I can't judge the quality of the NIV translation, since the only other
I am at all familiar with is the King James, my Greek is rusty and my
Hebrew rudimentary. (And I certainly wouldn't want to enter into any
debate about whether the translators were divinely inspired or not.)
The commentary is another matter; whatever its doctrinal merits, I
feel it lacks anthropological, archaeological,
historical, and literary
inspiration. So the traditional dates and authorship are accepted for
all the New Testament books with only a passing mention that these have
been rather seriously disputed, while the commentary on the Old Testament
makes no mention whatsoever of possible Persian or Egyptian influences
on Hebraic religion. Even from a religious point of view the commentary
seems likely to annoy some Christians, often doing more to tell the
reader what the "right" interpretation of the text is than to provide
them with the information necessary to come to their own conclusions.
So (to take a controversial example) in the note to Romans 1:27 we
find "Homosexual practice is sinful in God's eyes" — now either this
is clear from the text or it isn't, and the paraphrase doesn't give
the reader information about anything except the editors' opinions.
(A cross reference to 1 Corinthians 6:9 might have been more useful.)
The NIV Study Bible does come with lots of pretty maps and timelines,
which may be of use to the reader unfamiliar with the history and
geography of the Eastern Mediterranean, and I presume the nitty-gritty
of cross references and explanations of Hebrew meanings are accurate
enough, but, unless it is required by your doctrinal position, I
recommend giving the NIV Study Bible a big miss; I'm going to finish
reading the Old Testament using a New Revised Standard Version and the
Fontana Literary Guide to the Bible.
July 1994
- External links:
-
- buy from Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk
- Related reviews:
-
- books about Christianity + Christian history