|
2nd Century BC Scroll of Isaiah from Qumran |
"We had a strong sense of divine guidance and divine help in what we were doing ."
J.I. Packer , ESV General Editor
|
Why the English Standard
Version ?
|
| |
1. Does Translation Philosophy Matter?
2. Gender Neutral Translations
3. Helpful Links
4. English Bible History
A legitimate question is whether the world is truly served with another English Bible translation. Since the middle of the 20th century, English language translations have proliferated. Presently, there are more than 25 English translations.
The
English Standard Version (ESV), in contrast to
most modern translations, is not entirely "new." The ESV is the product of a rich translation
legacy which spans some 500 years. The beginning
of this heritage was William
Tyndale's New Testament (1526). The starting point for the ESV was the 1971 Revised Standard Version (RSV). Over 90 percent of the RSV is retained in the ESV. The RSV was regarded by many as the best modern translation in terms of precision and literary elegance.
The ESV improves upon the RSV in 3 important ways.
|
|
1. First and most crucial to the evangelical community, is that the ESV corrects key Old Testament passages whose prophetic intent was dulled in the RSV. The passage that served as a lightning rod for this controversy was Isaiah 7:14. (see also Genesis 22:15-18, Psalm 2:11-12 & Psalm 45:6)
|
RSV |
ESV |
|
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Imman'u-el.
|
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. |
|
Another example of an
important correction to the RSV was the
translation of the Greek word
hilasterion and its
cognates (Rom. 3:25, Heb. 2:17, 1 John 2:2
and 1 John 4:10) which the RSV translated
"expiation." The ESV corrected this to
"propitiation." Propitiation means to
appease the wrath of someone by the substitution
of an offering. Thus Jesus bore the wrath
of God that was due mankind. The
righteous anger that was due mankind was placed
upon His Son. Christ's sacrifice
had the effect of both bearing the sin of
man (expiation) and the punishment due man
for his wickedness (propitiation). It is
worth noting that the NIV and the NRSV both took
the "middle ground" and translated hilasterion
as "atonement." In so doing the
translators decided not to take a stand on the
issue since "atonement" captures both expiation
and propitiation. Clearly, many modern
translations have not translated hilasterion as
propitiation for the simple reason that it does
not fit their theology. That God's wrath
needed to be appeased was contrary to their
understanding of God. Both the "Message," and the CEV translations have removed the heart
of the meaning of propitiation from their
respective translations entirely. (See Romans 3:25)
2.
Archaic language
was updated. (Thee, Thou, Art, Ye, Hearken, etc.)
3. The ESV translation is more literal than RSV. It attempts, as much as possible, "not to improve on the originals."
|
| Summary |
|
The ESV is a grand "improvement" upon centuries of English Bible translations. With a zeal for faithfulness to the original text, and a desire for traditional literary excellence, the ESV is the best modern translation in the English language. We have attempted to explain why these qualities are essential to Bible translation. |
| |
|
|
| The ESV is an Essentially Literal Translation |
|
Codex Sinaiticus: a manuscript containing the Old and New Testament. (c. AD 350-375). Sinaiticus was discovered in the mid 1800's at the foot of Mt. Sinai. |
|
An "essentially literal" translation attempts to make the original biblical languages as transparent as possible to the reader. It gives the reader the best view of the original wording of the biblical writers. The focus of the "essentially literal" translation is on word-for-word precision. On the other end of the translation spectrum, are versions which attempt to translate the ideas of the biblical authors. These are often characterized as thought-for-thought translations. Most translations fall somewhere within this continuum. It is true that less literal translations may be more "readable," but often at the expense of accuracy and intended cross reference. The ESV is a superb choice for those who hold transparency to the original text, as a premium for an excellent translation. |
|
Does
translation philosophy really
matter?
Most people believe that different Bible
translations are simply a function of varying levels
of readability, though all roughly similar
in accuracy. So, for example, if we know of
a new believer who is not well
read, we give him a "CEV" or
"NLT" translation. Similarly, for youth we
pass on the translations which are simply "easier
to understand." What is critical, to this
understanding is "readability." In this
brief essay I want to demonstrate that
translations are not equal in accuracy, and that
"readability" comes at the expense of changing
God's words and therefore His
message.
Before the middle of the 20th century
there was only one basic philosophy of Bible
translation: "word-for-word" or "formal equivalence."
This translation philosophy placed a premium on making
the original languages transparent to the reader
to the extent that English grammar
would allow. This translation theory is grounded
in 2 essential facts.
