Bibles Bible Studies Books

If someone actually goes to the trouble of writing a book with your name in the title just to debunk your book, then you really must have struck a nerve or struck fear into the hearts of the flock. What are you afraid of? Believers flee from anything that could possibly put a thought in their head. Just so you know I have not read this book but I imagine that the author does not have the scholarship that Ehrman has or otherwise is a armchair scholar using the works of others and is not above using the bible to support his view of the bible.

The reliability of records and first-hand accounts was of paramount concern for first and second, and third century Christians:
'This cultural tendency existed partly because so few people knew how to write and read in the first century AD. It existed also because the character of the person spreading the story mattered so deeply to ancient people (in some cases first century folk may have been less likely to trust written records, because they couldn't speak personally with the individual that was telling the story!).' pg 85

Even BB Warfield denied Mark 16:9-20 as belonging to the original autographs, yet no one more clearly equivocated inerrancy than him. He reconciled textual criticism and inerrancy without doing violence to his faith, whilst Erhman clearly gnosticizes most of his so-called facts, to the delight of agnostics and atheists who are searching to dispel Christ as the Son of God.

Timothy Paul Jones sufficiently harmonizes cultural and historical clues and research, which causes a major disparity with the stigmatizing and assumption of Ehrman. Scribal traditions and additions were the human process of preserving the writings of the autographs, and the factor appreciated by Jones lies in the due admission in textual discrepancies in no way invalidating the Bible as the Word breathed by God. Whereas Jones thereby remains arbitrary towards their primitive means of re-recording the life of Christ and the apostles, Erhman assumes a stance of sentimentalism and clouded judgment. The clandestine work of the scribes serves as a basis for misinterpretation, overstatement and mock ridicule from a modern scoffer that bids Jesus come down from the cross.

'What's more, according to Ehrman, the precise contents of what we call Christian faith, didn't emerge primarily from reflection on the historical person of Jesus, or on the writings of eye-witnesses of his ministry. What determined the final shape of Christian faith was primarily the struggle between these various factions.' pg 80

What is clear is that the intensified battle of the earliest history of Christianity is oft resembled in the craft of 'spin' so prevalent today, with few able to distinguish truth from error. Christians can certainly learn much more of the Old Testament from Judaism, like the expressive power of the Hebrew language, and the wealth of historical material available on the New Testament times should see us better equipped to deal with the learned blows and tested assumptions of those who, despite their protestations, remain mere heretics.

Now mainstream Christianity can take heart from Timothy Paul Jones' defense - a modern cure to an antiquated challenge.

'A generation later, when someone in the Roman church considered which Christian writings should be authoritative, this emphasis on the apostolic eyewitnesses persisted.' pg 125 The early 'lost Christianities' left no room for speculation, as has Ehrman; and even amidst competing gospels, they created canon certainty through this general principle: 'Serapion's goal was the same as fellow believers scattered throughout the world: he wanted to preserve eyewitness testimony about Jesus.' pg 130

'The distinction between Scripture and the word of the gospel (Anglo-Saxon good spell) was that 'the word of God' in the gospel was primarily oral, because it did not come by reading, but 'faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ' (Roman 10:17). The verb that went with 'the word of God' in the book of Acts was not write, but 'speak' or 'preach' or 'proclaim' or 'announce' or 'teach'.
Jaroslav Pelikan, Acts, pg 112 - 113 (Brazos Press)

Written from the perspective of religious dogma and conventional religious teaching. Does not take historical research into consideration as much as merely following the Bible and Scripture. Not exactly a 'peer review' of Ehrman's work. However, worth reading, if only to research a contrary opinion.

Bart Ehrman has taken the NPR/NY Times/etc world by storm and has gained a sizable audience for his popular works. His main contribution has been to bring the arcane (to most of the world) subject of textual criticism and then state how this throws the inspiration of Scripture into disarray.

The best thing about this book is how it shows the danger in faulty assumptions. If your assumptions don't allow for messy things like textual variants, you are going to come to the same faulty conclusions as Ehrman. If you are a believer in Jesus, you will struggle or lose your faith.

Now, as to the book, the greatest technical strength (given this book is more of an overview for a lay audience) is its work with textual variants. Jones goes over the process of textual criticism giving a high level view of some examples.

But, as mentioned in the book, for the very small amount of texts where we aren't sure of the original meaning, no important theological point is in jeopardy.

