What do you think of the ESV?

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

Dear Friends:

What do you think of the ESV (English Standard Version)? Is it an improvement upon the RSV (Revised Standard Version)?

Also, what percentage of you are KJV only believers? Maybe we can tell if enough KJV believers answer this thread. We could estimate what percentage of you will, as a matter-of-principle, use only the KJV Bible.

Take care.

God bless all of you. Amen.

In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[Grandpa]

I like the KJV, always have. I like the fact that it is not copyrighted. Most of the newer translations are copyrighted. Why would they copyright God's word?? I don't know, but I don't like it.

But as far as versions go, I figure the version that a person will actually read is the best. I got my kids The Message because they would not read the KJV. But they did read The Message. As they get older they have questions and I show them what the "real" bible says.

A lot of the different copyrighted versions seem to be pushing certain doctrines. I don't know if they had an agenda before they started writing it or if the words just lend themselves to those doctrines. I only use different versions if certain passages don't line up with each other. Then I can see all the different ways people have interpreted it. A parallel bible works well for this.

I mostly only use the KJV. If I read Greek and Hebrew I would read the OT in Hebrew and the NT in both languages. So it looks like, for now, I have the KJV and a Strongs Concordance and I do my best.

 

[CrimsonFlames]

Had an ESV and ditched it.., many discrepancies

Grandpas to copyright a bible one must make a 15% change to the text to have it considered an original proof., interesting fact huh

However Im surprised you are a staunch KJV reader only to buy your children the message.., the message bible is perverted very badly

 

[jimmydiggs]

I have an ESV Study Bible, and on the forums I use the NIV.

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

I like the KJV, always have. I like the fact that

it is not copyrighted. Most of the newer translations are copyrighted.

Why would they copyright God's word?? I don't know, but I don't like

it.

But as far as versions go, I figure the version that a person will actually

read is the best. I got my kids The Message because they would not

read the KJV. But they did read The Message. As they get older they

have questions and I show them what the "real" bible says.

A lot of the different copyrighted versions seem to be pushing certain

doctrines. I don't know if they had an agenda before they started

writing it or if the words just lend themselves to those doctrines. I only

use different versions if certain passages don't line up with each other.

Then I can see all the different ways people have interpreted it. A

parallel bible works well for this.

I mostly only use the KJV. If I read Greek and Hebrew I would read the

OT in Hebrew and the NT in both languages. So it looks like, for now, I

have the KJV and a Strongs Concordance and I do my best.

Dear Grandpa: There is nothing more difficult and dangerous

for a Christian than believing things which are not so. In fact,

Grandpa, the King James Version is copyrighted.

See: "The KJV Is A Copyrighted Translation", by Doug Kutilek

http:// THE KJV IS A COPYRIGHTED TRANSLATION

See: "Authorized King James Version" -- Wikipedia

http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorized_King_James_Version

Thus, Grandpa, "It is wrong, always, everywhere, and for everyone,

to believe anything upon insufficient evidence" (Hans J. Eysenck,

"Psychology Is About People"). God bless you always in Christ

Jesus our God and Messiah. Amen. The KJV is indeed a copyrighted

Bible. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington, Thursday, December 1st,

2011 AD

 

[cronjecj]

I have an ESV Study Bible, and on the forums I use the NIV.

What is your stance on the KJV?

 

[jimmydiggs]

What is your stance on the KJV?

I couldn't stnad shakespeare in high school.



Regardless of that, I have read that the KJV isn't exactly the best translation out there on the market. Sometimes I like the poetic feel of it though. Some verses I think better in the KJV because of the language. Example: "Woe is me, for I am undone!"



Ultimately though, I am for producing bibles in the language of those who will be reading them, that includes updating them for languages change and develop, especially over 400 years.

If one wants to study thoroughly though, one must go back to the original languages and learn to read Koine Greek and Hebrew.

 

[Grandpa]

Dear Grandpa: There is nothing more difficult and dangerous

for a Christian than believing things which are not so. In fact,

Grandpa, the King James Version is copyrighted.

See: "The KJV Is A Copyrighted Translation", by Doug Kutilek

http:// THE KJV IS A COPYRIGHTED TRANSLATION

See: "Authorized King James Version" -- Wikipedia

http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorized_King_James_Version

Thus, Grandpa, "It is wrong, always, everywhere, and for everyone,

to believe anything upon insufficient evidence" (Hans J. Eysenck,

"Psychology Is About People"). God bless you always in Christ

Jesus our God and Messiah. Amen. The KJV is indeed a copyrighted

Bible. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington, Thursday, December 1st,

2011 AD

Maybe you meant was a copyrighted version. Now you look in a NKJV or NIV or whatever and it will say copyright 1981 or whatever. The KJV isn't copyrighted. The maps are copyrighted and the concordance, if it has one is copyrighted but the KJV is not under a copyright. Pick up a KJV bible for yourself and check it out.

 

[Grandpa]

Had an ESV and ditched it.., many discrepancies

Grandpas to copyright a bible one must make a 15% change to the text to have it considered an original proof., interesting fact huh

However Im surprised you are a staunch KJV reader only to buy your children the message.., the message bible is perverted very badly

Well I got them KJV bibles but they were too difficult for them to read. They wouldn't do it. They had no problem reading the Message. I just wanted them to read the bible. I figured God's word would communicate to them better than me forcing them to read something that they didn't understand. They ask me anyway when they don't understand something and I show them in the KJV why I believe a certain way.

