ESV

General Christian Theology
Judas Maccabeus
Posts: 3881
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 11:13 am
Location: Maryland
Affiliation: Con. Menno.

Re: ESV

Post by Judas Maccabeus »

cmbl wrote:Quick googling indicates that both the men J.M. mentioned are Calvinist in their soteriology. Packer is probably too ecumenical for some, and Grudem's eternal submission thing will be rejected, perhaps by the same group. Internal divisions in Calvinism aside, cursory examination appears to show both are still Calvinist.
ESS would likely be rejected out of hand.....IF they were not using it to buttress their concept of gender roles. It is the lynchpin of many of their arguments in that area.

Millard Ericsson wrote a whole book on the subject "Who's Tampering with the Trinity."

J.M.
0 x
:hug:
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23827
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: ESV

Post by Josh »

I think the NET is a high quality translation without a lot of overt bias.

HCSB, NIV (gasp), NLT, and NASB all seem okay too.
0 x
Wade
Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 12:09 am
Affiliation: kingdom Christian

Re: ESV

Post by Wade »

I never grew up with scripture. Nor did I grow up doing much reading. I watched television and played sports. I was horrible at English. The first church we went to was Baptist and was very much "KJV" only and taught all others are corrupt. I wasn't comfortable with that so I would read other translations at home trying to even grasp a little of what was being said... The Mennonite church we spent the most time in was "KJV" only and I still recall an entire sermon on it... (Oddly enough this happened just after one of our children forget a different version in a church pew one Sunday...)

I still don't understand old English writing and my wife has to continual explain things to me.

Now here on MN the preferred scripture when using the "bible" thing when posting is ESV.

I do enjoy reading Strong's for further insight - but now many are saying that is futile...

Where does a newcomer go with all this? It can be tiring.

Why is the ESV on MN if it isn't much good? I didn't even use it until learning of it from Mennonites on here...

What's next?
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23827
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: ESV

Post by Josh »

The ESV not being ideal is just my opinion. My most major gripe is a biased translation of 1 Co. 11.

My opinion is that any Bible translation, even one that's not very good, is still used by God and can be effective for both a believer and an unbeliever to hear his word.
0 x
Ernie
Posts: 5447
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 2:48 pm
Location: Central PA
Affiliation: Anabaptist Umbrella
Contact:

Re: ESV

Post by Ernie »

undershepherd wrote:
Judas Maccabeus wrote:The ESV has J.I. Packer and Wayne Grudem as leaders of the translation committee. Can't get any more Calvinistic than those two.
J.M.
You either don't know what hardcore Calvinism is or you don't know Packer and Grudem. They are hardly considered Calvinists by many self identified Calvinists - especially Grudem.
cmbl wrote:Quick googling indicates that both the men J.M. mentioned are Calvinist in their soteriology. Packer is probably too ecumenical for some, and Grudem's eternal submission thing will be rejected, perhaps by the same group. Internal divisions in Calvinism aside, cursory examination appears to show both are still Calvinist.
Yes, there are Calvinists, and then there are uber-Calvinists. Uber-Calvinists would likely not recognize those who diluted the "pure Calvinist" theology.

A person may teach salvation and the atonement according to Calvinist understanding, while differing on other less consequential points.
0 x
The old woodcutter spoke again. “It is impossible to talk with you. You always draw conclusions. Life is so vast, yet you judge all of life with one page or one word. You see only a fragment. Unless you know the whole story, how can you judge?"
User avatar
Robert
Site Janitor
Posts: 8522
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:16 pm
Affiliation: Anabaptist

Re: ESV

Post by Robert »

Josh wrote:The ESV not being ideal is just my opinion. My most major gripe is a biased translation of 1 Co. 11.
I have no issue with the ESV and see nothing in 1Cor 11 that is a flag. Care to be more specific? I would be interested in hearing what exactly you are seeing.
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are not after you.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
User avatar
JimFoxvog
Posts: 2891
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2016 10:56 pm
Location: Northern Illinois
Affiliation: MCUSA

Re: ESV

Post by JimFoxvog »

Robert wrote: I have no issue with the ESV and see nothing in 1Cor 11 that is a flag. Care to be more specific? I would be interested in hearing what exactly you are seeing.
I'm not Josh, but probably this footnote explains what is seen as a problem:
In verses 5-13, the Greek word gunē is translated wife in verses that deal with wearing a veil, a sign of being married in first-century culture
0 x
lesterb
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:41 pm
Location: Alberta
Affiliation: Western Fellowship
Contact:

Re: ESV

Post by lesterb »

Josh wrote:The ESV not being ideal is just my opinion. My most major gripe is a biased translation of 1 Co. 11.

