You partially answered it. The marketing arm did a lot to propel it forward.However, a major thrust was the castigation of the NIVI which was only released in the UK. That was the precursor of the TNIV. The latter was boycotted and vilified by World Magazine in true rag-style fashion.
I agree. I made a thread or two demonstrating that the NASBU using more natural English in comparison with the ESV in numerous places.
Well, that's a given.
Many go for the hype and trust big names who say it's the best thing since sliced bread.
I said before that the ESV was promoted by demeaning the NIV in its various forms.
People believe the mantra that it is "essentially literal." Although, as Moises Silva has said:"The unwary reader can hardly suspect how many major syntactical transformations are adopted by the ESV."
Me too. I have made many thread demonstrating that the ESV uses poor English. It's just unnecessarily awkward.
The revisers have made some baby steps to improve it. But it is too incremental. A whole devoted block of time needs to be devoted to the project. But,as I've also pointed out, if they do the necessary work it will look too much like the NIV --and they can't have that! :laugh:
The ESV is perfectly sound theologically and a better choice than the KJV,NKJ or Message. But the NIV and NLT will continue to outsell it.