And, I'm sorry Ehrman fans, but I've heard and have obtained audio which confirms quotations in this book. Ehrman knows and has admitted we "pretty much" know the words of the original authors.

The question is, even if no important point is in doubt, how can we still claim to have God's Word? Jones makes an important point on this: "supposing that God did inspire the original New Testament writings and that he protected those writings from error- are the available copies of the New Testament sufficiently accurate for us to grasp the truth that God intended in the first century? I believe the answer to that question is yes."

I have to paraphrase Dr. James White here. To prevent any textual variation God would either have to zap an erring scribe dead. Or there would have had to have been one controlling authority supervising all the texts. And if that were the case, instead of criticizing the textual variants, people would be spinning even more Da Vinci Code conspiracy theories about how we can't trust the text with no variations because of the one controlling authority. So, in this way, all the textual traditions increase our confidence in the New Testament texts.

Now, as far as issues involving canonization, "other Christianities" there are better treatments out there, but this gives an OK overview of the history. Definitely weaker than the textual criticism sections (Part 1).

As to issues about the authorship of the gospels and oral history, the overview here is good. The best work out there on the topic is Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels As Eyewitness Testimony. That goes into great detail on this topic. There are two interesting comments from that work which have bearing on this topic.

1) If you were simply making up apostolic authors, why would you choose Mark, Luke, and Matthew? Matthew was not the most prominent apostle. Mark and Luke weren't apostles, but instead associated with apostles. Wouldn't you simply use the apostles?

2) As to the telephone game analogy of pass it down the line. One would have to assume that the original eyewitnesses were teleported off the planet. They were still around when this oral tradition and texts were being passed around.

Lastly, I don't mind the negative reviews, but it would be nice if the negative reviews explained why Jones' arguments don't work, backing them up with details. Something to interact with.

I appreciated this work as it's a great introduction to an honest assessment of Bart Ehrman's terribly misleading book, Misquoting Jesus. I would encourage the reader to further pursue methods of answering critics like Ehrman by studying many of the works listed in the back of Dr. Jones' work, especially by comparing what Ehrman says with what Ehrman's Ph.D program mentor believed about the reliability of the text of the New Testament (Dr. Bruce M. Metzger). Dr. Metzger, one of the foremost textual critics of the 20th century, went on record regarding his views regarding the reliability of the text of the New Testament in an interview with Lee Strobel; an interview that is recorded in Strobel's book The Case for Christ. Read carefully the following portion of that interview and see how it directly contradicts Ehrman's basic views about the New Testament:

At the end of the interview, Stroebel asked Metzger, "All these decades of scholarship, of study, or writing textbooks, of delving into the minutiae of the New Testament text - what has all this done to your personal faith?"

Metzger responded: "It has increased the basis of my personal faith to see the firmness with which these materials have come down to us, with a multiplicity of copies, some of which are very, very ancient."

Strobel: "So scholarship has not diluted your faith?"

Metzger: "On the contrary, it has built it. I've asked questions all my life, I've dug into the text, I've studied this thoroughly, and today I know with confidence that my trust in Jesus has been well placed . . . very well placed." [The Case for Christ, 1998, 71]

In summary, I'd recommend studying Dr. Jones's book as a great introduction to understanding how to defend the reliability of the text of the New Testament; especially given Ehrman's misleading overstatements about the transmission and reliability of said text given the opposing and well-studied position of his own doctoral program mentor, Bruce M. Metzger.

I was very pleased with this book - this is the second one I have purchased. I bought it for one of the women in my church to use as a resource for a class on how God sees women that we are planning. It is an excellent resource for Christian women.

This book is an excellent reference book for all Christian women who really want to know about women who blazed the trail for us. Not only do you study the women in the Old Testament, but the New Testament as well. This book is used as a textbook in our Church Leadership School. Wonderful gift for a Christian sister. Of all the books cooncerning the women in the bible that I have read, this one is by far the best.

Women in the bible are often not a topic discussed in church or elsewhere. This book is a wonderful look at the ignored parts of the bible, (and I don't mean every book after Exodus). Women did participate in the bible and this book celebrates their accomplishments and gives them long overdue praise.

The books came in good condition and arrived sooner than promised. We are using it as a group study, and though it was published years ago the contents do not get outdated, any more than the Bible. It makes these women come alive for us as real people.