1. Plenary (Verbal)
Inspiration -the fact that
God inspired not only the "thoughts" of the
biblical writers, but also the "words."
(Psalm 12:6, Proverbs 30:5, Matthew 4:4, 2
Timothy 3:16, Revelation 22:18-19) Since
God inspired the words, one must be hesitant to
change them. It should be noted,
however, that the English language changes. Many
modern readers would be extremely hard pressed
to understand the English that John Wycliffe
spoke in the 14th century (or the AV of the 17th
century.)
For God louede
so the world, that he yaf his `oon bigetun sone,
that ech man that bileueth in him perische not,
but haue euerlastynge
lijf.
(John 3:16 Wycliffe
1382)
That if thou
knoulechist in thi mouth the Lord
Jhesu Crist, and bileuest in thin herte,
that God reiside hym fro deth, thou schalt be
saaf.
(Romans 10:9 Wycliffe
1382)
Word-for-word translation theory does not suggest
the preservation of archaic English. It attempts to translate
the original biblical languages as close as
possble to their contemporary
equivalents.
2. Thoughts can not be disconnected
from the words that produce them.
This is true in the Bible as it is all aspects
of communication. Scholar Raymond Van
Leeuwen says, "It is hard to know what the Bible
means when we are uncertain about what it says." (We Really Do Need Another Bible
Translation) In other words, even if
one didn't hold to the verbal inspiration of
Scripture, changing words necessarily changes
the resulting meaning. We have provided
examples below.
Since
the middle of the 20th Century there have
been a proliferation of new translations whose premium
is not transparency of the original
languages, but rather to make the "thoughts" or the
"meaning" of the text more comprehensible
to the modern reader. These
transations are called "thought for thought"
or "dyanmic equivalence"
translations. Undoubtedly with the noble intention of making the Bible easier
to understand, the result has produced translations
which ironically compromise the meaning of the
text.
In
summary, we believe that when a person reads
the Bible, he should be confident that
he is actually reading the words of God,
in the form God delivered them to the
biblical authors. From that
starting point we trust God to reveal His Word
to the reader. We do not trust
a well meaning translator to do that work.
We believe, of course, that there is a
place for biblical commentary, only it should
not be placed in the Bible text, and then called
"The Bible." Within this framework we
recommend the following translations: ESV,
NASB, HCSB . The KJV & NKJV are also "essenially
literal" translations, however, their Greek manuscripts are
inferior to those used by the ESV & NASB. (see
below) The NLT, NCV, GVB, CEV & Message may
be helpful study aids, but one must
keep in mind that in these translations
great liberties have been made
by translators in "helping" the reader
understand the text. In many passages
and verses you will in effect be reading human commentary.
The NIV has often been the source
of much criticism, in part, because of its
popularity. The NIV follows neither
a word-for-word translation philosophy nor a thought-for-thought
philosophy. With enormous admiration for this translation,
it must be said that, at times, translators opinions
have been inserted into the text. This
having been said, the NIV is a
solid translation that is more "word-for-word" than "thought-for-thought." As
a primary Bible, every Christian should be afforded the
opportunity to read it with the confidence
that the words are indeed God's words.
Below are a few examples of where "thought for thought" translations obscure the
meaning of the Bible text. (Please note
that we have also given specific examples of
similar difficulties with "gender neutral" translations) |
| |
|
|
|
|
Rom 1:5 |
through whom
we have received grace and apostleship to bring
about the
obedience of
faith for the sake of his name
among all the nations
(NASB,RSV) |
Through
Christ, God has given us the privilege and
authority to tell Gentiles everywhere what God
has done for them, so that they will
believe and obey him
, bringing glory to his name. |
Jesus
was kind to me and chose me to be an apostle, so
that people of all nations would
obey and have faith. |
Only
the first column gives the Greek translation of
the text.
Is it clear in the
NLT and CEV that obedience comes from
faith? |
| translation |
ESV |
NIV |
CEV |
Meaning |
John 12:27 |
Now is
my soul
troubled. And what shall I say?
(all literal translations) |
Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say? |
Now
I am
deeply troubled, and I don't know what to
say. (NCV, Message also use "I") |
Apollinarianism was a
heresy which denied that Jesus had a
soul or spirit. The Greek word "psyche"
can mean "soul" or "life." |
| translation |
ESV |
NIV,
TNIV |
NLT |
Meaning |
Acts
19:11 |
And God
was doing extraordinary miracles by the hands of
Paul
(all literal
translations) |
God did
extraordinary miracles through Paul |
God gave Paul the power to do unusual miracles |
Does it matter
that the word "hands" is omitted?
