What Think Ye About MacArthur's NIV (2011) Study Bible...?

I personally don't like the 2011 NIV, but not because of the gender-inclusive language. I have never read a copy of the MacArthur Study Bible, so I don't know if I'd like it or not. What's its theological position on key doctrines like salvation by faith, eschatology, etc?
 
Reformed Guy said:
...yeah, THAT one, the gender-confused version?

I don't know whether I should be more surprised or disappointed, but right now I'm more than a little of both.

http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2012/02/macarthur-study-bible-niv.html
Click to expand...

Hmmmm, not quite sure what to think. On the one hand I'm glad a NIV edition will be published, but I'm not overly thrilled with the NIV2011 version. I'll need to gather more information, I guess

Currently I have the NKJV version of the MacArthur Study Bible, and I have just about worn it out. I do have other Bibles I read, but that one is my "go to" Bible when I do serious study.
 
I like the NIV 2011, but I don't like MacArthur's notes. I have an NASB MacArthur Study Bible, but I rarely use it, because MacArthur makes me so mad I want to throw it, which is no way to treat a Bible. We're so opposite on so many doctrines, and he's so "my way or the highway" about it.
 
I don't know whether I should be more surprised or disappointed, but right now I'm more than a little of both.

Yeah, what are these boneheads thinking? Everyone knows that owners of poor Bibles don't deserve good notes. ::)
 
wheatpenny said:
I personally don't like the 2011 NIV, but not because of the gender-inclusive language. I have never read a copy of the MacArthur Study Bible, so I don't know if I'd like it or not. What's its theological position on key doctrines like salvation by faith, eschatology, etc?
Click to expand...

I don't like the gender-inclusive language either. I am really disappointed in the NIV 2011.  And I did not know MacArthur had a Study Bible in that translation.

As far as MacArthur's doctrine, he is basically a Reformed/Calvinist who believes in the Pre-trib, Premillenial eschatalogical scheme. I have the NKJV study Bible and that is the bent of the notes.  I don't like his view on salvation or eschatalogy, but the rest is good.
 
Ransom said:
I don't know whether I should be more surprised or disappointed, but right now I'm more than a little of both.

Yeah, what are these boneheads thinking? Everyone knows that owners of poor Bibles don't deserve good notes. ::)
Click to expand...

Or is it the other way 'round? Owners of good Bibles don't deserve cranky, intransigent notes.  ::)
 
Winston said:
wheatpenny said:
I personally don't like the 2011 NIV, but not because of the gender-inclusive language. I have never read a copy of the MacArthur Study Bible, so I don't know if I'd like it or not. What's its theological position on key doctrines like salvation by faith, eschatology, etc?
Click to expand...

I don't like the gender-inclusive language either. I am really disappointed in the NIV 2011.  And I did not know MacArthur had a Study Bible in that translation.

As far as MacArthur's doctrine, he is basically a Reformed/Calvinist who believes in the Pre-trib, Premillenial eschatalogical scheme. I have the NKJV study Bible and that is the bent of the notes.  I don't like his view on salvation or eschatalogy, but the rest is good.
Click to expand...

I don't mind Reformed/Calvinist. I don't wholly agree with it, but I understand it and I'm used to it. I don't like that he's pre-trib, pre-millennial, YEC or into Lordship Salvation... but what I really mind is that he's so obnoxiously opinionated about all of that, and (in his mind) everybody who disagrees with him is just flat-out wrong. I like my notes to be thoughtful and to consider all reasonable possibilities, not to be aggressively argumentative in favor of one of them.
 
Izdaari said:
Winston said:
wheatpenny said:
I personally don't like the 2011 NIV, but not because of the gender-inclusive language. I have never read a copy of the MacArthur Study Bible, so I don't know if I'd like it or not. What's its theological position on key doctrines like salvation by faith, eschatology, etc?
Click to expand...

I don't like the gender-inclusive language either. I am really disappointed in the NIV 2011.  And I did not know MacArthur had a Study Bible in that translation.

As far as MacArthur's doctrine, he is basically a Reformed/Calvinist who believes in the Pre-trib, Premillenial eschatalogical scheme. I have the NKJV study Bible and that is the bent of the notes.  I don't like his view on salvation or eschatalogy, but the rest is good.
Click to expand...

I don't mind Reformed/Calvinist. I don't wholly agree with it, but I understand it and I'm used to it. I don't like that he's pre-trib, pre-millennial, YEC or into Lordship Salvation... but what I really mind is that he's so obnoxiously opinionated about all of that, and (in his mind) everybody who disagrees with him is just flat-out wrong. I like my notes to be thoughtful and to consider all reasonable possibilities, not to be aggressively argumentative in favor of one of them.
Click to expand...

But if he is convinced he is right..... Well, then he is convinced you are wrong.  ;D (j/k) And I have never thought he was aggressively argumentative, just confident, very confident.
 
