I am a preacher without a Bible. I do own several Bibles, and I do preach from the Bible, but I do not own a Bible I actually enjoy taking with me into a pulpit. Let me explain.
The closest Bible to being my main Bible has recently shifted from my large print NASB MacArthur study Bible to reading from my BHS 4 (Hebrew) and UBS 5 (Greek) testaments. Having finished reading through the Bible quickly in English for the survey classes in seminary, I have resolved to do my own reading and study from the languages with little to no translation help. One of the great benefits that has already occurred is an increase in my ability and effort to notice details. Rendering details necessary for interpretation is the strongest point of the NASB–various people argue over its “flow” and “readability” (I personally find it both sublimely smooth in the pulpit and eminently readable in the study), but it is unrivaled as a translation for doing detailed Bible study from an English translation.
However, my MacArthur Study Bible is rather large. In fact, since it is large print, its dimensions are something like 9.75 x 7 x 2.25 inches. It weighs 4 pounds. This has drawbacks in the pulpit–holding this Study Bible, which is a helpful practice for extended reading, is tiresome and awkward. When transporting this Bible, it takes up half the space I have for books in my messenger bag. While for reading I have always greatly appreciated the 11 point type, I am still young and have 20/20 eyesight. Finally, a preacher who needs MacArthur’s study notes in the pulpit should almost certainly be anywhere but the pulpit. It worked quite well in college, since I could lay it out on a coffee table several feet away from me and still read during small groups. Indeed, at a coffee hangout-Bible study I led on Saturday it served me very well.
After referencing the original languages and my NASB, the next Bible I’m likely to consult while studying a passage is my HCSB. This Bible is actually a pretty good size for preaching, being around 6 x 9 x 1 inches in dimensions. The type is still easily readable, and the cross references are relatively unobtrusive. When I preached recently at a youth retreat, I used this Bible during all three of my sermons. Unlike my study Bible, I could actually fit it in my bag with all the other things I needed to bring.
But who uses the HCSB? And with the 2017 release of the Christian Standard Bible to replace it, who is going to switch to using HCSB? It’s differences with the much more popular ESV are noticeable enough that those reading along with my reading will have to alter not just word order but clause order quite frequently while following along.
I also have a pocket ESV. Its type is very small (about 6 point). Having gone on several missions trips with me and spent a significant amount of time in college in my book bag, it’s a little beat up too. It is not a good choice for preaching, not only because it looks almost comical in the pulpit but because it’s hard to actually do the necessary reading with it. A preaching Bible should be easier on the eyes than this one.
The other random Bibles I have aren’t worth mentioning–either they’re in some other language or don’t include the entire Bible. All this to say: I am training in seminary to preach, but I do not yet have a preaching Bible. What makes a preaching Bible?
My teaching experiences so far–college small groups and Bible studies, Sunday school classes, youth retreat, etc.–have given me a list of requirements and desires for such a preaching Bible. But there are also several unresolved dilemmas.
Format and Layout
Type size is a key concern in a preaching Bible, but so is font choice. The font standard in the HCSB is kind of dorky looking, but is more clear and readable than the chunky, almost blurry font common in Foundation publication NASBs. Crossway’s font in ESV is not bad, but the lexicon font in Cambridge Bibles is really much better. These font choices have various effects on font size. Beyond font choice, each of these publishers generally maintain different line spacings that also affect readability.
I can read the 6 point font in Crossway’s pocket ESV at arm’s length. I probably shouldn’t read at that distance. However, even the 8 point font in many of their personal reference Bibles seems small to me. For me, a preaching Bible with this font and line spacing should preferably be at least 9 point font. However, with the other fonts I am less sure where my preferences lie. All this to say, for pulpit reading, the type must be sufficiently clear.