 

[SantoSubito]

I own an ESV and read from it occasionally but the ESV really only takes the RSV and "Evangelicalizes" it somewhat. So I think I'll stick with the RSV/RSV-CE which conforms more closely with the Vulgate and traditional Catholic renderings of certain passages e.g. "Hail, Full of Grace" instead of "Hail, O highly favored one".

That being said the ESV is by no means a bad translation, but it is somewhat pointless for Catholic or Orthodox Christians to use it. The only way it could be brought to fit Catholic standards is if they reversed most of the changes they made to the RSV, which puts us back to square one.

Also the KJV is still under copyright in the UK, since it was a work of the crown the KJV has a perpetual crown copyright and only authorized printers of the KJV can publish it in the UK (Oxford, Cambridge, and R.L. Allan)

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

Maybe you meant was a copyrighted version. Now you look in a NKJV

or NIV or whatever and it will say copyright 1981 or whatever. The KJV isn't copyrighted.

The maps are copyrighted and the concordance, if it has one is copyrighted but the KJV is

not under a copyright. Pick up a KJV bible for yourself and check it out.

Have you read Doug Kutliek's article and the Wikipedia before you "finally decide" the KJV wasn't copyright?

Kutilek's article proves it WAS copyrighted. It was printed with the Latin words "CUM PRIVILEGIO", "with

privilege", which means it is copyrighted by the Anglican Church.

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

I own an ESV and read from it

occasionally but the ESV really only takes the RSV and "Evangelicalizes"

it somewhat. So I think I'll stick with the RSV/RSV-CE which conforms

more closely with the Vulgate and traditional Catholic renderings of

certain passages e.g. "Hail, Full of Grace" instead of "Hail, O highly

favored one".

That being said the ESV is by no means a bad translation, but it is

somewhat pointless for Catholic or Orthodox Christians to use it. The

only way it could be brought to fit Catholic standards is if they reversed

most of the changes they made to the RSV, which puts us back to

square one.

Also the KJV is still under copyright in the UK, since it was a work of

the crown the KJV has a perpetual crown copyright and only authorized

printers of the KJV can publish it in the UK (Oxford, Cambridge, and

R.L. Allan)

Dear Santo:

I use the ESV because it has the Apocrypha in the Oxford University

Press edition. It's a lot better than the NRSV. Which has inclusive

language.


Scott R. Harrington Erie PA

 

[Kyouken]

I prefer the KJV, but I don't own one (I use a NKJV). As for other translations, I'm not much a fan of them, simply 'cause I believe that the KJV is the one to read (I could have phrased that better but I'm not sure how to :/). Although, the KJV had to come from somewhere, so I guess I'd have to learn Hebrew/Greek.

 

[cronjecj]

I prefer the KJV, but I don't own one (I use a NKJV). As for other translations, I'm not much a fan of them, simply 'cause I believe that the KJV is the one to read (I could have phrased that better but I'm not sure how to :/). Although, the KJV had to come from somewhere, so I guess I'd have to learn Hebrew/Greek.

brother the reason why we use the KJV is because its
the oldest and you know what they say about the old
paths in the bible? Jeremiah 6:16 (KJV)

...even if it has the shakespeare language in it

 

[Kyouken]

cronjecj, I get it ! I've also read some things about different manuscripts and what not, but the verse just trumps those things! Thanks! That really blesses me!

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

the ESV is ok but it is grammatically inferior to most other bible translations...

in places the sentence structure is absolutely awful and there are many problems with pronoun reference too...

 

[SantoSubito]

the ESV is ok but it is grammatically inferior to most other bible translations...

in places the sentence structure is absolutely awful and there are many problems with pronoun reference too...

Weirdly the ESV tends to be somewhat Latinate in it's sentence structure, which is probably a leftover from the RSV. But growing up Catholic gets you used to Latinisms since the Mass is full of them (even more so now with the new translation.)

 

[NickInCali]

brother the reason why we use the KJV is because its
the oldest and you know what they say about the old
paths in the bible? Jeremiah 6:16 (KJV)

...even if it has the shakespeare language in it

Uh, no. The KJV is not the oldest Bible. It's not even the oldest English translation of the Bible.

 

[SantoSubito]

Uh, no. The KJV is not the oldest Bible. It's not even the oldest English translation of the Bible.

Yeah I was going to mention that they're were Old English translations of the Bible (at least parts of it), but I didn't want to be a drag.

 

[ChosenbyHim]

I do have a copy of the ESV. What's interesting though is that it was the very first translation I ever bought. And I bought this translation right before my eyes were opened to the Bible Version Issue, and the truth of the King James Holy Bible. And how the KJV is God's true and preserved word. Now, when it comes to reading and studying the word, I simply use the King James Bible. I only keep the ESV for documentation purposes and to keep it out of circulation, as there are already enough corrupt bible versions out there on the market.

The ESV New Testament text is based on the Westcott-Hort Greek text, which is very different from the text of the KJV. In fact, it could be argued that the ESV is just another Catholic bible. The Old Testament of the ESV is basically a mixture of several different texts, including the Hebrew Masoretic Text, the Septuagint (LXX), Vulgate and the Syriac. What's important to note is that even though the ESV uses the Hebrew Masoretic text in certain places, in many other places it will depart from this same Hebrew text and reject its readings and will follow the Septuagint (LXX) instead. That alone should raise a red flag to any serious student of the Bible. And like the NIV, the ESV also omits some 5,000 words as well as 18 verses from the New Testament.

So, because of that, I would not recommend the ESV to anyone. I would simply recommend the King James Holy Bible. Of course, whatever Bible version they do end up buying and using is totally up to them. But at least they will know where God's absolute truth can be found. And they will know that God's infallible and inerrant words are right in the King James Bible.