The Ryrie Study Bible Nasb

[Rachal Langwith]

Iwanted to ask your opinion on something. Like you, my primary Bible has been the Ryrie Study Bible. I use the Ryrie NASB is my own personal reading. I think the NASB is a great bible for personal reading and study. Like you and many others I am really big on grace and the clear gospel. I was raised Catholic and saved nearly ten years ago, so I have experienced firsthand the deadly mixture of faith and works. Let me say first off, I really really value Dr Ryrie. His book So Great A Salvationa is a great thesis on salvation. I agree with him that believers will bear fruit at sometime, somewhere. Even deathbed conversions have the fruit of peace etc. However his note in the Ryrie Study Bibleb in James 2:24 is troubling.

This verse is the reply to the question of v.14. Unproductive faith cannot save, because it is not genuine faith. Faith and works are like a two-coupon ticket to heaven. The coupon of works is not good for passage, and the coupon of faith is not valid if detached from works.

What do you make of this comment? It seems to fly against what I know Dr Ryrie believes. I know he is big on grace and is not lordship. Yet his note here seems to indicate he would believe in Perseverance of the Saints as opposed to Eternal Security.

Will believers have good works? Probably . . . but we cannot qualify it and [this] rules out deathbed conversions. Deathbed conversions have the fruit of peace, but hardly works. Same same thing with the thief on the cross.

Curious on what insight you may offer. I love my Ryrie NASB and KJV study bibles and don't want to have to find something else! I do not think there is one with better cross references. (I just wish they made it in NKJV as I like that text better).

The footnote in the Ryrie Study Biblea to which you refer has been pointed out by many in the grace community as problematic and inconsistent with what Ryrie has said elsewhere in his brilliant critiques against Lordship Salvation in books such as So Great A Salvationb.

The basic problem with the footnote is that it asks a question from James 2 that the epistle is not designed to answer. The saving faith of James audience is presumed throughout the letter. The faith of his audience already exists and is being matured and tested (Jas 1:2-4). Thus, James refers to his audience as "brethren" throughout the letter. Rather than asking the question about whether faith exists based upon the presence of fruit as the Ryrie Study Bible footnote assumes, the real question James asks is whether one's faith, that already exists, is useful or productive in the Christian life. The issue in James 2 is not existent vs. non-existent faith but rather is productive vs. non-productive faith.

Except for a few problems like these, the Ryrie Study Bible is a very fine study Bible. I do not think that you can find a study Bible that is 100 percent perfect. Even if there is one that is soteriologically perfect, they usually have defects in their Eschatological understanding. This goes to show that no human Bible interpreter, even an outstanding one like Charles Ryrie, is perfect. As you well know, our eyes need to be consistently on the Lord and not man.

I also started with the Ryrie NIV study bible. I later moved to the Ryrie NASB study bible and used it for many years. I still use it regularly as I study and prepare my Sunday School lessons. Currently, my preferred study bible is the ESV study bible. I switched to the ESV a couple years ago and eagerly awaited the release of the study bible. It is now my everyday bible. I have also wanted the MacArthur NASB study bible. At some point I will get it.

Choosing a Bible can be a complicated task. With a plethora of versions and editions to choose from, with an equal number of study/reference editions, along with bindings. It seems like a daunting task.

There are other considerations as well which are minor but still merit consideration: (1) text format [verse v. paragraph], (2) binding [genuine leather v. bonded v. imitation leather v. hardcover v. paperback], and (3) other features.

1: In terms of translation, my highest preference and recommendations are for a conservative protestant, multi-denominational, formal equivalence translation [such as the NASB or NKJV]. While I will refer to other translations occasionally, such as dynamic equivalent translations like the NIV, ESV, or HCSB, my use of them is limited as more of a commentary and to examine how others may draw different conclusions of the meaning and application of a text based on their translational choices. I have absolutely no use whatsoever for paraphrases such as The Message, the Good News Bible, or the Contemporary English Version.