My opinion is that any Bible translation, even one that's not very good, is still used by God and can be effective for both a believer and an unbeliever to hear his word.
I think it is good to take one version and use it most of the time, especially for personal and family worship, etc. Then use other trusted versions to go to when we want to expand our understanding. The advantage of this is that the version you use regularly becomes a "personal friend". You get to understand it and it feels comfortable.

I grew up with the KJV. At one time I would have defended it because it was the "conservative" version. But in my years of studying the Bible, I have found that to be faulty reasoning. A number of years ago, before the NLT / ESV / etc. became readily available, I started to use the NIV personally and for family reading. Like Wade, I first ran into the ESV on MennoDiscuss. Some years ago, Boot recommended the NLT, and I've used it as well. Here is sort of my opinion at this point.

These opinions are based more on a practical usage level. I'm not a theologian or scholar.

1. I use the ESV, NIV, HCSB, NET, and NLT on a regular basis for study purposes. We still use the NIV for family reading.

2. I view the ESV as a more conservative translation, but still readable. I had used the NASB earlier, on a limited basis, but found it too stilted for general use. I don't care for the NKJV, because it really isn't much different than the KJV. If I'm looking for input from that tradition, I use the KJV.

3. I find that the NLT is freer to replace literal translation with thought translation. Mostly those are ok, but I feel a little uncomfortable with the freedom to they take to insert their own opinion. So of my list above, it is probably the version I pay the least attention to if I really want to know what God said. For instance, in ECC 10:20, all the versions I listed above speak of cursing the king, and cursing the rich. The NLT says, "never make light of the king," and "don't make fun of the powerful."

4. I find the HSCB and the NET to be similar in their approach to translation and readability. I like them both, but I find the ESV to be just a bit more literal, while not losing the readability that I think a Bible should have.

5. I have used the ESV in church without any comeback. I used it quite a bit during our SS studies of the minor prophets. I'm not saying that you could do that in every CA congregation, but the ESV sounds more like the KJV without the weaknesses of the KJV.


Now that is a purely practical analysis. There could easily be problems that I don't see. But I don't see a KJV-only position as being the answer to our discussion.
0 x
lesterb
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:41 pm
Location: Alberta
Affiliation: Western Fellowship
Contact:

Re: ESV

Post by lesterb »

Josh wrote:The ESV not being ideal is just my opinion. My most major gripe is a biased translation of 1 Co. 11.

My opinion is that any Bible translation, even one that's not very good, is still used by God and can be effective for both a believer and an unbeliever to hear his word.
I would share your concerns about this. But this is an old tradition as well. Luther used the German word Weib for woman in this passage. While this can mean the more generic "woman" it does lean in the direction of being a "wife-woman". The old order people that I grew up with did not advocate an unmarried woman wearing the veiling for everyday life. They wore it to church after baptism, but not elsewhere until they were married. That was how they understood the German reading.

I have heard, but can't document, that the Russian Bible used by the Old Believers also translated this as wife or married woman.

Here is the etymology from Wiktionary...
German[edit]
Etymology[edit]
From Old High German wīb, related to Old Saxon wīf (whence Low German Wief), Middle Dutch wijf (whence Dutch wijf), Old English wīf (whence English wife), Old Norse víf (whence Common Scandinavian viv). Ultimately from Proto-Germanic *wībą.
0 x
User avatar
ohio jones
Posts: 5222
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:23 pm
Location: undisclosed
Affiliation: Rosedale Network

Re: ESV

Post by ohio jones »

On the continuum between formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence, I have a definite preference for formal equivalence, and that means using primarily NKJV and ESV.

Formal equivalence doesn't mean that the translator wore a tuxedo, of course, it means that the structure and grammatical format stick close to the original when possible, though obviously the languages are different enough that not everything can be matched up. But as a matter of principle, where there's a pun in the original, there should be a pun in the translation as well.
0 x
I grew up around Indiana, You grew up around Galilee; And if I ever really do grow up, I wanna grow up to be just like You -- Rich Mullins

I am a Christian and my name is Pilgram; I'm on a journey, but I'm not alone -- NewSong, slightly edited
Post Reply