ESV

I purchased a leather bound ESV about a year ago (the first ever with my name imprinted on the cover).
Unfortunately the print is too small for pleasurable reading.

POSITIVES OF ESV
</font>

• Reads very smoothly</font>

</font>

• Attempts to make some conciliation between dynamic equivanence and formal equivanence in translation.</font>

</font>

• Uses the Nestle/Aland - 27th ed. Greek text (A+ in my consideration)</font>

NEGATIVES
</font>

• Small print (too small for me at least)</font>

</font>

• Poor binding of book has been reported by some others</font>

</font>

• Doesn't italicise added words in text</font>

</font>

• Not generally used in church (I don't know why)</font>

Rob

 

There are places where I think the ESV is too slavish to the RSV. Sometimes I think it could've been just a little more DE and been more accurate in the process. But all in all, it's the best we've got.

 

I have a ESV from Crossways its print is to small for my liking .I have a Reformation Study Bible in the ESV the print is bigger so is the over all quality of the binding and paper .Both are genuine leather .

 

I read somewhere that 94% of the ESV text is identical to the RSV, with the main changes being in controversial passages like Isaiah 7:14 and 2 Timothy 3:16. That being said, I think the ESV is an excellent translation. Perhaps a more thorough revision will be done in future years.

 

I own an ESV Heirloom Edition in Calfskin Leather... this binding is very well made as it is the top of the line for the ESV. The font size is also great in this edition at about a 10 point type.

 

Be sure and read the preface. I really enjoyed it.
Someone also wondered why the ESV hasn't recieved more church use and just wanted to say on here that the Baptist General Conference mostly uses the ESV.

 

Deadman, you can go to the Crossway website and it will tell you what font size it is in. It can be found at http://www.gnpcb.org/catalog/bibles.

 

The only problem i had with my ESV is the binding problems...as mentioned.
At the same time, when it did start falling apart all had to do was contact Crossway and they were more then happy to replace it. I had to lose about 4 years of notes and usage in it...but sometimes there is nothing better than a new Bible!

As for the translation itself, i really have no major complaints. I bought it about the same time the HCSB was coming out, and felt that the ESV was a bit smoother and at times more accurate (from what i can tell with the little bit of Greek and Hebrew i had...a total of 21 academic hours).

And as for usage of the ESV, you will find it used i bit more at Southern Seminary in Louisville than in the other SBC seminaries due to Dr. Mohler's influence. That is actually how i got started on using it.

in HIS gbrip
bobbyd

 

I read somewhere that 94% of the ESV text is identical to the RSV, with the main changes being in controversial passages like Isaiah 7:14 and 2 Timothy 3:16. That being said, I think the ESV is an excellent translation. Perhaps a more thorough revision will be done in future years. </font>[/QUOTE]The ESV has a lot of verses that match the RSV and a LOT that do not.

It is my understanding that most of the problems with the RSV were corrected by the ESV.

The only negative issue that I have with the ESV is that it often leaves out contriversial verses (verses that only appear in the Majority text), while other Bibles such as the NASB will at least include the verse and then place a footnote about its authenticity. The ESV just chooses to leave them out (most). However, that is a very minor issue considering the small number of verses that are in question.

 

I was taking Dr. Mohler's theology class when they began working on the ESV and the way he explained it to us was that a group of conservative scholars obtained the copywrite to the old RSV and their plans were to begin with that manuscript and fix, repair and improve it into a conservative and scholarly modern version of Scripture.

So, if you do come across a lot of similarities between the ESV and the RSV, that is why. Plus in the prologue you will read that they admit to using the RSV manuscript as a starting point.

 

You are right. When I first found out it used the RSV as a "base" and I compared it to an RSV I was disappointed; then I found out that it was indeed corrected of the biases found in the RSV.

Good post bobbyd.

 

Off subject post deleted.

[ December 27, 2005, 04:25 PM: Message edited by: Phillip ]

 

This is NOT a thread on the KJV and KJVonlyism. Trying to derail a thread into KJVOnlyism (pro or con) will get the thread shut down quickly and posts will be edited.

 

From Phillip

The ESV does print the varying/controversial verses by placing them as footnotes. There are sometimes several different texts and it is good to have them to compare with in the footnotes. I do wish they would kept some verses in but mostly because it is what I grew up memorizing and not for any scholarly reason.

 

Here's a suggestion for those of you who said the ESV's print is too small. I always keep a magnifier nearby when I read various printed Bible versions. I have a magnifying glass in my desk drawer and I carry a compact magnifier I bought at Walgreen's in my shirt pocket whenever I leave the house. Alas, my old eyes just aren't what they used to be and I often find the magnifiers very convenient!

 

God bless you, DeadMan! Do everything you possibly can to keep your eyesight, because when it starts to fail you due to diabetes and other problems, it can be a very trying experience!