Oxford University Press is sponsoring an ambitious new study Bible focused on the early Church Fathers and their interpretation of Scripture (press release here). The Ancient Christian Study Bible (ACSB) will include a brand new translation of Sacred Scripture, focused on the source texts that are revered by Orthodox churches. The Old Testament will be translated from the Greek text preserved in the Codex Vaticanus manuscript (and there will be textual notes for variant readings in other biblical manuscripts) and the New Testament will be translated from the Patriarchal Text (which was published by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople in 1904).
Three types of study notes will be included:
- Textual notes: listing notable textual variants from other Greek, Hebrew, Latin, and Syriac editions of Sacred Scripture
- Exegetical notes: explaining the plain historical meaning of the text
- Patristic notes: scholarly summaries of dominant early Christian interpretations of the text
Approximately 80% of the notes are expected to be Patristic notes.
The notes will focus on biblical passages (known as “pericopes”), rather than individual verses.
A complete list of editors and translators has been assembled, and the collaborators are currently working on translating the Greek biblical text and writing the annotations. The group of editors and contributors is ecumenical, with Orthodox, Catholics, and Protestants represented. The two Editors-in-Chief are Fr. Eugen J. Pentiuc (Dean of Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology in Brookline, MA) and Dr. Paul M. Blowers (Professor of Church History at Emmanuel Christian Seminary, in Milligan University, TN). Fr. Pentiuc was previously a General Editor for the Orthodox Study Bible (published by Thomas Nelson in 2008).
The complete Bible is expected to be published by the end of 2027. There are more details in the press release from Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology.
I must say, this is one of the most exciting Bible projects I’ve heard about in recent years. After reading the Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Biblical Interpretation earlier this year (for which Dr. Paul Blowers was an editor), I’m very much looking forward to a complete Bible (including the deuterocanonical books) which summarizes the interpretations of the Church Fathers. I will be following this project with interest! Many thanks to the reader who sent me this news!
Well shoot, YouTuber R. Grant Jones just got his dream Bible project put into practice lol: a translation with a Byzantine NT and a Septuagint OT, with patristic footnotes. (Oh, and the Eastern Orthodox will be happy too.) Looks like the old independent “Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible” will be very much supplanted by this effort, as will Newrome Press’s effort to combine the aforementioned EOB NT with the Lexham English Septuagint. And needless to say, Thomas Nelson’s Orthodox Study Bible (especially its defective OT translation) will be completely supplanted.
I don’t really care about the Byzantine NT, the differences between the Byzantine text and the criticial text are so small that unless you have a list you are unlikely to notice the difference, but a good translation of the Septuagint is badly needed.
Matthew 5:22 Critical text and NV: But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment
Matthew 5:22 Byzantine text: But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment.
Matthew 6:13 Critical text and NV: And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.
Matthew 6:13 Byzantine text: And do not lead us into temptation, But deliver us from the evil one. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.
Matthew 17:21 Critical text and NV: (blank – this verse is removed)
Matthew 17:21 Byzantine text: However, this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting.
Matthew 20:22 Critical text and NV: But Jesus answered, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am to drink?” They said to him, “We are able.”
Matthew 20:22 Byzantine text: But Jesus answered and said, “You do not know what you ask. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?” They said to Him, “We are able.”
Mark 9:29 Critical text and NV: And he said to them, “This kind cannot be driven out by anything but prayer.”
Mark 9:29 Byzantine text: So He said to them, “This kind can come out by nothing but prayer and fasting.”
Mark 10:24 Critical text and NV: And the disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said to them again, “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!”
Mark 10:24 Byzantine text: And the disciples were astonished at His words. But Jesus answered again and said to them, “Children, how hard it is for those who trust in riches to enter the kingdom of God!”
