alexander284
Well-Known Member
ESV vs. NRSV: which do you prefer (and why)?
-
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!
ESV vs. NRSV
- Thread starter alexander284
- Start date
Between the two I prefer the NRSV because it's more accurate. It doesn't make outrageous claims in its Preface as the ESV does. The language of the 1971 RSV has been updated in more places than the ESV; and I am not only speaking of inclusive language. I had a thread in the past that went through at least a score of examples comparing the two with the NRSV getting it right while the ESV fell short.
The Esv, not as much inclusive language, and follows more of an "essentially liiteral" translate process!
"Translate process"? Really? Do you understand that we have to translate your posts?
Hangover form my Bapticostal tongue days!
Hangover from my Pentecostal tongue days?
I have no idea how many of the NRSV "improvements" made to the RSV were not incorporated in the ESV. But it figures that many of the flawed ESV verses taken directly from the RSV were corrected in the NRSV. Probably more than one hundred. Certainly Revelation 13:8 demonstrates the problem. Rather than "liking" one over the other, I think both are very flawed and several other translations are to be preferred.
Ignorance is bliss. Unless you evaluate the unincorporated changes of the NRSV, you have no basis for preference, only provincialism.
As Van alluded to, unless you take it upon yourself to evaluate, you are just blowing smoke.
Little quiz
One translation darling of Reformed/Calvinist/Baptist
Other
Mainstream and liberals/critical
Which would you prefer?
Three choices?
Just 2 second version is the choice of mainstream and liberals!
I'll take the 2 second version for $50.00 Alex.
Makes sense, as its the darling of those into Inclusive language renderings!
In fact it makes no sense in English, your foreign language.
Dave G
Well-Known Member
I understand his posts, @Rippon2 , but perhaps it's because I'm versed in "military-speak"...
or, being of a technical mindset, I tend to "truncate" my sentences when thinking out loud.
Sometimes I call it "compressed speech", where the target audience has to fill in the missing words in order to make better sense of it.
It's not that hard...
For example:
I take this to mean, "[That] makes sense, as it is the darling of those [that are] into inclusive language renderings!"
Another example:
I take this to mean, "[The] ESV [is] superior, due to not pandering so much to [those who prefer] inclusive language!"
Similar to reading the Greek and then looking at where the AV filled things in with italics, it can be understood after a fashion.
Try not to be so hard on him, OK?
Last edited: