Featured The English Standard Version (ESV)

It reads to me like a modernized Kjv actually!

 

Guess just not enough Gender Inclusive renderings!

 

Just follow my threads, especially the ones when my handle was simply Rippon.

But here are two of my favorite snippets from the ESV:
Lev. 26:10 : You shall eat old store long kept.
Hebrews 13:2 : Some have entertained angels unawares.

Both renderings me the chuckles.

 

The ESV is certainly an improvement over any incarnation of the KJV. Nevertheless, though it was published in the 21st century, it does not reflect current English usage. It's a throwback to an earlier time.

 

Ok, and your claim was that it is poor English. Please explain.

 

I was having a chuckling fit.

 

Great.... and back to how it is poor English? By the way, sound and preference do not equal poor English. That is subjective. What grammatical rule did they break?

 

It's antiquated English. It's inelegant. It's not in the least natural sounding. It's biblish. It's entirely unnecessary.

 

That is a subjective opinion. So no, it is not poor English. You just don't like it.

 

The reasons I don't like it were stated above. Plus I have demonstrated my claims hundreds of times in numerous threads. You sound like a Rykenite. I have heard people and pastors stumble over the awkward syntax many times. It's not, contrary to some, "literary and beautiful English." Portions of it are fine, which are largely in the New Testament. The revisers did very little in the Old Testament. They retained most of the 1971 RSV. The NRSV has much better renderings in multiple places. I wish they had done more.

 

But that is not the same thing as poor English which was your claim. It's just English you don't like. Call it for what it is, not for what it is not.

 

Although I’m a NKJVer, the ESV is excellent. It retains some very poetic English and beautiful renderings (I personally think the NKJV and ESV read very similarly). I recommend reading ‘The ESV and the English Bible Legacy’ by Leland Ryken. It explains the translation very well. Even though I prefer the textual basis of the KJV/NKJV tradition, the ESV remains one of my favorites. Several students in my youth group read the NKJV, and the ones that don’t carry the ESV. Both excellent translations.

 

I have spoken out against Ryken before. The sole book I have of his is The Word Of God In English. Rodney J. Decker did a paper called Review Of The English Standard Version. I agree with his insights.

"In summary, my conclusion is that Ryken's work is seriously flawed to the point of being unusable. This book may have some helpful points from time to time, but most of it is filled with linguistic nonsense. It is written by an English professor --- and as such he is well respected in his field. But he appears to understand little about translating the biblical languages into English. The book is characterized by overstatement, straw men, invalid assumptions, and faulty conclusions." (p.2)

 

Not inclusive language enough for him!

 

Add to that list the Nas, and you would be well set!

 

Wasn't he the one that really praised the 2011 Niv?

 

Reads well to me, and to many others here!

 

He's just being nit picky on stylistic choices, not actual English.

 

"The one"? As if one scholar praised the NIV. Many have praised it.

 

I got a tremendous laugh out of the above. Oh my imputed righteousness!

It reads well to you, does it? Well, if you approve its English style, then the matter is settled.