Zondervan NIV Study Bible (Hardcover)

A certain amount of the "Evangelical defensiveness" I found bothersome in the 1995 edition has been burnt off in the nicely-conceived, thoughtful re-expression of book introductions found here. Compare, for instance, these statements from the Introduction to Job:
[1995 ed.] "Two dates are involved: (1) the date of the man Job and his historical setting, and (2) the date of the inspired writer who composed the book."
[2002 ed.] "Two dates are involved: (1) that of Job himself, and (2) the composition of the book."

While the editors have not gone overboard trying to turn the NIVSB into a "pc/inclusive language" text, they have restated a few things here and there that, to my sensibilities, seemed worth fixing. For instance:
[1995 ed., from Wisdom Literature Introduction] "The Jews sometimes speak of the OT as the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings."
[2002 ed., page 725] "An ancient tradition among the Jews divided the collection of their holy books into three major divisions: the Law (Pentateuch), the Prophets (Former and Latter) and the Writings."
These are small but welcome changes. [For those who may be following the controversy about the "Today's New International Version" translation, an adaptation of the NIV which endeavors to use gender-inclusive language when both men and women are clearly being discussed or addressed, the NIVSB uses the "unaltered" NIV. This is a good choice for a Study Bible, since serious Bible students need to confront the patriarchy of the ancient world at some time or another. The notes, rather than the translation of the text, seems the best place to accomplish this.]

Although I see nothing in the introductions and notes that should be alarming to the book's primary audience (Evangelical Christians), the NIVSB now seems worthy to be used by Christians from other Protestant traditions, as well as by the general reader who may be curious about the Bible as one of the most important texts of Western civilization.

The NIVSB continues to use three "icons" with its introductions, charts, and notes: a "seedling" to suggest an item that will help the reader apply something to her/his personal life; a "trowel" to identify items based on archaeological discoveries; and "a human head" to call attention to items relating to key characters. One could read the notes carefully and dispute the way these icons have been assigned throughout the text, but the editors should be applauded for their judicious restraint. To tag more notes with icons (or to introduce more types of icons) would have created visual clutter. The publisher should also be applauded for making the icons gray instead of solid black as in the previous editon; it's easy to read around them. (I only pay close attention to the "trowel" icons, because I am personally curious about what in the Bible can and cannot be confirmed by external evidence; although I usually skip the "seedlings"--because I don't like to be told how to apply Scripture to my life--these notes often discuss key theological concepts and are equally worth reading.)

The typography is improved in the 2002 edition, most notably in the center column reference system. However, I still find it difficult to know where to look when I see a superscript marker in the Scripture text (To the center column or at the foot of the Scripture text?). At some points in the text, there are two superscript markers! For example, the name "Immanuel" in Matthew 1:23 is followed by a roman superscript "d" and an italic superscript "w." Oddly, both identify Isaiah 7:14 as the related text. Although, I suppose, there's nothing technically wrong with stating something more than once, I think it unnecessary in a book so tightly packed with information. The unintended effect on the reader might be to erode his/her willingness to pay attention to the notes or to bother to look things up. That would be unfortunate, indeed, because there's a lot in the revised NIV Study Bible that is worth checking out.