English Standard Version

From Textus Receptus

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Protected "English Standard Version" [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed])

Revision as of 18:43, 22 July 2009

The English Standard Version (ESV) is an English translation of the Bible. It is a revision of the 1971 edition of the Revised Standard Version<ref name=esv>Cite web|url=http://www.esv.org/|title=ESV.org, official website of the ESV|accessdate=2009-05-18</ref>. The first edition was published in 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers.

The ESV Study Bible, also published by Crossway Bibles, was published in October 2008<ref name=esvstudy>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref>. It uses the ESV translation and adds extensive notes and articles based on evangelical Christian scholarship.

Contents

Translation philosophy

The stated intent of the translators was to produce a readable and accurate translation that stands in the tradition of Bible translations beginning with English religious reformer William Tyndale in 1525–26 and culminating in the King James Version of 1611. Examples of other translations that stand in this stream are the Revised Version (1881–85), the American Standard Version (1901), and the Revised Standard Version (1946–1971). In their own words, they sought to follow a literal translation philosophy. To that end, they sought as far as possible to capture the precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer, while taking into account differences of grammar, syntax, and idiom between current literary English and the original languages. The result is a translation that is more literal than the popular New International Version, but more idiomatic than the New American Standard Bible.

History

Work on this translation began over the perceived looseness of style and content of recently published English Bible translations. Under noted theologian J.I. Packer who served as general editor the group sought and received permission from the National Council of Churches to use the 1971 edition of the RSV as the English textual basis for the ESV. Nevertheless, only about 5%–10% of the RSV text was changed in the ESV. Many corrections were made to satisfy objections to some of the RSV's interpretations that conservative Protestants had considered as theologically liberal, for example, changing the translation of the Hebrew "almah" from "young woman" to "virgin" in Isaiah 7:14. The language was modernized to remove "thou" and "thee" and replace obsolete words (e.g., "jug" for "cruse").

The ESV underwent a minor revision in 2007.<ref>Mansfield, R. 2007 ESV Changes: Hebrews - Revelation, This Lamp.</ref> The publisher has chosen not to identify the updated text as a second or revised edition; it is intended to replace the original ESV under the original name.<ref> Mansfield, R. ESV Comparison Backlash??, This Lamp.</ref> At present, both revisions coexist on the market.

An edition of the ESV with Apocrypha (featuring books from the Protestant Apocrypha, and the deuterocanonical books of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Old Testament) was developed by Oxford University Press and published in January, 2009.<ref name="oup.com">http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Bibles/TextReferenceBibles/?view=usa&ci=9780195289107</ref> The publisher cites the fact that the ESV "has been growing in popularity among students in biblical studies, mainline Christian scholars and clergy, and Evangelical Christians of all denominations." Thus, they deemed, "Along with that growth comes the need for the books of the Apocrypha to be included in ESV Bibles, both for denominations that use those books in liturgical readings and for students who need them for historical purposes." The publisher's hope for this new edition with Apocrypha is that it will be used widely in seminaries and divinity schools where the Apocrypha is used in academic study.<ref name="oup.com"/> The team translating the Apocrypha includes Bernard A. Taylor, David A. deSilva, and Dan McCartney, under the editorship of David Aiken.<ref name=esv-oup>English Standard Version Bible with Apocrypha. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. Pg. 1177</ref>

There are also anglicized editions of the ESV available from HarperCollins UK, which modify the text slightly for consistency with British spelling and grammar.

Textual basis

When necessary to translate difficult passages, the translators referred to the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Bible (as found in the second edition of Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia), to the United Bible Societies' fourth edition of the Greek New Testament, and to the twenty-seventh edition of Nestle and Aland's Novum Testamentum Graece. In a few exceptionally difficult cases, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syriac Peshitta, the Latin Vulgate, and other sources were consulted to shed possible light on the text or, if necessary, to support a divergence from the Masoretic text.

For the Apocrypha, the Oxford translating team relied on the Göttingen Septuagint for all of the Apocrypha except 4 Maccabees (relying there on Rahlf's Septuagint) and 2 Esdras, which used the German Bible Society's 1983 edition Vulgate.<ref name=esv-oup/>

Criticism and controversy

Dr Mark L. Strauss has defended gender-inclusive language in Bible translations like the TNIV, NLT and NRSV, and is a member of the TNIV Committee on Bible Translations<ref>http://www.tniv.info/story/cbtmembers.php</ref>. Strauss argues that the ESV uses similar gender-inclusive language, and wrote, “What is odd and ironic is that some of the strongest attacks against the gender language of the TNIV are coming from those who produced similar gender changes in the ESV”.<ref name=gender> cite web | url = http://www.geocities.com/bible_translation/list/files/gender-inclusive-esv.doc | title = The Gender-Neutral Language of the English Standard Version (ESV) | accessdate = 2007-12-03 | last = Strauss | first = Mark L | date = | year = | month = | format = Microsoft Word Document | quote = What is odd and ironic is that some of the strongest attacks against the gender language of the TNIV are coming from those who produced similar gender changes in the ESV </ref> Strauss has also suggested that criticism against competing Bible translations to the ESV is marketing contrived.<ref name=marketing> cite web | url = http://www.geocities.com/bible_translation/list/files/gender-inclusive-esv.doc | title = The Gender-Neutral Language of the ESV | last = Strauss | first = Mark </ref> ESV translator Wayne Grudem has responded that, while on occasion the ESV translates "person" or "one" where previous translations used "man", it keeps gender specific language where that is in the original, so it does not go as far as gender inclusive translations such as the TNIV and NRSV;<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> and the ESV web site makes a similar statement<ref>Gender Issues, ESV web site</ref>.

