NEW NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible by D.A. Carson & Zondervan 4K

[@NicoleRetuta]

You've convinced me to get myself a copy! :)

[@freebird1118]

Nice bible, nice review. Thanks for the effort. God bless

[@TheBlessedgardner]

Thank you for this review. I have the original NIV Zondervan Study Bible and I just can't see spending more money from what I've seen in their repackaging of this study Bible. Not to mention you can get the old hardback now for just $17.99 and a large print for $34.99. But I enjoyed your review and appreciate the time and detail you put into this video. Thank you.

[@parkermeeks4256]

I experienced the phenomenon that is ASMR (autonomous sensory meridian response) while watching this video lol! I'm a christian by the way. It's a tingling, relaxing, fuzzy sensation throughout the entire body. I guess the sound of the bible pages turning triggered the feeling haha. I probably will get this bible though I prefer the ESV

[@seawynd99]

I purchased it in the bonded leather (which was like some kinda purple thinnish-paper)...the actual text was so close to the original NIV Zondervan SB (almost every feature,chart and picture that you mentioned is identical in the NIV Zondervan SB including a 153 pp. concordance),I sent it back and purchased a lovely bonded leather LP in the original ZSB,..also the print was too small on this one for me.Glad you like yours.I'll take the original,frankly it is almost the identical to the first one..might be ok in a hb as a collectible but the quality of the bonded 'leather' is sad,imho :)

[@charlesratcliff2016]

I love this Bible. I got a copy

[@markl1073]

'Insane concordance' - love it! Thanks for this great review. If only there was an Anglicised version...;)

[@kal-el-vinist1507]

Thanks for the great review! I have the original release of this Bible and the type-facing is much improved in this new version. The original is very difficult to read from for extended periods of time. I love the map index as well. I wish everyone would follow the Cambridge pattern and include an index in their Bibles that have maps. Blessings, brother!

[@buildtolove]

Thanks, I was hesitated because the "[un]comfort print" but the color scheme is nice. I placed an order :D

[@pb1wolf]

Great video, thank you for showing the maps!

[@laudate2957]

Thank you! This study bible is definitely for me! So relieved to know that the NIV study bible is still doing an awesome job 30 or so years on! Along with the NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible (which is available in NKJV and NRSV as well) and NET's full note edition will for a powerful triad to study from!! Would you be reviewing any of those other two? Thanks again!

[@mrsamp173]

Thank you

[@TheCrossFireMessage]

Love that burgundy color!

[@SoftOtaku]

Is there actually more content in the Zondervan Study Bible than in this? Or is the former just bigger in size?

[@SoftOtaku]

Caleb Bass Thanks! I just wish I could find the BTSB with a nicer leather. I prefer the blue for the notes over the ZSB brown. That 300 pages is a mystery, though!

[@DonZillla]

Wasn’t sure about this, your video helped a lot! Ordered from cbd!

[@CaseyFleetMedia]

Great review Caleb

[@CaseyFleetMedia]

Caleb Bass yw bro! You making me want this one too

[@Dundatta258]

I'm considering purchasing this bible, although I'm more into the king James version, but I want a bible that will go more in depth of the doctrine

[@juniorjones5137]

Is there a difference between this and the NIV zondervan produced in 3 years ago? The reason I ask because the 2015 version had 2880 pages this has 2560 that's a 330 page difference something has to be missing! Also the font is smaller the olderer (20150 version may have been better

[@NicoleRetuta]

This is a quote from a review from PL of New York in Amazon comparing the 2015 and 2018 version: "How does the new NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible (NBTSB) compared to the Zondervan NIV Study Bible? The contents (text and figures) are identical. However, the new version is much improved in terms of presentation. (see photos below.) I loved the older version's content but it was too hard on my eyes and too hard to carry around. The font for the new version is bigger and much more readable: the new Comfort Print font is pleasing to look at. They have decreased the wasted white space in the older version. In addition, the new Study Bible is not as big or as heavy (4.6 vs 4.2 pounds): it is easier to carry. The paper is not thin, with great printing quality. They have also condensed the space given to the study note, making the text of the Bible more prominent: this is important for me. Comparing the NIV Study Bible to NBTSB study notes: my general impression is that NBTSB is more conservative and more directly relevant to me as an evangelical Christian. I have been studying Ephesians using thick commentaries, and I found that NBTB nicely summarizes the key points from the thick commentaries that I have been reading. Don Carson is the editor: he is probably one of the most respected conservative commentators currently, and I am comfortable that I am in good hands with him and his team as my guide to God's words Overall I am pleased with my purchase. I have a lot of Study Bibles (ESV, NIV, NLT, Life Application, Harper Collins, etc): each has its pros and cons; each has its target audience. But if you need a trustworthy Study Bible that is faithful to the text, deep in its insight, reliable in its theology, fair to different viewpoints written with a gentle voice: NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible would be my choice. (I did not receive this as a free book: just my way to say Thank You to the editors and Zondervan team.)"

