# John Piper ESV Evaluation



## Robin (Feb 21, 2005)

Here is a link for a very useful evaluation of the ESV by John Piper:

http://www.desiringgod.org/library/topics/word_god/esv.html

Robin


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Feb 22, 2005)

Hi, I'm Mr. Wendy, unofficial spokesman!


----------



## ANT (Feb 22, 2005)

I enjoyed the article. Thank you for the link. I am looking for all the articles I can on the ESV. So, if you know of any more, please be sure to post the links. 

Thanks again.


----------



## matthew11v25 (Feb 22, 2005)

I am interested to see "current" takes on the ESV. Piper and Sproul have supported the ESV since its release and I would be interested to hear of it's reception by their congregations and other reformed congregations.


----------



## heartoflesh (Feb 22, 2005)

Anytime I give a new translation a chance, I'm always pestered by the "quirks"-- the renderings I'm not used to, which I've either memorized or attached myself to from my "beloved" translation (mine is the NKJV).

Here's just a sampling of some personal quirks from the ESV. I'm not saying they are incorrect renderings, but that I could probably never get used to them at this stage in the game.


*Colossians 2:10*

NKJV
"...and you are complete in Him"

ESV
"...and you have been filled in him"




*Philippians 3:12*

NKJV
"Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected; but I press on, that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me.

ESV
"Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own.




*Romans 1:17*

NKJV
"...For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith *to* faith"

ESV
"...For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith *for* faith"




*1 Corinthians 1:30*

NKJV
"But of Him you are in Christ Jesus..."

ESV
"He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus" 


There are more personal quirks, and they seem to come by the dozen when I just sit down and read. Again, it boils down to what I'm used to--not a slam against the ESV. I think it's a fine translation--(even if it's little more than a warmed over RSV) I certainly think it's better than the NIV, which I would, like Piper, like to see "sail off into the sunset". 


Rick

[Edited on 2-22-2005 by Rick Larson]


----------



## Robin (Feb 22, 2005)

For what it's worth, our pastor (a theologian) says we're phasing over to ESV by next year. He says the newest re-do of the NIV is bad and will only get worse.

R.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Feb 22, 2005)

When picking a Bible to read and study, where does "personal preference" have any place in making that decision? Shouldn't we be focusing on accuracy and readability combined?


http://graphics.christianbook.com//Graphics/specialty/1003/transarrowchart.gif


----------



## ANT (Feb 22, 2005)

That's a handy chart. Where did you find that?


----------



## heartoflesh (Feb 22, 2005)

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> When picking a Bible to read and study, where does "personal preference" have any place in making that decision? Shouldn't we be focusing on accuracy and readability combined?



I suppose personal preference comes into play when dealing with translations of equal accuracy. One could also consider how much they have already invested into a good, accurate translation-- memorization, etc.

Readability is a somewhat relative term.


----------



## JasonGoodwin (Feb 22, 2005)

Brethren, I must admit that I could be what some people call "anachronistic". Even with a new version, the ESV in particular, certain endorsements may not persuade me to switch over from the Authorized Version to the ESV.

Here's another site to consider which defends the Authorized Version:

http://wilderness-cry.net/bible_study/translators/

It may be a bit long to read, but I read it in book form in the mid 90's. It was well worth the time.

BTW, Brother Gabriel, thanks for supplying the chart. It gave me something to think about.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Feb 22, 2005)

No problem. I pray that you will see the idea of an "Authorized _Translation_" is not necessary or Biblical. What is necessary is having a passion to read the closest thing to God's Word in our language today, for understanding and being able to clearly and plainly understand His law.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Feb 22, 2005)

Gabriel,
Did you make that chart?


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Feb 22, 2005)

No, it is on CBD's website, in the "Bible selection" area.


----------



## bond-servant (Feb 23, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ANT_
> I enjoyed the article. Thank you for the link. I am looking for all the articles I can on the ESV. So, if you know of any more, please be sure to post the links.
> 
> Thanks again.