This exhaustive work is invaluable to anyone who wants to know the stories of Biblical women better. I'm doing research on Biblical widows, and this book is the most accessibly organized sourced I've found. It was written in 1955, so don't be surprised if it's a bit dated stylistically & theologically. Still, it's valuable as a reference tool that may lead to you to deepened encounter with women of faith.

This book will allow you to see the influences of some of the people in the Bible as you have never seen them.

This is one of the best investments I made in a book. I own this book for at least 6 years, and still use it for the good notes I took and the good discussion. This book is great for personal or group Bible study. The studies are informative, not deep theological details but not simplistic; just the right piece of steak! It dose not replace studying the characters from the Bible but organizes the study and gives many helpful insights and draws parallels of Christ when appropriate; such as with studying lesson 9 "Joseph".

You will not regret buying this book.

This is an excellent way to learn about the great characters of the bible, as well as learn the Old Testament as well. The book will take yoou on a tour though the Old testament. You learn great lessons, I found myself not wanting to put my Bible down.

I am currently using this book to go through with a small group from church. This group has found this book to be very informative and gives quality lessons to learn from each character.

We meet on the 1st and 3rd Fridays of the month and this is a very economical bible study. We will actually have over 2 years worth of study in just this one book. Fantastic.

It's a major task "analysing" a book with so many variations and long historical scope. Limiting the parameters to "literary" aspects is hardly a pruning - even when historical elements are essentially stripped away. Alter and Kermode saved themselves some of the labour by farming out much of the analysis required for this job. The result is a collection of essays readable only in selected bits. The variety of approaches will perplex the reader experienced in biblical analysis. The newcomer, however, who perseveres with patience and a willingness to consult other resources, will find the full scope of the collection a worthwhile investment.

Selecting authors for these essays must have been daunting. They should each be familiar with the books and with the essentials of literary criticism. It's said that "anyone can be a critic", but approaching books held in such awe and reverence by large segments of the population takes a certain level of finesse. Most of these authors exhibit that capability. Alter and Kermode note that they don't demand "uniformity of style" in the entries, but the approach is uniformly constrained, but not narrow. The essays are not buried in arcane literary movements, such as structuralism, feminism or post-modernism, which were prevalent when this book was published. Alter and Kermode, in their introductory essays, acknowledge these movements, but they and most of the authors return to more a classical framework in their analyses. This approach is likely motivated by the use of the King James Version, with which most of their readers have at least passing familiarity.

The KJV foundation, however, restricts much of the appeal of this collection to Protestant Christianity. Anything else would be chaotic, but the reader may find a few authors use circular reasoning as they attempt to retrieve literary elements. It becomes "what is said, was said". The KJV, at a midpoint between biblical events and modern times, presents an atmosphere out of joint with the subjects dealt with. The editors caution the reader about this, but once past their introductory comments the individual authors strive, sometimes successfully, to place occurrences in a proper frame of reference. Omitting the historical environment tends to make the literary analyses fragile and incomplete. It limits "literary" aspects to what the modern reader can understand and utterly omits what a reader of the times might perceive. How would people of that era have viewed the various stories and the characters they portray?

The editors make a final attempt to preserve the historical framework in a half-dozen general essays that conclude the book. These writings address the issues of assembling the books into a "canon" - the establishment of the books into a voice of authority - biblical poetry and the impact of Greco-Roman writing techniques and use of accepted mythologies in that world. A serious and scholarly collection, the volume provides an excellent foundation for understanding biblical literary aspects. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

I haven't read the bible for 40 years. I decided to reread it, and found that even the new jazzy translations are often undecipherable. Most it them sound stupid, to be blunt.

I asked my pastor about a Bible Commentary. He suggested the Harper, which I found at a local bookstore. You need a truck for that one.

I simply wanted to know things such as "Who was Matthew?" and other minor, but interesting questions. And I didn't want to ruin my abdominal muscles carrying a Concordance or Commentary.

I find this took to be just about what I wanted. It's superficial, but good lord, to get all the material in the bible, with depth, you need a huge book.

In short, this is just right for me. It doesn't appear to be biased, it isn't filled with cloying hosannas to God. By the way the paperback version is a[lot less expensive.] [$].

