KJV-Henry Morris Study Bible

IMHO this is the best study Bible available in English and has been since it superseded the earlier editions and previous best study Bibles The New Defender's Study Bible and The Defender's Study Bible. How can I make such a claim? Allow me to illustrate.KJV: To start with it uses the standard King James Version as the basic text. There is a reason that the overwhelming majority of people who make accuracy of translation their highest priority choose the KJV: a disagreement over textual criticism: the methods used to arrive at the correct text from a collection of hand-written copies, including both scribal errors and (possibly) deliberate changes. Up through the KJV, the underlying principle was "majority rules", that is all things being equal, the reading that is the most common is the most likely to be correct. However, virtually all post-KJV translations have used a different underlying principle: "age before beauty", that is assuming that a handful of older by a century manuscripts rediscovered beginning in the 18th century contain the correct readings even though they represent only about 5% of the total and appear by internal evidence to all have been copies of copies descended from the same original source. The problem is that if this assumption is wrong (and there are excellent reasons for believing it to be wrong), all such versions are introducing more errors than they correct while after nearly 400 years the errors in the KJV have pretty much all been caught and either corrected or footnoted in modern editions. Since the total differences in the NT versions amount to no more than 5% and (arguably) change no major doctrines of Christianity, one might be tempted to dismiss this as Yet Another argument about the number of angels who can dance on the head of a pin, but conservatives point with some justification to the occasionally dishonest footnotes in some modern versions which falsely assert "majority rules" for what are in fact minority readings and call into question by enclosing within brackets text that there is no rational reason for questioning.ANNOTATIONS: This still leaves a wall full of KJV study Bibles; what separates this one from the pack are the over 10,000 footnotes that, according to the Introduction, "explain the Bible's difficult passages, resolve its alleged contradictions, point out the evidences of its divine origin, confirm its historical accuracy, note its remarkable anticipations of modern science, demonstrate its fulfilled prophecies, and in general remove any doubts about its inerrancy, its authority, and its ability to meet every human need."What makes them particularly useful is that they are printed directly below the text in question, putting the defense of so-called Biblical "mistakes" within easy reach of anyone looking them up. Of course no claims of divine inspiration are made for these works of man, but they do represent the culmination of many years of careful research.Despite years of Bible study, I was frankly astonished by how much I learned from reading these notes, especially things present right in the text all along that I had somehow missed. For example, one of the minor but by no means insignificant claims of a Biblical mistake is in Gen 9:13-16 where God supposedly first puts the rainbow into the sky as a token of His promise never to destroy the Earth again with a flood. Well, this is OBVIOUS nonsense because, as we now know, the conditions for producing a rainbow occur quite frequently after a rain so that the only way this verse could possibly be true is if it had never rained before the Flood.Funny how I had never really noticed Gen 2:5-6 before: "...for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth... But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground."Other notes explain how this could have worked, based on a scientific explanation of what the "waters which were above the firmament" of Gen 1:7 were and what their effects would be and how the mechanism of the Flood would work, but the interesting thing to me is that if you assume that some ancient just made it all up, how did he know that it was necessary to claim that it had never rained prior to the Flood for the story to work? Which is more plausible to you? An unsung ancient Isaac Asimov? Or just some Bozo writing down what he observed without necessarily fully understanding it?INTRODUCTIONS: In addition to the annotations each testament and each individual book of the Bible have introductions addressing more general questions. One of the most interesting to me was the introduction to Genesis. Liberal Bible scholars almost universally insist that Moses was not the actual author of Genesis, and this introduction agrees but not in the way that liberals mean it. Again the evidence was in the text in plain sight all along in the form of the recurring phrase "These are the generations of..." followed by a name. Parallels with the terminology of ancient Babylonian tablets indicate that these names are actually the signatures of the original writers as the tablets were being passed down to the next author, and whenever Genesis is referenced in the New Testament, Moses is NEVER claimed as the author, unlike the case with references to the other four books of the Pentateuch, which often claim Moses as the author. This makes sense because Genesis records alleged history long prior to Moses' lifetime while Moses was a direct participant in the events of the following books. So the text of Genesis itself claims it to be composed of the assembled writings of Adam, Noah, the three sons of Noah, Shem, Terah, Isaac, Jacob, and Esau, with the final section being based on information from "the sons of Jacob." And just as critics claim, there ARE two separate creation accounts in Genesis divided by Gen 2:4. The second is part of Adam's account while the first ends with the slightly different phrase, "These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created." Since the first section, Gen 1:1-2:4a, tells of events prior to the existence of any witness to record them, logically God Himself must either have written this section directly or specifically revealed it to Adam, and another alleged "mistake" is resolved.APPENDICES: Finally there are almost a hundred pages of useful appendices, addressing specific topics. To me the most interesting were the "Global Processes Indicating Recent Creation", which details a large number of worldwide natural processes whose rates are currently known yet which cannot possibly be reconciled with a 4.6 billion year old earth, and the Chronology of the Patriarchs in Genesis, based on the lists in Gen 5 and 11, which reveals some astonishing overlaps:Adam could have known all the pre-flood patriarchs except Noah and Shem.Noah could have known all the pre-flood patriarchs except Adam and Seth.Noah and Shem could have known Abraham.Shem could have known Isaac and Jacob.Note: This Bible was published in several different formats from hardback to genuine leather at several different prices so pick the one that fits your budget. Sadly, no "thumbed" edition of this edition was ever published so I waited a long time to finally order this one (sigh); now I actually have to learn the order of the books of the Bible!... ...I wonder if that was God's point....Note: At one time there was an advantage to purchasing previous editions direct from ICR because they would include a PC version on CDROM for free, but now that the complete Bible and Notes are available online at their website, they have apparently stopped the practice. After all if you can go on the Internet anytime you want to search it, why fill up your hard drive with it?Note: One downside to all these annotations is that in many places, in Genesis and Revelation in particular, the notes take up more of the page than the Bible verses do. For study this causes no difficulties, but for reading along this WILL result in a lot more page flipping for you than for the rest of the congregation. It isn't quite, "In (flip) the (flip) beginning (flip) God..." but the first two pages contain Gen 1:1-2 and nothing else but notes! In addition though I don't know how much of this to attribute to the notes, this time through I felt that I finally and fully understood Revelation,...seriously,... stop laughing.Note: A Chinese edition The Defender's Study Bible - Traditional Chinese Version (of the first edition only of The Defender's Study Bible) has been published, and while I cannot personally attest to it (not being able to read Chinese), the Chinese readers I have directed to it or given copies of it, have been impressed with this combination of the Dr. Henry M. Morris' 6,000 study notes from the first edition, translated into Chinese, and added to the Chinese Union Version of the Bible.

