of customers would recommend this product to a friend.
Page 1 of 1
Jeremy MAsheville, NCAge: 25-34Gender: male5 Stars Out Of 5Great for removing our modern spectaclesDecember 11, 2019Jeremy MAsheville, NCAge: 25-34Gender: maleQuality: 5Value: 5Meets Expectations: 5Here are my impressions of this Bible in what is hopefully an organized critique:
The brown cover has a nice texture, the gold embossing is well done, and the gold-gilded page edges are beautiful. The interior uses cream pages and two colors of font (black for the text and red for verse/chapter numbers, names in commentary, and decorated drop caps). The font itself is easy to read and its size is good. Pages are a little thin but that seems to be the case with most Bibles I've seen printed in the past several years.
I'm new to the Christian Standard Bible. So far, I like it. My one suggestion would be to utilize the Septuagint a little bit more where it gives a better reading to the Old Testament. The alternate LXX reading is sometimes mentioned in the footnotes, but not always. For example, in Isaiah 14:19 it reads, "But you are thrown out without a grave, like a worthless branch." Branch makes little sense in the context of dead bodies and so the LXX reading of "carcass" is superior here, in my opinion, and should at least be footnoted.
Given the context of this translation (one with the writings of ancient Christians from the first thousand years of Christianity), it would have been nice to have included the Apocrypha since that was used universally by Christians for 1500 years.
The ancient commentary is the only reason I purchased this Bible. I almost purchased the "NKJV Ancient-Modern Bible" instead, but after reviewing the commentary included, saw that it was much more modern than ancient. The commentary in this comes from Thomas C. Oden's "Ancient Christian Commentary" series, albeit this is quite abbreviated compared that 30-volume set.
The commentary includes notes from well over one hundred ancient writers, most of whom were canonized as saints, but a few that were heretics (such as Origen, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus, and Tertullian). Most of these heretics wrote solid biblical commentary, and were erroneous mainly in their other writings. So I appreciate their inclusion here. The number of entries per person has a lot to do with how much that ancient person wrote and if their writings are still extent. For example, John Chrysostom, Augustine of Hippo, Origen, Theodoret of Cryus, Gregory the Great, Jerome, Cyril of Alexandria, Ephrem the Syrian, Bede, and Ambrose have the heaviest share of commentary in this volume (Chrysostom has the most).
Overall, it is enlightening for us modern, 21st century people to read the Bible through the eyes of Christians who lived much closer to the time it was written in a culture that was far more similar to that of Bible times. While our technology and ability to perform textual criticism has increased, our wisdom certainly has not. Many of the theologians quoted here were sages of the past who were filled with the Holy Spirit and wrote enlightened commentary.
The articles are mostly good and will help those who have not studied the ancient writers and heresies, or those who have studied but need a refresher. I'm thankful for their inclusion.
They do contain a few errors, but most of you can probably ignore this nitpicky digression: Most of the errors I've noticed thus far revolve around "The Nicene Creed" on page 1620, which I'm glad they included but which is incorrectly named and has an error in it. The creed formulated in Nicaea was updated in Constantinople a few decades later to include more language regarding the Holy Spirit. So, it really should be entitled "The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed." Regarding the Holy Spirit, it should not include the filioque that was added about seven hundred years later (even during the controversy of Photius and Pope Nicholas, there was no filioque being used in the Creed in Rome). For those less studied, it means the Creed should read that the Holy Spirit "proceeds from the Father" not "the Father and the Son." It is disingenuous to call this the "Nicene Creed" with the additions in it. I have seen at least one article (and perhaps commentary?) with this error where they quote a Greek (Eastern) writer using the filioque, which would not have happened since the filioque never existed in Greek.
Overall, this is a Bible worth having and I'm glad I purchased it. It is now my go-to Bible and has made it more fun to read the Bible without having to dig through my patristic commentary to find some reflections.
Shawnskey5 Stars Out Of 5Great resourceNovember 30, 2019ShawnskeyQuality: 5Value: 5Meets Expectations: 5A wonderful window into the wisdom and history of the early Church. Each page drips with insight from the great historical minds of Christian history. You can just dive in anywhere and be edified. And it is such a handsome edition as well.
vb5 Stars Out Of 5The CSB Ancient Faith Study BibleOctober 29, 2019vbQuality: 5Value: 5Meets Expectations: 5I purchased the Ancient Faith Study Bible for two reasons.
I had been reading about the new CSB translation and wanted to have it in my library to use as a reference.
Then, when I found out it contained readings from the early Church Fathers that go back as far as the late first century, I was even more intrigued.
So after receiving this bible and reading through several sections, I am happy to say it has become a favorite.
It is a very well crafted bible, beautiful to look at, and soft to hold in the hand. But it is a large bible.
I am not an academic by any means; just one who loves the Lord, loves reading His word and being uplifted by it.
This bible definitely meets my expectations.
Page 1 of 1