2: In terms of text format, I prefer a verse format over a paragraph format. Bibles which follow the verse format are becoming fewer as new editions of versions which appeared originally in a verse format [the NKJV and NASB] are now being issued in paragraph format. Unfortunately, these are getting harder to find. [See paragraph which follows]

CC = Center-column references, a system in which cross references and certain notes appear in a center column between two columns of text [as used in the MacArthur Study Bible and the NKJV Study Bible].

D = Dispensational, a theological perspective which teaches that God has revealed Himself successively via different covenants and has instituted different economies dictating how faith is properly demonstrated/expressed within those economies.

El = Evangelical liberal, a theological perspective which asserts that Scripture is authoritative based on church traditions and creeds, but questions/denies that Scripture is fully inspired by God. This perspective also asserts Scripture is infallible on matters related to faith, but may be in error in matters of history or science.

MacArthur Study Bible [Ec-D-Cs perspective]: This edition is more stridently cessationist than either Ryrie or Scofield. This is available in the ESV, the NKJV, the NASB(95), and the NIV. In addition, MacArthur is more polemical in his notes. On the plus side, the notes are more detailed and prevalent than in either the Scofield or Ryrie. MacArthur is also more consistently reformed in his soteriology, while remaining avowedly dispensational in his eschatology. I have to mark this edition somewhat lower on my evaluation because the abundance of notes, the small type and the paragraph format combine to create a somewhat crowded looking layout which can be overwhelming. The referencing system is CC. Also available in Spanish. Rating: 4.6.

Reformation Study Bible [Ec-R-Cs]: This is an updated and revised version of what was formerly known as the New Geneva Study Bible. While the former edition used the NKJV text, this uses the ESV. Stridently cessationist, Calvinistic and anti-dispensational, the tenor of the notes are not explanatory or expositional, but polemical. The goal of this edition appears not to be so much promoting growth in Christian character as it is arming amateur theologians with ammunition for debates with non-Calvinists and dispensationalists. As with the MacArthur Study Bible, the small type size, the format of the text, and the abundance of notes makes the page layout daunting and confusing. The referencing system is CC. Rating: 2.0

Life Application Bible [El]: Available in the KJV, the NASB(95), the NIV, the NKJV, and the NLT. Only the NASB(95) uses verse formatting of the text. The other versions use paragraph formatting. While acknowledging the authority of Scripture, the notes display a clear rejection of the doctrine of inerrancy by their denials of such events as a literal six-day period of creation and a global deluge. By inference, the editors suggest that Jesus was a liar for teaching that the creation and fall of man and the flood were historical events. My personal view is that Christians are better served without reference Bibles like these. Rating: 1.0

The NIV Study Bible [also the NASB Study Bible] [El]: Only slightly less liberal than the Life Application Bible, but the annotations still show a dismissal of key events in the Old Testament as not being historical events. Rating: 1.2

More importantly I wanted to check out a few theological points of the study Bible. I thought what said about the authorship of the Song of Songs, pointed out some (non-)issues about to authorship of Isaiah, and for example on chapter 42 and how it related to Christ. It has passed some my simple tests.

I agree it is never what Man says but what the bible says. Thank you for the good discussion.It is hard to di-sect what happens at conversion, but I like what you said. For example I knew I was sinner since I was a child, I just did not understand what had been done for me. The moment I was made aware of what Christ had done for me and I trusted in his work alone, I have not been the same. Perfect? Oh not even close ? My goal now is to be pleasing to HIM, as a lost man it was to please ME. Now am I always pleasing to HIM? No! But that is my underlying desire. I remember after trusting Christ, a hunger for His Word etc.

I am daily amazed by HIS grace, that he would take the punishment I deserve.

God is amazing, his Grace is abounding to a sinners like us.

I found that you answered the NKJV and NASB question on your blog. Great insights.

You also answered the KJV issue as well. KJV Only-ism in an unnecessary yoke to put on a believer, especially a new believer and is overall dangerous at least, heretical at worst.

However for those attend a KJV church (Not KJV Only but a church that just uses KJV,) the Nelson KJV seems to help make the arachiac words easier in the maragins, that is helpful.

I do not agree with all the notes in ANY study bible, but the Nelson KJV Study Bible can be very helpful.

3a8082e126