The Orthodox Study Bible -- An Overview and Critique

[@RepublicConstitution]

This guy is a fantastic book reviewer.

[@ibdora05]

His voice is relaxing and precise as well.

[@tatianapantazopoulou7518]

Indeed

[@stephengilbreath840]

Best there is in my opinion

[@thepattonians]

Excellent ASMR qualities.

[@gabrokkerhun]

"that's my cat, it is 158 mms wide" Wow.

[@RGrantJones]

She could stand to lose a pound or two.

[@steventaylor6819]

At the minimum, the Septuagint should be used alongside every other translation in study. It almost always brings clarity to confusing passages.

[@teresaramirez1009]

I agree! In fact it agrees more with the Dead sea scroll (DSS) unlike the Masoretic Text (MT)

[@Rafael-zl7fh]

AMEN!

[@fredeskridge22]

Bo matter how many subs you have. Youre the greatest when it comes to reviewing Bibles

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks, Fred. Almost 700. That's about 690 more than I thought I'd have.

[@walter5700]

I just ordered this one, and I'm so excited to read it! Thanks for the helpful review.

[@VampireHub616]

@@Jonathan-A Is the otherdox Bible different from kjv Bible? I just guessing you got the book by now

[@RGrantJones]

I had to cut out a few scenes to keep this video from rivaling "Dr. Zhivago" in length. One of those scenes contrasted the Orthodox Study Bible with the Nelson's "The Orthodox Study Bible New Testament and Psalms" (ISBN: 9780840783912), printed in 1993. As you can guess, that was an early, partial edition of the Orthodox Study Bible, but it was superior in several ways: (1) the format was verse-by-verse, (2) the paper was thicker and more opaque, (3) the NKJV translation notes were included, (4) center column references were present, and (5) the font was smaller and darker. On the down side, the OSB New Testament and Psalms had the words of Christ in red.

[@josephr.gainey2079]

I would love to see the whole version! PLEASE POST IT!!!!!!!!!!!

[@RGrantJones]

Other reviews of this book: Danny McMullan: kzbin.info/www/bejne/f3zXqoqGg7pql7s Mia Debretu: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qWbEZ3SEmbSio9k Дом 28: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jITdgKmGapqNqrc BibleJournalCrafts: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pHnMl3uYeNFli7c About a leathersoft edition: Ancient Faith Store: kzbin.info/www/bejne/iXjYZaurpq2nopo

[@costakeith9048]

Sorry to hear you got so many dislikes, as an Orthodox Christian I think your analysis was fair, detailed, and accurate and think this video deserves more credit and attention. Many Orthodox Christians are also exceedingly unhappy with this publication. The translation is problematic as you masterfully point out, relying far too heavily on the NKJV to the point that it seems lazy on the translators' part, the patristic references are scarce, to be generous, and some of the theology in the notes is dubious, at best. If nothing else, this was a huge missed opportunity and this publication has done no great service to Orthodoxy. I too am curious as to why so many (presumably Orthodox Christians) have disliked this video, it is not polemical in the slightest and rightly criticizes the work based on the standards the publishers themselves put forth.

[@bobdobric6787]

They disliked it because of Ego and people being people they are never satisfied. This book i have found has helped me with my faith . I wonder what would Jesus think of those Christians who are complaining about this bible

[@AnHebrewChild]

Costa Keith "relying far too heavily on the NKJV." You are absolutely correct. And that's an issue with nearly all these newer translations. The ESV, for example, only departs 6% from the RSV. There are numerous places where it in no way corresponds with the UBS 27 it is purported to reflect, even repeating well known RSV translation errors. And then there's the MEV which uses the word _reward_ for what the NASB/ESV/RSV/ASV all render as _rear guard_ Look at Isaiah 52:12 But how could this happen? Here's how: the KJV has the word _rereward_ here: an Early Modern English word which means rear guard. I need not explain to you what happened here; what level of laziness (and ignorance) produced this. It'd be laughable if it was an error in something other than God's word. These men are in it for the mammon. End of. (note: even all the other translations' following of the KJV by inserting _rear guard_ is clearly the fruit of laziness. "Good artists borrow, great artists steal." but it least those thieving artists had enough sense to double check an archaic word's meaning so as not to get caught.

[@όαγωνιστής-θ6θ]

@Eremias Ranwolf As long as it has the full canon

[@obscuredictionary3263]

@Eremias Ranwolf That only has 66 books though? It’s not the whole orthodox bible.

[@TheoWrigt]

What orthodox translation would you recommend?

[@jacobfoster7726]

Man, your reviews are the best! Thank you. I'm sick in bed today, and your thorough reviews are quite calming. I just got a OSB last week. I was considering having it rebound as split calfskin or goatskin, but I'm actually not minding having a hardback for a change! (The last hardback I had was about 8 years ago, a Tolle Lege 1599 Geneva)

[@Airik1111bibles]

Jacob Foster Agreed, I find myself always watching late at night for a nice calm review. Yep, ya gotta grab your popcorn before sitting back with an R. G Jones vids😉

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the encouraging words! Hope you feel better soon. I'd say that at least a third of my Bibles are hardbacks. I actually prefer hardbacks for the larger study Bibles. I intend to review the Tolle Lege 1599 Geneva one of these days. Before I do, I'd like to compare it with the 1560 and make a table showing a few places where the two translations differ.

[@RGrantJones]

To Airik111: Those videos beat warm milk and melatonin!

[@Airik1111bibles]

R. Grant Jones 😄😉

[@justanotherchristian3408]

You do a better review (academically) than anyone else I have listened to. THANK YOU. I know a very highly placed and internationally honored Eastern Orthodox theologian who says that this Bible is a disgrace. I think you have just proved why he is right. I like your method of review - attention to EVERY detail, both physical and doctrinal. THANK YOU AGAIN! NEXT, on to your review of the Cambridge Cameo with......... 3John2 Just Another Christian

[@Garbanzo884]

Who is the Orthodox scholar who says it is a disgrace?

[@paraglokhande936]

So which Bible would you recommend for the Orthodox faithful?

[@quantumodality]

Wow! What a detailed review. Thanks, for all the hard work. God bless you.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for those encouraging words, Quantum Modality. (By the way, quantum mechanics was my favorite subject in graduate school.)

[@quantumodality]

@@RGrantJones Thank you for the reply. I understand and share the same view about QM. That is why I am doing a little education in the field of NMR spectroscopy. :). After all the basic units of Existence itself bears the mark of our Creator and it is really awe inspiring to gaze into it and behold His Creative genius.

[@fr.johnwhiteford6194]

The second Ecumenical Council finalized the Creed, which states that Christ's kingdom will have no end, contrary to millennialism.