Winston said:
Izdaari said:
Winston said:
wheatpenny said:
I personally don't like the 2011 NIV, but not because of the gender-inclusive language. I have never read a copy of the MacArthur Study Bible, so I don't know if I'd like it or not. What's its theological position on key doctrines like salvation by faith, eschatology, etc?
Click to expand...

I don't like the gender-inclusive language either. I am really disappointed in the NIV 2011.  And I did not know MacArthur had a Study Bible in that translation.

As far as MacArthur's doctrine, he is basically a Reformed/Calvinist who believes in the Pre-trib, Premillenial eschatalogical scheme. I have the NKJV study Bible and that is the bent of the notes.  I don't like his view on salvation or eschatalogy, but the rest is good.
Click to expand...

I don't mind Reformed/Calvinist. I don't wholly agree with it, but I understand it and I'm used to it. I don't like that he's pre-trib, pre-millennial, YEC or into Lordship Salvation... but what I really mind is that he's so obnoxiously opinionated about all of that, and (in his mind) everybody who disagrees with him is just flat-out wrong. I like my notes to be thoughtful and to consider all reasonable possibilities, not to be aggressively argumentative in favor of one of them.
Click to expand...

But if he is convinced he is right..... Well, then he is convinced you are wrong.  ;D (j/k) And I have never thought he was aggressively argumentative, just confident, very confident.
Click to expand...

I agree.
Everybody can't be right, somebody has got to be wrong!

In this no valedictorian culture, we want everyone to always be equal, which leads to shared mediocrity!
 
Well, he's confident to the point that it irritates me, since I'm equally confident of my opposite positions. But he does know a lot and is a pretty good teacher, his confidence issue aside.
 
Izdaari said:
.... not to be aggressively argumentative in favor of one of them.
Click to expand...


BUT that's what we do here  :) :) :).


 
Izdaari said:
Well, he's confident to the point that it irritates me, since I'm equally confident of my opposite positions. But he does know a lot and is a pretty good teacher, his confidence issue aside.
Click to expand...

Which would be?  I mean, where do you disagree with him? Gender issues?
 
Winston said:
Izdaari said:
Well, he's confident to the point that it irritates me, since I'm equally confident of my opposite positions. But he does know a lot and is a pretty good teacher, his confidence issue aside.
Click to expand...

Which would be?  I mean, where do you disagree with him? Gender issues?
Click to expand...

Yeah, that. And YEC, pre-mil, pre-trib, and Lordship Salvation, just for a start. I also don't agree with the L petal (Limited Atonement) of the TULIP, though I'm mostly ok with Calvinism otherwise.
 
Ransom said:
I don't know whether I should be more surprised or disappointed, but right now I'm more than a little of both.

Yeah, what are these boneheads thinking? Everyone knows that owners of poor Bibles don't deserve good notes. ::)
Click to expand...

So God's words get twisted, distorted, shredded-- but MacArthur's words stay intact?

I guess that whether or not one sees that as a good thing depends on which he values most-- God's words or man's.
 
Reformed Guy said:
Ransom said:
I don't know whether I should be more surprised or disappointed, but right now I'm more than a little of both.

Yeah, what are these boneheads thinking? Everyone knows that owners of poor Bibles don't deserve good notes. ::)
Click to expand...

So God's words get twisted, distorted, shredded-- but MacArthur's words stay intact?

I guess that whether or not one sees that as a good thing depends on which he values most-- God's words or man's.
Click to expand...

I'm disappointed as well.
I find it interesting that D A Carson also gives the new version his seal of approval.
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
Reformed Guy said:
Ransom said:
I don't know whether I should be more surprised or disappointed, but right now I'm more than a little of both.

Yeah, what are these boneheads thinking? Everyone knows that owners of poor Bibles don't deserve good notes. ::)
Click to expand...

So God's words get twisted, distorted, shredded-- but MacArthur's words stay intact?

I guess that whether or not one sees that as a good thing depends on which he values most-- God's words or man's.
Click to expand...

I'm disappointed as well.
I find it interesting that D A Carson also gives the new version his seal of approval.
Click to expand...

http://www.amazon.com/Inclusive-Language-Debate-Plea-Realism/dp/080105835X

Not all that surprising.
 
I am no fan of the NIV2011 (or any of the others in a lesser degree) but it is better to have excellent commentary on a poor translation than poor commentary on an excellent translation.

As to the accusation that JM chose the NIV for $$$$, well, nonsense! He gets NOTHING from the sales of his books.

In my not entirely humble opinion the MSB, NKJV is the finest commentary/notes in the best available translation.

And Izdaari, don't confuse confidence with arrogance. If you have no confidence in your faith you have no confidence in the Author and Finisher of your faith. :(

I disagree with JM in some areas. I am not a Dispensationalist. I am an Historic Chilliast. But JM has been slowly moving back from classic dispensationalism and is moving toward what he considers a progressive dispensationalism. He still has not come for enough to suit me but he is moving in the right direction. And escatology is only one branch of Theology. He is a lot more right than he is wrong. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top