[@elionielessa1086]

Is the book sewn or glued?

[@dburum1]

What is the difference between this biblical theology bible and Zondervan NIV cultural background study bible..cultural has red letter and theology bible does not? What is main difference?

[@rolandojr.delarosa575]

i PRAY THAT YOU WILL ALSO MAKE a King James Version of this Biblical Theology Study Bible, please, please, please?! =)

[@kellysdad2326]

Compared with ESV Study bible, which is your most likely preferred?

[@DiscipleDojo]

The comment on Romans 9 in the BTSB is unfortunate (because the quote from Malachi is 100% talking about the nations of Edom and Israel), but it is at least good to see them present both views, since evangelical scholarship is divided on it. Study Bibles that only present one view when there are multiple ones on an issue are doing a disservice to the student of Scripture, IMO.

[@diebibel5596]

will there be a large print edition?

[@daleclark3138]

Good review. Got mine for $22. May be better than the Archaeological Study bible

[@reformedheart]

How is it different from the Zondervan NIV Study Bible?

No. It is exactly the same. There are approximately 300 more pages in the NIV Zondervan.

[@jayman1338]

Brother that was a great review of that Bible and so thank you very much for it…. Also I’d like to say that Romans 9 is talking about personal election in regards to Isaac and Jacob but it is the question of what did God elect them for and why is that even important to mention at this point within the text? While salvation would also be the end all outcome, God here is establishing His covenant with both Issac and Jacob who represents spiritual Israel through promise and not their older brothers, the first born, who would represent the natural descendants of Abraham through works of the flesh. These first verses are a matter of God Sovereignly electing the Israel of God of His choosing...When you read down further in verse 14 the question that is asked is in regards to God electing the Israel of God to be through the promise as has always been and that it not be through the natural descendants of Abraham. 14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! Furthermore in verse 15 Moses represents spiritual Israel of promise whereas Pharaoh in. verse 17 represents harden Israel, those in whom God used to crucify His Son Jesus Christ. Furthermore verses 19-22 is in regards to the natural descendants of Abraham as a whole being the one lump of clay that God had rights over as being the Potter to make some for noble use and some for common use. The common use there is in regards to them being hardened. In verses 21-22 God wanting to show His wrath to the vessels of wrath but choosing not to so as to show his mercy to the vessels of His mercy is in regards to God not destroying hardened Israel so many times as He should have but rather spared them so as to bring about the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ so that His mercy might go out to all through the cross. So that’s my interpretation of those verses and many might disagree but I’m just trying to help you to maybe see that if a commentary doesn’t agree with the Calvinistic mindset doesn’t have to mean it’s a bad commentary and you kind of made it seem like it would be a bad thing…Do you know what I’m saying brother? You did make that comment towards a non-Calvinistic commentary on Romans 9… I feel that the non-Calvinistic approach to interpreting Romans 9 aids in understanding Romans 9 and I’m not alone in this. I think Mike Winger does a really good job of interpreting Romans 9 as also Leighton Flowers and even guys like Norman Geisler Chosen But Free. So I’m just trying to encourage you to see that a commentary that is non Calvinistic isn’t a bad thing as these matters of differences are non-essential issues. Or as to say denominational differences within the one true body of Christ. Unity in essentials Liberty in non-essentials And in all things love Grace and Peace brother.

[@johnnyjonsson8064]

Not a singel sentece on the textual basis for the translation!

[@glenconverse1327]

Font ia way too small and very light. Forget it!

[@brotherarn]

Thank you for pointing out that it's a calvinistic interpretations of Romans. By the editors commentators saying that it is most likely a personal reference and not a national reference. Seems like an opinion to me. They didn't back it up with facts. So thank you. I definitely won't get that Bible. Oh by the way I'm not a calvinist in any shape or form. I'm actually prefer to be called more like a traditionalist / provisionalist Baptist🕵

[@brotherarn]

@@CalebBass thank you Brother for the review of that bible and for responding to my comments.

[@keragangelhoff7496]

Hello there may I ask if you have had your sins remitted and if you’ve yet obeyed the gospel of Jesus Christ? I ask humbly of course.

[@SaneNoMore]

Yes it’s speaking of personal election but it is an election of who will become the father of the nation of Israel and not an election of salvation.

[@josealvarado9690]

Carson is a calvinist so it is a calvinist study Bible, but we who love to study both the Bible and calvinist errors can enjoy this Bible without paying attention to its huge biblical errors. Thanks for your video.

[@RichWhiteCyberCPU]

"Calvinist study Bible"? I guess that means it doesn't twist scripture to support a man centered tradition. 🤷‍♂️

[@RichWhiteCyberCPU]

Not sure why you deleted your reply but faith alone is what makes the difference between a Christian and a non-Christian. If you deny faith alone in Christ alone you're not even a Christian. I recommend you repent and Trust In Christ Alone. Your Works cannot save you. The discussion between Calvinism and arminianism is not a Salvation issue but denying faith alone is. You cannot bribe your way into heaven with your good works. Your works are nothing but dirty rags.

