The ESV Is the Best Bible Translation
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- For Certain People in Certain Circumstances.
🎁 Help me end Bible translation tribalism, one plow boy at a time:
✅ / mlward
✅ buymeacoffee.c...
📖 Check out my book, Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible:
amzn.to/2r27Boz
🎥 Watch my Fifty False Friends in the KJV series:
• 50 False Friends in th...
👏 Many, many thanks to the Patreon supporters who make my work possible!
Name, James Duly, Robert Gifford, Lanny M Faulkner, Lucas Key, Dave Thawley, William McAuliff, Razgriz, James Goering, Eric Couture, Martyn Chamberlin, Edward Woods, Thomas Balzamo, Brent M Zenthoefer, Tyler Rolfe, Ruth Lammert, Gregory Nelson Chase, Ron Arduser, Caleb Farris, Dale Buchanan, Jess English, Aaron Spence, Orlando Vergel Jr., John Day, Joshua Bennett, K.Q.E.D., Brent Karding, Kofi Adu-Boahen, Steve McDowell, Kimberly Miller, A.A., James Allman, Steven McDougal, Henry Jordan, Nathan Howard, Rich Weatherly, Joshua Witt, Wade Huber, M.L., Brittany Fisher, Tim Gresham, Lucas Shannon, Easy_Peasy , Caleb Richardson, Jeremy Steinhart, Steve Groom, jac, Todd Bryant, Corey Henley, Jason Sykes, Larry Castle, Luke Burgess, Joel, Joshua Bolch, Kevin Moses, Tyler Harrison, Bryon Self, Angela Ruckman, Nathan N, Gen_Lee_Accepted , Bryan Wilson, David Peterson, Eric Mossman, Jeremiah Mays, Caleb Dugan, Donna Ward, DavidJamie Saxon, Omar Schrock, Philip Morgan, Brad Dixon, James D Leeper, M.A., Nate Patterson, Dennis Kendall, Michelle Lewis, Lewis Kiger, Dustin Burlet, Michael Butera, Reid Ferguson, Josiah R. Dennis, Miguel Lopez, CRB, D.R., Dean C Brown, Kalah Gonzalez, MICHAEL L DUNAVANT, Jonathon Clemens, Travis Manhart, Jess Mainous, Brownfell, Leah Uerkwitz, Joshua Barzon, Benjamin Randolph, Andrew Engelhart, Mark Sarhan, Rachel Schoenberger
When I left KJV only I went to the ESV. It flows very well to me.
I like the saying "The best bible is the one you read". Bible versions are just another point of contention that need not be. Loved the video!
Right! Amen!
You got out of KJV Only? I didn't know that was possible to leave them...
To a non-speaker of English (like I am) there is no 'best translation'. The REB is the English translation I have used for years and still use and I wonder why this translation is not mentioned. I like the NIVUK, the NKJV and all the other translations but to me they're 'just other versions'. I can't tell the one from the other.
@@Nick-wn1xw the church of scientology says the same thing.
I have read the KJV for 14 years. I love it and agree with your take on the KJV false friends and other out dated English words. When I started reading the ESV, it filled in the GAPS the wonderful KJV left open for me. I really like the ESV and the KJV, although I do not really read the KJV alot anymore. Thanks for your work here Mark!
You’re so welcome! I think you’re thinking well.
The ESV is translated from the vaticanus and sinaiticus texts which are not credible at all. The KJV is from textus receptus, which has been passed down from the original texts. The minor translation issues this pastor mentions are not the issue, it’s the fact that they are everywhere and minor mistranslations have led to 50,000,000 Baptists burned at the stake during the dark ages. This pastor is not interested in the true word of God, but the Bible is very clear over and over about the preserved Word. Walking away from the KJV is the biggest mistake you can make.
“But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.”
Micah 5:2 KJV
“But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose coming forth is from of old, from ancient days.”
Micah 5:2 ESV
ESV is saying that Jesus was created. KJV says he is everlasting! KJV is the PURE word of God!
ESV is so perverted along with its sister NIV.
