Ryrie Study Bible

Could you expound the Scriptures a bit for us, and how the verses you have posted relates to the discussion at hand, Craigbythesea? [/qb]


[/QUOTE]I was wondering the same thing myself. [/QB][/QUOTE]


Me too.

 

I have a kjv ryrie and love it.
Its my main bible that I preach out of.
I have others, but this one seems to have most of the things I need in one package.
Alot easier to take this one bible than to take a bible without notes, a concordance, etc..

 

Well who wouldn't? Some people CAN differentiate between the two. </font>[/QUOTE]It's because some people don't want to study but instead have comments handed to them.

 

quote "Is it any different than Christians filing into church every Sunday having comments handed to them from the pulpit and neglecting to study? It is not the fault of the teacher, in this case Ryrie, but the laziness of the one who neglects to study" quote

Not much different that some coming to the BB to be told what they believe. I even study my own teaching and preaching to ensure what I have said is right...

 

After using the Ryrie Study Bible for years in the various translations, all I can say is that I love it!

 

I have three Ryrie Study Bible's .NIV,NASB and KJ .I really like the way the Bible is set up .Room for your own notes and the print is easy on my eyes .

 

Is it any different than Christians filing into church every Sunday having comments handed to them from the pulpit and neglecting to study? It is not the fault of the teacher, in this case Ryrie, but the laziness of the one who neglects to study.

People wanting to be spoon fed doesn't give a case against study Bibles. We can all glean and learn from one another, including those gifted with teaching. The Bible teaches this. </font>[/QUOTE]In practical terms: If you will spend some money and buy a good book on a survey of the OT and another on the NT and buy a plain Bible without notes you will have much more information at hand than any study Bible.

In most cases if you understand the historical background of scripture you wil have little trouble interpreting scripture. Plus there are so many helps available today on the internet.

 

The primary problem that I have with study Bibles is that they influence the reader through means other than the Scriptures before the reader is even aware of it. Outlines appear to many individuals to be objective, but the truth is that they are very subjective and interpretive, often strongly favoring one major interpretation over another.

The early Greek manuscripts of the New Testament included no punctuation marks and no paragraphing, but all English Bibles do. I have noticed that simply changing the paragraphing of a chapter can radically change the interpretation of the chapter. I especially find this to be true in the Epistle to the Romans.

If simply changing the paragraphing of a chapter can radically change the interpretation of a chapter, can you even begin to imagine what the consequences of looking at an outline of a chapter could be? And the very sad part of it is that most readers are not even aware that an editor is influencing their interpretation of what they are reading.

When outlines, theological notes, timelines, etc., are not included with the text of the Bible, the reader is very much less likely to be influenced by an editor. It is not much more difficult to pull two books off of a shelf than one, but it is very much more difficult to pull books off the shelf and open them up to the appropriate place than it is to shift the eye from the Bible text to the outlines and notes on the very same page.

Some will argue that they know the difference between the Bible text and the helps in their Bible, but the “helps” in their Bible can very substantially influence their interpretation of what they are reading without their realizing it. An easy to grasp parallel to this can be found in the correlation between the denomination one fellowships with and ones theology. Very few people who are raised in a Lutheran church interpret the Bible as do Baptists. They thought that they were interpreting the Bible for themselves, but their Lutheran environment determined their theology. The very same thing is true of those who are raised in a Baptist church. Baptists believe that the Baptist churches teach what the Bible teaches, and Lutherans believe that Lutheran churches teach what the Bible teaches. The Baptist will argue—no, I believe what the Bible says; and the Lutheran will argue—no, I believe what the Bible says. Neither the Lutheran nor the Baptist realizes the impact of their environment. The Bibles that we use are in important part of our environment, and the more time we spend reading them, the more important that part of our environment becomes. The more free our environment is from influences apart from the Scriptures themselves, the less likely we are to be influenced by men rather than the Scriptures.

But how about Bible commentaries? When we pull a book off of the shelf in addition to the Bible that we are reading, our mind tells us that we are reaching for the interpretation of someone else. And not only that, we are much less likely to pull that book off the shelf unless prompted by the Holy Spirit to do so. And when we pull off the shelf 20 or 30 commentaries, we get a broad spectrum of what other believe and why.

As I said in another post in this thread, I have about 800 commentaries on various books of the Bible, but I spend more time reading and studying the Scriptures than I do all other books combined.

 

Gershom,

I have "The Ryrie Study Bible - NAS" and like it very much. I used it for several years and would most likely still be using it if it were the King James version.

I currently use the "Old Scofield Study System - KJV" and "Dake's Annotated Reference Bible - KJV". For sheer biblical information from just about every angle, Dake's is hard to beat. One has to keep in mind from whence Dake came, however. He was a Pentecostal Holiness preacher who came to a very good understanding of Pauline Dispensationalism. He was also into end times prophecies big time. I attended one of his end times lecture series in St. Louis back in 1970. He had a chart that extended across the width of the church. His publishers still insert a miniture foldout chart like this in every Dake bible.

So, if you have an extra $80. to $120. to spare, take a look at Dake's bible. I like it much better than my Scofield bible. Just remember that Dake's commentary can get a bit quirky in a few places.

Incidently, I also have a "Life Application Bible - NIV" that I use occasionally.

However, my FINAL AUTHORITY for my faith, practice and doctrine is the Authorized Version of the King James Bible. This is only the case because I read and speak the English language. If I were French, German, Spanish, etc., I would seek out a bible version based upon the Received Text.

 

Just look at the breaks in most Bibles between James 1:11 and 1:12 when it should be between 1:12 and 1:13.

The word for trial is vastly different than for temptation. Most English Bibles will tie temptations and trials together by tying verses 12 and 13 together. Trials and temptations are quite different.

 

Dake's Annotated Reference Bible is unique as far as study Bibles go. Most certainly anyone studying the doctrine of salvation in Ryrie's study Bible should compare Ryrie's concept of salvation with Dake's concept of salvation—not at all two peas in a pod.

 

How;s Dake and Ryrie differ on salvation ? Doesn;t he Dake also believe something unorthodox on the Deity of Christ .I heard something over the years but can;t remember ?

 

Just my two-cents. I have a very worn out copy of the NASB Ryrie. I like most of his opinions. He seems to know when "not" to opine.

My brother had a copy that was more worn out than mine, before he went to be with the Lord of a heart attack. I can just say I'm thankful that he read it so much and I know he is with the Lord today.

 

Amen!