Why the English Standard Version (ESV) Should not become the Standard English Version

Too late…

Functional equivalent versions(NLT, NCV, TEV, CEV, GW, etc.) are helpful for communicating clearly, naturally and accurately the meaning of the text. Formal equivalent versions(KJV, NKJV, NASB, RSV, ESV, NRSV, etc.) help to reproduce formal features of a language like metaphors, idioms, word-plays, allusions, ambiguities and structural markers.

If this is your reasoning, I don’t really see why you would need the literal translation at all. If (that’s a crucial “if”) the functional equivalent versions accurately communicate the meaning of the text, what additional purpose does it serve to reproduce the language features - which are only tools for accurate communication in the first place?

Are we surprised this paper is hosted online by a Zondervan site … the publisher of the NIV?

Really???

But he may have a bias

[Brian McCrorie]

Too late…

Not according to the latest statistics…

http://www.cbaonline.org/nm/documents/BSLs/Bible_Translations.pdf

The NIV, NLT, KJV, and NKJV all rank above the ESV in both dollar and unit sales.

Not saying that makes a translation good or bad. Just observing that it’s hardly a standardized text.

Tough call on which translation has the highest sales.

The CBA numbers don’t include sales from Amazon, big-box retailers, or direct sales from the publishers.

And the CBA numbers probably favor Lifeway and Cokesbury (the biggest Christian chains that feed numbers to CBA). Or for that matter, the numbers are probably skewed toward the South, where Christian bookstores have survived longer. Then you’ve got the problem of redacted statistics, trying to sort out the translations used for a zillion different Bible “flavors” (Do you want your NCV as a Duct Tape Bible, Immersable Water Resistant Edition, or as a Mom’s Study Bible?)

…but whichever one would specifically be the highest, taking Amazon and others into account, isn’t the point I was trying to make. I was just observing that the ESV is far from being anything resembling a standardized text- there is still plenty of competition.

http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Books-Translations/zgbs/books/764432

No ESV in this top 20 (though it is not compiled the same way as the CBA stats)… though ESV Study Bibles do appear in the current #21 and #24 positions…

The apostles used the KJV over the ESV so I’m sticking with the KJV.

I’m not convinced there has to be one standard

There hasn’t been for some time. We’ve had the:

• American Standard Version (1901)
• Revised Standard Version (1952)
• The New American Standard Version (1971)
• The English Standard Version (2001)
• Holman Christian Standard Bible (2004)

Aside from the RSV with its liberal bias, I think all of the above are serviceable translations. I appreciate the NKJV, NET Bible, and NIV (1984) as well.

There does not need to be a standard English translation. The guy has a vested interest in the NIV; and to be very frank, I’d rather chew on soggy cardboard than read the NIV. I feel like I’m reading an office memo from God when I read that version.

I like the ESV very much; I do all my studies with it. The KJV is simply the most beautifully written version in English in some places. I preach from it. I like the NET Bible.

We have an embarrassment of riches in the English-speaking world, Biblically speaking I think linguistic talents may be better served by translations into other, neglected languages from here on out.

If the KJV was good enough for St. Paul, it’s good enough for me … !

Someone pushing the NIV is seriously talking about a bad translation? Seriously? That is just bad comedy. The NIV is a commentary. If I wanted a commentary, I would buy one. If I want a Bible, I will get one that isn’t a waste of space.

The HCSB is better than the ESV. I don’t have major problems with the ESV, but it is too much like the KJV for me to take seriously. That isn’t American English, so why would it help to have a translation that way?

So many have switched to the ESV because they are fanboys of those who have publicly changed to it (Piper being one of them).

James. Maybe I’m just a recluse, but I use the ESV because I just like it. I never knew Piper used it. I don’t care about Piper. He isn’t somebody I’d read. I don’t know anybody who uses the ESV. My orbit is almost exclusively KJV.