REVIEWS
Barker, Kenneth (GeneralEditor): The NIV Study Bible. Grand Rapids, Michi-
gan: Zondervan Bible Publishers 1985. xvii+ 1950+45+153pp., 16maps,
no price stated.
This publication is the result of a tremendous amount of work by contributors,
editors, and publishers alike. NIV itself was a piece of responsible conservative
scholarship based on a reliable text. In the same way, the NIV Study Bible is a
thoroughly professional piece of work.
As a book, it is easy and pleasant to handle. Although it has slightly more
pages than the New Jerusalem Bible, which does not claim to be a study Bible, it
is over 16% lighter and over 27% thinner.
The Introduction to the Study Bible begins with a eulogy of NIV which
includes clear doctrinal statements: those responsible for the Study Bible "all
confess the authority of the Bible as God's infallible word to humanity"; the
Study Bible "reflects traditional evangelical theology". Where there are differ-
ences between conservativeevangelicals, notablyon the millennium (Rev 20.2),
these are fairly stated. By contrast, the notes on Mt 16.16-20 do not
enter
the
controversy between Roman Catholics and others concerning the place of Peter
and his alleged successors.
The arrangement of notes on the page is perhaps unnecessarily complicated.
NIV text notes are indicated by raised, bold-faced letters, and cross references
by raised light-italic letters, so that the reader frequently has to cope with things
like:
"Praise the LORDnu" (Ps 112.1).
In addition, study notes, referred to by chapter and verse numbers, occupy on
average just over one-third of the page. There is considerable overlap between
cross references and study notes; sometimes they are identical (e.g. Mk 7.7-10;
ct. Ex 21.13). References to quotations are distinguished by an asterisk. Refer-
ences to "headlinks" are prefaced byS, for "see";this device functions like
"!"
in
Nestle-Aland. There are many more cross-references than, for example, in the
Special Edition of GNB; in particular, more references from the Old Testament
to the New.
In terms
ofthe
quantity of information given, the NIV Study Bible willbe hard
to beat in a single volume.
"The
concordance", it is claimed, "is the largest ever
bound together with an English Bible." Unfortunately, its compilers, or perhaps
their computers, have not learned from the mistakes of the full NIV Con-
cordance to distinguish homonyms.
Under
"lie", for example, we find in uneasy
concubinage:
Lev 18.22
'''Do
not I with a man
19:11
'''Do
not I
The Index to Subjects unnecessarily includes page numbers, but fails to indicate
whether references are to text or notes.
Turning to introductions to individual books, the introduction to Genesis
contains a fine survey of related ancient near-eastern texts. Statements about
144
JANUARY
1987
REVIEWS 145
authorship, however, are generally to the right of a moderately conservative
evangelical publication such as the Inter-Varsity Press's
Dicationary
of
the Bible.
"The 40-year period of Israel's wanderings
...
would have been the most likely
time for Moses to write the bulk of what istoday known as the Pentateuch." The
introduction does however allow for "a certain amount of later editorial updat-
ing". Similarly, Isaiah "may have written chs. 40-66during his lateryears. In his
message to the exiles of the sixth century
B.C.,
Isaiah was projected into the
future, just as the apostle John was in Rev 4-22". "The strongest argument for
the unity of Isaiah is the expression 'the Holy One of Israel,' a title for God that
occurs 12 times in chs. 1-39 and 14times in chs. 40-66. Outside Isaiah it appears
in the O'T only 6 times" (1014). This selective statement contrasts with the
comprehensive computer analysis of the book's language by Y. T. Radday,
referred to in
Harper's Bible Dictionary, 427a. The introduction to Daniel is
even more tendentious. By comparison, the introduction to the Psalms is
cautious about the Davidic authorship even of psalms headed "[A psalm] of
David"; but David is assumed to have written Ps 110, no doubt because Jesus
referred to David as its author.
A Study Bible cannot answer everyone's personal questions, but the NIV
Study Bible gives little help in solving the notorious moral problems raised by
some
O'T and even NT texts. God's order to destroy the Amalekites (1 Sam 15)
means that "Saul isgiven an opportunity as king to demonstrate his allegience to
the Lord by obedience in this assigned task." The killing of Ananias and
Sapphira (Acts 5) is explained by comparison with God's judgments on Nadab
and Abihu, Achan, and Uzzah;
but
ifyou are a Christian, this isa case ofobscura
per obscuriora.
Perhaps, in the end, those readers who use this book critically, making full
allowance for its distinctive theological slant, willbenefit from it even more than
those who accept its statements without question.
P.E.
Achtemeier, Paul
J.,
ed.:
Harper's
Bible Dictionary. New York, London:
Harper
& Row, 1985. xxii, 1178 pp., plus 18 maps.
Members of the Society of Biblical Literature, 179 of them, have worked
together to produce an outstanding one-volume Bible dictionary. This will
certainly prove to be one of the best available today.
It
is especially useful in
terms of archaeological information.
Some features: names occurring three times or more are included, plus those
that have special significance. Articles are found on every book of the Bible,
including the Deuterocanon; on important theological terms; general articles on
culture, language, history, economics, sociology; on some of the
pseudepigrapha and the New Testament apocrypha; on ancient sites not men-
tioned in the Bible, such as Ebla, Mari, and Ras Shamra; and much more.
Most illustrations are photographs (occasionally out of focus) that frequently
reduce the length of explanations required. Maps are inserted throughout, with
