The Orthodox Study Bible-Thoughts?

[Ramon96]

Hello,

I am currently investigating the Orthodox Faith, and I am thinking about becoming Orthodox. I want to buy the Orthodox Study Bible (OT + NT), but what do Orthodox generally think about this Study Bible? Does it faithfully and accurately communicate the Orthodox Faith? Do you believe the OSB needs improvements? If so, what are the flaws?

Thanks

[Knowledge3]

I own a OSB. I also use the Divine Office prayer in the back Index. It is passages of scripture with patristic commentary of the Fathers, it is however different from other Bible formats because the OSB is arranged according to the liturgical year of the Church.

[Julina]

i read a review that critized the old OST (the one with just the new testament and psalms). http://www.anastasis.org.uk/bible_review.htm

does anyone agree with this guy? or think that the full version would be the same as this? i've heard good reviews so far, but i've been saving up my money to get one so i really hope it's worth it.

[Macarius]

The OT+NT Orthodox Study Bible is marvelous. I fully support it. Of all the books I could recommend, the Bible is the most Orthodox of them all ;)

The commentary at the bottom tends to be simplistic, if accurate. An adaquet introduction. I would strongly recommend getting a copy of "The Orthodox Church" by Timothy Ware (Kalistos Ware). Read it when you have time, while using the OSB for daily bible readings. That way, you are in the scriptures daily and encountering the patristic interpretations that particular study bible offers and, at the same time, getting a general introduction to Orthodoxy.

If haven't already done so, I'd also contact a priest. Orthodoxy is, at its heart, an experienced and recieved faith. We don't discover it in books, though the Book certainly conveys it. Rather, we are discipled into it by the Church, both in her membership handing on the faith and by her liturgy in which we commune with God.

Anyhow - as for the OSB II itself (the OT+NT version) I love the translation, though the NT is still the NKJV and could use a little work. The deuterocanon like Tobit and such is done beautifully. The Psalms are fantastic - the number of messianic prophecies in them are brought forward by the translators and the commentaries.

Definitely a good purchase.

In Christ,
Macarius

[jckstraw72]

i think a lot of the commentary is pretty lacking, often nothing more than a paraphrase of the verse or passage. i wouldnt say its a bad buy, but i think you could find better commentaries elsewhere probably.

[Knowledge3]

Actually, the one I have is NT only from SVS press.

http://www.svspress.com/product_info.php?products_id=11

[Macarius]

i read a review that critized the old OST (the one with just the new testament and psalms). http://www.anastasis.org.uk/bible_review.htm

does anyone agree with this guy? or think that the full version would be the same as this? i've heard good reviews so far, but i've been saving up my money to get one so i really hope it's worth it.
I think his view is valid but a bit of an overreaction. I know a few of the people who put the first one together, and they came from evangelical stock. Great folks, but that "tone" or "feel" came with them, for better or for worse, and to some it feels out of joint with Orthodoxy.

The second ed. still has a bit of that, but it is dramatically reduced. Most of the comments and materials are patristic comments or summaries. There's only one "proselytizing" article in the beginning.

Granted the concept of a study bible is indebted to protestants, but I don't care what they call it. I'm just excited to have a complete, Orthodox OT translation. Next up should be OSB III with an Orthodox NT translation.

[Julina]

what do you mean by an orthodox NT translation?

[Macarius]

Well, the current OSB uses the NKJV, which though admirable and accurate was done by protestants.

The OT was based heavily on the NKJV, but they retranslated the psalms, deuterocanon, and any place where the Septuagint and Hebrew disagreed to be in favor of the LXX as opposed to the Hebrew (as per the teachings of the Orthodox Church).

In particular, the nuances of translations of some of Paul's epistles carries with it a protestant emphasis in NKJV - as well it should since that's who translated it and all translation is, on some level, interpretation.

I would like to see a fresh translation of the NT into contemporary english by Orthodox scholars and translators, so that when there is a choice (ie between propitiation and expiation in Romans) the more Orthodox choice would be made.

I can make that substitution on my own, but it's a stretch, and having come from a protestant background when I read protestant phrasings I have to have a little debate in my head about how an Orthodox Christian would understand / reinterprate that phrasing.