Oftentimes Jesus and the apostles actually touched the people they ministered to. |
| translation |
ESV |
NLT
(NCV) |
Message |
Meaning |
Rom. 13:4
See also Prov. 13:24 with omission of "rod
" |
for he
is God's servant for your good. But if you do
wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the
sword in vain. For
he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries
out God's wrath on the
wrongdoer. (NIV + all
literal translations keeps sword and wrath) |
The
authorities are sent by God to help you. But if
you are doing something wrong, of course you
should be afraid, for you will be punished. The
authorities are established by God for that very
purpose, to punish those who
do wrong. |
But if
you're breaking the rules right and left, watch
out. The police aren't there just to be admired
in their uniforms. God also has an interest in
keeping
order, and he uses them to do
it. That's why you must live responsibly-not
just to avoid punishment but
also because it's the right way to live. |
The word
sword, Greek --"machaira" is omitted and
replaced with punish. Similarly wrath,
Greek "orge" is omitted.
First, sword was
an instrument of death-and likely capital
punishment is in mind here.
Second, wrath is replaced with "punish." Wrath is a biblical attribute of God. Also it references Rom. 12:19. |
| translation |
ESV |
NLT |
CEV |
Meaning |
Psalm
23:5a |
you
anoint my head with oil
(all literal translations) |
You
welcome me as a guest, anointing my head with
oil |
You honor me as your
guest, and you fill my cup until it
overflows |
This is an
example of changing a biblical metaphor.
Do we have the right to restrict this metaphor only
to "welcome?" When you "explain" a metaphor by placing it in the text you narrow its possible meanings. |
| translation |
ESV |
NIV |
NLT |
Meaning |
1 Cor. 4:9 |
For I
think that God has exhibited us apostles as last
of all, like men sentenced to death, because we
have become a spectacle to the world, to angels,
and to men |
For it
seems to me that God has put us apostles on
display at the end
of the procession, like men
condemned to die in
the arena. We have been made a
spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as
well as to men |
But
sometimes I think God has put us apostles on
display, like prisoners of war at the
end of a victor's parade,
condemned to die. We have become a spectacle to
the entire world--to people and angels
alike |
This is
another typical difficulty with "thought for
thought" translations: all that you see in red
is not in the original text.
Are we free
to add what the Holy Spirit didn't give to
Paul?
Added text gives a "clearer"
picture, but not the one in the Bible. |
| translation |
ESV |
NIV |
Message |
Meaning |
1 Pet. 4:12 |
Beloved, do
not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. |
Dear friends,
do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you. |
Friends, when life gets
really difficult, don't jump to the conclusion
that God isn't on the job. |
see
below |
|
| |
In the above example of 1 Peter 4:12, the NIV translates the Greek pyrosis as "painful," instead of its literal meaning, "fiery." It would appear, at first sight, to be an example of a "helpful" translation since "fiery" is not a common way to express a difficult trial. However, the Apostle Peter may have intended the listener (reader) to understand the trial in light of Malachi, "For he is like a refiner's fire and like fuller's' soap." (Malachi 3:2) Only with a literal rendering can such illusions be made transparent to the reader. Only a consistently literal renderings will expose intended cross references to other Biblical passages. |
|
This Masoretic Text is dated to the 9 th Century. The MT forms the basis of our Old Testament. |
|
|
A great resource regarding
the importance of an essentially literal
translation can be found in: Translating Truth The Case for
Essentially Literal Bible Translation . The contributors
include: Wayne Grudem,
Leland Ryken, Vern S. Poythress, Bruce Winter,
and C. John Collins. The forward is by
J.I. Packer. Another succinct book,
which gets to the heart of these issues
is Choosing a
Bible by Leland
Ryken .
Gender Neutral
Bible Translations:
Some modern
Bible translations (NRSV, NLT, TNIV, NCV, GNB
and CEV) have substituted "male-oriented"
language with "inclusive" language. The
stated intention of the NRSV was to "become
sensitive to the danger of linguistic sexism
arising form the inherent bias of the English
language towards the masculine gender, a bias
that in the case of the Bible has often
restricted or obscured the meaning of the
original text." (NRSV Preface, Metzger)
Beside apparent sexism was alleged
archaism. In other words, in modern
English, we no longer use the
masculine pronoun "he" to refer to both male and
female. Nor do we use the word "man" or
"men" to refer to "people." Thus, from
this perspective, gender neutral translation
theory is allegedly nothing more than bringing
archaic language into modernity. It is
similar to changing thee, and thou to
"you." The TNIV is perhaps one of the most
popular examples of a gender neutral
translation. There are more than 3,600
changes to Hebrew and Greek "male-oriented"
language in this Bible. These are documented in a
short title by Wayne Grudem and Jerry
Thacker. Do any of these
changes alter the
meaning of God's Word? Look
at some of the examples below from
the TNIV & NLT. It is clear that these
changes do alter the intention of the
text.
|
NIV |
TNIV |
Change in Meaning |
He protects all his
bones, not one of them will be broken.
(Psalm 34:20) |
He protects all their
bones, not one of them will be broken.
(Psalm 34:20) |
The change of the Hebrew
pronoun "his" obscures its prophetic intent
fulfilled in John 19:36, "Not one of his bones
will be broken." |
For since death came
through a man, the resurrection of the dead
comes also through a man.
(1 Corinthians
15:21) |
For since death came
through a human being, the resurrection of the
dead also comes through a human being.
(1 Corinthians 15:21) |
The Greek word anthropos can
signify both a man or person depending on
context. Here both Adam and Jesus are the
intended. Both are "men." |
| I stand at the door
and knock. If anyone hears my voice and
opens the door, I will come in and eat with him
and he with me. (Revelation
3:20) |
I stand at the door
and knock. If anyone hears my voice and
opens the door, I will come in and eat with
them, and they with me. (Revelation
3:20) |
The change in the masculine
pronoun obscures the fact that Jesus makes his
home with the individual. |
| KJV |
NLT |
Change in Meaning |
| So David slept with
his fathers and was buried in the city of
David. (1 Kings 2:10) |
Then David died and
was buried in the city of David. (1 Kings
2:10) |
In this example not only is the
Hebrew "'ab" or Father not included but died is
substituted for slept. The metaphor slept
may entertain a hope of a future
resurrection. Died leaves no such
hope. |
When one
chooses a translation we think it imperative to listen to
the words as God gave them to the
prophets. If "all Scripture is God-breathed," and
"every word of God proves
true," we must refrain
from making Scripture palatable for our culture. God
had a reason for using masculine pronouns and words,
just as he did for using the
word "slept" instead of "died." We must
not take the liberty to change
words that God
chose. |
|
| The ESV retains the elegance of its
Tyndale (1526) and King James (1611)
heritage. |
| |
In addition to being a precise translation, the ESV holds "literary excellence" in high regard. In keeping close to the style and wording of its roots in Tyndale's New Testament (1526), the King James Version (1611), and most recently the Revised Standard Version (1971), the ESV is ideal not only for serious Bible study, but also for worship, preaching, memory and personal devotion. |
| |
| A
Trustworthy Translation . |
| |
The Translation Team for the ESV is comprised of over 100 Christian men and women who have a firm commitment to the truthfulness of God's Word. The translation team represents a broad coalition of evangelical leaders and scholars. There has been a concerted effort to translate the Bible as it has been given by our Lord, and not with an eye to suit contemporary cultural fancies. This is an important consideration in choosing a Bible. |
| |
|
| |
| For more information on the ESV translation |
| |
| For an independent analysis of the ESV
translation |
| |
How does the ESV differ from other
translations, click
here
For a
complete list of ESV
links
Purchase an English
Standard Version Bible
Recommendations for ESV Bible editions / ESV Bible Blog |
| |
| Summary |
| |
The ESV is the Bible of choice for those looking for both transparency to the ancient languages, as well as elegance in literary style. It is suitable for in depth Bible study, preaching, worship and Scripture memory |
| |
"A Brief Schematic History
of the English Bible"
|
| |
| I have also provided a
schema that demonstrates the historical legacy
of the English Standard Version. It is
noteworthy that the ESV inherits a nearly 500
year translation tradition beginning with William
Tyndale's 1526 New Testament. |
|
This papyrus manuscript (P66) contains most sof John's gospel. (c. AD. 150-200) (click on picture) |
|
At the same time, the ESV makes use of Hebrew and especially Greek manuscripts, which are far more ancient and accurate, than that which was available to translators until the late 19 th Century and into the 20 th Century. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| All Contents © Copyright 2005-2008. |
|
|