wfdfiremedic
New Member
I see all the major reformed preachers utilizing the ESV: Piper, MacArthur, Sproul etc. What is the deal? Why do they like the ESV so much?
-
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!
Why do so many reformed believers use the ESV?
- Thread starter wfdfiremedic
- Start date
- Status
Because it's the Eternally Secure Version!
Because it is endorsed by RC Sproul and Ligonier Ministries as well as others. That is the way I see it, at least.
The translation leans reformed in places...that would be my guess.
Robert Snow
New Member
I believe this is the case.
BTW, my wife works at a Christian bookstore. They have two or three copies of the ESV on the shelf. She has never sold one copy to anyone. They sell KJV, NKJV, NIV and NLT's by the hundreds each quarter.
Since English has morphed so much in 500 years, most of us prefer the ESV as a good/accurate translation that follows the best Greek with a solid philosophy (formal equivalence).
Most of us loved the ASV1901. Its revision (NASB) was not the best but was used by Mac et al. The ESV is the best of the modern English translations, so it makes sense.
Most of us loved the ASV1901. Its revision (NASB) was not the best but was used by Mac et al. The ESV is the best of the modern English translations, so it makes sense.
Robert Snow
New Member
I don't doubt the validity of the ESV, but have wondered why it doesn't sell well here in Houston, TX. Could it be the over saturation of bible versions? I don't know. Personally, I like most of the translations.
The reason is probably because the ESV uses poor English. The more cumbersome the sentence structure is the more essentially literal it becomes.:laugh:
True that. The almost "wooden" translation of the NASB made it very difficult to read. And for Christians today if you can't read it, you can't understand it. Even the MOST literal.
Here is a good article on why this Reformed Seminary uses the ESV:
http://www.tnars.net/proesv.html
http://www.tnars.net/proesv.html
There are numerous places the ESV and NIV are identical. So I don't buy that the ESV is wooden. That said, as with all translations, it could be better in terms of translation and word choice in many passages.
The ESV does not lean reformed in my estimation. This seems to be a bromide put out by the anti-reformed side. Now, there are indeed many who are reformed who are on the advisory board, and many in reformed circles have adopted this Bible. But I've yet to see proof that the ESV is decidedly Reformed via word/translation data.
So why? Probably because folks tend to want a better translation than the NIV/TNIV, but don't want to go to the NKJV text type or the NASB. It is imporant not to paint with too broad a brush here though.
The ESV does not lean reformed in my estimation. This seems to be a bromide put out by the anti-reformed side. Now, there are indeed many who are reformed who are on the advisory board, and many in reformed circles have adopted this Bible. But I've yet to see proof that the ESV is decidedly Reformed via word/translation data.
So why? Probably because folks tend to want a better translation than the NIV/TNIV, but don't want to go to the NKJV text type or the NASB. It is imporant not to paint with too broad a brush here though.
Interesting that this puts the KJV in the essentially literal camp.
Here we go again with the same old "literary beauty" remark being ascribed to the ESV. Apparently TNARS hasn't actually read much of the ESV. Ryken has certainly been successful in his campaign.
Rippon. I'm sorry but every time the ESV comes up as a version, you need to disparage it. It doesn't matter what you say and to say that they apparently haven't read much of the ESV is laughable. No seminary just grabs a Bible off the shelf and uses it. Please discontinue your attack on a wonderful Bible version that many of us use and prefer over other versions.
Agree. And noted. Attacking a translation is not allowed on the BB. Discussing them (including shortcomings - real or perceived) is as we have with the NASB, KJV, Geneva, NIV, etc
I'm with Rippon on this one, and don't see the need to call him out on what he said. If it's your favorite version, fine...but he never attacked the ESV. He simply stated "The reason is probably because the ESV uses poor English. The more cumbersome the sentence structure is the more essentially literal it becomes."
Nothing he said here was an attack or untrue. The ESV was the translation I used all of last year and he is dead on...it is harder to read due to sentence structure. Is it as hard to read as the NASB, NKJV or KJV? No, but it is awkward in many places.
Nothing he said here was an attack or untrue. The ESV was the translation I used all of last year and he is dead on...it is harder to read due to sentence structure. Is it as hard to read as the NASB, NKJV or KJV? No, but it is awkward in many places.
Yet he attacked the seminary and the version saying "Apparently TNARS hasn't actually read much of the ESV." The school researched and chose a version and stated why. Rippon decides that they are apparently lying and actually didn't read it. I see that as quite an attack.
He's right, there is no "literary beauty" from my experience with the translation, that's quite a hyperbolic statement. It's an average / slightly better than average translation. How a seminary can claim that is beyond me.
Literary beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It is just as fallacious to say the seminary is wrong as it is to say their opinion is correct. Opinions are opinions. Nothing more. Some people think the NIV is beautiful. Others say the KJV is. I think both are wrong, but I could be as well.
While Rippon didn't attack the ESV per se, it is a little old. Everytime the subject comes up, it gets ridiculous.
We get it, Rippon. You can't stand the ESV and its proponents. Time to move on.
While Rippon didn't attack the ESV per se, it is a little old. Everytime the subject comes up, it gets ridiculous.
We get it, Rippon. You can't stand the ESV and its proponents. Time to move on.
- Status