Jerry O'Dell

Another excellent book by Dr. Morris. Once again he cuts through the subjective mumbo-jumbo smoke of modern meaninglessness and doubt to give us clean air: exactly what the text says, along with connecting notes to the related Scripture and prophecy, and occasionally a note on the Greek to inform us where English translation falls short. Short of learning Greek for yourself, this book is a worthwhile addition to the library of any Berean-minded Christian. It will strengthen and encourage your faith. It will inform and arm you without tempting you to superimpose the passing imaginations and traditions of men over and above the word of God. Highly recommended.

Book is a good package.
Fine hardcover fine paper
print as small and very readable
to make it good and plenty
of hard and worthy reading.

This work tells the revelation book the way I believe God told John uncut and un edited, as all the Bible should be read, the warning from or Lord God is " Do Not Change The Meaning of My Word". Great discussion and explanation of End Times. Jack

If you are a Christian, and have wondered about the book of Revelations, this book is a must. I have not found a more intensive, deep, and thorough review than what Henry Morris does in this book.
My wife and I read through it every morning for our devotions and have loved every minute of it!!! A++++++

This book is obviously inspired! He provides insights and other supporting scripture for his views. His verse by verse review provides insights well beyond just the book of Revelation.

I am very glad I read this book. While I found it hard to get into, once I was past the first few sections I couldn't put it down. His strongest section is where he explores the trial and crucifixion of Jesus. David Garland challenges any romanticised pre-conceptions that the reader may have about the crucifixion and explores without apology the uncomfortable things about this gospel: the total failure of the disciples, that Jesus' last recorded words are "My God my God why have you forsaken me?" and the lack of appearance of the risen Christ (he stops at 16:8). I gained insight on a new angle on the death of Christ. I recommend this book to anyone interested in Mark or Jesus mission.

This was my first Schaeffer book, so I was unsure of what to expect. I consider myself rather picky with regard to religious subject matter. Mr. Schaeffer's book was enjoyable, and I will try another one. While "Genesis" did not really have any significant new ideas, it was well communicated and easy to follow, even for laymen or the casual reader.

If you are unfamiliar with Genesis and the conservative approach to its interpretation, this is a good book. It is not scholarly or philosophical, in my opinion, but it remains substantial - which many people will find refreshing.

This is a great book for all Christians to read. It puts creation back into perspective and establishes all the solid biblical proof for why creation had to exist in both space and time. Unbelievers will scoff but in this book believers will be reminded of who they are and where they came from.

One of Schaeffer's best that I have read.He looks at the start of time for us not God, since God is eternal.It really made me stop and think. Also to look at Genesis in a whole new way

Francis A. Schaeffer (1912-84) was an American Evangelical theologian and philosopher whose works were very influential on Evangelical thinking. In this fascinating book, Dr. Schaeffer takes a look at the first eleven chapters of the book of Genesis, which many Christian thinkers seem to find irrelevant to a truly Christian worldview. On the contrary, Dr. Schaeffer shows that the early history of man, as contained in the beginning of Genesis, is crucial to understanding why man is the way he is, and how God works with and through man.

I must say that this is a truly mind-expanding book that goes a long way towards giving the reader a truly Christian view of the man and the world that he inhabits. I mean, how is man "fallen," and what was and is his relationship with God? These are crucial questions to understanding the very foundational concepts of our religion, and the answers are contained in this book.

This is a great book, and a true classic of Christian thought. I do not hesitate to say should be read by all believers.

Christianity contains the answer to the modern man's questions. This book provides the foundation for Christian belief and the understanding of an infinite personal God who is there.

A must read...for all

I have used many Life Guide bible studies before and have been quite pleased with them. However, this one disappointed me. In almost every lesson there were a few questions that were very difficult to answer or confusingly worded. I had numerous ladies in my bible study group calling me asking for clarification. The leader's section in the back tended to dance around these difficult questions without giving specific answers. If I had it to do over, I would not use this particular study guide on Proverbs.

This 95-page booklet is an excellent fill-in-the blank study guide for the individual or a Bible study group. Right at the beginning you get two invitations to two different dinners, each held at the same time (Lady Wisdom & Dame Folly). At the begining of each of the 13 theme-based lessons are listed selected proverbs illustrating that theme. There suggestions on how to study and Leader's notes. For a more in-depth commentary as a companion read THE COMPLETE GUIDE TO THE BOOK OF PROVERBS by Cody Jones. The comments are interesting and very readable and put things into a historical setting. It includes many historical drawings and photos to give you a sense of the culture of the time. There is a topical guide and 6 translations in parallel to aid understanding. Also many of the mysteries and riddles of Proverbs are explored.

In this text, Ron Allen once again weaves his extensive preaching knowledge and skill together with him Bible knowledge and expertise. A professor of both homiletics and New Testament, he is ideally suited to teach on the subject of appropriate and useful Biblical interpretation for the task of preaching.

Allen addresses things from the standpoint of modern scholarship in the Bible, and in particular historical-critical interpretative frameworks. 'Strictly speaking, many of the exegetical disciplines are descriptive and not theological.' In saying this, Allen puts forth a thesis that is broad-based - this is a text that can be useful to people of differing theological persuasions conservative and liberal. Likewise, Allen does not shy away from the shortcomings or controversies of the historical-critical enterprise, or any other academic endeavour with regard to Biblical scholarship. A book from Allen's early days of teachings, it shows (when taken with his later scholarship, which is extensive) how remarkably consistent his work has been.

The topics discussed in this book include historical background, form criticism, redaction criticism, structuralism, sociological exegesis, and canonical criticism. These ideas will be familiar to students and graduates of seminaries, Bible colleges, and schools of religion, and no doubt most will already have a notion as to their relative value for Biblical study and interpretation. Allen takes this into account as he develops each theme. 'When a pastor settles down with a text to begin sermon preparation, he or she is seldom a tabula rasa, a blank slate,' Allen writes. In giving key questions, specific scriptural examples, and suggestions for further readings, the reader of most any slant will find useful information and guidance.

Allen devotes a special chapter to the concerns of liberation theology. Liberation theology is not a particular discipline of exegesis, but rather a broader framework of interpretation that has developed in the later half of the twentieth century that seeks to find the liberating voice of God in scripture and church action. Drawing on themes from the Hebrew scriptures and the gospels, Allen shows ways of incorporating liberation ideas into responsible biblical interpretation and preaching.

Allen also gives special attention to looking at the Bible as a work of art. This involves giving attention to feelings and intuitions about the Bible, as well as looking at literary and artistic nuances and devices in the text itself. Key questions are important here, as well as a framework for ensuring responsible answers, and not letting emotionalism cloud good judgement.

The final chapters of the text deal with issues of authority and hermeneutics - these are separate chapters, but in many ways go together as one issue no doubt influences the other in dialectical relationship. Looking at the Bible as a canon of scripture rooted in a particular historical setting, the implications of the relationship between the timeless and the time-specific become clear. Then, drawing largely on Ricoeur as well as the approach of the hermeneutic of analogy, Allen discusses the importance of meaning as well as the difficulties of finding 'true' and 'unalterable' meanings in the text, not subject to interpretation.

Allen includes a compendium of the key questions gleaned from the chapters, a section of endnotes, and an index of scriptural quotations. As a reader, I prefer footnotes to endnotes (this is often a publisher decision rather than an author decision), and I will also issue the loud call for an index (subject, author, key word and concept), which this text lacks, which makes it less useful for scholars.

Overall, this book is a fine collection of ideas and questions for students and active preachers to help develop sensitivity to the various issues involved in interpreting Biblical passages for preaching.

I guess you get what you pay for!

That is what runs through my mind as I give thought to The HarperCollins Study Bible. To start off, I have had this Bible for five months ; so I will be speaking as one who has had the Bible for a while.
When I got the Bible, the first thing I noticed was the cover. To pass this thing off as Genuine Leather as to be a stretch. Maybe Genuine Leather is not what it used to be. The cover was very thin and felt like cardboard. It had this shiny coat on top that reminded me of Bonded Leather.
(ps. Watch out for people who say something is Genuine Leather, and the price is really low. Bonded Leather is made by taking strips of Genuine Leather and fusing them together with a type of laminate. So they can legally say that the Bible is Genuine Leather.)
Most publishers are up front and tell you that the Bible is Bonded. I am sure that Harper Collins have not done this; it is most likely "crappy" leather.
Also every page was stuck together from were the gold was placed on the edges. So I had to turn every page of the Bible as soon as I got it. After only a month the gold stamping on the spine of the Bible started coming off. This is unacceptable!
As far as the content, this Bible is right up there with it's biggest competitor, the Oxford Annotated Study Bible. The notes are very helpful, and do not distract from the text it's self. By far the Book Introductions are the best part of this Bible. It shows the historical context of every book; even the Apocrypha! Overall this Bible is good because of its content, and the very low price. However, if you are looking for something were the quality on the outside is just as good as the inside, go with the Oxford. You may spend a few more bucks, but it is well worth it.

