[peopleoftheway]

Hey there Brother

Will Kinney has written a great article on the ESV it can be found on this very site. http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/kinney-esv.html

Hope that may help shed some light on the ESV.

I found that I only had to go to the website of the ESV to see exactly what was wrong with it, they seem entirely obsessed with "the originals"

“But the ESV Bible also builds on the best Christian scholarship of the last 100 years. The result is a fresh and compelling Bible translation with a timeless quality, that’s trustworthy and true. . .

The result is a Bible that conveys the timeless quality of God’s Word and that remains trustworthy and true to the original words breathed out by God. . .”

(http://www.esv.org/about/intro)

“The Bible says every word was ‘breathed out by God’ (2 Timothy 3:16). For this reason, the ESV seeks to translate the original Greek and Hebrew words with the greatest possible accuracy and precision.”

(http://www.esv.org/about/intro)

“The ESV is an ‘essentially literal’ translation that seeks as far as possible to capture the precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer. As such, its emphasis is on ‘word-for-word’ correspondence, at the same time taking into account differences of grammar, syntax, and idiom between current literary English and the original languages. Thus it seeks to be transparent to the original text, letting the reader see as directly as possible the structure and meaning of the original.”

(Preface, English Standard Version)

Problem is WE dont have the originals! they passed away

Matthew 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

They are basically lying as the originals dont exist!

[Brother Tim]

The ESV also is linked to the National Council of Churches.

Below is a portion of a reference site about the ESV, found here. It quotes part of an article from World Magazine about the creation of the ESV.

Some months later, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School professor Wayne Grudem and Crossway President Lane Dennis entered into negotiations with the National Council of Churches to use the 1971 revision of the Revised Standard Version as the basis for a new translation. An agreement was reached in September 1998 allowing translators freedom to modify the original text of the RSV as necessary to rid it of de-Christianing translation choices.

I do not know if this agreement required that the NCC receives royalties, but it is possible.

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

The ESV also is linked to the National Council of Churches.

Below is a portion of a reference site about the ESV, found here. It quotes part of an article from World Magazine about the creation of the ESV.


I do not know if this agreement required that the NCC receives royalties, but it is possible.

(KJV)Job 6:6 Can that which is unsavoury be eaten without salt? or is there any taste in the white of an egg?

(Revised Standard)Job 6:6 Can that which is tasteless be eaten without salt, or is there any taste in the slime of the purslane?

(Jewish Pulication Society OT 1917)Job 6:6 Can that which hath no savour be eaten without salt? or is there any taste in the juice of mallows?

(ESV)Job 6:6 Can that which is tasteless be eaten without salt, or is there any taste in the juice of the mallow?

Tim, at the top is the thoroughly archaic, unreadable and obsolete rendering of the Elizabethan English of the KJV for Job 6:6, "white of an egg..." Below it is the easy to read and understandable readings, the best and most understandable is the RSV(I am having a couple scrambled purslane sandwiches for breakfast this morning).

The ESV "translators" seem to compromised with this reading in adopting the one from the JPS OT of WW I.

I suppose I should do more version comparisons before I speak, I would not want to end up with mallow on my face...

Grace and peace brother.

Tony

[Brother Tim]

I would not want to end up with mallow on my face...

I have not done any comparative examinations between the Pure KJB and the flawed ESV before. I have concentrated my battle on the NKJV because it is supposedly the best "replacement" for the KJB for today's progressive conservative evangelical. I am seeing the ESV being touted more lately by some of the MVers, so I may start building my arguments against it as well. This verse is a good one to have them explain as being "easier to read and comprehend". Yeah, right!

[Luke]

The ESV is a reformed Bible.

The general editor was J.I. Packer. It is endorsed by him and John Piper, as well as many other covenant theologists and reformed pastors

Strangely though, the god of the ESV has no omnipotence, but sits around wondering whether things will happen (things he supposedly decreed).

Jer 3:6 The LORD said to me in the days of King Josiah: "Have you seen what she did, that faithless one, Israel, how she went up on every high hill and under every green tree, and there played the whore?
Jer 3:7 And I thought, 'After she has done all this she will return to me,' but she did not return, and her treacherous sister Judah saw it.

Here, the god of the ESV just sits around thinking that Israel might return after they have their "fun". They don't. God gets mad.

A similar thing happens in the KJB, except God spends seven verses calling them back to him first, before He gets fed up.