In acts 8:37 the verse is taken in ESV away….why? Because it wants people to believe we are saved by baptism! I’m sorry, but ESV/NIV is from the devil!
I praise God for you Mark! Lack of unity in the body grieves me greatly, and your measured, articulate, winsome approach is a breath of fresh air! As to the topic at hand, I was given a NASB by my grandma on my 21st birthday…it remained my preference for many years, partly out of a nostalgic homage to grandma…when the ESV came out, the PCA church I belonged to began using it…after moving away and before landing at another church home, I found myself going back to the NASB…I now belong to another local body and the pastor preaches out of the ESV…so…I’m back to the ESV…
Thank you for your kind words!
This the experience of so many-and a reason why I'm trying to help the church take up its embarrassment of riches in English Bible translation. So few of us can come anywhere near close to guaranteeing that we'll get to live in a church community that uses our favored Bible translation. I myself haven't been able to do this. I've gone from KJV to NASB to ESV to NASB in the four churches I've been a part of in the last 30 years.
I actually just started exploring the ESV today (that's why I went looking for ESV videos). I've been comparing it to my NKJV tonight, and I like it. It's easier for me to read than the NKJV (which itself isn't very difficult, but has it's moments). Right now it's just an app on my phone, but if I continue to like it I'll buy one.
It's definitely worth having!
I bounce between the ESV and CSB in my personal devotions. I am excited for this series of videos. Thank you for the work you put into them.
You’ll like the first two videos, then! And thanks for the kind word.
Luke 2:33 KJV:
"And 👉Joseph👈 and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him."
ESV:
"And 👉his father👈 and his mother marveled at what was said about him."
I could show you hundreds of other satanic changes. Stay away from the satanic modern perversions.
@@Beautreillis17 If the original Greek text says "patēr" which means "father", then how is the ESV translation satanic?
Just started exploring the ESV. So far, I love it! I also greatly appreciate the ESV Bible app on my phone. It’s always handy.
Yes! I've used it countless times! And their beautiful ESV website.
I rarely write in the comment section, but I wanted to let you know how amazing your channel is. You have executed your channel with prestige and grace, I immediately added your channel due to your visuals, tempo of how you deliver a message, calmness, clarity, and directness... I just wanted to let you know - Tamaine
Thank you for this thoughtful and kind word!
I'm looking forward to this! I'm working on a series of projects that uses a lot of translations(NKJV, ESV, NASB, NLT & NIV so far) so this is one of my favorite topics!
Sounds great! I use all those translations all the time!
@@markwardonwords Just watched your video and the way you talk about all of the translations is awesome. I haven't even heard of the translation you mentioned at the end. Looking forward to it!
Thanks for sharing your opinion on the ESV translation, Mark. The ESV is my primary bible for daily reading and study. That said, I read several translations for comparison across the spectrum from formal to dynamic. The ESV Study Bible delivers some of the best study notes that I've seen compared to other study bibles.
Wonderful! Love this!
Thank you for the beautiful location. I noticed even before you mentioned it.
You, Sir, are a scholar and gentleman. I never knew these translation wars were a thing. And a very serious thing in some circles. Wow! I'm thankful I have been spared.
I can only speak from my experience, but the average Christian who genuinely wants to follow Christ is not an academic. Even for more geeky people (like me) it can be over our heads. Or we may be in life situations where parsing all this stuff out is just not realistic. I'd love to study this stuff all day, every day. But my current life situation does not allow for it. For people like us, we just want a Bible translation that's accurate. My experience has been mostly 1984 NIV and in the past 10-12, the ESV. I've had pastors who used mainly NASB. Those are the three I know best. I honestly have not seen anything major (meaning-wise) changed. That's fine with me.
Thank you! That's Silver Lake Camp up near the Canadian border!
You're right in your big paragraph. I'd like to see more Christians simply acknowledging their limitations here and getting it clear that a) they will have to trust someone to translate the Bible for them and b) God gave us this situation, so it's okay. Regular Christian people just can't be expected to parse all this stuff out. Not even the nerds can do it. Not even I can verify every little translation decision in even a single Bible translation. Not even the translators can do that, because they divide into NT and OT experts, and they have limited time themselves. This is the situation our good God gave us!
