The ESV Study Bible

The other day I bought myself an ESV Study Bible - The one I got was $87.00, but if there is something I will pay good money for it is a Bible. This is a translation which I first was exposed to in 2003 (the year it was first published). My friend Brad and I were working at the annual gathering of the ETS (Evangelical Theological Society) in Toronto - we were working for InterVarsity Press (Free books and 10 bucks an hour you can't go wrong!) - It had just come out in a bland hard copy version - 

Interested in what it had to offer, we bought it and neither of us has regretted it. It has been helpful over the years - and has been becoming more and more a part of my study as the years have gone on. It is a great translation with many theologians and linguist at the helm which I respect including J.I Packer, Wayne Grudem, William Mounce, Greg Beale, and Craig Blomberg. The study notes are written by great biblical scholars such as Frank S. Thielman, Clinton Arnold, and Thomas R. Schreiner. Also three teachers from my school (Regent College) are responsible for the notes: V. Phillips Long (Joshua), Iain Provan (1 and 2 Kings) and J.I Packer who was the theological editor for the entire Study Bible.

On that note, J.I. Packer has said about his involvement with the Study Bible: "I find myself suspecting very strongly that this was the most important thing that I have ever done for the Kingdom" - This is a big statement from the person who wrote "Knowing God" one of the all time best selling, most read, most beloved Christian books of all time - and a classic in every right. (A must read for anyone reading this who has not bee blessed by its pages)

Also, Pastors such as James Macdonald, Mark Driscoll and John Piper have officially changed their preaching Bible to the ESV which says alot.  It is a good translation that balances linguistic faithfulness and contemporary readability. It is a good balance of being a "word for word" translation (think NASB) with meaning for meaning flow (think NIV, NLT) - with much needed corrections and updates to the NIV ("righteousness from God" in Romans? Where did the NIV derive such a concept? Its the "righteousness of God"!)
About a month ago they released the ESV Study Bible. I am excited, and in the words of Merry and Pippin from The Lord of the Rings "I'm getting one!" Well, as mentioned above I already got one. I found a list someone had written; 10 reasons why the ESV Study Bible is great. I thought I would share it with you as I agree with each point he makes:

___________________________________

1. It’s based on the English Standard Version, which is one of the finest and most faithful translations available today. While it’s always good to consult various translations for study, the ESV does a great job recognizing variants in translation in the footnotes.

2. The introductory notes to each book are informative and helpful, and don’t overwhelm you with interesting but non-essential background information.

3. The notes are extensive and answer questions I actually have about the text, without avoiding difficult passages.

4. The notes cover material that is not only helpful, but pastoral, aimed at helping me understand God’s Word better and as a result in growing in Christian faith.

5. The notes are well laid out. I’ve found them easy to follow along with the text.

6. The treatment of the first few chapters of Genesis is very even-handed and well-researched. The notes aim to give us an appreciation for the interplay of science and the Bible without giving ground on the ultimate authority of Scripture.

7. The focus is always Gospel-centered. The notes seek to answer the question, “Where does this section of the Bible fit into the larger story of God sending Jesus to redeem a people for his glory?”

8. The articles in the back of the Bible are almost a book in themselves (I’d love to see Crossway publish these separately), and address many significant issues clearly, briefly, and effectively. They include Biblical Doctrine, Biblical Ethics, Reading the Bible, The Reliability of Bible Manuscripts, The Bible and World Religions, and the History of Salvation in the Old Testament. In addition there are several additional articles between the Old and New Testaments that shed light on the inter-testamental period.

9. The maps and illustrations actually contain the cities, areas, and details I want to know about, and are placed close to the passages they refer to.

10. The notes don’t go beyond what the text says. They affirm what is clear, and plainly present different views when a word, phrase, or passage is unclear.

The only negative comment I’d make at this point is that the Bible is so big it’s hard to imagine carrying it around a lot. Unless I also want to use it as part of my exercise program.

But it’s a Study Bible, especially useful for personal devotions. I’m so eager to read through the ESV Study Bible that I’m setting a goal to read through the entire Bible with text notes by the end of 2009. It’s an ambitious goal, at least for me. The Bible and text notes come in at almost 2500 pages. Over 14 months, that’s about six pages a day, without missing a day. Like I said…it’s ambitious. But I’d rather aim high and fall short of my goal than aim low and miss it. I’ve found that I do better when I attempt a Bible reading plan that necessitates God’s grace than one that I can accomplish on my own.

__________________

Here is a list of endorsements from Christian leaders, Pastors and Theologians:

“I was privileged to act as General Editor of the English Standard Version, and now that I look back on what we did in producing that version, I find myself suspecting very strongly that this was the most important thing that I have ever done for the Kingdom, and that the product of our labors is perhaps the biggest milestone in Bible translation in certainly the last half century at least, and perhaps more. And now, as Theological Editor of the ESV Study Bible, I believe that the work we have done together on this project has set an altogether new standard in study Bibles.”
J. I. Packer, Professor of Theology, Regent College, Vancouver, Canada

“The ESV is a dream come true for me. The rightful heir to a great line of historic translations, it provides the continuity and modern accuracy I longed for. Now the scope and theological faithfulness of the ESV Study Bible study notes is breathtaking. Oh how precious is the written Word of God.”
John Piper, Pastor for Preaching and Vision, Bethlehem Baptist Church, Minneapolis, MN

“The ESV Study Bible is the most important resource that has been given to the emerging generation of Bible students and teachers. The ESV Study Bible is the best. Period.”
Mark Driscoll, Preaching Pastor, Mars Hill Church, Seattle, WA; President, Acts 29 Church Planting Network

