I use the Tolle Lege 1599 Geneva Bible almost exclusively. IMHO it is the best Translation in existence. However that does not mean it cannot be improved upon. I have a few suggestions
1. Captalize the Tetragrammaton in the OT as LORD so it can be differentiated from Lord. Almost every other Translation does this. It is very helpful in Bible Study.
2. Incorporate relevant maps throughout the Bible like many modern Study Bibles do.
3. Provide the meaning of obscure words in the footnotes rather than at the back of the Bible.
4. Bring back the Family Sized Edition, with its larger type.

If anyone else has further suggestions, please go ahead.

__________________
Jacob Peters
Layman
URC
Toronto
Canada

Put it in a decent, and consistent, binding. I don't think I've ever seen a bible targeted toward serious students of the word in a worse binding. For that matter I have rarely seen any bibles in that bad of a binding.

__________________
We shall not adjust our Bible to the age; but before we have done with it, by God's grace, we shall adjust the age to the Bible. - Charles Haddon Spurgeon

Lawrence Underwood, Jr.
Pastor - Providence Family Fellowship / Mobile, Alabama
1644/46 LBC
My Blog - Imprimis

I echo Lawrence. Mine sits on the shelf for historical value and occasional reference. It would be very difficult to use as my regular Bible.

But hey, you guys have spoiled me. My "regular" Bibles now are a premium calfskin ESV, a premium calfskin NKJV (both classic thinlines), and an Allan KJV Clarendon Blackface.

I simply refuse to "use" my ESV Study Bible except in morning devotions with my wife since my puny arms are insufficient to carry that dumbell around with me. (Actually, it might be a great Bible for Rosie the Riveter).

__________________
Dennis E. McFadden, Ex Mainline Baptist (in Remission)
Atherton Baptist Homes, CEO
First Baptist Church of Alhambra, Member, Transformation Ministries (CA)

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Add the "Arguments" back from the original, and I wouldn't mind an edition with the Apocrypha separated out.

I don't think they could do "Lord" and "LORD" because the Geneva did not distinguish between Jehovah and Adonai in the OT, though it's a shame they didn't.

__________________
Johnathan Tate
Cornerstone Presbyterian Church (OPC), Arden, NC

Husband of one, father of 3 (1 in-utero); Time's "Man of the Year" 2006

I agree with the OP's suggestions, except #3. I like having the Glossary in the appendix and wouldn't want to see it incorporated with the original 1599 notes.

I wholeheartedly agree with LawrenceU's observation! My Calvin legacy edition fell apart within a few months. I had it rebound, rather than exchanging it for another poorly-bound copy. I DO use this as my regular Bible!

My suggestion for a new version would include higher quality paper and a darker, more consistent imprint. Some pages are too light, and too many pages suffer from bleedthrough.

__________________
SW
Church of the Highlands, San Francisco, CA

That's my biggest complaint with mine. Some pages have incredibly light print. Especially in the notes.

__________________
Shane
1689 LBCF
Rosemont Baptist Church
Winston-Salem, NC
www.rosemontbaptist.com

"Tis not that I did choose thee, for Lord that could not be. This heart would still refuse thee, hadst thou not chosen me."

I personally don't like Bibles that do this. It clutters the text. Comprehensive maps in the back of a Bible are a better alternative IMHO.

I prefer the simple beauty of just the text (sacred text, commentary & references) to a lot of distracting clutter (maps, word focus, articles, &c.).

In a strictly aesthetic sense, the old Scofield Study Bible did a good job of this.

__________________
C. M. Sheffield - Pastor
Smith Street Baptist Church
Vidalia, Georgia
www.sacredsimplicity.org