English Standard Version - what do you think?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Jeffrey H, Mar 31, 2004.

  1. Jeffrey H

    Jeffrey H
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2003
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    1
    What do you think of the ESV? It appears to be an excellent translation and I'm thinking of getting a copy. No one at my church has one or knows anything about it.

    Responses by "KJV onlies" will be not be considered.
     
  2. mesly

    mesly
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jeffrey,

    I have been using the ESV as my main bible for about 2 years now. The translation is very literal, but not so literal that it sacrafices readability.

    My only concern has not been the translation, but rather the quality of the binding used. Seems like Crossway hasn't put the best materials into their bindings, although I hear that this is changing. I did recently purchase a thinline genuine leather and am well pleased with it. The early "Classic Reference" leather bounds were terrible (i.e. lots of glue).

    Overall, I would highly recommend it.
     
  3. TC

    TC
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,225
    Likes Received:
    10
    I like the ESV. I have the classic hardcover which is of decent quality - at least much better (IMO) than the early classic leather ones.
     
  4. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have an imitation leather and it seems okay. The pages are not the thin-film style of high quality Biblical paper, but I actually like it better because it is easier to make notes on without bleed-through.

    As far as the translation I agree with both mesly and TC. It is a great translation. More literal than the NIV, but still very readable.

    It makes an excellent study Bible. In fact, some of the language made me get help researching the Greek and Hebrew to make sure it actually said what it did; and yes, it does. Every time I have questioned a verse, its translation is very accurate in modern language.

    I honestly like it better than the Holman, so far, because it seems a little more literal. But, this is based on my simplistic studies, so I am anxious to hear from the real scholars, like Doc. Bob.


    A lot of people yell because it is a remake of the RSV. Many verses are the same, but then again, many are updated and appear even more understandable.

    As Dr. Bob mentioned in another thread, Sunday School materials will spend a lot less time explaining the definition of words.

    He is exactly right because that is what I find that our pastor is doing when he does a Bible study in the KJV, he is spending 90% of his time explaining what each word means in modern English; while he uses the Greek to show that the words do indeed translate into the modern terms.
     
  5. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,074
    Likes Received:
    102
    I have the classic reference edition. I'm not particularly impressed by the quality of the binding, but the translation within retains much of the flow of language of the KJV while still being fresh.
     
  6. Michael52

    Michael52
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    360
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like the ESV. I have been reading it for about a year.

    Our church uses the KJV, so when preparing a SS lesson, I typically compare the KJV, NASB and ESV (along with the NKJV and NIV sometimes) to make sure I have a good undersatanding of the passage.

    Assuming the NASB is the most literal and 'accurate?', the ESV seems to agree with the NASB's reading (in my estimation) a little more consistently than the others. Like the NIV, it is easier to read than the NASB. It's literary quality is similar to the NKJV. That is, it sounds/reads with a 'traditional' flow and cadence. Of course, this is with respect to the 'traditional' KJV, which none rival. If I had to choose only one for my own use, I would choose the ESV (narrowly) over the NASB. Simply, because it takes a little less of my limited mental energy to figure-out what I'm reading!

    I have the hardback deluxe ref. edition, which is OK. I'll surely be glad when they release a large-print edition (for my mature vision).
     
  7. Daniel David

    Daniel David
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Messages:
    5,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have the cheapo binding and the genuine leather reference edition. I really like the ESV. I would barely choose the NASB over it for study purposes.
     
  8. go2church

    go2church
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    6
    I love the ESV, use for preaching, study and most other reading. We have even adopted it for our pew bible at church. Obviously I think it is a great translation. The quality is getting better and better
     
  9. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,971
    Likes Received:
    128
    I purchased an ESV about a year ago. I like the ESV but find myself checking it with other versions in places where I don't recognise the verse.

    Like Michael52 said, sadly the print is rather small making reading difficult without my glasses or when reading in dim lighting.

    So recently I broke down and purchased another NAS LARGE print leather (I guess I'm like the KJV-friendly folk, I grew up with the NAS and it's comfortable for me).

    I still have the ESV on the shelf for when my glasses are handy.

    Rob
     

Share This Page

Loading...