What are your thoughts regarding.....

[ktn4eg]

.....the value of what's called a Chronological Study Bible?

The other day I was at the LifeWay bookstore near me, and I noticed that there was a 50% off sale on the leather-bound NLTse's edition of the Chronological Life Application Study Bible.

Now, the MSRP of this leather-bound Bible was somewhere in the neighborhood of about $70 - $80. LifeWay had it on sale for about $40.

As a non-seminary-trained lay person, I've come to really enjoy the NLT Life Application Bible, so I purchased this sale Bible for the said $40.

Later on, I got to thinking [always a dangerous thing! :laugh:], "Now, why would LifeWay put a Bible on sale for half-price???"

The only thing that I could think of is that, since it's a "Chronological" Bible rather than a "regular" Bible, probably not too many people are going to lay down $70-$80 for a leather-bound Bible such as this since they'd find it difficult/impossible to use it either in the pews or (assuming one is a preacher [which I'm not]) from the pulpit. IOW, this "sale" was for all intents and purposes a "Closeout" sale!!!

Your thoughts on this would be appreciated.
















PS-----Boy, I sure wouldn't want to be given a chronological Bible to use were I a contestant in a Bible Sword Drill contest!!!!! :laugh:

 

[Dr. Bob]

Good for study (not for any public use - finding "stuff" is hard)

Also, the "guess" of a man/committee and may not be accurate in any sense.

I used Reese's Chronological years back when I taught a course on Bible chronology. Found LOTS of places I 100% disagreed with

 

[annsni]

I just printed out a "Reading the Bible in a Year - Chronological" reading plan and followed along in my regular Bible. It was great!

 

[Deacon]

A chronological bible is a novelty that one must read with the knowledge that it is one persons best guess about when biblical events may have occurred

Where a section fits into a chronological sequence is often but a guess.

Some books cover large spans of history, others cover a brief time.

To split a book up disturbs the continuity of the author's purpose.

Rob

 

[annsni]

See, I love seeing the Psalms that were most likely written by David during the different parts of his life. It really makes them stand out a LOT.

 

[DocTrinsoGrace]

Traditional Order of Books

..."Chronological" Bible rather than a "regular" Bible...

In my humble opinion, understanding the chronology of the books is valuable. However, we need to be careful not to lose what we can learn from the carefully thought through order in which we have received the Scriptures. We do not know who was responsible (probably a variety of Jewish scribes relative to the Old Testament, and a variety of Christians scribes relative to the New Testament) but through the generations there is now a consensus regarding the sagacity of the book order.

Psalms, also, has the hidden hand of an editor. A careful study will reveal that the Psalms are grouped with specific forethought. It is a real blessing to have that truth exposed as the Psalms are systematically considered.

Just my two cents... or perhaps two mites a la Luke 21:2b.

 

[JonC]

It would be interesting (particularly in regards to the OT). But I think we’d miss some of the gospel writer’s focus if that were our primary method of study.

 

[DocTrinsoGrace]

It would be interesting (particularly in regards to the OT). But I think we’d miss some of the gospel writer’s focus if that were our primary method of study.

Hopefully we study all Scripture in the light of all other Scriptures (AKA Analogy of Faith), lest any of it falls through the cracks. What a blessing that we have text (2 Timothy 3:16-17), two millennia of gifts of Christ to the church (Ephesians 4:11-14), one another (Colossians 3:16), and the Holy Spirit (John 16:13-14) to help us insure that we don't miss anything. :godisgood:

So much to study, so much yet to learn, but time is so fleeting.

Thank you, JonC, for the good reminder that any method isn't all sufficient unto itself!

 

[franklinmonroe]

In my humble opinion, understanding the chronology of the books is valuable. ...

I agree that an understanding the chronology of the books can be valuable. For example, recognizing that James probably predates Romans gives the reader a different perspective. However, most Bibles marketed now as "chronological" are communicating that the text has been organized by the order of biblical events in history. I have Bibles that are organized both ways.

However, we need to be careful not to lose what we can learn from the carefully thought through order in which we have received the Scriptures. We do not know who was responsible (probably a variety of Jewish scribes relative to the Old Testament, and a variety of Christians scribes relative to the New Testament) but through the generations there is now a consensus regarding the sagacity of the book order. ...

What would you say can be learned from "the carefully thought through order" of the Bible? Virtually all common Bibles today are organized in the order of the Septuagint, which is different than the canonical order of the Hebrew Tanakh. Additionally, many ancient manuscripts of the New Testament scriptures display different book orders than modern Bibles. Which order were you suggesting was carefully thought through?

 

[ktn4eg]

Also, the "guess" of a man/committee and may not be accurate in any sense.

