation still makes sense, I do not include them in my study of those particular verses. Also, the NASB has footnotes, some of which contain a more literal translation. I read the verse using the literal footnote rendering.

By "scrubbing" the NASB95 as indicated above, I believe I have the best version to study, the version that comes closest to what God's actual inspired words say.

My next step is to look at the pronouns and determine, as best I can, who the pronoun refers to, i.e. Jesus or the Father or Paul or whoever. Some translations, like the NET often insert the person the translators believe is in view.

As indicated above, the NET can be found on line, and it has extensive footnotes which are very useful, not perfect but good.

I am a non-Calvinist, so I do not recommend study from the Calvinist view, such as would be found in the ESV study notes or the MacArthur study notes. Other than the Zondervan study notes, I like the Ryrie Study notes.

 

But with all your "word studies" your idiosyncratic renderings are far from the NASB readings.

It just makes perfect sense to do so. It is not a novelty.

 

Easy, The KJV study bible...


It corrects the errors made in the originals...

What?? :saint: