The question led me to various cross-blog readings. Jeremy gave a very good presentation on translation problems and also linked to the genius of the English Bible Blog (which I actually put in my “Bible Tools” section some time ago, Wayne is that good) who was also addressed the topic. I have been also going through Adrian’s questions for the ESV blog (1, 2, 3, 4, 5 to date)

In one of his responses, Adrian states that the ESV is being embraced by all types of Christians online. That also sparked my interest and I started searching why this would be the case. He mentions that it could be a form of pyromarketing (something I have stated on Tim’s board after Tim highlighted the danger of Rick Warren’s marketing approach) and I think that could be part of it. The ESV has done a good job of interacting with Bloggers while simultaneously employing a slick CSS feel, easy linking to their bible verses and openness in communication. My favorite translation, on the other hand, has a very dated site, clunky searching capability and one finds it easier to search verses on the Bible Gateway than anything Lockman has touched.

Be that as it may, I’m still not too sure how diverse the ESV lovers-online are. I find it interesting that a lot of the ESV-pushers seem to be from the Reformed camp. Yes, I know that the ESV Reformation Study Bible came out and that may be part of the reason but there was an ESV buzz long before the Reformation Study Bible came out.

Adrian mentioned that this Bible (presumably above other Bibles) has such a scholarly clout that it should make some one sit up and take notice. I personally think that it’s more pyromarketing at it’s best (with a nice shining quote by Reformed golden boy John Piper displayed proudly on the main page) to have publicly known names as part of their committees because other Biblical translations have as much scholarly clout. For the common Joe to sit up and take notice because Grudem and Packer are part of the team sings too close a tune of “I am of Paul, I am of Apollos” to me.

Sure there’s a few non-Reformer types who seem to enjoy the language of the ESV. I can’t say that it’s because they were former NIV users and now find something a bit more literal since there are hundreds of thousands of NIV users.

So here’s my questions for you: Why do you like the ESV? What is your theological leaning? (Reformed? Calvinist? Arminian? Dispensationalist? Anything?)

-r-

FYI: Wayne (and Joe Missionary) asked the same exact question over on his site. So if you want you can post your comment on both of our sites or read what folk are saying over at Wayne's much more famous site. :)

Comments (26)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

...
written by Wayne Leman, June 25, 2005

Rey, the same question came up this morning on my Better Bibles Blog. As I was about to publish a post to try to get the answers, my RSS reader notified me that you had just posted the same question. So, I am pointing visitors to my blog to your blog post here, and it would be helpful if you did the same. Maybe between the two of us we\'ll keep the platter clean (or something like that).

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Rey, June 25, 2005

Great Suggestion, Brother, I\'ll update my post. If anything this will make a great social excercise.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Wayne Leman, June 25, 2005

We all can use more exercise, Brother Rey. B)

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Jeremy Pierce, June 25, 2005

The Reformation Study Bible is now releasing an edition with the ESV, but that doesn\'t make the translation Reformed any more than their use of the NASB and NKJV in the past.

The reason I\'m excited about the ESV is that I\'ve been waiting for years for something between the NASB and NIV. The ESV and HCSB came out within a few years of each other, both occupying such a position. I\'ve only read the NT of the HCSB, so I can\'t comment on that, but I\'ve read the whole ESV except a few of the minor prophets, and I really do think it\'s the sort of thing I was looking for. It has nothing to do with the TNIV, which isn\'t doing anything new anyway. The NRSV, NLT, and others did the inclusive language thing first, and the only other changes in the TNIV are improvements over the NIV. I plan to get the TNIV and read through the whole thing. While I have just the NT, I\'m reading that and enjoying it. It\'s a good translation. It\'s just not what I prefer for my primary one. The ESV is.

So the short of it is that my reason for liking the ESV is exactly what you don\'t want answers to be. I don\'t like it because of specific examples. I like it because of the general approach.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Curt, June 25, 2005

I use ESV and NASB equally, and both for the same reason. They are both understandable without being breezy. I may trust the NASB a little more because of the seemingly exhaustive notes and references about literal and questionable translations, but so far I have not found anything in ESV that offends my theology. I\'m no Hebrew or Greek scholar, so I have to rely on people smarter than me to attest to its accuracy. There are plenty who do. Its detractors have not presented any arguments that cause me to question the ESV. I really don\'t understand what all the fuss is about.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Pastor Russ, June 25, 2005

Rey - say it ain\'t so!!! I thought that big names like Piper, Sproul, and White would never{/i]dirty their hands with such a thing as \'P-M-\' (I can\'t even bring myself to say such a disgusting word).

Imagine....people trying to use big names to sell products....whoever thought that up? What has Christianity come to....