There have been attempts to formulate lists of translation issues in the ESV. Bible translator and linguist Wayne Leman has compiled a list of translation problems in the ESV.<ref>ESV Links, see heading "ESV translation problems, noted by Wayne Leman"</ref> Meanwhile, at the 2008 gathering of the Evangelical Theological Society, Mark L. Strauss presented a paper entitled "Why the English Standard Version (ESV) Should Not Become the Standard English Version"<ref>The entire article can be read at the Better Bibles Blog here: [1] or in the original PDF document here: [2]</ref> in which he detailed the most common translation errors (in his view) of the ESV. He states in the opening,

I am writing this article, however, because I have heard a number of Christian leaders claim that the ESV is the “Bible of the future”—ideal for public worship and private reading, appropriate for adults, youth and children. This puzzles me, since the ESV seems to me to be overly literal—full of archaisms, awkward language, obscure idioms, irregular word order, and a great deal of “Biblish.” Biblish is produced when the translator tries to reproduce the form of the Greek or Hebrew without due consideration for how people actually write or speak. The ESV, like other formal equivalent versions (RSV; NASB; NKJV; NRSV), is a good supplement to versions that use normal English, but is not suitable as a standard Bible for the church. This is because the ESV too often fails the test of “standard English.”

William Mounce, the New Testament Editor of the ESV, responded briefly to Strauss on the Koinonia blog owned by Zondervan:

While the content of the paper was helpful, I am afraid that it only increased the gap between the two "sides" of the debate. There has been a lot of hurt and damage done toward people on both sides of this debate (e.g., someone shot a bullet through a TNIV and mailed it to the publisher), and I got the feeling that Mark was getting tired of being attacked. I would be tired if I were in his shoes. He kept saying that the ESV has "missed" or "not considered" certain translational issues. While I am sure they were not intentional, these are emotionally charged words that do not help in the debate. They are in essence ad hominem arguments focusing on our competence (or perceived lack thereof) and not on the facts. He was not in the translation meetings and does not know if we in fact did miss or did not consider these issues. Time and time again Mark said that if we made a change, then we would have gotten it "right." This, of course, is not a helpful way to argue because it implies there is only one "right" way to translate a verse. His solution appeared to be that we should adopt a more dynamic view of translation, and then we would have gotten it right. The solution to this debate is to recognize that there are different translation philosophies, different goals and means by which to reach those goals, and the goal of the translator is to be consistent in achieving those goals. In all but one of his examples, our translation was the one required by our translation philosophy.<ref>Koinonia: "ETS Day 2 by Bill Mounce, [3]</ref>

Use of the ESV

Two previously existing study bible editions of other translations have been adapted to use the ESV text: the Scofield Study Bible III,<ref>Oxford University Press, 2001, ISBN 9780195278750</ref> an update and revision of the Scofield Reference Bible, and the Reformation Study Bible, edited by R.C. Sproul, which adapted the notes from the previous edition that used the New King James Version. The ESV edition was published by P & R Publishing, while the original New King James Version edition was published by Thomas Nelson (publisher).

In 2007, Crossway Bibles published the Literary Study Bible based on the ESV, with notes on the literary elements of Scripture by literary scholar Leland Ryken of Wheaton College and his son, Presbyterian pastor and theologian Philip Ryken.<ref>http://www.literarystudybible.org</ref>

The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod has adopted the ESV as the official text used in its official hymnal Lutheran Service Book, released in August 2006. It is in use in the church's three and one year lectionaries released with "Lutheran Service Book." The official publishing arm of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, Concordia Publishing House, is using the English Standard Version as its translation of choice in all its published materials. Concordia Publishing House is releasing The Lutheran Study Bible in October 2009, which will use the ESV translation.

The ESV Study Bible was released by Crossway Bibles in October 2008. The general editor is Wayne Grudem, and features ESV editor J.I. Packer as theological editor<ref name=esvstudy/>. Initial sales of this study bible have been high, with the publishers announcing, "With pre-publication demand surpassing the first 100,000 printing, the ESV Study Bible has already gone back to press for a second printing of 50,000 copies, with a 50,000 third printing soon to follow." Online Christian book retailer Westminster Books has called the ESV Study Bible "by far the fastest selling new product in the history of our store."<ref>http://www.esvstudybible.org/blog/2008/10/esv-study-bible-goes-back-to-press-prior-to-october-15-publication-date/</ref>

Notes

External links

Retrieved from "https://mail.textus-receptus.com/wiki/English_Standard_Version"
Personal tools