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you for the comment, Father John. I thought that the phrase "whose kingdom shall have no end" was included to deny Marcellus of Ancyra's heretical interpretation of 1 Corinthians 15.23-28. As I understand it, Marcellus believed that the Son would be dissolved into the Father at the end, when he shall have "put all enemies under his feet" and ceased to reign. So it would seem to me that the phrase "whose kingdom shall have no end" is not directed against any particular view of the kingdom -- one that asserts that Christ will continue to reign from the right hand of the Father without ever setting foot on earth again, or one that asserts that a phase of Christ's kingdom will include a lengthy period where He is personally present on earth, or any other possibility -- but against any view of the kingdom that asserts that Christ will cease to reign when all enemies are under his feet, death is destroyed, and God is "all in all". But, as in all things, it's possible that I'm mistaken regarding that historical background, and the fathers of the Second Council did mean to condemn the millennial views of Irenaeus of Lyons and others, rather than to safeguard against Marcellus's theological error.

[@georgiii_]

I read this same copy and I love and connected to it

[@ggesman7811]

I have a question. Tobit 8:6 quotes Genesis 2:18 in Brenton's LXX, and says, "...,let us make..." In the OSB Tobit quotes Gen2:18 from the LXX correctly, but Genesis 2:18 in the OSB seems to be from the MT saying, "I will make..." Do you concur with this, or am I missing something? If so, why would the OSB translate from the masoretic text in Genesis 2:18?

[@RGrantJones]

I believe you're correct. But as to why the OSB fails to translate the LXX, as it often does, I don't know. The OSB fails to conform the NKJV to the LXX frequently in Genesis and Exodus.

[@ggesman7811]

@@RGrantJones Thanks for the quick response. I am very much enjoying learning about the differences between the MT and LXX, and it gets unduly complicated when I don't have accurate English translations. Fortunately Brenton and NETS got it right. Thanks again.

[@amlesh8638]

Hello. Why did the protestant bible remove some books in the old testement ?

[@RGrantJones]

The decision to remove them was made by one of the Bible societies in the early nineteenth century to save money (a smaller Bible is less expensive to publish). Other publishers followed their lead. So while in the eighteenth century, most King James Bibles were printed with the Apocrypha, by the beginning of the twentieth century, an English Bible intended for Protestants with the Apocrypha included became very hard to find.

[@the2494silvester]

What is your opinion on the last minutes of this video, regarding the differences of the Greek and English Text. The problem is that other english translations do not include these Greek verses (marked in blue) and also translations in Italian and Albanian (since I am from Albania). Do you think maybe it should be looked at the hebrew text?

[@RGrantJones]

The point is that the Orthodox Study Bible's Old Testament is supposed to translate the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament. But it doesn't do that consistently. The Greek and the New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) agree with each other -- the NETS is an accurate translation of the Septuagint. But the Orthodox Study Bible often fails to translate the Greek. When it does so, it agrees with the NKJV, which is a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament.

[@Eisho.G]

Get the leather like soft cover, its much better, the way its put together. About the different translation passages. Genesis 15:11 Septuagint Brenton translation, it say "And birds came down upon th the bodies, even upon the divided parts of them, and Abram sat down by them." Genesis 31-48, the OSB leans more to Brenton's translation.

[@MusicalMedley2]

Is the paper better quality on the leathersoft cover one?

[@convert2islaam500]

@@MusicalMedley2 the paper is great quality man in my opinion

[@convert2islaam500]

It's almost identical to KJV in this verse besides middle English and modern English differences like OSB says "vultures" and KJV says "fowls"

[@photorailfan]

I have this and highly recommend it.

[@sylvaindurand1817]

Thanks for the review. Since this is one of my two current reading Bibles (the other being in french) I thought I would add my two cents. Being the only Orthodox study Bible, It is the best and the worst one at the same time. There is a lot of good information in there but the notes are uneven. I don't like the layout, the text is not easy on the eye, especially when there is no breaks with titles. I would have much preferred a text divided by verses, but since the LXX is much longer, they probably wanted to save space by cramping the text (no Turquoise for the Orthodox!) I was dubious about the quality of the LXX translation and your review only confirms my suspicions. Might as well use a version where significant differences with the Greek are noted. There are only minimal references and being tucked in the corner of the page, they are not easy to access. When I'm done going through it once, I probably won't use it much, except to check out notes if needed. This is too bad, since, like I said, there is no Orthodox alternatives.

[@RGrantJones]

I'd be willing to overlook most of the flaws in this Bible if it had been a careful attempt to translate the Septuagint. I was very disappointed when it was finally published, many years behind schedule.

[@edmonddantes5104]

I have one also that was a gift. I have an Ancient Faith Study Bible I recently purchased and a Sir Lancelot Brenton LXX. I prefer them over the OSB .

[@normandennis9420]

I have recently become interested in the Septuagint because of obvious omissions in the Masoretic text most bibles use. I have both The Orthodox Study bible and the NETS which do you recommend or is there another?

[@HandJvlogs]

Norman Dennis there is also the Lexham English Septuagint (which has also been reviewed on this channel)

[@KingOfComedyXD]

Lexham is currently the best one

[@epitome99]

its really unfortunate that it is so hard to find a high quality Bible hardcover that is worthy of mans ability, who have a relationship with God. You can find countless esoteric books that are really high quality. what more is deserving than the word of God to be truly high quality.

[@brotherseanrichard]

New to the orthodox faith and looking for a bible that includes all the scriptures the orthodox accept. Seems a lot hate this translation so for any orthodox seeing my comment what bible do you recommend

[@RGrantJones]

I'll be interested in the response as well. I knew an Orthodox priest who used the Oxford RSV Annotated Study Bible, but that was before the OSB was published. The Third Millennium Bible is another option. For the New Testament, there's the Eastern Orthodox Bible. I haven't heard when or if the Old Testament will be published. The EOB New Testament is a rather large paperback. I hope to review it in a few weeks.

[@tradne85]

My instincts were correct it seems. I am new to Orthodoxy, but no stranger to the Holy Bible. I have a few different translations. My copy of the OSB was a gift, and mainly was used for praying the Office (I’m Western Rite and pray the English Office Noted), though these days I use an app on my phone that has the KJV with the “Apocrypha,” which is basically the rest of the canon. The OSB mainly is used for the footnotes, which offer little snippets of insight.

[@bradleyjh4939]

Most Orthodox will tell you that no Bible/translation is sufficient on its own other than actually using the Old Greek OT and the 1904 Patriarchal Greek NT. I use a variety of translations and Bibles. Another option for the Orthodox OT canon, although problematic, is the NETS. It used the NRSV as it's base rather than the NKJV like the OSB. The NRSV, and by it use of it, the NETS, are ecumenical and "liberal" translations. The benefit is that it is the whole canon and even includes 4 Makkabees (which the OSB does not). Some people also like to use the Brenton Septuagint, but I find it too archaic like the KJV or ASV. Most Orthodox just use a common but "literal" translation for the NT; typically the RSV, ESV, NKJV, or NASB.

[@nevesdarocha]

I am also new to the faith and the father at my parish recommended this version. I will, however, tell you that when I study the Bible I prefer to have a concordance, dictionary, and several other books at hand.

[@tekboi9195]

@@piquant7103 You obviously are not orthodox based on your statments but a hypocrate

[@Jay-fv1hc]

Does this bible include all the books. I'm a catholic and have found my small study Bible is missing a few books and I would love to have a Bible that contains every working. I collect books, and feel it's every man's duty to create his own library and preserve the ancient texts

[@RGrantJones]

Jay - it contains more books than the average Catholic Bible. I show a chart that compares the Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant canons at about the 9:00 point. The Orthodox Study Bible includes all the books listed in the Orthodox canon.

[@Jay-fv1hc]

@@RGrantJones awesome! Thank you so much sir. I'll definitely be getting myself a copy

[@truthboy3936]

I bought this today, on the plus side I find it interesting in that it has a lot of insight from the Church Fathers (though I don't suppose they are always right, its interesting) on a negative side the author talks about things like the 'Veneration of Mary' (singing songs about her and icons etc, I was saved out of the Roman Catholic Church so I have seen where this can lead to) and also the view that baptism is necessary for Salvation. I would say while it is 'appropriate and fitting to be baptized' it is hardly necessary imo; just consider the thief on the cross....''Today you shall be with me in Heaven''.

[@junkaccount2535]

From what I had read online, the OSB is supposed to be the Septuagint but in an NKJV translation? I've found different places online claiming that it is in the NKJV yet still containing the Septuagint, which is very confusing.

[@RGrantJones]

The New Testament is the NKJV New Testament. For the books of the Protestant canon, the Old Testament is the NKJV Old Testament adjusted to agree with the LXX. However, the corrections weren't made with sufficient care. As a consequence, there are places where the OSB reads like the NKJV where it shouldn't. For the books in the OSB Old Testament that aren't in the Protestant canon, the OSB follows the Septuagint.

[@junkaccount2535]

That's actually rather awesome. I've been looking for a book which contained the NKJV NT, but also had the apocryphal books in the Septuagint's format so that I could read them just as the early church fathers (as they didn't have a specific canon yet from what I understand). Sounds like an amazing Bible rebind candidate as well since the updated version has the bound spine. I think I'll buy the newest ancient faith hardcover and have it professionally rebound and use that for a long time. Thanks!

[@PomazeBog1389]

*_I WOULD LOVE FOR YOUR TO NARRATE MY AUTOBIOGRAPHY._*

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you! I'm glad you like my voice, but many people find it annoying. I wonder how the same voice can induce such different reactions.

[@BlackMetalSchecter]

cant talk, 2 major car accidents unfortunatly

[@PomazeBog1389]

@@BlackMetalSchecter *_I NEED TO TALK TO YOU._*

[@geraldparker8125]

I have this fine study Bible, strong in Patristics, in both leather and hard bindings. The leather is serviceable and attractive enough (bonded leather, I would guess) but it not of the highest grade. I bought both (and a second hardback of it, as well) in 2008, so I do not know if the leather binding still is around to buy or not. As a Lutheran, I am PLEASED that this Bible's study matter rejects chiliasm.

[@RGrantJones]

Gerald Parker -- Thanks for the comment. Just to be clear, my objection is to the Bible’s misinterpretation of 1Constantinople, not to its rejection of a millennium characterized by a return to the Old Testament law. People can disagree about eschatology without distorting history.

[@truthboy3936]

25:58 The claim in the notes regarding the 2nd Ecumenical Council and the 1000 year literal reign of Christ is questionable, some maintain the issue wasn't even hinted at during the Council.

[@RGrantJones]

I agree. I went into this question in more detail at the 22:47 mark in this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/aZ2ZimeAm518lck .

[@darkstreamfish2729]

Another question for you: How many illustrations/icons are in this publication?

[@RGrantJones]

I count 12 color icons. I don't believe there are any other illustrations - no diagrams, black-and-white maps, tables, etc. - at least I don't recall seeing any.

[@alexm7765]

Great channel! May I ask what Mr Jones thinks of the Revised English Septuagint by LXX Publishing? What's caught my eye is that it reads 'invisible' instead of 'unsightly' when referring to the earth at the beginning of Genesis. The original LXX Greek word in that verse appears to be 'ἀόρατος', which Google indeed translates as 'invisible'. I wonder if the word 'unsightly' was originally simply the Germanic equivalent to the Latin-based word 'invisible'

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks! I'm not familiar with the Revised English Septuagint. (The results of an internet search tell me that it's a modernized edition of Brenton's translation.) "Invisible" is the word the NETS chose; Charles Thomson also. That's also the definition in my copy of the second edition of Bauer's lexicon. My guess is that Brenton went behind the Greek to the Hebrew and chose an English word which he thought better reflected the meaning of the original.

[@clouds-rb9xt]

@@RGrantJones What about the Lexham English Septuagint?

[@RGrantJones]

@@clouds-rb9xt - I believe that I wrote the comment above about a year before the LEB was published. The LEB 2nd edition uses 'unseen' there.

[@sphereboy]

I lost my ways; but now I am found. Thank you for this review as I begin my new journey into the Orthodox Church

[@veneroantonio905]

In your opinion,which is the best English translation of the Septuagint?

[@RGrantJones]

That’s a hard question to answer. I wish I could say the Saint Athanasius Academy Septuagint (SAAS), since I like their overall approach. (They take the New Testament’s understanding of Old Testament texts seriously and render them accordingly). But the SAAS simply strays from the LXX toward the Hebrew too often. (SAAS is the Old Testament in the Orthodox Study Bible.) I think the New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) is generally accurate, and I use it frequently. It also packs a great deal of useful, scholarly background information. The font is somewhat small, but larger than that in the standard edition of Brenton’s translation. Some people dislike the fact that NETS transliterates names from the Greek (Moyses instead of Moses), but that doesn’t bother me. The Lexham English Septuagint (LES) is good also. I generally liked the second edition, though some of the language was too informal for my taste, and some of the renderings too loose. LES has the advantage of a relatively large, dark typeface and a wide margin in which corrections can be written. Unhappily, the text block is glued, as is that in the next translation. Brenton’s translation is still a very good choice. I disagree with some of his renderings, but I’ve found him to be generally accurate. This edition also includes the Greek text alongside the English, which makes it easy to check. My chief problem with it is the tiny font for the English text. Charles Thomson’s translation is also generally reliable. Unfortunately, the edition I’ve seen includes only 39 books. So, if I could have only one, I would probably chose NETS. But I make frequent use of SAAS, NETS, and Brenton.