[@nathanburgett1599]

Horrible translation. Also likely to be teaching Calvinism not chritianity.❤

[@nathanburgett1599]

Caleb Bass i know that's troubling. As a Calvinist i became convinced of the same thing. Then the Holy Spirit humbled and corrected me. There is only one Gospel and it has nothing to do with calvinism. As much as i love some of spurgeon's stuff, pushing Calvinism as the gospel is pushing a false gospel. The gospel clearly laid out is that Jesus willingly took off his divinity like a cloak and died to satisfy the law and wrath and justice of God. So the record of debt against the world is nailed to the cross. Then he was raised from the dead after 3 days to show it was accepted. That anyone who believes and follows Jesus is given life freely. He made the new living way of righteousness from the inside out instead of outside in. Basically summarised in 1 cor 15. What the law was powerless to do weakened as it was by sinful flesh, God did by sending his only son in the likeness of sinful flesh so that God condemned sin in the flesh. That God might be both just and the justifier of those who have faith in Jesus. Faith is described, defined, and exampled in Hebrews 11. It's hearing God, believing God, then acting on that belief. This is consistent with both James and Paul in Romans and galatians. Paul explains in Romans that by the law we have all fallen short of the righteous requirement for life. So that righteousness is unattainable through the law. Therefore our only hope is righteousness that comes by faith apart from works of the law. In galatians Paul explains all that matters is faith working through love. James explains in James 2 that this inward change that comes from placing our faith in Jesus, causes us to act on what he has said; just like the examples given in hebrews 11. Even John wrote 1 John to show what believers look like. In 1 John 3 he sums up that the commands of God are to believe in Jesus and love others just as he loved us. We know that we remain in him by the Spirit he has given us. Anyway sorry for the rant. The basic idea is that Calvinism isn't the gospel. Its a tradition made in the mind of man. Paul warns us to be on guard against such, col 2:8, See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, which are based on human tradition and the spiritual forces of the world rather than on Christ. Calvinism didn't start until the middle of the 4th century. It was created by Augustine near the end of his life. It was based on reading his former Gnostic beliefs into the verses. Isegesis not exegesis. Calvin later fully developed these ideas and systamitised the divine determinism based around false starting presuppositions. If look you at the fruit of their lives they didn't even meet the biblical requirements to be leaders. Repeatedly over the last 2000 year's the enemy has infiltrated the church. Jesus sent us the Spirit of Truth to lead us into all Truth though. I was not looking to leave Calvinism. I lost friends. I had to decide though whether i was gonna listen to God or man. Calvinism is just error. It isn't that big a deal by itself because we all learn, grow, and are wrong at some point. If someone is saying Calvinism is the gospel though...that's demonstrably wrong and a false gospel. I would encourage anyone who thinks that way to take some time Really praying and studying the gospel, lest they fall under the divine curse Paul speaks of. ❤

[@danielmann5427]

@@nathanburgett1599 you sound ignorant of what calvinism is. Not sure what you mean when you say 'God become Jesus...' That can be a very heretical statement, you might want to clarify?

[@nathanburgett1599]

Im not sure how you misuderstood but I'll try to clarify. I was a calvinist for a few years until God corrected me and showed me the harm i was doing. If you can explain exactly what's confusing or what you didn't understand I'll try to explain it clearer. Ty❤

[@nathanburgett1599]

Ok. I thought and read it again. It seems to me what i said is clear enough. The fact that you want to find something to disagree and argue about seems to be the problem. The bible is clear about Jesus. I'm not confused about who he is, your just being contentious it seems. Jesus is clearly portrayed in scripture as God. So the point i made is completely scriptural. Jesus set aside his divinity to step into human flesh. God became Jesus. If i had said the Father became Jesus there would be a issue. The problem is only semantic though. When you read out in the context i used it, the context clues show that's exactly what i meant. If you'd like to have objective non-contentious conversation about what scripture clearly says I'd be glad to do that. I was confused at first about what you were even asking, sorry. Its really hard to see past the self righteous Pride. I get it though because as a Calvinist i used to act the same way. That isn't love. If you'd like to talk I'd be happy to, i can show everything i now believe, in scripture and in context aligned with the intent of the author. Before as a Calvinist i had to butcher the context and intent. I also realised that what i believed could only be traced back to the fourth century. Divine determinism is only found taught clearly by the gnostics prior to Augustine in the fourth century. Being he was a gnostic it's not surprising So no I'm definitely not ignorant of what Calvinism claims nor of the logical implications of those claims. Maybe you don't understand it as well as you thought you did? Be happy to discuss it if you wanna try again without the attitude. I hope you do. ❤

[@allensagalla6340]

Nathan Burgett So Arminianism is Christianity?

[@rolandojr.delarosa575]

i PRAY THAT YOU WILL ALSO MAKE a King James Version of this Biblical Theology Study Bible, please, please, please?! =)