@@markwardonwords I think it's actually better this way. God did not create us as robots or puppets. He gave us minds to use. The more examination and discussion there is, the more we see that nothing major has been changed or lost. That speaks more to the Bible's divine origin than if there was (supposedly) one text, in only one language, that is the "right" one. Contrast this with the Quran, in which only the Arabic version is considered as the "real" one. (And I'm not even sure if there was only one Arabic one, originally!)
Our church doesn't have a translation "that we use." Everyone just brings and uses what they like. We're mostly an older demographic, and I'd guess the NIV might have a slight majority. I think it's a benefit that we can compare versions.
I've been an ESV fan for a while. I prefer it for personal Bible study, and I have preached from it before I switched to the CSB for preaching and our group Bible studies.
I think that's where a lot of churches are going, and I'm fine with that. But I don't have hard data on this, just experience.
I switched to the ESV about a month ago, before then I used the NIV. I prefer the ESV as it's more literal, and I feel like I'm getting the style of each Bible writer far more than when I use the NIV. But I don't get why some people argue over what Bible translation others use, we should be thankful that we're blessed with so many English Bible translations, when I've heard that there are languages that don't have any.
AMEN!!
Having grown up in KJV-Only circles, my first foray into contemporary English was the ESV. I liked it well enough when I was first getting myself comfortable with other translations, but these days I find it's just not a big enough readability improvement over the KJV to be worth refamiliarizing myself with all the passages I'd already memorized.
Now the CSB, that's my jam. But, I probably would have never landed on the CSB if the ESV hadn't been my springboard away from the KJV. So it's now a translation that I'm eternally grateful for, but probably will never read cover-to-cover again.
I kinda went through that stage and then back around to the ESV. There really is something about the proven value of the Tyndale tradition, and of a mostly literal and literary rendering. I’m just over the division and the oneupsmanship.
Hi 👋 new to Christianity and wondering what ESV is I was brought up on the old king james as a child but walk away as a teen.
The ESV is an excellent translation of the Bible in the King James tradition. It is, I think, what the KJV would be if it were made today rather than 400 years ago. It's made into contemporary English rather than Elizabethan English.
I continue to learn and also worry less about Bible choice every time I watch a video.
Thanks for replying and helping me decide. Using ESV Study Bible now, but I tend to enjoy may translations so I’m glad that’s not wrong (within the bounds of being honest translations and not things like The Message) but I really learn new things I didn’t even notice when reading these side by side any changes that change the intention of the passage I may be questioning at the time actually don’t change much.
Wonderful! I really love this! You discovered why I’m here!
Many people forget about the HCSB. It has, for Americans, one of the best vocabulary choices on many occasions. I believe that it is faithful to the originals, and has a great, yet non-King James-y choice in many renderings - rather, chooses it own scholarship and use of both traditional AND descriptive English. It is the chosen text for many Southern Baptist Sunday school curricula. I bought the HCSB audio CD Bible, and listen every night. I am ever and increasingly closer to God from this English translation. I memorized many Bible verses in RSV when I was young, and the ESV sounds a lot like the RSV. But I also use the NIV and the New King James.
All good options! I never did read through the HCSB. I've used it, for sure, but I haven't read it from cover to cover.
Are you ABSOLUTELY SURE that you're not me? Our preferences are just about identical. I think the RSV sounds more natural than the ESV, because it seems like a true UPDATE of something older, whereas the ESV seems more like, I dunno, "Let's backpedal this update a little for no clear reason" (who really says "lest" anymore, even though its a pretty good word?)
HCSB vs. CSB: Speaking as an English teacher, I find the HCSB a bit more unnecessarily wordy when compared to the tauter, leaner English of the CSB. I also consider the HCSB's distinctions between "LORD/Yahweh" and "Christ"/"Messiah" more confusing than helpful to a hypothetical "average reader." Anyway, thanks for reading about my opinions.
