# Evangelical Heritage Version



## Doulos McKenzie (Mar 22, 2017)

I thought many of you would be interested in this new translation being done by the WLS. 
http://wartburgproject.org/


----------



## Pilgrim (Mar 23, 2017)

Reportedly most if not all of their recommendations were adopted by the CSB committee, so we'll see if this version goes anywhere. I believe it was a response to not being able to use the NIV84 anymore and the ESV, HCSB and NIV 2011 all being unacceptable to them (as a whole) for various reasons. 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## Dachaser (Mar 23, 2017)

Pilgrim said:


> Reportedly most if not all of their recommendations were adopted by the CSB committee, so we'll see if this version goes anywhere. I believe it was a response to not being able to use the NIV84 anymore and the ESV, HCSB and NIV 2011 all being unacceptable to them (as a whole) for various reasons.
> 
> Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


I though that they had a study bible out from their publishing group that was in Esv?


----------



## Jake (Mar 23, 2017)

Is it based on the majority text? It says the main translation it's based on is the World English Bible which is a majority text translation.


----------



## KSon (Mar 23, 2017)

I find the WELS page evaluating different translations interesting for various reasons. They have clearly put a lot of time and thought (rightly or wrongly) into evaluating different translations with the goal of providing direction to their congregations. There is a brief pro/con list of the AAT (a Lutheran translation), ESV, HCSB, NASB, NIV, and NKJV here. For a bit more of an in-depth examination of such things, here is their Bible Translation Resource Page.


----------



## Pilgrim (Mar 26, 2017)

Dachaser said:


> I though that they had a study bible out from their publishing group that was in Esv?



This is the Wisconsin Synod Lutherans (WELS.) The ESV Lutheran Study Bible to which you refer is published by Concordia, which is a Lutheran Church Missouri Synod publishing house. 

In several ways, the WELS would be considered to be more "conservative" than the LCMS. Usually that translates to favoring a more "formal" or "literal" translation. But there seems to be a commitment among many in the WELS to use more of a dynamic or contemporary language translation. (See their list of "cons" under the ESV.) Otherwise, I'm sure they would have just adopted the ESV.


----------