[@veneroantonio905]

@@RGrantJones thanks so much for your reply, I am looking to buy an English translation of the Septuagint,I didn’t know of SAAS,was only familiar with Brenton,Thomson and NETS,so I didn’t know which one to get,your answer helped a lot,thank you. Love your Bible reviews.

[@ralphraymondsadlucapperez8235]

Is OSB in Chronological order?

[@RGrantJones]

No, it isn't. Thanks for the question!

[@witchf4ce310]

It says in the OSB itself that The Old Testament is the Septuagint (LXX) but you say it’s not? I’m confused...

[@RGrantJones]

The OSB Old Testament includes material from the LXX, but it doesn't do so consistently. Thanks for asking!

[@witchf4ce310]

R. Grant Jones thanks for the reply! Do you know what the rest is if it’s not the Septuagint? And how much of the Septuagint was used in the OSB?

[@RGrantJones]

@@witchf4ce310 - It looks like the NKJV, which is based on the Masoretic Hebrew. I don't have a good idea of how much LXX material they left out. You can take a look at my written review (linked in a pinned comment) for a lengthy but far from comprehensive list of examples. Of course, the Deuterocanonical / Anagignoskomena books are entirely from the LXX.

[@witchf4ce310]

R. Grant Jones Okay thank you so much!

[@doctorbenway6382]

Probably way too late to be of help, but one way you can still get to measuring the normal sheet thickness / GSM is just measure a section of pages that don't include the card stock (say the first few hundred pages), then divide by those pages. Not sure if you're factoring in any weight. If you are, that method won't work.

[@RGrantJones]

I normally measure the thickness of the text block and divide by the number of sheets. The problem with this book is that heavy pages are inserted frequently, and the sections of light paper between them are too thin for me to measure accuracy. (After I have the sheet thickness, I multiply that by a density -- based on a set of Bibles with advertised GSM values -- to arrive at paper weight. The procedure is inexact, of course, since paper density varies and my measurements are imperfect, but I've found I'm generally within about 10% of the advertised paper weight.)

[@KonanKultiviranin]

I'm searching for the most accurate translation of the Bible available in english language. So my questions are? First question: If i were to buy just one Bible, in english translation, which includes OT & NT, which one would you recommend me? Second question (if the previous criteria of most accuracy isn't possible with just 1 book to include OT & NT): If i were to buy 2 Bibles, one with OT, other with NT, in english translation which ones would you recommend me? Third question: If i were to learn Ancient Greek, for the purpose of reading the Bible in that language, which editions of OT & NT would you recommend me? God bless You

[@David-dc4kq]

I don't see a review of your Septuagint in Greek (not the reader's edition), is that something you may review in the future? God bless!

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the question, David! I haven't reviewed my copy of Rahlfs yet (the small blue volume). But I will some day, God willing.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the question, David! I haven't reviewed my copy of Rahlfs yet (the small blue volume). But I will some day, God willing.

[@David-dc4kq]

@@RGrantJones Awesome! I look forward to it 😁 Have a blessed day!

[@gtgodbear6320]

Is there a place where you can order a custom Bible. I want a KJV with Deity capitalized like the NKJV. (Him, He, ect...) I always get confused with all he and hims are lowercase letters I have no idea who's talking to who when I read the KJV.

[@RGrantJones]

I don't know that anyone does what you ask. But there is a Bible that uses a slightly modified KJV text with pronouns for deity capitalized: the Third Millennium Bible. I intend to review it within the next few weeks.

[@suiko2fan2]

There aren't that many modern English version of the Orthodox Bible (septuagint or otherwise). This version has some issues for sure, relying prepares too much on the NKJV for the OT. That said, I hope do they do a 2nd edition in the near future, and correct a few of those copyist's choices. Plus, seeings as how this edition came out in 12 years ago, hopefully they are working on it now.

[@stephonolomax7749]

I greatly appreciate your channel, as I've stumbled upon it only a few months ago. Grant I wanted to know this: how well does the Orthodox Study Bible complement the Ancient Faith Study Bible?

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the question, Stephono. The OSB provides the books and sections that are outside the Hebrew canon, which are absent from the Ancient Faith Study Bible (AFSB). It doesn't quote from patristic sources as frequently as the AFSB does. I haven't checked the two side-by-side, but I would be surprised if they often cite the same sources in the same locations. The OSB, which used the NKJV as its starting point, is more literal than the AFSB, which relies on the CSB. The OSB often shows the influence of the Septuagint; the CSB much less so.

[@stephonolomax7749]

@@RGrantJones That makes sense, Grant. Thanks a lot for getting back to me!

[@Lochlannach661]

There is an ancient faith edition of the OSB, so if you want the best of both worlds, you could get that

[@kingpatriarch224]

Is Genesis 25:34 missing from your version? It is in mine.

[@RGrantJones]

Yes, it is missing. Nice catch!

[@kingpatriarch224]

@@RGrantJones I was wrong. Upon research, it was left out because it is not in the Septuagint. This bothered me because the verse was left out of their newest edition. As such, I went to the original text. I should have done this instead of thinking it was a mistake.

[@RGrantJones]

@@kingpatriarch224 - Are you sure you were wrong? Rahlfs' Septuagint includes the following between Gen 25.33 and 26.1: Ιακωβ δὲ ἔδωκεν τῷ Ησαυ ἄρτον καὶ ἕψεμα φακοῦ, καὶ ἔφαγεν καὶ ἔπιεν καὶ ἀναστὰς ᾤχετο· καὶ ἐφαύλισεν Ησαυ τὰ πρωτοτόκια. That translates to 'And Jacob gave bread to Esau, and lentil stew; and he ate and drank, and he arose and departed; so Esau slighted his birthright.' The verse is in Brenton's LXX, the New English Translation of the Septuagint, the Lexham English Septuagint, and Thomson's Septuagint. I also checked the Cambridge Septuagint, which is Greek only, but which has a decent apparatus listing textual variants. There is no indication there that LXX manuscripts omit this verse. I recall verifying all that when I saw your comment the first time. I just looked at the Patriarchal Text of 1904/12 and the Apostolic Bible Polyglot. Genesis 25.34 is present in both.

[@RGrantJones]

My written review of the Orthodox Study Bible, with many examples of its problematic translations, is [was] available here: [this link is broken]

[@Garbanzo884]

Your geocities page has been hacked. Every time I clicked on the link a "you won a prize" page pops up.

[@RGrantJones]

Sorry to hear that, Thomas. The link still works fine on my computer. No pop-ups.

