Featured Categories of "One Bible, Many Versions" view

We have categorizations of "KJV Only" (JR White, p. 23ff) and even a set of definitions here on BB. But what are the categorizations of the preferences of those who use other versions? I am thinking there are Majority Text only and Critical Text only -- that is, some of you are going to want a translation that is only based off one or the other of these. Then I assume there are preferences based on the type of translation, such as formal vs. dynamic. While you may all agree on not being KJV-Only, you obviously don't all agree on which translation is the best and how to choose it. How would YOU categorize the "One Bible, Many Versions" view?

Thanks.

 

The World English Bible is supposed to be an update of the 1901 ASV, with the NT conformed to a Majority Text. Also there is the English Majority Text Version New Testament translated by Paul W. Esposito. I think there is an English translation of the 1904 Byzantine text used by the Greek Orthodox Church, as well as a translation by Wilbur Pickering of his majority text.

 

37818, would you clarify what you mean in these two statements. For example, by the first do you mean no one should just use only one translation, or something else? On the second, I'm just not getting what you mean there. Thanks!

 

Thanks for the clarification. I appreciate it.

 

This thread never gained much traction, with little apparent interest in categorizing Bible views that are not “KJV-Only.” This morning I ran across a writing that had classified “ESV-Only,” styled after categorizations of “KJV Only” by James R. White (his book, p. 23ff). The following was written by Christian McShaffrey, a minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and Textus Receptus advocate. He writes, “Most of my ministerial peers in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church use the English Standard Version in their public preaching and teaching. Some of them have asked me, ‘Are you KJV-only?’”

ESV-Onlyists Categorized
Following the noble example of Dr. [James R.] White, I would never lay the “___-only” charge without making proper prior distinctions, so here are the categories I will keep in mind as I begin my “ESV-only” inquisition:

Group #1: “I Like the ESV” – This group of individuals believes the ESV is the best English translation available today.
Group #2: “The Textual Argument” – This group believes the underlying Hebrew and Greek (i.e., the Eclectic Text) text of the ESV is superior to the Byzantine/Majority/Received text.
Group #3: “Critical Text Only” – This group has tentative certainty that the Hebrew and Greek text from which the ESV was translated is in the process of being providentially preserved.
Group #4: The Formal Equivalence Convert – After using the near-paraphrase NIV, individuals in this group have realized that it is better to translate scripture on more thought-for-thought basis.
Group #5: The Good Customer – Individuals in this group simply responded as good American consumers to the greatest Bible marketing campaign ever seen in the evangelical world: ESV.ORG

Notice once again that there is no equivalent of a Ruckmanite movement included in the above options. Again, the well-educated demographic of ESV users seems to preclude the very possibility.

At the same time, and especially in regard to 1 and 5, let me suggest that some ESV readers might be as intellectually lazy as the Ruckmanites.