Type layout is also a factor: single column or double column? Paragraphed or broken up at each verse? Steve Lawson mentioned during one of my classes he would prefer a preaching Bible to have each new verse start flush left so that he wouldn’t lose his place; personally I’d rather have a paragraphed text so that my intonation in reading can reflect not just micro-syntax (periods and commas), but macro-syntax (paragraph breaks and major transitions). Single column is objectively more natural and easier to follow, but growing up reading the Bible has made double column layouts equally natural to me; at this point I really don’t care.
But features affect the layout as well. Cross references, while helpful in the study, are useless to me at the lectern. I don’t have time to look at and pick cross references while teaching. The level of eye contact and engagement necessary at a youth retreat or developmentally disabled Sunday school class minimizes the permissible time to look at notes; taking time to look for cross references would be absurd! Further, cross references clutter the page, reducing readability.
However, the footnotes that indicate literal renderings of the original text in place of the translator’s word choice are extremely helpful. Recently while taking a college Bible study through Genesis 38 emphasizing some of its literary ties to the Joseph story, I frequently made use of these footnotes to highlight the word repetition and subtle shades of meaning Moses used to paint a beautiful, literary narrative, not a blocky, routine recounting like you’d find written by some no-name author on the internet like yours truly. Having these footnotes in the pulpit is critical. With them, I can help those who hear me learn how to use the resources within their Bibles to bolster the depth of their study.
Summary: For a preaching Bible, I want a comfortably open layout so that the text is easily readable, with paragraphing and footnotes, but preferably without cross references. The emphasis is on the text.
Binding and Size
A preaching Bible should be presentable. Pocket Bibles look childish in public. However, overly large Bibles are difficult to transport. Further, for extended readings or pulpit wanderings, large Bibles are heavy to steadily and easily hold. Personally, I am now between two options for optimal preaching Bible size: either something like the Cambridge Clarion reference Bibles or a thin-line at about a 6 x 9 inch footprint (5 x 7 would still be acceptable; it’s below this that Bibles tend to start looking particularly small).
Hardcover and paperback Bibles look funny, as do many imitation leather editions. A good, handsome genuine (or premium) leather Bible is a classic pulpit look. Admittedly, no one listening is going to care that much. But the weird, colorful, flashy covers of many Bibles can prove distracting. What matters for appearance is less the material than the design. But having never personally owned a genuine leather Bible, I’m intrigued.
Translation
I am torn at this point. The church I grew up at uses NASB for all public reading and preaching. However, the ESV is far more popular, even with the congregation there. Basically all my friends from high school and college, as well as many of my friends now in seminary or at our church’s Pepperdine Bible study, use the ESV. But I believe the NASB to be a marginally more faithful translation. Further, I am much more familiar with the NASB than the ESV. Other translations are out: not many people are going to read HCSB, CSB, or NRSV. And KJV, NKJV, and NIV all have noticeable flaws. ESV and NASB are very similar, and very close to each other in levels of faithfulness. But I do know of multiple passages where I very strongly prefer the reading of NASB to ESV because not just of doctrinal, but hermeneutical implications of the ESV rendering.
For a preaching Bible, what do I want? Do I want what the people already read? Shall I cave to the demands of democratic majorities? Should I submit to peer pressure? Should I buy an ESV? My ‘swonderful, godly girlfriend uses the ESV. Wouldn’t it be ‘smarvelous to read together in the same translation? Or do I want to be didactic? Should the translation I use indicate what I think people should use for their Bible study? Do I even care that much about my conviction of NASB superiority? Since I’m going to be studying from Hebrew and Greek anyway, does translation even matter? If I believe that my best study is done in the original languages, why do I care about translation?
Should I be a man of the people or a hardliner? Should I get ESV or NASB? Should I use what people are very likely to use, leading them through how to interpret the Bibles they already have, giving into Crossway (aka “the system”)? Or should I use what I believe is the most faithful English translation, what I can read very naturally and accurately due to my familiarity with it? This is the primary question I will have to answer now in selecting a preaching Bible.
Citizens & Sons 