[@Mr19861120]

Pls suggest me perfect Bible version

[@alexm7765]

Thank you for your work! I'd be immensely grateful if you could reply to my comment below

[@theespjames4114]

First let me thank you for what is a thorough review of the OSB on your website …. can you recommend what you feel is the most reliable English translation of the Septuagint? thank you Robert

[@JoaoHenriqueMartinelliDaSilva]

Wow, this is a great review. Thank you so much for this.

[@jaqian]

Disappointed that they modified the NKJV instead of doing a proper LXX translation.

[@user-wo5rb8ow2f]

This exactly

[@cynthiaadams4322]

Can you order this on amazon?

[@RGrantJones]

I think so, Cynthia. This one has the same ISBN: www.amazon.com/Orthodox-Study-Bible-Hardcover-Christianity/dp/0718003594

[@elizabethshaw734]

It's not a Bible without Maps! :-)

[@peterpapoutsis496]

Good morning Mr. Jones. I was wondering if you had a list of all the corrections to the Orthodox Study Bible that conform to the underlying Septuagint? Please let me know as a new edition of the OSB is coming out this June 2021 and I do not think they corrected the OSB text. Any help in this area would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Peter A. Papoutsis

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the comment, Peter! My list isn't thorough by any means. I grew tired of listing them early in Exodus, and I may have missed a few along the way. If you send me an email at [e-mail], I'll be happy to email you a copy of my OSB review from 2009. It's a .htm file.

[@peterpapoutsis496]

@@RGrantJones will do. Thank you so much. Also keep doing your great and wonderful videos. They are greatly appreciated. Thank you again.

[@peterpapoutsis496]

@@RGrantJones I just found your list of correction for the OSB that go all the way into Jeremiah. Did you do a full list of corrections now for the OSB or is it still incomplete? I literally just found it on Duck Duck Go. Can't find it on Google. Let me know. Thanks.

[@RGrantJones]

@@peterpapoutsis496 - no, I ran out of steam at some point, so it's incomplete. My hope was that the editors would pursue it further, resulting in a corrected edition.

[@peterpapoutsis496]

Hello Grant. I'm just checking in to see if you ever found out why the OSB left out Genesis 25:34? This looks like a mistake, but IDK. Let me know if you know.

[@ggesman7811]

Have you done a review of an Ethiopic Bible in English?

[@RGrantJones]

No, not I.

[@ggesman7811]

@@RGrantJones I just bought a very large thick Bible entitled Holy Bible Ethiopic Version. As you know the Ethiopic Bible was an early translation from the LXX. After evaluating it, I was very surprised to find that this Bible is a Mesoretic based translation. It's also only the Old Testament and does not contain the three Ethiopian Maccabee books. It's a hybrid of MT with added Apocrypha, 1 &2 Enoch, and Jubilees. Not what I was expecting. I'm debating whether or not to return it. Thanks to you showing me the hundred less known variants between the LXX and MT, I was able to pick it out pretty easily. Thanks again Dr Jones.

[@radical7663]

Perhaps the negative thumbs are for the product and not the presentation?

[@RGrantJones]

That's an optimistic thought! But I suspect they're from people who are loyal to this Bible, for whatever reason, and don't want to hear that it has flaws.

[@radical7663]

Could I ask your view on the Dakes?

[@RGrantJones]

@@radical7663 - I haven't examined it in detail. I saw one in a used bookstore once. It was overpriced and I was discouraged by the small font, so I left it there.

[@IndianaJoe0321]

If you ever think to do a Dake's review, @@RGrantJones, please do so. There are still sincere believers in the U.S. who swear by it, despite the Dake's support for the Gap Theory, and some allegations of racism.

[@RGrantJones]

@@IndianaJoe0321 - if I come across a copy at a reasonable price, I'll purchase it and review it.

[@inTruthbyGrace]

@27:28 *WHOA!!!* oh my gosh... yikes! I'll stick with John 17:17 for my understanding of how I am _sanctified_ and your observations about the translation of the "LXX" in the OSB is consistent with what I found too... it is a NKJV spiced w some LXX, it is the same slave to Hebrew primacy with little more then a hat tipping to the OG. Same problem prevails in all the English OT/NT bibles, strangely and disappointingly as you demonstrate, even among the "Orthodox Greek" folks. It was a real let down but ultimately the reason I decided to take on Koine for myself! I do not recall how the OSB handled Dan 7:6 (glossa? v MT "authority") and Jer 17:9 (βαθεῖα deep v MT "wicked") but those are usually target texts I check for comparison along the LXX translation path.. (sadly even C. Thomson's missed Dan 7:6) Thanks for your work!

[@pennsyltuckyreb9800]

I really want an English Septuagint....what is your opinion on the best one? I'm looking maybe NETS vs LES?

[@justinharnett]

I was reading in 2 Samuel 10 and noticed the EOB says that the men's beards were shaved, whereas the other translations say that they were half shaved off.

[@hassanmirza2392]

To new comers of Bible, what will you suggest? Which Bible is the most standard one? Protestant, Orthodox or Catholic? The best English translations are for Protestant / Catholic denominations, not for Orthodox ones. This Orthodox Bibles suffer from bad translation, probably.

[@RGrantJones]

I recommend the New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha in the Revised Standard Version. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z4TQmmmaYteDmbs

[@hassanmirza2392]

@@RGrantJones Thanks, I will try this out. I personally think that Catholic Bible looks solid too.

[@RGrantJones]

@@hassanmirza2392 - I understand your reasons for preferring a Catholic Bible. For myself, I like the New Oxford Annotated Bible (NOAB) with the Apocrypha in the Revised Standard Version. While the NRSV uses modern gender neutral language, the RSV is mostly in mid-twentieth century standard English. The RSV uses archaic endings when God is being addressed, and that seems more reverent to me. I like having the books in the Eastern Orthodox canon, and I fact that the RSV NOAB places the Apocryphal books at the end, rather than between the testaments.

[@hassanmirza2392]

@@RGrantJones Many people keep saying that Catholic Bible is more complete, makes sense. Orthodox ones are not standard either in West. The Oxford Bibles are mostly humanist ones. I don't like it either. They keep saying that Bible stories are all legends and not real stuff. They bring their own secular biases in foot notes. A believer's Bible is better than a Secular Bible.

[@RGrantJones]

@@hassanmirza2392 - Just a word of warning in case you haven't discovered this fact yet: Some Catholic Bibles are also humanistic.

[@BibleLovingLutheran]

I think they purposely matched the NKJV in spots. I think they put what they felt were correct.

[@normandennis9420]

Perhaps Jesus, Paul, Stephan had an older Hebrew text. The one the Septuagint was taken from?

[@RGrantJones]

I'm no expert, but given Dead Sea Scroll alignments with the Septuagint, that seems like a real possibility.

[@1Immanuel8]

@@RGrantJones have you interacted with Doug Woodward's 2 volume work Rebooting the Bible? Thanks!