The rating I gave of course is not for the translation (KJV) I love them all...KJV, NIV, NLT, NASB, ESV ...all. I would rather read the NLT Bible than the NYT newspaper..or any newspaper actually..OK..this Bible is very nice, the cover is soft, pliable, nice looking (except for the title on the front cover) (I don't prefer that) Here is where I may be criticized..I own many, many bibles..what is important to me is the aesthetics of each one that I purchase, and if I am to spend hard earned money for one, I certainly want, what I want..so when I received this Bible and opened it, I was disappointed..the paper inside..(to me) looked like cheap recyclable paper found in typical trade paperback books, it was not the thin white typical "bible paper" I am used to...the font was a modern looking type set, not a classic type set such as one found in a Classic Edition Old Scofield Bible..(which aesthetic wise, is my favorite) (only I have the compact edition, wish I could be certain of a larger standard edition existed) yes, yes I know to most people these are not important issues to them and the message inside is the same regardless of how it is presented. But again this is what I like and maybe there are likeminded folks out there that find these things important to them as well. As in the Scofield and other Bibles, I like the outline and "titles" above the verses or groups of verses...This bible had very few in comparison...The reference system was very minimal and the concordance was minimal as well. The notes inside are interesting and I enjoy reading them, although contradictory to many other reviews (that I based my decision to purchase on) there are not that many as compared to more popular study bibles...the KJV Study Bible from Nelson has a lot of notes and commentary compared to this one and the Old Scofield has very few compare to this bible..Anyway I had two bibles in ming when I purchased this one..the other was the Ryrie KJV Study Bible..I am sort of remorseful I didn't decide on it..(maybe in the near future) ( when I can convince the wife that yes, I would like to have yet another Study Bible)...My favorite Study Bible of all time is my original NIV Study Bible (bonded leather) that I purchased 20 to 25 yrs ago and have carried all around the world...still carry it everywhere...don't see that happening with this new purchase...most likely will go to near the bottom of the stack...I will reference it for some of it's commentary..I hope this helps...If anyone has a comparison of this one to Ryrie KJV Study bible I would appreciate that info (concerning the aesthetics, not the theology)..hope this helpsUpdate on my original review:I have upped this to 5 stars, this has become my "at hand" bible..I work away from home and even pack it with me even though it is large..I have the brown imitation leather and it is very soft pliable and you can bend the cover around without it crinkling..It lays flat as well...this bible is a handful, luckily I am a big guy with big hands and that helps..very good bible, has ministered to me in areas all my other study bibles have failed to do.

Ok, so it is a tome and you wouldn't want to haul it around, but I LOVE this Bible. I LOVE the big print; it makes it easy and relaxing to read. I love Henry Morris' research included in the notes and there are invaluable helps in the back. I was a little bummed that it only came in the KJV, but I am actually loving that part, too! Great for young earth insights as you read the Bible!