Search results

It will have less than the ESV. No surprise there. I don't believe it will become very popular because it is so in-house and narrow --at least from the vantage point of the larger Evangelical Community. It needs to be a bit more diverse, with translators from some smattering of different...

Biden won't run. He's merely placeholder. There will be a brokered convention. If Hillary isn't housed at Gitmo before November, Big Mike will carry the banner.

Proverbs 28 v. 10 ESV : a goodly inheritance NIV : a good inheritance v.14 ESV : Blessed is the one who fears the Lord always NIV : Blessed is the one who always trembles before God [Here I have no objection to the ESV wording. The ESV sounds NIV-like on this occasion.] v. 22 ESV : A stingy...

Nice. I appreciate that. Good, but it's 'equivalent effect' not 'equivalent express.' The point is that Phillips and Rieu did, in fact, use reader's response to govern their translations. They used that principle before Nida made his 'invention.' I never made mention of the KJV employing that...

I did some checking for 'let not' in the NIV. There are seven verses, that use that kind of wording --- 5 in the O.T. and 2 in the NT. The CSB used that sort of old-fashioned wording 4 times. Of course there other kinds of old-fashioned constructions in the NIV such as the one you pointed out...

Again, you're thinking of word replacement. That's not translation. I have said this before, if the two most form-oriented translations in English aside from the old ASV, have several thousand more words than the original in the N.T. you know that is an impossible task. For most of the canon...

English dude, English.

The ESV reverts to functional equivalence so often that the term "essentially literal" is about as accurate as "optimal equivalence" when describing the CSB. In other words : false advertising.

That's an impossibility.

It's not too literal, and not too dynamic. That's right. That's why it's considered balanced.

Yes, that is an example of clunkliness in the NIV. Elsewhere, on another thread, I recall not which one :-) I had remarked that the NIV is not free of these missteps. I have sent suggestions for the NT, but there are still instances of awkward English here and there in the NIV. The NLT is beeter...

Proverbs 27 v. 12 ESV : The prudent sees danger NIV : The prudent see danger v. 17 ESV : one man sharpens another NIV : one person sharpens another v. 19 ESV : As in water face reflects face, so the heart of man reflects the man. NIV : As water reflects the face, so one's life reflects the...

"I have put it on the chart midway between essentially literal and dynamic equivalence because it has elements of both." (Wayne Grudem in chapter two where he defends the ESV. The book is Which Translation Should I Use?, p.47)

Proverbs 26 v.4 ESV : Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself. CEB : Don't answer fools according to their folly, or you will become like them yourself. v. 12 ESV : Do you see a man who is wise in his own eyes? CEB : Do you see people who consider themselves...

Proverbs 25 v.10 ESV : lest he who hears you bring shame upon you and your ill repute have no end. NIV : or the one who hears it may shame you and the charge against you will stand. v. 19 ESV : Trusting in a treacherous man NIV : reliance on the unfaithful v.20 ESV : like vinegar on soda NIV...

"To argue...that 'he' is the correct' translation while other renderings (such as plurals for singulars, second person for third, singular 'they' for singular 'he,' or passive constructions) are distortions of the text is simplistic and naive." (p. 130 of the Challenge Of Bible Translation. Mark...

You will note how JJ's interpretation of the Nida & Taber quote mangles their formulation.

The above quotes knocks the wind out of the sails of JJ. He's too stubborn to admit that Martin Luther, Phillips, Rieu and others down through the centuries used the method of dynamic equivalence. And that includes the principle of equivalent effect and reader's response. Nida didn't invent the...

They dod? What Council are you speaking of where they used the English word "begotten"?

You still have given no response, even an unreasonable one, to the above.