[@RGrantJones]

@@1Immanuel8 - No, this is the first I've heard of it. Looks interesting. Thanks for mentioning it!

[@1Immanuel8]

@@RGrantJones really enjoying your reviews! Thanks. My Greek is pretty rusty. I'm a former Baptist pastor. What Septuagint materials do you recommend? I think I read somewhere Rahlfs's Reader and Brenton for English. I also have the LXX interlinear on Logos software though my aging eyes work better with books.

[@RGrantJones]

@@1Immanuel8 - I use Hendrickson's two-volume reader's edition, with NETS as a crutch. I reviewed the Hendrickson edition in a video on this channel -- it has good paper and decent-sized print. Thanks for the kind words about the videos!

[@thapack45]

I appreciate the review. I would very much like a copy of the Orthodox Bible in English but don't want to always lug around one with all the commentary. Do you know of anyplace I could get just the Orthodox Bible without the commentary? This one or a NT is all I can find everywhere I look. Thanks so much, I'm already benefitting from a few of your reviews and comparisons (on translations). God bless your endeavors.

[@RGrantJones]

No, as far as I know it isn't available without the notes. The New Testament is the NKJV, of course, and I believe NKJV New Testaments are in print. But the Old Testament translation is unique. Thanks very much for the encouraging comment!

[@Winterwalker442]

There’s an Orthodox copy of the New Testament

[@Jame629]

I got this for a study resource im protestant if i was a orthodox Christian i feel a little bummed because i see not much about how orthodox Christians prey nothing about the jesus preyer no hail mary in the preyers it feels to have a western lense i see no problem for a protestant to shoot from this which is quite worrying Thomas nelson lol

[@X988F]

Thanks, I’m a proud orthodox Christian

[@shemholmes8293]

THIIIIIS is what i need... but the fact it has thin paper is bothersome.

[@Shindler39]

I would love to have this Othodox Study Bible, I would study it day and night:-) The Orthodox Bible have more books that the Catholic and Protestant right?

[@RGrantJones]

Yes. You can see the difference in Old Testament canons at about the 09:00 point. Thanks for commenting!

[@gypsylane8723]

excellent review thanks for sharing

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you, gypsy.

[@hectorestrada4744]

Good work. Thank you.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks, Hector.

[@BibleLovingLutheran]

WEBO states seventh as the OSB does. In Gen 4:8 it has Cain telling able let's go into the field. In Genesis 15:11 it does the same as OSB.

[@jaimeomayan8889]

I want to buy but how it would be.

[@larrym.johnson9219]

Nab. Pardon my bad typing.

[@colonyofcells]

I heard the orthodox new testament study bible has longer commentary that were shortened for the orthodox study bible.

[@johnritter5951]

I have received a KZbin response telling me that the Orthodox Study Bible you review in this video IS a sewn binding. You say that it is NOT at the 2 minute mark in this video. Might you be mistaken or do you still believe you are correct. I won't buy one without the sewn binding and I'm waiting to get what Francis Schaeffer called the True Truth. Thank you.

[@RGrantJones]

My copy is definitely glued, not sewn. But it was printed in 2008. While it's possible that the editions available today are sewn, Christian Book Distributors also sells the OSB, and they say their copies have glued bindings (www.christianbook.com/the-orthodox-study-bible-hardcover-edition/9780718003593/pd/003590?product_redirect=1&search_term=orth&Ntt=003590&item_code=WW&ps_exit=PRODUCT&Ntk=keywords&event=ESRCP ).

[@clannard1]

@John Ritter The Orthodox Study Bible reviewed in this video is the 2008 edition published by Thomas Nelson, which is glued. The OSB published by Ancient Faith Publications in 2019 is smyth sewn and available in hardback and leathersoft (faux leather). Apart from the addition of pre- and post-communion prayers, the AFP version has exactly the same contents and layout.

[@darkstreamfish2729]

Are the words of Christ in red?

[@RGrantJones]

No, they aren't.

[@larrym.johnson9219]

R.G.Grant I have found you reviews helpful have you ever reviewed the man Catholic Bible any incarnation except the nabre I don't like inclusive language I have the baby I think 1991and the rsv ce 1 and 2 I would love a Cambridge with the aprocryhpa I need Large print. I would like to know your opinion of the nab 1991? Thanks

[@RGrantJones]

I have a couple of copies of the older NAB, but I haven't bought an NABRE yet. When I do, I'll review it. As a translation, the NAB is fairly free, but much more literal than the Jerusalem Bible. I haven't used the NAB very much recently. My recollection is that it has a tendency to employ as few words as possible, and I like that economy of expression.

[@larrym.johnson9219]

Thank you for your quick response.

[@victoriouskingdom]

I am very sad to see that "mighty God, the everlasting father, the prince of peace" is missing from Isaiah 9:6

[@Garbanzo884]

The Septuagint was put together 200 years before Christ. The present day Masoretic Text was codified around 1000AD when a large number of Jews were in present day Iraq.

[@davidfigueroa8188]

OrangeCola Juice Then please explain why the New Testament writers used the Septuagint.

[@IndianaJoe0321]

They did use the Septuagint, @@davidfigueroa8188, but not exclusively. There are times when a quote comes from Hebrew and there are times when a Pauline quote comes from an unknown source. Knowing this, it should inform one's "doctrine" of inspiration -- which most evangelicals don't understand.

[@TruthSeeker52342]

@@IndianaJoe0321 Both Jesus and the apostles quoted the LXX more than the Hebrew OT.

[@TruthSeeker52342]

@@piquant7103 The Qumran scrolls actually confirm the LXX more. You must have misunderstood something. Besides that, Jesus and the apostles quoted the LXX more even when it differed from the Proto-Masoretic Text. Just deal with it.

[@TruthSeeker52342]

@@piquant7103 I guess I've misunderstood then. I thought you argued for the MT and against the LXX. To be fair we don't have a full LXX from before the time of Christ. However, 300 AD (Codex Sinaiticus/Vaticanus LXX) is way closer to Jesus than 920 (Aleppo Codex MT) or 1008 (Codex Leningradensis MT).

[@dalestalnaker7646]

Has anyone checked out the Orthodox Study Bible in the Olive Tree App format (on a electronic tablet or smart phone)?

[@WgB5]

I was surprised by the choice of the NKJV. Before then some folks insisted that the church had no official NT.

[@Jd-808]

They don’t have an ‘official’ NT (English translation, at least). As far as I can tell they aren’t really hung up on translation. Liturgically only a few select are approved but for use it’s not a big deal. I think a lot of Protestant converts just think it is.

[@Rafael-zl7fh]

"THE REAL BIBLE MATTERS."

[@donwright5997]

You are a very good book Reviewer.. Reason. You talk nice and slow I can understand you. Can you review? The companion Bible. Doctor billinger.