“The definitive clarity and beauty of the ESV Study Bible is extraordinary. In a world where words are distorted to mean anything, it is wonderful to have complete confidence in the reliability and truth of the Bible—so clearly and persuasively demonstrated by this world-class team of Bible scholars and teachers. For everyone who wants to understand God’s Word in a deeper way, the ESV Study Bible is an outstanding resource. I will be an avid user!”
Joni Eareckson Tada, Founder, JAF International Disability Center, Agoura Hills, CA

“Outstanding! The ESV Study Bible is a treasure—a beautiful volume, filled with a wealth of resources. It will be just as useful for the seminarian and long-time pastor as it will be accessible to the brand-new Christian.”
R. Albert Mohler Jr., President, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY

“Wow! Concise, lucid, enlightening—the ESV Study Bible is an amazing resource. With its textual fidelity, doctrinal substance, and artistic beauty, the ESV Study Bible will be an immense help to all who hunger for God-breathed Scripture. I wholeheartedly recommend this exceptional resource.”
Randy Alcorn, bestselling author of Heaven and Money, Possessions, and Eternity

Christmas Theology: The Virgin Conception

One of the seminal miracles in all of the Bible, is the virgin birth, and it bears some close scrutiny especially at this time of year. In fact, the miracle of Christmas has several components, but none more crucial than the miracle of the virginal conception which presents us with an explanation as to how the Incarnation happened. Several preliminary points need to be stressed.

Firstly, there are no real parallels to this story, despite the ‘Zeitgeist-ites’ contentions to the contrary. Mary of Nazareth was a historical person, unlike stories about Isis which are pure myths about mythological deities, not mere mortals. Furthermore, the mythological stories about the divine rape of a mortal woman by some male deity (cf. the story in Gen. 6.1-4 about wicked angels) are very different than the story of the virginal conception which stresses there was no intercourse with any kind of male, whether terrestrial or celestial. Then too, the stories about Caesar or other Emperors having divine origins besides being imperial propaganda (which even Romans recognized as pure P.R.) do not involve virginal conceptions. Finally, there are no comparable earlier Jewish stories. For example the stories about Moses’ origins (either canonical or extra canonical) do not include the notion of a virginal conception.

Secondly, it needs to be stressed that Isaiah 7.14 while patient of the interpretation that it refers to a virginal conception, was never interpreted that way before the time of Mary of Nazareth. Why not, because a literal rendering of the Hebrew there is as follows “an almah will conceive and give birth to a child…..”. The normal translation of almah is ‘a young nubile woman of marriageable age. Now, in an honor and shame culture, this would normally include the conception of the virginity of the woman, and thus we should not conclude that the translation of almah is incorrect, when it renders the word as parthenos ("virgin"). The latter is a term with a more limited semantic field, focusing more clearly on the virginity of the woman. 

Even so, what Is. 7.14 and in particular “a virgin will conceive and give birth to a child” seems to have been understood to mean in early Judaism was that a woman who was a virgin would conceive by the normal means and give birth to a king. In short, no one seems to have been looking for a virginally conceived messiah in early Judaism. And this leads to an important conclusion—it was the unexpected event in the life of Mary that led latter Christian interpreters to search the OT and interpret Is. 7.14 as they did (see Mt. 1-2). 

ASIDE: A guy once called me and challenged me on this interpretation, "Mark,  the Hebrew Bible only pictures a young maiden and thus Mary was not a Virgin!" I pointed out that he should not base the whole argument about her virginity on the Isa. text but on Matthew, who twice tells us that Joseph never had sex with Mary until after Jesus was born (1.18, 25) - I asked if he was willing to believe the alternative, that Mary was sleeping around with other men then Joseph. He was not.

The claims that the story of the virginal conception is an example of prophecy historicized, rather than being a reflection on an actual historical event, won’t work because Jews did not read that prophecy that way. On the contrary, it was the actual historical event that led to the re-evaluation of OT prophecies, including in particular Is. 7.14.

There are further problems with the contention that this story is not historical, namely in an honor and shame culture like early Judaism, and when we are talking about a religion that was evangelistic in character, no one in their right mind would make up a story about a virginally conceived messiah, because the skeptical would immediately conclude that what the real story was that Jesus was illegitimate, and in fact we know that that was the rebuttal in second century Judaism, with the suggestion being made that Mary was impregnated by a Roman soldier named Pantera or Panthera.

We can see the difficulties of explanation that were presented to a Gospel writer like the Jewish Christian who wrote Matthew almost immediately. How in the world does one squeeze Jesus into Joseph’s genealogy, as is done in Mt. 1, whilst maintaining that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus? The genealogy in Mt. 1 is a patrilineal genealogy, a genealogy of begats, basically, which means you are tracing the line through the male descendents of King David and even before that of Abraham. The answer is--- you put Mary into Joseph’s genealogy!

 

And you prepare for that little surprise by mentioning in passing other women who had surprising or irregular unions with Jewish males from Israel’s past--- women like Tamar, or Rahab, or Bathsheba. Notice how the genealogy concludes---- ‘Joseph, whose wife was Mary, who bore Jesus….’ And then the author goes on to explain that if Joseph had not been alerted in a visionary dream to marry Mary even though she was already pregnant, Jesus might never have been part of a patrilineal genealogy going back to David at all. In other words, the actually historical occurrence of the virginal conception is what causes all remarkable these genealogical gymnastics. The story of the virginal conception is a story too improbable not to be true, as an ambitious evangelical religion in an honor and shame world would not make up a story prone to all sorts of negative alternative appraisals. The possible punishment for pregnancy out of wedlock by a betrothed virgin was stoning. The virginal conception imperiled Mary’s very life, and it is no wonder that she took a little trip to see her cousin for various months immediately after the shock of becoming pregnant in a highly irregular manner.