:laugh:

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Rey, June 25, 2005

I didn\'t even know there was an NASB Reformation Study Bible. Jeremy, this is good though, helps clear up some of my own misconceptions if more people like the translation like how you and Curt do.

Curt, I\'m not so much a detracter as slow on jumping on board.

And Russ, I\'ve said it outright but folk have ignored me. Keep the comments coming folks. More over at Wayne\'s site.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Brian, June 25, 2005

They below blow entry has a link to an ongoing post concerning the ESV (why people like it, why people have switched, etc etc...)

http://www.pantokrator.org/200...esv-bible/

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Jeremy Pierce, June 25, 2005

Complaints about ESV Renderings
There are certainly theological problems in the ESV, as there are in any English translation. Philemon 6 inexcusably makes the same error as in the NIV, translating \'koinonia\' as \

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Jeremy Pierce, June 25, 2005

NASB Reformation Study Bible
The original version of the Reformation Study Bible was in the NASB. For some reason they switched to the NKJV, making it available only in that translation. I was going to get it, and then they did that, and I decided not to bother. I don\'t think the TR is a very reliable manuscript tradition to base your whole translation on, so I don\'t use the NKJV very much.

I don\'t know if the change was because someone involved in the decision-making process went Zane Hodges or because of a falling out with the Lockman Foundation. The Lockman people have done strange things in the past. They wouldn\'t release the list of their translators to prove they were real scholars for a long time; I don\'t know if they have done so even now, I\'ve never seen such a list. Given that, it wouldn\'t surprise me if they just stopped giving permission for their translation to be used for this for a completely irrational reason.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Rey, June 25, 2005

That\'s so odd that they did that. Maybe I should pull an Adrian and see if they\'ll answer some questions ( ). Barring that, I think they\'ve released their translators but if that\'s the full list of translators or not is a mystery to me.

Lockman probably should also consider updating their site. ESVs sitle is gorgeous (not that this should be a basis for choosing a Bible or anythingҗhope Im not implying that but there should be a certain design level to something being done. It was one of the reasons I offered and slightly helped on NETҒs Bible.org redesignthough in the end they picked nothing I worked onׅheh heh). I can see how the ESVs translation choices can be looked over if you know theyҒre there (like any translation I guess) but it could prove annoying when folk are preaching building points on things like that. Some of the worse has been with the NIV so Ill move on.

Brian, thanks for the link to ESV Support. Quite some reading to do there.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Jeremy Pierce, June 25, 2005

NASB Translators
Well, that list includes some good people. It\'s a bit longer than the ESV list, but some of the best people in both lists are the same people. A lot of them overlap with the NLT list also, which shows how silly some of the charges against that sort of translation are (e.g. that the translators are trying to undermine the Bible or certain doctrines).

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Jeremy Pierce, June 25, 2005

Innerency and Dispensationalism
The Lockman site says all the translators endorse inerrancy. That\'s not true. They list John Hartley, who doesn\'t. I wonder what the deal is there.

The other thing I notice about the NASB list as compared to the NLT list and the ESV list is that there\'s a much higher concentration of dispensationalist than in the other two. In that it\'s like the HCSB. For a view that\'s very popular among the masses but increasingly rare among scholars, that probably says something about what the NASB and HCSB boards were going for in selecting their translators. Some of these people are very good and eminently qualified, but the high numbers of well-known dispensationalists stands out as unlikely if they just were looking for good scholars.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Phil, June 25, 2005

Yes, I admit it, I am an ESV enthusiast. I used the NIV for 25 years faithfully and so I do not change translations easy or often. In fact this is only the second time in my life that I have changed primary translations. I have been in the ministry for over 27 years now. I am not a Reformed or Baptist Pastor. Rather I am a Pentecostal Pastor.

When I first began reading the ESV in 2001, I immediately fell in love with it. I found it readable, clear, fresh, and very much like coming home after being gone for a long time. After making the switch and having used the ESV for awhile now, I still as am excited about it as I ever was. I find making the switch to it a lot easier than moving from the KJV to the NIV was. It is a translation that I know that I can trust and for me this is crucial, besides I really, really like it. I actually do not understand why everyone doesn\'t like it as much as I do .

I wholeheartedly endorse, encourage others to read for themselves and buy a copy to use primarily in their study, memorization, preaching and teaching and writing. It\'s great!

Blessings in Christ Jesus!

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Rey, June 25, 2005

I wonder what percentage are dispensationalists on the NASB vs. the ESV translators. Since I don\'t know the names of all of the scholars I\'m not the one to answer that

Thanks Brother Phil for sharing your enthusiasm and endorsement. Much appreciated.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Pastor Scott, June 25, 2005

Greetings...

I am an Arminian Baptist. I purchased the ESV shortly after it's release in late 2001. By the end of last year, the church I pastor had completely made the switch to this translation. Why? A few reasons:

1. I like the fresh, readable text in it's "essentially literal" form. I have nothing against those who use NIV or NASB. Prior to purchasing my ESV, I used an NASB study bible as my primary study tool for sermons while preaching from the KJV since that is still largely my denomination's preference (In about 98% of our churches).

2. Since my tradition was KJV, I can say that I find the ESV a solid translation to switch to. The cadence and structure of the ESV text is very much rooted in the KJV but is still fresh and new without compromise. I'm not a die hard KJVO. I have been looking for a translation that could be used by Dad & Mom, Grandparents and kids alike. The ESV does this beautifully while still preserving the accuracy of the text.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Shane, June 25, 2005

NASB is one of the better English version. ESV is okay but very replacement theology as are most. For a very literal translation into English, much better than you\'ll find in the Christian bookstores, try this: The Scriptures If you have e-sword, there is a version for it.

An example of ESV lack of context is in an article I just wrote: The Hem of His Garment - Prophecy

And yes, it is a shameless plug.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Fr. Daniel, June 25, 2005

I am a charismatic, evangelical Anglican priest who appreciates the ESV. I'm also a five point Arminian.

Before the ESV, my favorite translation was the KJV. Actually, I still admire the KJV; in fact, I still use it quite often because I am more familiar with its phrasing than any other version. However, I find no major obstacles to using the ESV: it is traditional in translation procedure and contemporary in language construct.

So, though I tend to vacilate between the two in my personal study, I prefer the ESV for public proclamation over any other English version. (When I was a deacon, I almost broke into hysterics when reading a Gospel passage from the KJV which includes the word "afrighted"; this would have certainly broken up the church service and resulted in my excoriation by the bishop.)

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Rey, June 25, 2005

If anything this comments thread is proving my perception wrong and I can praise God for that. There is much diversity here!

Brother Shane, that "Scriptures" download that's on their site...is that the actual module? I couldn't find the module on E-Sword's site. Also, much thanks for the shameless plug

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Shane, June 28, 2005

The download on their(The Scriptures) site is the plugin for e-sword, it is not avaible on e-swords site.

I submitted a reply on the Lord's supper thingy, but it is gone. So, maybe it got lost or you "wacked" it for bad taste! This is where I would use a smiley emoticon. Shalom.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Rey, June 28, 2005

Definitely didn't wack it and didn't even see it. This new commenting system allows me to block certain offensive IP's that were leaving tons of curses in my archives but it sure is causing me some major headaches. I'm going to download that plugin. You don't happen to remember what you were saying about the Lord's Supper do you? Here I would insert a winking smiley face with maybe a thought balloon that says "pretty please".

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Aaron, October 06, 2005

I really dig the ESV!! As far as a nice, formal yet readable translation, it can't be knocked down too far. As far as "pyromarketing" or what not, I dunno. I actually miss most of everyone's advertising stuff, and I simply get into what I am into. That said, I am a staunch supporter of the ESV, simply because it's that good!! It fits in well with the NIV, NASB, HCSB, and KJO crews, as far as not being so different translationally from the others that you can't keep up in a sermon. Of course this comes the nut that has, like, 3 copies of nearly every Bible published. I find that mining all of them ( on RARE occassions) is beneficial. It's like asking three of your colleagues how they interpret this passage and such. But as far as my "main" Bible goes: ESV. Consequentially, I am converted Mormon-boy who will not tolerate anyone fooling around with the Historic, Biblical Truths determined by the Early Church Fathers, as far as the Doctrine of Salvation by Faith in Christ Alone is concerned. So, I guess I am now having Reformed leanings, although I do not agree or understand all of what is held up as Truth by The Reformers. It's just better than Joe Smith and the 15,000 glaring falsifications in the entire Mormon History/Doctrine-Sideshow. Hope my view helps you out....

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Rey, October 07, 2005

Yup, it does help out. Thanks for stopping by, Aaron.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Aaron, October 07, 2005

Okay, so I have an itchy mouse finger!! I'm just glad I gave ya the Reader's Digest version!!

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Fr Scott, August 29, 2007

I use the ESV almost exclusively. I suspect that one reason the ESV is growing in popularity is it's free use on e-sword. As an Anglican, I say that it would be great to see the Apocrypha added!

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Michael, August 30, 2007

Hello, I'm a Reformed Baptist and a five-point Calvinist. I really like the ESV a lot for its beauty, accuracy, and readability. I also think it has the best cross-references of all translations...they definitely have a reformed theological bent. My major problem is it's less literal than the NASB. And the NASB's general format is better for the reader in my opinion. I use both, but I'm undecided on which one
to make my official translation.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

Name

Website

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (Registered users only)

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment