KJV New Defenders Study Bible [Hardcover]

Thomas Nelson (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: March 15, 2006

This study Bible provides a handbook for a solid defense of the accuracy, integrity, and inspiration of the Bible, a seven-day creation, and Jesus as God's incarnate son.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 2201 pages
• Publisher: Thomas Nelson; Thumbed edition (March 15, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 052912162X
• ISBN-13: 978-0529121622
• Product Dimensions: 9.5 x 6.7 x 1.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 3.3 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 4.9 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (9 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,844,839 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

73 of 73 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Examination by an owner of the first Defender's Bible, August 25, 2006

By 

Mani (Canada) - See all my reviews

This review is from: KJV New Defenders Study Bible (Hardcover)

I imagine that some people are wondering what's different about the New Defender's (ND) compared to the original Defender's (OD). Here is my examination.

-The Main Text: It's the same double column but with no center margin references. Thus the text seems larger. There seems to be a lot more editorial section headings. For example, each of the seven vials in Revelations are split into chunks of text with the corresponding headings (ex. "First Vial," "Second Vial," etc.). There are end-of-verse notes that direct the reader to related passages and define archaic words. The definition of archaic words and phrases might be helpful, but the text seems more cluttered because of the in-text reference marks. The definitions of archaic words seem fairly accurate and conservative (ex. "servants of righteousness" is NOT defined as "slaves of righteousness" as in modern Bibles, neither is "superstitious" defined as "religious" in Acts 17:22. BUT "world" is defined as "age" in numerous places {some Christian scholars argue that "aeon" means "world [as an aspect of time]"} and "dragon {tannin}" is sometimes defined as a contemporary animal {how unfortunate in a "creationist" Bible}, and "Lucifer" is defined as "literally, Day Star", however any KJV with the original translator notes would have this alternate definition for "Lucifer"). The definitions are given in British English (ex. "armour" instead of "armor"). The ND also retains italics indicating words supplied by the translators, whereas the OD does not. Exotic names are spelled out using the "self-pronouncing method" (ex. "Zedekiah" is "Zed-e-ki'-ah"). This might be helpful to some, but I found that it clutters the text. The OD text, which does not have in-text-references, italics, and self-pronouncing names, seems to flow better. If you're keen on readability, the OD might be better. If you're keen on information for study purposes or if you are new to KJV's archaisms the ND is might be better.

-Appendices: There are new sections (ex. "The Creationist Faith of Our Founding Fathers," and "A Creationist's Defense of the KJV"). Whereas the layout of the OD seems to have more white spaces (wasted spaces, perhaps) the new layout of the Appendices looks sleeker and compact. In defending the KJV in the appendix, Morris takes the moderate position that the KJV should be used because it's the most reliable and well-written translation available for English speakers today.

-Study Notes: The font is noticeably larger than that of the OD. In fact, the font size of the notes is the same as that of the main text. The majority of notes remain the same. Some new notes are added and some old notes are expanded. Whereas the OD has many pages with no notes (in certain parts of the Old Testament), the ND has notes on almost all the pages. There seems to be more notes on archeological discoveries. However, some alleged contradictions of numbers (ex. between 2 Chronicles 9:25 and 1 Kings 4:26), which could be resolved upon close examination, are still unfortunately explained away as scribal errors.

-Size of the Book: The ND is considerably thicker than the OD (the genuine leather edition is slightly over 1.5 inches {4cm} in thickness).

-Subjective Conclusion: The New Defender's is a better "study Bible" than the original Defender's. Yes, the main text is harder to read (not harder to see), but it contains more information. The study notes, since they are the same size and font as the main text, can sometimes overpower the main text, especially on a page where the notes take up most of the space on the page. I read another KJV with plain text and large font when I just want to read the main text. For study purposes, I make this New Defender's my primary choice.

35 of 35 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Magnum Opus of Dr. Henry Morris, August 9, 2006

By 

J. Michael Nace (NY State) - See all my reviews

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: KJV New Defenders Study Bible (Bonded Leather)

This study Bible is the lifetime achievement of the late Dr. Henry Morris of Creation Research in California. This edition is the 2nd edition that is several hundred pages longer and more comprehensive. He finished this work before he died and it is a work of art. The notes essentially are intelligent and fair commentaries on the Text of the KJV Bible, which text is set in easy to read format. The entire Bible is reader friendly and contemporary in visual appearance. The page notes under the text are detailed and comprehensive, not copying any other Study Bible. There is limited scientific vocabulary referring to weaknesses of pantheism and evolutionary theory, but Dr. Morris shines in his comments on New Age, cults, End-times [financial global controls-James chapter 5] etc. After the Bible text notes are dozens of pages of commentary on World Religions and current issues. The entire project is well-done, and any conservative-oriented theological student will be pleased. It is not a legalistic approach, but definitely a straightforward and no-compromise approach with deep intelligence [Dr. Morris had 3 Doctorates].

8 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Best Study Bible PERIOD, May 11, 2010

By 

fredtownward "The Analytical Mind; Have Brain... (Mocksville, North Carolina, United States) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   

This review is from: KJV New Defenders Study Bible (Leather Bound)

IMHO this is the best study Bible available in English and has been since it superseded the earlier edition and previous best study Bible 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 9,000 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. About the only recommendation I'd make is to get a "thumbed" edition; having tried thumb indexes once, I'd never go back!

Note: At one time there was an advantage to purchasing 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 disk 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!