Here's what the "Introduction To The Chronological LASB" has to say about this (p. A 17) [bolding is mine]:

"Organizing the Bible into chronological order is sometimes tricky, and excellent Christian scholars do not always agree on the order of certain books or passages. The editors of the Chronological Life Application Study Bible created the chronological arrangement by consulting several scholarly resources, but it should not be considered the only legitimate way to organize the Bible chronologically. Some books, such as the book of the prophet Joel, are very difficult to place chronologically. In cases like that, we used our best judgment, but ultimately certainty eludes us. We encourage readers to question our decisions and consider alternatives to the arrangement we have provided---the text of Scripture is infallible, but our arrangement of it in this Bible certainly is not!

 

[Yeshua1]

.....the value of what's called a Chronological Study Bible?

The other day I was at the LifeWay bookstore near me, and I noticed that there was a 50% off sale on the leather-bound NLTse's edition of the Chronological Life Application Study Bible.

Now, the MSRP of this leather-bound Bible was somewhere in the neighborhood of about $70 - $80. LifeWay had it on sale for about $40.

As a non-seminary-trained lay person, I've come to really enjoy the NLT Life Application Bible, so I purchased this sale Bible for the said $40.

Later on, I got to thinking [always a dangerous thing! :laugh:], "Now, why would LifeWay put a Bible on sale for half-price???"

The only thing that I could think of is that, since it's a "Chronological" Bible rather than a "regular" Bible, probably not too many people are going to lay down $70-$80 for a leather-bound Bible such as this since they'd find it difficult/impossible to use it either in the pews or (assuming one is a preacher [which I'm not]) from the pulpit. IOW, this "sale" was for all intents and purposes a "Closeout" sale!!!

Your thoughts on this would be appreciated.














PS-----Boy, I sure wouldn't want to be given a chronological Bible to use were I a contestant in a Bible Sword Drill contest!!!!! :laugh:

Good for studying respecially the OT books, as it helps to keep together the various prophets and their Kings!

 

[DocTrinsoGrace]

Thoughts About Our Received Order

What would you say can be learned from "the carefully thought through order" of the Bible? Virtually all common Bibles today are organized in the order of the Septuagint, which is different than the canonical order of the Hebrew Tanakh. Additionally, many ancient manuscripts of the New Testament scriptures display different book orders than modern Bibles. Which order were you suggesting was carefully thought through?

Hi, there! The order to which I was referring is that which is common to most any Bible you pick up. One of the reasons that it is carefully thought through is evidenced by the consensus of Christendom. I do not know any contemporary that argues against the current order.

Nonetheless, as I posted my thoughts, it occurred to me: "Stop and think, self. Do not assert anything that you cannot substantiate with the same level of confidence that you assert it." As is far too common -- and certainly the case of the post you asked about -- I didn't take my own advice!

Nonetheless, if you don't mind my continuing to speak off the top of my head -- it has been a long day at work -- I will offer up some of my thoughts. Please excuse me if the following is not so carefully argued or organized. If nothing else, perhaps it will be food for thought.

The most obvious indication of order is that of the Old and New Testaments; i.e., old covenant and new covenant. Genesis begins with the Suzerain-Vassal covenant, describing creation, while Revelation ends with the consummation of the covenantal relationship between the Suzerain and Vassal.

We could talk through the arrangement of the Old Testament, but if you don't mind I'll just jump into talking about the New Testament. (The order of the LXX was certainly done with reasons in mind. Much of that can be surmised, but I wouldn't doubt that there is some ancient discussion of the subject.)

The Gospels begin the New Covenant, rightly presenting Christ as Prophet, Priest, King -- the Lamb of God. A Gospel is a genre unique to the Bible. Any of us would agree that if the New Covenant is presented it rightly ought to be with the Gospels. To the Jew first (Matthew) then to the Gentile (Mark and Luke). It also stands to reason that the synoptics are grouped together.

Speaking of which, one might expect that the Gospel of Luke ought to be followed by the Acts of the Apostles, nonetheless, the Gospels are grouped together, emphasizing the importance of the non-synoptic Gospel of John.

The position of Acts makes sense, providing details about the churches expansion in obedience to the Great Commision.

Acts is followed by the epistle of the Romans, arguably one of the greatest systematic presentations of doctrine in the possession of the church.

The doctrine of Romans finds application in the epistles that follow, which contain divisive issues arising in individual churches.

The pastoral epistles are grouped together, containing specific admonition to elders in the primitive church -- perhaps logically surfacing from the issues in the preceding epistles.

The general epistles are grouped together, too. Perhaps this is because they apply more broadly to the whole church, built upon the Kerygma as a whole. James appears to be more of a wisdom book, differing from the others. But it is likely meaningful that these books appear in the order that they do.

Finally, Revelation, as has been pointed out, concludes the New Testament. Regardless of one's eschatology, I do not think any of us in Christendom would argue that it is a wonderful conclusion of great hope.

Anyway, sorry if you wanted to discuss the LXX order in greater particular. There is certainly significance to it, historically, prophetically, and pedagogically.

Now I think I'll go settle down to supper. :smilewinkgrin:

In Him, Doc