The NRSV is a superlative translation of scripture with very few drawbacks. Unlike the writers of the dogmatic, Evangelical-doctrine-riddled NIV, the translators of the NRSV (and earlier RSV) made a real attempt to be literal, yet use modern language. When there is ambiguity or other difficulty in translation, the NRSV includes footnotes that tell the reader other possible readings, rather than arbitrarily choosing what to include and not informing the reader that there are other possible translations (as the NIV does).

The annotations are comprehensive, and were written by the foremost Bible scholars, yet are easy-to-read and shed much light on difficult passages. I would question those who decry this Bible as "un-believing" or "dangerous to the faith." I've had my doubts about Christianity before, but after reading the Harper-Collins Study Bible cover-to-cover, I found renewed interest and inspiration, rather than the alleged detrimental effects being shouted-about by some reviewers.

If to you ignorance equals faith, don't read this version. If honest scholarship that doesn't shy away from difficult concepts is dangerous to the soul, go ahead and burn this book-- but you'll never grow in your faith.

I am no liberal- but I found this Bible to be faith-affirming, and it helped me to see God in a new way that was much more beautiful and wonderful than before. My faith and the way I approach life changed after reading this Bible. It may do the same for you- but it's not the easy kind of self-affirming, indoctrinating Bible study notes sought by some people.

---

Many people seem to be complaining about the quality of the binding, etc. It may be that the paperback versions are poor quality, so I would suggest readers buy one of the hard-cover editions. I've never had any problems with the binding or pages and I have the hard-cover student edition.

Thank you for reading this review. If you choose to buy this study Bible, I pray it will help your faith-journey. It will NOT turn you into an "evil unbeliever" as some suggest!

`The Harper Collins Study Bible' for the New Revised Standard Version is one of, if not the best study Bible I've found for serious study. Its closest competitor may be the `Oxford Annotated Bible', which I originally used to prepare Bible Study classes, until a Theological Seminary professor recommended the Harper-Collins. The very first thing which one notices is that the general editor for the Harper-Collins is Wayne Meeks, who, even in my short experience with Biblical studies, stands out as one of the more important mentors of Biblical scholars in the United States.
One thing the Harper-Collins is not is a fancifully colored layout. The text of the scriptures are plainly stated, but with the advantage over Oxford of providing titles for the various subjects and incidents (commonly called pericopes when they appear in the Gospels). Oxford does not have these, and they are an immediate help.
Another thing the Harper-Collins does not have is a Concordance section. Oxford has such a section, and I found it a total waste of space. While their section was a few dozen pages, the Strong concordance runs to over 1200 pages. One can imagine that Oxford left a lot of things out!
The Harper-Collins and Oxford had several features which were virtually identical, such as the maps section and the table of parallel passages in the Gospels. Oxford did have a comparable section for Hebrew Scriptures, which I do not see in Harper-Collins, so that's one point for Oxford.
Harper-Collins also has an eminently useful listing of all Hebrew passages quoted in the Christian scriptures. This is invaluable. I only wish they had done it by both OT and NT books rather than just by OT books.
In the notes, I tend to find Harper-Collins more useful and richer in the number of notes and the amount of information therein, but that may vary from book to book, as different contributors did different books. It is certainly true of the Gospels.
Like some other books, `Oxford' is a brand name which yields good, but not excellent results. If you can get your hands on a Harper-Collins Study Bible, you will not be disappointed, as long as you do not expect it to replace commentaries on individual books.

Buyers beware, the Bible commentaries are written by liberal theologians. They tend to disbelieve miracles and try explaining away Divine prophecy by assigning late dates for the books. When I was reading the commentaries, I couldn't help but get the feeling that the writers were trying to destroy my faith. Also, while it is not a bad translation, the NRSV does have some gender-neutrality inserted into it. All in all, I cannot recommend this study Bible. It reads like skeptics and non-believers wrote it.

I got this for a class I took along with the handbook and it was great. Easy to read and follow. Plus it was required for the class. :)