FAQ's on the English Standard Version

10/17/08 | Tim Schaaf

FAQ's on the English Standard Version

1.                  What is the "ESV"?

  • The ESV is a translation of the Old and New Testaments of the Bible that was published a few years ago by Crossway Publishing. It is written with the goal of being as literal as possible, while maintaining clear understanding and readability.

2.                  Why are we talking about the ESV?

  • A recommendation for the Church Health Team on "Passionate Spirituality" was for our church to adopt a recommended study bible. In mid-October of 2008, the "ESV Study Bible" is being released. With study and prayer, our Elders are recommending this to be the recommended study bible for our church.

3.                  How does the ESV compare to other popular translations?

  • There are many translations, many of them fine. But the ESV has a few distinctions. The KJV/NKJV is based on inferior manuscripts, the NASB is literal, but is very wooden and is lacking in literary quality, the TNIV (Today's New International Version) and NRSV opt for a gender-neutral approach, The Message is too paraphrastic, the RSV is burdened by theological bias, etc. More detail could be given on any of these points and helps for study are given at the end of this guide.
  • Since the switch at CGS would be from NIV to ESV, most of the questions pertaining to the ESV will be in comparison to the NIV.

4.                  Is the ESV a "literal" translation?

  • The ESV employs an "essentially literal" translation philosophy. The NIV has a less literal "dynamic equivalence" philosophy.
  • The difference means the ESV tries to translate "word-for-word"as much as possible
  • The NIV translates "thought-for-thought."

The different approaches can be seen by comparing prefaces.

  • Taken from theNIV Preface
    The first concern of the translators has been the accuracy of the translation and its fidelity to the thought of the biblical writers. They have weighed the significance of the lexical and grammatical details of the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts. At the same time, they have striven for more than a word-for-word translation. Because thought patterns and syntax differ from language to language, faithful communication of the meaning of the writers of the Bible demands frequent modifications in sentence structure and constant regard for the contextual meaning of words.
  • Taken from the ESV Preface
    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 biblical 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.

5.      Why is a literal translation helpful?

  • The ESV does less thinking for you and asks you to wrestle with the text of the Bible. While this might require some thought, you won't be completely left alone. The Notes in the ESV Study Bible will help you push through to understanding.
  • The problem with translators "thinking for you" is that there are times when the Greek or Hebrew construction can be easily translated while the meaning of the translation is still ambiguous. A common example in Greek involves genitives. The most basic translation for a noun in the genitive case is "of." For example, 2 Cor. 5:14 reads (in the ESV) "For the love of Christ controls us..." The phrase "the love of Christ" translates the Greek agape tou Christou which is, grammatically, a nominative noun followed by a genitive noun. The love of Christ could mean the love Christ has for us, or the love we have for Christ, or both. All three are possible from the Greek and from the ESV translation. The NIV, however, translates 2 Cor. 5:14 "For Christ's love compels us..." This may be what the Greek phrase means (or it may not), but the NIV has settled the matter for us-agape tou Christou means the love Christ has for us (i.e., "Christ's love")-and has not allowed the reader to come to his own conclusion.

6.                  Is the ESV more "true" to the original languages?

  • If by "true" you mean more in keeping with the way the original books and letters were written, then "Yes." Leland Ryken, professor of English at Wheaton College and literary stylist for the ESV, argues that dynamic equivalent translations often don't do justice to the artistry, meter, subtlety, multi-layeredness, and concreteness that can be found in the literature of the Bible, especially poetry. Remember, the goal of the NIV and many other modern translations is to rework the passages so that a modern reader can easily grasp the meaning. As a side-effect, these dynamic equivalent translations undermine the literary nature of the Bible. And "what is bad about an unliterary Bible?" asks Ryken. "It distorts the kind of book the Bible is (mainly an anthology of literary genres). It robs the Bible of the power that literature conveys. And it changes the nature of the writing that God by his Holy Spirit moved the biblical authors to produce."

Here are a few examples:
ESV Psalm 35:10 "All my bones (etzem) shall say, "O Lord, who is like you...'"
NIV Pslam 35:10 "My whole being will exclaim, ‘Who is like you, O Lord?'"

The Hebrew word is "bones," not "being."  It may be that "all my bones" is David's way of speaking of his "whole being," but when the text loses "bones" it trades a vivid poetic metaphor for an abstraction.  Besides, does anyone really think that David's bones verbally spoke?  Don't we intuitively understand that David uses "bones" to refer to the depth of feeling and intensity in his cry to God?  The poetry of the NIV is not as good as the ESV which better conveys a vivid, understandable Hebrew metaphor.

ESV Psalm 78:33 "So he made their days vanish like a breath (hevel), and their years in terror."
NIV Psalm 78:33 "So he ended their ways in futility and their years in terror."

The punch of the original is lost when "breath" is traded for "futility."  The image of a puff of air vanishing as soon as it leaves the mouth is much more striking poetry than "futility."

Similarly, Proverbs in the ESV, with its essentially literal approach, often sound more, well, proverbial.  The NIV often turns the aphoristic sound of proverbs into everyday conversation.

ESV Proverbs 27:6 "Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy."
NIV Proverbs 27:6 "Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses."