[Dorothea]

I love both my old OSB that just has the NT and psalms and stuff and the new OSB that has both OT and NT. I'm currently reading out of the new OSB. :)

[buzuxi02]

I love the OSB NT, but some of the criticism against it is valid. Its basically more for non-Orthodox seekers from a protestant background. Like the article explains this is best seen in the back of the book where there are morning and evening prayers yet none invoke the intercessions of the saints or the Virgin Mary.

Another criticism of the book which i agree with is that none of the commentary are from the Church Fathers. Also the comments under Acts 3.1 irks me the wrong way when it makes mention of 'advent' (there is no advent in Orthdoxy). The article is correct that Phoebe should have been identified as one of the first female deacons of the church in the commentary instead as simply "a leading christian woman'.
Its a great as a beginning, but doesnt go deep enough for us who like an indepth Orthodox approach .

[Ramon96]

Thanks for your comments! I just purchase my copy today from Conciliar Press (should get it my next week). I just have to see how it is personally next week. I was little disappointed to learn that the NT is based on the NKJV. I do not like how the NKJV phrases certain passages in the Bible. I would have prefer the KJV.

I do hope that Orthodox scholars and translators make a new Orthodox translation of the NT (hopefully there will be another edition of OSB). I am looking forward for the Eastern Orthodox Bible (OT) which will be coming out in Late 2008. I haven't bought the NT yet, but I will. Hopefully, some of the valid negative reviews will be fix in the next version of OSB (if there going to be one).

[EmperorConstantine]

I like having an English LXX available as well as all the notes on the bottom of pages.

[JM]

Is this Bible out? I tried to order it from Chapters.ca and it's not yet released on that site.

[Lukaris]

Is this Bible out? I tried to order it from Chapters.ca and it's not yet released on that site.
see http://www.conciliarpress.com/

[JM]

Thanks, I sent them an email.

[-Kyriaki-]

I love mine, but I prefer the NT only one's version of the prayers *grins*

I understand the criticism, but overall I think it's great for most people. People who want something more scholarly have options, they're just harder to find and not likely to be found in major bookstores :)

One thought I had was with commentary - seriously, the Bible is huge as it is and they had to take out the cross referencing to make it fit the binding. How much commentary could they include? I've always used commentaries that weren't in my Bible as well as the Bible itself, much as I like notes that are close to the text. If I want something more than the short commentary (which is what's in most Bibles) then I go find it. We have so much in the way of Orthodox scholarship for commentary...how on earth could they include it all?

[JM]

Are the prayers, etc. not found in the complete Bible?

[gzt]

It has its shortcomings. It's probably a good thing, in general. I mean, not everybody can afford to get Blessed Theophylact's commentaries on the Gospels, and then those are only the Gospels. There is certainly a place for criticizing them, but I don't think it's helpful to most lay readers to pay that much attention to the criticisms because it gets them into the habit of criticizing things rather than seeing the good.

[-Kyriaki-]

I don't think it's helpful to most lay readers to pay that much attention to the criticisms because it gets them into the habit of criticizing things rather than seeing the good.

Quoted for truth. And I include myself in that group!

[Michael the Iconographer]

I prefer the translation of the Oxford RSV with Deuterocanonicals and Apocrypha to that of the OSB.

[JustinHesychast]

I got a copy yesterday when I visited a different parish! I really like it so far! I am really bummed that they got rid of the center cross references, and there seems to be fewer icons, and they pages are noticeably thinner than my other Bibles. But I love the good sized font, the many articles scattered throughout, passages that are marked for specific Church readings, and the fact that the OT is from the LXX! ^_^

[Orthocat]

there is also the NT translation from the....Holy...monastery....

ok, went completely blank! :sorry:

It's black binded...has two books...
It's also good although I'm not sure about the monastery itself.
wow, I was just reading from it earlier...

I'm sure someone knows what I'm talking about since I certainly don't!! :)

[jckstraw72]

Holy Apostles Convent i think ... Gospels and Epistles

[Orthocat]

Holy Apostles Convent i think ... Gospels and Epistles

That's it!! :thumbsup:

yep, I like this one too.