Ant, heres a good one : http://esvbible.blogspot.com/


----------



## Robin (Feb 23, 2005)

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> When picking a Bible to read and study, where does "personal preference" have any place in making that decision? Shouldn't we be focusing on accuracy and readability combined?



Absolutely! 

That's why the ESV is becoming the more preferred translation. It is clearer and more reliable.

R.


----------



## ANT (Feb 23, 2005)

> _Originally posted by bond-servant_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by ANT_
> ...



That's an excellent resource! Thanks Beth!


----------



## heartoflesh (Feb 23, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Robin_
> 
> That's why the ESV is becoming the more preferred translation. It is clearer and more reliable.
> 
> R.



I'll stick with the NKJV. The most literal and readable translation available.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Feb 23, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Rick Larson_
> 
> I'll stick with the NKJV. The most literal and readable translation available.



You can't be serious?


----------



## ANT (Feb 23, 2005)

Here's an excellent little explanation by Dr. Vern S. Poythress of WTS.

http://www.wts.edu/publications/articles/poythress-esv.html

Short - To The Point - Profitable

Enjoy


----------



## bond-servant (Feb 23, 2005)

Cool!  Here are a few more: 

http://www.stnm.org/meditation/feb03.html#top

http://www.bible-researcher.com/esv.html

http://www.bibletexts.com/reviews/bibles/esv.htm


----------



## heartoflesh (Feb 23, 2005)

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Rick Larson_
> ...



I can be 

But, to each his own is what I say.


----------



## ANT (Feb 23, 2005)

> _Originally posted by bond-servant_
> Cool!  Here are a few more:
> 
> http://www.stnm.org/meditation/feb03.html#top
> ...





The middle link by J.I. Packer was very good. At the bottom of the article it gives this link ....

http://www.gnpcb.org/home/esv/

There is alot of info there too.

[Edited on 2-23-2005 by ANT]


----------



## ANT (Feb 23, 2005)

This video is excellent! 

It's only around 11 minutes long.

http://www.gnpcb.org/page/esv.video


----------



## JasonGoodwin (Feb 26, 2005)

Sorry, guys. I did not intend to start a firestorm with regards to using the term "Authorized Version". That was what it was called back when it was published back in 1611. I am thinking about getting a copy of the ESV soon. However, I have some misgivings about it. For example, Acts 8:37 is footnoted instead of being included in the text. There may be some other verses that are like this. Can anyone explain why this is the case (as is the case in some of the other modern versions)?


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Feb 27, 2005)

> For example, Acts 8:37 is footnoted instead of being included in the text. There may be some other verses that are like this. Can anyone explain why this is the case (as is the case in some of the other modern versions)?



That verse, like the others, are not contained in the earliest extant manuscripts of the New Testament in greek.


----------



## heartoflesh (Feb 27, 2005)

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> 
> 
> > For example, Acts 8:37 is footnoted instead of being included in the text. There may be some other verses that are like this. Can anyone explain why this is the case (as is the case in some of the other modern versions)?
> ...



And from what I understand, those manuscripts are hardly even in agreement with each other in many places.

Even so, I have come to accept that I will never be qualified _myself_ to make textual evaluations. And is there anyone on this board who _is_ qualified to do so? It seems we have to either believe what so and so says, or we have to believe what so and so says, and back and forth it goes. I guess, given the choice, I choose what is closer to the majority text--NKJV.

If it was good enough for Spurgeon, it's good enough for me!

Just kidding, kind of.

Rick


----------



## bond-servant (Feb 28, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Rick Larson_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> ...



Rick, you bring up an excellent point. I have studied theories about the underlying manuscripts for several years and have looked at both common arguments for or against the MT and not as common ones. 
At this point, I can relate to Solomon's statement "For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow. " Ecc 1:18
What I know now is that I know enough to argue a debate for either side. I lean toward favoring the MT. 
Both the NKJV andESV are great modern translations.


----------