Which sounds like a proverb and which sounds like conversation in the kitchen?  The difference between the two translations is the difference between "A stitch in time saves nine" and "If you stitch something now, you'll save yourself nine stitches later."  Proverbs are supposed to sound different from everyday speech.
Even outside the Wisdom literature, the ESV retains more of the concrete, vivid language of the original languages instead of trading it for interpretative abstraction.

ESV 1 Thessalonians 2:12 "we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you to walk (peripatein) in a manner worthy of God..."
NIV 1 Thessalonians 2:12 "encouraging, comforting and urging you to live lives worthy of God..."

Isn't "walk in a manner worthy of God" more striking than "live lives worthy of God"?  The verb conjures up images of physically walking away from evil and walking side by side with the Lord.  Or to give one more example:

ESV John 1:13 "who were born, not of blood (haimaton) nor of the will of the flesh (thelematos sarkos) nor of the will of man (thelematos andros), but of God."
NIV John 1:13 "children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God."

Not only is the ESV a much more literal translation, it is still very understandable with the more concrete, earthier language of blood, will of the flesh, and will of man instead of the more abstract language of natural descent, human decision, and husband's will.

7.      Does it matter if our translation of the Bible is as close to the original languages as possible?

  • In our opinion, yes. While we've benefited from many translations, there are good reasons to want a more literal translation. This point is connected to the way we think of the Bible (the doctrine of verbal plenary inspiration). We believe that God the Holy Spirit inspired not just the thoughts of Scripture but the very words and details.

8.                  Are there theological biases in the ESV translation?

  • It is impossible to make any translation without interpretation. The goal of a good translation is to minimize the interpretation and to allow the reader to make his or her own interpretations. The way the ESV approaches this goal is to uphold the theological nomenclature of Scripture.
  • One of the more popular arguments for translations and paraphrases like the NIV and "The Message" is that people do not understand the technical terms that Scripture uses to express its thoughts. Some feel that words like "justification" and "propitiation," should be replaced with more modern words that people can understand. Again, with the ESV Study Notes, even these difficult words can be understood within a few minutes.

9.                  Is the ESV Translation Better for Preaching?

  • That depends on the preacher's style. Some preachers use many different translations, picking the specific version that best fits what they intend to say. At CGS, Pastor Tim likes to preach "expository" sermons. That is, he preaches through books of the Bible, letting the Bible itself choose the topics that need to be covered. For his style, the ESV is a very helpful translation. When you participate in an expository sermon (because both the preacher and the listener are equally worshipping God as they interact with the preached Word) it is important to keep an eye on the original languages. Here is one example to illustrate this point:
  • ESV Ephesians 5:17-21 "Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit, addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with all your heart, giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ."
  • NIV Ephesians 5:17-21 "Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the Lord's will is. Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit. Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ."
  • This is a wonderful passage to preach from for many reasons, not least of which is the clear structure that Paul employs. Verse begins with a negative command, "Do not get drunk with wine." Then he adds the positive command, "be filled with the Spirit." What Paul means by being filled with the Spirit is fleshed out by four participles in verses 19-21. A participle is a verbal adjective, often ending in "ing." The four participles-addressing, singing, giving thanks, submitting-are easily pointed out when preaching from the ESV. They are impossible to see in the NIV unless the text is un-explained. The NIV unnecessarily breaks 18-21 into four sentences instead of one, and translates three of the participles as commands (speak, sing, submit) and only one as a participle (giving thanks). It's true that participles can be translated as commands at times, but to do so here (inconsistently at that) ruins the obvious pattern. The pattern is further upset in the NIV by making verse 21 a new paragraph, as if submitting to one another introduces a new section, but is not tied grammatically to the command "be filled with the Spirit." Without correcting the text, there's simply no way to preach on this passage from the NIV and use Paul's clear and compelling structure-a structure that greatly aids in understanding the passage correctly.

10.              Is the ESV the only translation God uses or that we can use?

Let us be clear in saying the Lord, in his sovereignty, has used, and will continue to use many different English translations to build his kingdom.  The NIV, RSV, KJV and other translations have changed the lives of many people in our church.  Everything we've just been through is not meant to be critical of other translations.  It is meant to say that out of many great options, we believe that the ESV is most appropriate for our church. 

Other translations are still allowed as are other Study Bibles.  Don't throw them away or stop using them!  The main goal of this decision is to have a single recommended translation and Study Bible for the church, especially for people who receive Christ through our ministry.

References:

The examples of comparisons from the Greek and Hebrew as seen in both the ESV and NIV are from Rev. Kevin DeYoung, an RCA pastor in Lansing Michigan. (http://files.urc-msu.org/TBB/bibletranslation.html)

 

Mark Driscoll's article regarding the change to the ESV at Mars Hill was very helpful as we considered this issue. (http://theresurgence.com/mark_driscoll_2007-01-09_pastoral_reflections_on_bible_translations)

For Further Reading on Bible Translations

The Indestructible Book by Ken Connolly
The Word of God in English by Leland Ryken
Choosing a Bible by Leland Ryken
The Bible in Translation by Bruce Metzger
How We Got the Bible by John Sailhamer
A General Introduction to the Bible by Norman Geisler