These are some of the most notable differences in Matthew and Mark. As one whose first experience of reading and studying the Bible came from the NKJV, which follows the Byzantine text type, I was confused and felt a little deceived when I found out that many of the verses I had come to know and quote and live out in my life, were not authentic. There are dozens of places where the Byzantine text adds extra words to match a parallel verse from another Gospel that is slightly different, and it will often add extra clarifying statements that were not present in the original. The same issue happened when I switched from the RSV-2CE to the NCB, after having used the RSV-2CE for over a decade. There were again numerous passages that were different, because the RSV-2CE uses many variants present in the Byzantine text. That said, it most likely won’t affect the majority of people in any substantial way.
I too grew up with the NKJV (which uses the Textus Receptus, not strictly the Byzantine text form, but very close). My dive into amateur textual scholarship came three years into being a Priest when I couldn’t find the verse where Jesus tells James and John that “You do not know what spirit you are of” when they ask about calling down fire from heaven. Of course, I found it in the footnotes, but not the main text. From then on, it was like following Morpheus down the rabbit hole…
This sounds marvelous. I will eagerly snap this up.
Just go ahead and hook me up to an IV of that future study Bible.
Glory to God! This sounds wonderful.
Thanks for letting us know about this Marc! It will be really nice to have a one-volume complete Bible with patristic commentary. Just imagine how thick it will be. It might even give the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible a run for their money.
Too bad it won’t be released for a few more years, but fortunately there is a multi-volume patristic commentary series currently underway called The Church’s Bible. There are only 6 volumes released so far (Matthew, John, Romans, 1 Cor, Song of Songs, and Isaiah), but it is Catholic and the commentaries are exclusively from the Fathers of the Church. Here is a link to the Verbum edition for those interested:
https://verbum.com/product/205195/the-churchs-bible-cb?queryId=4595e9685ec68c8744caa26beb8b8ae3
I’ve noticed some commenters taking issue with the English Septuagint translations currently available. I’d be interested in knowing more about the shortcomings of the English translations that we have now (Brenton, Lexham, Orthodox Study Bible, NETS, Fr. King’s version, etc.). I’m asking this as a layman who has no ability in Greek; I’ve only read from Brenton’s LXX and a bit from NETS because they’re available for free online.
I’m not meaning to imply that there isn’t a need for another English translation of the LXX. I’m just trying to understand what shortcomings the current ones have and how they stack up against each other.
Also, can anyone recommend a good English translation of the Syriac Peshitta?
For academic purposes, the NETS is the standard, though it has a woodenness due to its frequent transliteration of Greek names. It’s also a reworked NRSV text, so it’s not exactly a “fresh” translation of the Greek, but rather a tweaking of an English translation of Hebrew to correspond to the Greek. However, it is the only LXX translation of the current critical LXX Greek editions, hence it being the scholarly standard. The Lexham is the next best option; though it sometimes fails in its mission, and has some weird readings from time to time, it is a very nice (and objectively more readable) alternative to the NETS, and a decent companion to it. Unlike the NETS, the Lexham is not translated from the critical edition of the LXX, but instead from Henry Swete’s “diplomatic” edition of the Septuagint, i.e., Codex Vaticanus with the gaps filled in by Codex Alexandrinus. The Orthodox Study Bible OT is bad and should be avoided, because it’s half-baked and frequently is just retaining the NKJV’s translation of the Hebrew rather than being edited to correspond to the Greek. And Fr. King’s translation, I’m less familiar with, though I recall generally negative feelings about his edition, though I can’t recall if the issue was with the translation, primarily, or with the layout and physical construction of the book itself, or both.
For an English translation of the Syriac Peshitta, consider the “Peshitta English New Testament: The Antioch Bible English Translation” by Gorgias Press. There’s also an edition that includes the Syriac text itself on facing pages.
It should be noted that simply referring to the “Byzantine Text” is a bit misleading. This Ancient Christian Study Bible is translating from the 1904 Patriarchal Text for its NT, which doesn’t match either the so-called “Majority Text” or the “Textus Receptus” that underlies the KJV and NKJV exactly. If I remember correctly, the Patriarchal Text mostly follows the Majority Text against the Textus Receptus when variants exist, though it occasionally does the opposite, such as by including Acts 8:37 and the Comma Johanneum that are lacking in the Majority Text.