By Collins Anglicised ESV Bibles Holy Bible: English Standard Version (ESV) Anglicised Black Leather Thinline edition (Esv Bibles) (Later Edition)

It's hard to get an idea of size when buying via a laptop, but I thought this bible was of a standard bible size. It is a lot smaller. This has worked out great as it goes in to my pocket when preaching on the streets, but I was thinking it would be bigger. The description of large text doesn't seem to be 100% accurate. The text is fairly small. But I do like this bible - even though it's not what I expected.

I love how The Bible drives atheists insane. They are quick to dismiss The Bible as "fairy tales" while being willfully ignorant to the fact that the hypothesizes that they believe in are concepts that are used within works of science fiction and which have no evidence. See below...-Atheists believe in abiogenesis which is an evidenceless hypothesis proposing that life arose from non-life but this has no evidence, isn't falsifiable (therefore being nonscientific), not observable (and never will be again if it's to be believed) and is just generally garbage.Atheists will yell and exclaim about an experiment titled the "Miller-Urey experiment" but that is outdated and doesn't prove (or even lend support to) life being able to rise from non-life. They will then exclaim about a lab experiment (which is more recent) showing that RNA molecules can form. What they deliberately forget to mention is that RNA molecules are simply a part of the building blocks for life, not life itself and the experiment was conducted in a lab with humans deciding the conditioning, properties, values of the atmosphere (and chemicals) and order. If anything, this experiment affirms biogenesis (the scientific law that life can only arise from pre-existing life).-Atheists adhere to a philosophy called naturalism which is an incorrect refuted philosophy which would have you place blind faith in the idea that the universe proceeded from nothingness (which is nonscientific). Some atheists will mention quantum physics and the vacuum but they have no understanding of these subjects because neither prove that nothing can do something. The vacuum (which is what they say is evidence) actually contains small amounts of energy. The scientific principle of causality (which atheism denies) asserts that everything in motion and everything that has begun has an instigator.-Some atheists believe in social Darwinism which is a discredited form of evolution mainly only believed now by atheist nuts. It is a racist theory relating to human societies, that we shouldn't help the poor, the meek or the unhealthy. It is the incorrect belief that we shouldn't help such people because it would be harmful to the concept of a "superior society" and really is the incorrect misreading of what natural selection is.-Some atheists believe in the now debunked steady state theory of the universe which would have us believe that it's eternal without a beginning. This has long since been refuted by the facts, data and evidence amassed for The Big Bang theory showing an origin point for all matter and energy in the universe.-Atheists believe in the multiverse which is science fiction, often used in Doctor Who and other science fiction shows, which refer to a hypothetical set of alternative universes, realities and dimensions (all of which we've never seen and have no evidence for) and atheists use the multiverse in their chain universe hypothesis which proposes that every universe is born from another. This has no valid grounding in science and is based upon pure speculation and blind faith. Meanwhile their evidenceless hypothesis is refuted by common sense. The infinite chain universe argument (the argument of universes being born from the death of another) has no beginning so there can't possibly be any effect from something that never had a beginning (and therefore wouldn't exist) and isn't eternal. It's an impossibility and illogical in terms of observational science and general common sense. An atheist might try to apply my refutation the other-way around to God but it would fail considering the concept of a prime-mover (God) would be that he's unmovable and eternal. This is necessary because you cannot have an infinite chain of gods or universes creating one another. For the reason why God is the better logical explanation behind the creation of the universe rather than "something from nothing" or any of the other atheist's evidenceless assertions, see below.The Argument for deism/theism:The Big Bang theory lends support to the idea of a creator along with the scientific principle of causality. The former implies a beginning of the universe, the later states that it's necessity for all things that have begun and in motion to have a prime mover/first cause. I'm a Christian Deist so I believe in the teachings of Jesus in The Bible but believe in God simply as the instigator behind all the natural mechanisms of the world and cosmos (i.e gravity, four fundamental forces, evolution and so on and so such) but don't believe that he answers prayers or interacts because there's no evidence of that. Deductive reasoning is what leads me to God because we can deduce that nothing is incapable of doing something and also that mindlessness cannot produce the complexity we observe within the universe. Physicists throughout history (from Isaac Newton of the past to Paul Davies of today) all agree that the universe is finely tuned (see the four fundamental forces of nature, their constants and values for more) and the fact that the universe has a mathematical cosmology lend support that the instigator behind the universe was an intelligence.Also evolution doesn't debunk God. It simply explains the variation of life. I suggest the atheists take some proper science lessons.Atheists need to get educated on what the scientific method is alongside what the scientific principle of causality is (a fundamental part of science and physics). You'll find that the later (cause and effect) has a valid standing within theism/deism but atheism rejects it with its assertion that nothing did something. That therefore makes atheism nonscientific by its rejection of a scientific principle.Let's be honest here, most atheists are such because something bad happened to them. They've come to conclusion that "there is no god" because of emotion, not rationality or reason. They're as brain washed as a fundy and I have no time to attempt to reason with someone like them when they have an irrational hatred and misunderstanding of religion.There is no conflict between belief in a god and science. The conflict exists only in the imaginary world of the atheist where religion is responsible for all the conflicts of the world (but anyone educated in history knows that that's not the case and that most of these problems were due to politics).And that's the end of my review. Feel free to agree, disagree or whatever but if you're going to attempt an argument against this review then be prepared to use evidence rather than anecdotes. Although I have neither the time nor patience to argue with atheists so excuse me if I ignore you.

This book has a format of two columns on each page which I think most bible readers will be used to. Binding and printing are to a good standard. The book size has been criticised elsewhere but it is a standard USA size which I find very comfortable to handle. Most importantly the paper used in this edition is not the thinnest and so the pages do not drag downwards as is the case of many large books. To give a practical example when I held the bible open at John the left hand side of the book moved downwards only a little. Those of us who hand hold the book to read will appreciate just how good that is! As a comparison I have the CEV version and the pages are much thinner and are very prone to slip. So it is a very nice book to read at the practical level. Footnotes and other essential cross references are kept to small print at the bottom of the page so that they do not interfere with continuous reading. I find this a very good translation although to enlarge on meanings I refer to other versions on occasion and it might be dishonest not to admit that. On the whole though it is a good reading version, but I am still not sure that it is 'better' than the Revised English, which I consider is still very undervalued. Nevertheless it is still my 'pick' of the large print bibles of which there are not that many really. One final note is that the text is clear and large of course but the font has 'tall upright character' which I am now settling down to but which I had not seen before. The easy to read properties of this bible are probably going to make it my favourite book.

This Bible smells of newsprint inside, when you're leafing through, and just reading, I do hope it evaporates soon. That seems cheap to me and makes my eyes water.The stitching around the edge of the cover has been finished off by burning the thread ends, or with glue, not sure which, but it's crispy and has a nasty feel. To stop it unravelling.I've noticed on a few modern bibles with 'gilded' edges to the pages, that the finish is tight and causes the pages to buckle and corners to curl ever so slightly. This Bible does that. The finish must be shrinking the very edges of the paper. I have an old Scofield KJV, although with faux leather cover, has gilded edges that don't tighten like this.I read the review about cracked binding and so went about opening it gently. When I was given my Scofield, there was a note with it about how to do this:Gently lay your Bible open with the covers flat on a table but all the pages stood up straight. Separate out a few leaves front and back and lay them down to the covers. Alternate so you can support the centre pages. Repeat till you meet somewhere in Psalms. Don't rush, just a few pages at a time and smooth your finger gently down the pages in the centre of the binding each time. This should mean that when you first open the book to use it, it won't keep separating there and the gilded edges keep smooth and even. A good tip.I need reading glasses, about +2.5 and I can read the font in good light, but not the refs/notes at the page bottoms so well. It is compact and so a bit crowded on the page, but does achieve its stated feature of being clear to read, once my eyes stop watering that is!But for just over £9, and remembering you get what you pay for, it's good value. VERY pleased to have Anglicised English