Candy does address Dake's views:
I believe Dake to be wrong about "planet heaven," his view of the trinity (3 Gods, instead of 3 in 1), and the gap theory.
Candy's highest criteria in a Bible is whether or not it can cause one to question the authenticity of the Bible. The last time Candy wrote on this topic, I asked her what she meant by that. She replied that it was in reference to those footnotes you often find in Bibles which say "This verse not found in the earliest manuscripts." She said that she felt, especially for new Christians, that this could cause one to doubt the authenticity of the Bible.
Personally, I think if you are recommending a Bible with the new Christian in mind, that Dake's heretical views on the Trinity alone would be enough to rule it out. I understand this isn't a problem for Candy, but I worry that her glowing review could lead others into believing that Dake is a trustworthy source. She did address that this time, with the above comment, but in previous editions of this article, she didn't add the disclaimer.
Her second choice Bible, the Scofield, comes from a similarly controversial choice. Scofield is primarily associated with the dispensationalist movement, and unlike Candy, he is a premillenialist.
It is fitting that Candy prefers the Dake and Scofield, because both lacked formal theological training. Candy has said before that she feels that theological study can hinder one from truly interpreting Scripture, because you bring preconceived notions to your study of Scripture.
I read the Bible through several times before I had any type of real Doctrinal Teaching. That is a blessing, because that means I was able to read the Bible several times on my own, without anyone else’s interpretations getting in the way. The first several to dozen times through the Bible, I used text only, or reference Bibles,- no study Bibles.
For those who may be interested, let's look over some Catholic study Bibles.
Personally, I think the gold standard is the Navarre Study Bible. The notes are so extensive, that the full edition runs to a 12 volume New Testament! The commentary is taken mostly from the Doctors of the Church, and Early Church Fathers, so you are really getting an education in history by reading through the notes. I have the medium edition, which is a 3 volume New Testament. I'd like to start chipping away at the Old Testament on my Christmas list.
A similarly well received project is the Ignatius Study Bible, which is primarily written by prominent Catholic apologist Scott Hahn, with several co-authors. However, it is still being written, and currently only available in a series of paperbacks, as far as I am aware. I use an inexpensive Ignatius Bible for when I want to read the Bible without the in depth study of the Navarre, because I prefer the Revised Standard Version.
The Catholic Answer Bible is written geared towards apologetics, but I have not actually looked through it personally.
The Oxford Catholic Study Bible also looks promising, but again, I have no personal experience with it.
For those of you with a King James Version bent, be sure to try out the Douay Rheims Study Bible. It's pricey, but look that list of contributors to the commentary!
Please chime in with your favorite Bible versions in the comments, especially if you've seen some of these that I haven't.
5 comments:
I thought the Dake bible was an interesting choice, considering that he does not adhere to Candy's brand of Once Saved Always Saved theology.
Are there very many study bibles from that perspective? It's relatively recent doctrine. I'm not sure about Scofield's position.
BTW, the Navarre Pentateuch is FABULOUS!
Have you seen BibliaClerus, which is put out by the Congregation for Clergy at the Holy See? It links Scripture with Early Church fathers, sermons, and saints.
Yes, I think I posted the BibliaClerus link in the John 1 post.
I sometimes find that they don't link to the relevant part of the writing of the early church father, and I get bogged down trying to find exactly where in Homily 2348 that Pope Leo said anything about verse 12. Ya know?
On the other hand, it gives you the entire thing, whereas the Navarre just gives you a few lines. I think they would probably cross-reference very well, if you wanted to read more of what the Navarre just quoted a little bit.
My husband is OSAS, and he uses a Rainbow Study Bible.
From what I understand, Scofield was more Calvinist.
Charles Stanley is a big name in the conservative (not charismatic) OSAS field; he's even written a book called "Eternal Security, Can You Be Sure?" that lays out the doctrine; he recommends the "Life Principals Bible".
Post a Comment