Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Not by me.is The 2011 NIV Bible Seen as being better to study from then ESV/Nasb?
Not by me.
...thought the ESV is easy to read.
Yes. :tongue3: I refer to it from time to time and prefer it, I think, to the 1984 NIV. I prefer my trusty NKJV to either, however.Do you even have an ESV Steve?
Yes. :tongue3: I refer to it from time to time and prefer it, I think, to the 1984 NIV.
That is one (but by no means the only) reason why I prefer the NKJV. My preference for the ESV over the NIV is that it is Formal Equivalence. Also, it includes the term 'Propitiation' which is one of my litmus tests of a good translation.So you have a physical copy of the ESV. Interesting. And you prefer it to the 84 NIV. I know you are against so-called inclusive language. I call it gender-specific language. The ESV has much more inclusive language than the 84 NIV. As a matter of fact,there is a greater percentage difference in that regard between the ESV and 84 NIV than between the ESV and 2011 NIV.
Seriously? There are sections especially in the Epistles that read considerably better than the rest of the Canon -- but no. It certainly is not,on the whole,an easy read. Quite the contrary.
You know, I find it interesting that when anyone says that they find the ESV easy to read, you disagree with them every single time.
You say it is not. That is your opinion.
But then again, I've not seen you say much positive about the ESV...
Wow,is it that often? I do try to keep tabs on false statements though.
I think I have made a decent case with all the threads in which I have established the fact. But I am not alone in that certainty.
I have said some positive things about the ESV,but you are right --not much. I'll have to dig up the positives for you some time.
isnt the basic problem witht he ESV thatit tries too hard to be a mediate Bible between say NIV/NASB?
that by doing that, it doesn't read as 'smooth" as NIV, nor as accurate as NASB..
The main problem with it is that it doesn't use proper English. It has Yoda-speak,inverted negatives,stilted and contorted sentences, plus the conjuction "and" out the kazoo.(Among other problems.)
I have a couple of copies of the ESV including the ESV Study Bible, the Reformation Study Bible and a few paperback copies plus e-sword. None of those would I want to drag to church or Bible study. Anyway, I basically avoid the ESV on principal but for some reason my pastor has decided to read it (the ESV) from the pulpit. I received a 35% off coupon from my local Bible Bookstore so I decided to see if they had a copy of the New Reference ESV in black genuine leather. Reason: it is a sewn binding and real leather and made in the USA. I really just wanted to actually hold a copy of this edition in my hand before I made a decision.
Anyway, the store had just 1 copy of this edition so I took it out of the box to examine it. I found about 20 pages folded over at the bottom opposite the spine. This enabled me to get another 5% off for 40% total, meaning I get this Bible for about $42.00.
Over all, for the price I paid the Bible is nice.
But what really has me buzzing about this particular ESV edition is the endorsement on the back of the box from John Piper; John states that this is the Bible that he has been "dreaming about". How I ask, you can it possibly get any better than that?
So far the emphasis has been on the exterior. How about the interior --the actual translation?
I respect John Piper very much. But just like John MacArthur --on the subject of Bible translations they are out of their element.
Piper may have been dreaming about a certain edition of the ESV. But when you get down to the particulars --no matter the special wrapping -- it's not the English Standard,nor should it be.(Pardons to Mark Strauss.)