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you for the kind comment, Don! I reviewed the Companion Bible a few years ago -- kzbin.info/www/bejne/r5PIgHVqerBopbs

[@HollywoodBigBoss]

Have two copies. Hardcover and Leathersoft cover. Really like this Bible. Although I will strongly disagree with this bible on the dating of the Synoptic Gospels.

[@justanotherchristian3408]

Dear Mr. Jones, While hoping to not make any trouble for this extremely high up TRIPLE PHD Orthodox theologian that I have known and studied under for almost 20 years, he says that this Bible is a DISGRACE to his Orthodox traditions and that the use of the NKJV Bible is an absolute folly because of it's gross generalities and abominable changes in the text (see Psalm 12:6-7 and compare with KJV or Darby, for example), things which I am personally aware of through 47 years of study. He sent me this same Bible as soon as I asked about it, and he has sent me (all free of charge) many of his books since I met him in 1997. BTW re: the "Triple PHD" - he has the PHD from a prestigious Baptist Seminary in Texas, THE Roman Catholic Seminary in The Vatican, and an Orthodox Seminary which he attended in yet a very different place. WE (he and I) both totally agree with the Creeds (Nicean - Chalcedonian). AND, the show-through is terrible, and as you noted, the print is faded and inconsistent. There is not a hint of line matching. Nelson can do and has done much better than this. I really like the high-tech nature of your review, so I will watch more reviews by you. THANK YOU! BELOW is the advert for the ministry in which I have served for the past 28 years. *DO YOU REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHY America (and The Whole World) is in such a rapid MORAL decline? *It's the great and final apostasy of Christendom and the whole world*...... read THE GREAT DREAM (book) the great and final apostasy of Bible prophecy described, online to read FOR FREE, continually since October of 1992 now available in English, Dutch and Spanish ONLINE TO READ FOR FREE The Last Days of The Church Age? the Introductory letter for THE GREAT DREAM www.apostasynow.com/open%20letter.html THE GREAT DREAM (the great and final apostasy of Christendom, described) ENGLISH www.apostasynow.com/tgd/index.html DUTCH apostasynow.com/tgdd/index.htm SPANISH www.justanotherchristian.com/apostasy-now/ ........and even more inspiring articles and books - wonderful resources for "Just Another Christian" Articles on subjects that real Christians will be thrilled to have finally found. Honest Saints will be relieved to have found a genuine remnant of "us 1John 4:6" RELIGION IS NOT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING because RELIGION WAS ALWAYS THE *ONLY* IMPORTANT THING (2 Thessalonians 2:3 AMPLIFIED BIBLE version) Let no one deceive or beguile you in any way, for that day will not come except the apostasy comes *first* [unless the predicted great falling away of those who have professed to be Christians has come], and the man of lawlessness (sin) is revealed, who is the son of doom (of perdition), [Dan. 7:25; Dan. 8:25; 1Ti. 4:1]

[@elizabethshaw734]

I realize I am late to the party but does anybody know if there is a large print Orthodox Study Bible?

[@clannard1]

@Elizabeth Shaw no there isn't unfortunately.

[@__soap__]

It seems to use a translation similar to the Good News Translation for Isaiah 64 9. It should be "and the angel of his presence saved them" it says "Not an elder or an angel, but the Lord Himself saved them". This denies the trinity

[@M3124-t5f]

I was not aware of this differences, it's Very disapointing

[@BibleLovingLutheran]

So, are you reformed and not Orthodox?

[@juancastillo2900]

The Orthodox Study Bible only had the New Testament but not the Old😢

[@bbhhgghhh9337]

It has old Testament....

[@lj8428]

Thank you for that lovely detailed review. The following information is something of which few may realize. Some modern translations of the Bible, including the New King James Version, have removed the Author's name entirely from the pages of His own book, that Author being Almighty God, which, in English, is most commonly pronounced as Jehovah. The four letters of God's name, commonly known as the tetragrammaton, appear in the ancient, original Hebrew holy scriptures 6,828 times as YHWH or JHVH. This is because the ancient Hebrews did not write in their vowels, but provided them as they read the text. Later Jewish copyists or scribes, when copying the Hebrew scriptures, began the practice of substituting God's name with titles, replacing His holy name with words such as Lord, the Lord, Adonai or God, and this practice was applied to later copies of the Greek Septuigent translation and others. Jehovah's name was first restored by William Tyndale. In 1530 he published a translation of the of the first 5 books of the Bible into English, which included Jehovah's name once in Ex. 6:3. In a note in this edition, Tyndale wrote: "Jehovah is God's name...Moreover, as oft as thou sayest LORD in great letters (except where there is an error in printing) it is the Hebrew Jehovah." From this the practice arose among translators to use Jehovah's name in just a few places. This practice was adopted by the translators of the Authorized King James Version in 1611, where Jehovah's name appears only 4 times, namely, in Ex. 6:3; Ps. 83:18; Isa. 12:2; 26:4. The 1611 KJV reads at Psalms 83:18, "That men may know that thou, whose name alone is Jehovah, art the most high over all the earth." It is clear from this verse and many others throughout scripture that it is God's will that his name be made known throughout the earth, to all mankind. Some newer translations, including the 1903 / 1929 American Standard Version, have honored the Almighty God and Creator by restoring His name to it's rightful place in His word.

[@mybigfatfrog7975]

Deut. 25:11-12

[@EdwardTheMedievalist]

Just purchased from B&N. This be a ride.

[@piperalpha]

20:30 You have a very narrow cat!

[@RGrantJones]

:)

[@trench01]

Its not that great. A bunch of former protestants writing an orthodox books with some misinterpretation and false explanations at times. A few Popular priests came out against it but but that has been quietly swept under the rug. Even when I pointed out to a church official which I wont say they said I should use my own judgement what is true or not. But the issue is for the people that are completely ignorant like some commentators here which they wont get any help. Which not even a priest can defend this if pressed on the inconsistencies about it. Some good some bad but I give this a 6/10

[@meklit3130]

sorry to bother but do you think esv is a good bible? i’m kinda young but i wanna read the truth

[@trench01]

@@meklit3130 Long story short be humble and use your own judgment. Nothing is perfect, not even ones own interpretation which is why one would need to ask a priest or preferably a more traditional one than modern one since 1/2 the church is against the other half. Modern priests vs traditional priests I assume. One has to use judgment for everything and be humble enough to feel one is wrong despite you can feel the other is. Christ did not come to make the bible but the church. And the Church was Greek first since Ancient Greek views are similar to what Christianity preaches which is why it flourished in Greece. Also the fact that Greece had the majority of the places even where Christ was born and the apostles spoke Greek, many of them went to Greece which is why most in the New Testament are locations in Greece, and the official old and new are Greek. Their is a lot that the priests do not know but better than most but just like when doing to see a doctor for medical advice best to ask a 2nd opinion since every priest seems to interoperate differently. The Orthodox church has apostolic succession and was in control of the original churches when the counsel was in order, and had the majority when getting rid of the pope since he declared himself above other which is a sin since even Christ said their is no one above others and everyone is equal. Which is why the Orthodox church has the ecumenical patriarch called first among equals. The Key this this story is Greek has the original which one can not learn the ancient Greek well enough, but even if they do one needs the guidance of a priest since self interpenetrating can be an issue for most despite hard enough for a priest which has more knowledge on the matter due to their theology degree. But One has to use common sense with everything even the Greek or the ESV. I go with what is online and if i have a question I ask a priest online or in person if they have time.The Orthodox study bible is kind of better than most but some passages I feel are anti Greek since they interoperate the world Greek as non Jewish which their is a world for that already which means gentile which the Study bible gives the wrong info on that basic thing. A anti Greek view is anti Christianity since no other nation has spread Christianity for 2000 years as proper as them, and even when the Greeks went to see Christ Christ said the hour has come for God to be glorified. Christ and the apostles ate bread not including Job since its not allowed for a jew to eat bread during Passover. The apostles went to Greek terrines to preach since they knew Greek despite some say they did not know Greek, St Katherine stated that the Greeks were the ones to first predicted Christ would arrive, The church reads the linage of Abraham to begot Joseph the husband of marry to begot Christ which is not true since that goes against immaculate conception and presented to show a lineage to Abraham but if that was true then they would state how the Virgin Mary is but they don't since their seems to be non and the be of Jewish one has to be of Abraham descendants. No church would state that. Does that sound logical? Point is like every profession one must think to feed themselves information than be fed. The study bible is better than most English version but again Christ did not come for people to read the bible since the church put it together and a assistant to the church. But most bibles are from the perspective of protestants so. Even modern Priests are trying to look like protestants maybe to slowly merge churches which I assume they will merge Catholics with Orthodox to rename the pope as a new ecumenical patriarch if they were the merge. Protestants have done more hard to Christianity than help of this feel good mentality than truth. I am not expert but I state what I hear from others that know more. The Russian Orthodox church lately has their things in order and not pressured by politics as much but I dont know of any book they have. Politics affect everything from the food you eat, the cloths you have, what the priest is not allowed to state, etc. You can read them and listen to a priest but ask question to try to make sense of things. But dont questions too much since many get upset. You would need to ask a priest. I prefer one with that is more traditional than modern that has a long beard and hair that looks like a priest if they have the time. Just my opinion.

[@meklit3130]

@@trench01 thank you very much!!! i’ll be doing more research

[@DoctressZ]

Nice Seiko SNK803, I have the exact same one

[@carolynpagliuca5657]

That is not slovic its byzantine

[@mihailgae-draghici4864]

LXX = the second ' Golden Calf ' ---> [ Sefer Torah I, 8 ] . 'HAS VE'HALIYLAH!

[@paulyounker2588]

You must have an old lady living next door that gets angry if you speak too loudly. Please, you won't wake the dead if you speak normally.

[@RGrantJones]

My voice won't last if I speak loudly. Thanks for commenting!

[@lapd9682]

I have this bible. I use it with the fire bible together. Sometimes the orthodox study bible has more to say and sometimes the fire bible has more to say .. but i love orthodoxy which is the genuine faith. I wonder is there better orthodox bible today than this one????? I would use that as well

[@witchf4ce310]

Alexander Albano do you know any good books with writings by the church fathers? I belong to and go to the Orthodox Church because I’m greek but I honestly haven’t believed in God up until last year... and I would love some good information on the Orthodox Church in text if possible! Thanks 😄

[@GreekOrthodox7]

It’s not a Russian cross it’s a Greek cross. Orthodox Christianity started in Greece and Russia and other countries copied

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks! I'm sure you're right about the cross. The rounded look at the ends of the crossbar and the top of the vertical beam is characteristic of the Greek cross, isn't it? But didn't Orthodox Christianity start in the Holy Land in the first century?

[@MosesMedinaE]

Its an Orthodox Cross, all 14 Jurisdictions use it.

[@someguy9571]

Orthodox Christianity began in Jerusalem, not Greece and certainly not Russia. Also, "copied"? Do you think that Christ is for the Greeks and Russians only? Was Christ a Greek or a Russian?

[@ExVeritateLibertas]

The 3 bar cross originated in Russia around 500 years ago by Ivan the Terrible. You'd be hard pressed to find one atop a church in Greece. Or other non-Slavic Orthodox churches, like Georgia.

[@carolynpagliuca5657]

Its greek orthodox

[@andrewbradbury8527]

Smash it about a bit, enjoy it, instead of whinging. Too perfectionist

[@RGrantJones]

Lol. That's what the publishers want me to do!

[@elizabethshaw734]

It's the same usual Bible paper that Bibles have used for decades if not longer.

[@therougesage7466]

Nothing wrong with the notes bro I read them and they made perfect sense , don’t know what your question was about there

[@therougesage7466]

26:59

[@jesusismyking6520]

You speaking or you crayng...

[@josephr.gainey2079]

There is one change (and a major problem with the Orthodox Study Bible for me, although I'm converting to Orthodoxy) that bothers me greatly which you missed. Song of Songs 1:5 in the OSB reads "I am black AND beautiful, O daughter of Jerusalem, ... ." (Thomas Nelson ed., p. 883, col. 1) The original text in both the Hebrew and Greek reads "black BUT beautiful," a fact not mentioned in the notes. The translators had no right to make this change!!! PERIOD!!!!! END OF DISCUSSION!!!!!!!!!!!!! What the Bible says it says. Every Bible translation in English I can remember checking in the last 20+ years does the same, certain in the name of political correctness and to avoid charges of racism. However, they have NO RIGHT TO DO SO!!!!!!!!!! Regarding the Orthodox Study Bible, this makes me wonder what other changes the editors made and likewise failed to document. If they can change this and get away with it, the next thing they'll be silently emending is "You shall not commit adultery" in the Ten Commandments.

[@RGrantJones]

Rahlfs' Greek text reads, "μελαινα ειμι και καλη."

[@clovisahmed6041]

THAT IS NOT CHRIST CHRIST WAS NOT WHITE HE WAS BLACK REVALATION 114 KJV ALL THE DISCIPLES IN THE BIBLE WERE BLACK EVERY CHARACTER IN THE BIBLE ARE BLACK JOB 3030 KJV LAMENTATION 5 10 KJV JEREMIAH 14. 2 KJV REVALATION.114 KJV LAMENTATION 4 8 KJV WE ARE THE TRUE PEOPLE OF THE BOOK WE ARE HEBREW ISRAELITES