That was cool! I like all you said! I was just curious about the ESV since I recently recommended it and began to wonder if some would have reason to disagree. I feel I was led to hear your videos first and now I will listen to you again regarding the CSB since that and the ESV were the only two I recommended. So far, I think we are in total agreement! 🤗❤️ God bless!
Glad it was helpful!
ESV has been my go to, and if I’m honest I began with it mainly because of the endorsement of men like Piper and others.
However I am very fond of the smooth read of the NLT. Can you talk about that one? I was happy to hear my Pastor say it’s a decent translation, of course when you ask him what his favorite is, he says the original languages 😂
And to my shock, this weekend he did not speak as favorably about the ESV as I thought he would. 🤣 He’s unconventionally reformed.
You are the Best! Thank you, Mark, for a very meaningful and useful review of the ESV. As always, I enjoy your explanation and and viewpoint! God has greatly blessed you with clear, unique, to-the-point perspective on Bible translations and excellent, helpful communication skills! Please keep the reviews coming! GOD BLESS YOU AND YOUR CHURCH AND YOUR FAMILY!
Thank you!
Our church uses the NASB 1995. I’m not a Calvinist but I still enjoy your presentations.
Many thanks!
It is a very good translation and one that was my primary for several years but once I read the Legacy Standard Bible I switched and never looked back.
I use the ESV primarily, but I totally agree with you. I'm a recent subscriber, you have an awesome channel. Keep up the good work!
Thank you!
Great thoughts! Beautiful video! Looking forward to the CSB video.
It’s done-it took me longer than almost any other video I’ve ever done. I ended up having to reshoot one section three times. Production issues!
@@markwardonwords technological issues = the work of Satan! Haha
the ESV is the first english translation I bought! (my first language is Arabic)
I love it!!
Excellent! I love it, too!
Arabic is such a beautiful written language!
@@Yesica1993 yes very beautiful, hijacked by Islam unfortunately
@@thetruthshallsetyoufree2040 Oh, I know! It's very sad. May my Arabic speaking brothers & sisters all over the world stand strong. May they have access to God's (true) Word in their own language so they can see the beauty of the Messiah, Jesus.
Nice video! NRSV and RSV are the best translations for me personally, but I am very thankful that there are so many great translations of the Bible in English, including KJV, ESV, and many others.
We have an embarrassment of riches in English!
Like many of us... my favorite bible is the one that I can understand. Began with KJV and learned to understand it and wore it out, moved to the NKJV and felt more comfortable, then off to the Life Application/Students addition and learned to smile and now use the CSB. All this over 47 years. Cannot wait to get my Cross Way Readers ESV... whoop-whoop! Oh, and did use a an Emphasized Bible for a couple years. All of it exciting and so informative... I will soon run out of time before my travels through translations is done. Thank you sir for helping us to understand that there is more than one way to say, "The building is on fire!" And as for Calvin... who really cares... I have a ten volume set of the Ante-Nicene Fathers and learned that even the learned men of old are often wrong, like Calvin.
Love your testimony!
I prefer the ESV, but bring a CSB to church since that is what my pastor preaches from.
Good plan. I support that choice.
Waving back at you from (presumably), north of you in 🇨🇦. I personally find the NRSV to be the best literary heir, but of course, that is what is used in my church! However, I also use many other modern translations for all the various reasons you tend to name in your work. Thanks for your ongoing work on translation and teaching about the Bible.
I’m simply not very familiar with the NRSV. I have used it, but I’ve never read all the way through. I miss going to Canada! We’ll be back in Vancouver as soon as we can!
The way I see it, the NRSV and ESV are like two siblings who argue about politics but otherwise seem eerily similar in their appearance, speech patterns, and mannerisms.
For example, consider the book of Obadiah. It's only 21 verses long, so it's an easy comparison. In verse 1, there's a one-word difference ("her" vs. "its" in reference to Edom). Same thing with verses 4 ("says" vs. "declares"), 6 ("searched" vs. "sought"), 15 ("against" vs. "upon"), and 18 ("of" vs. "for"). In other words, nearly a quarter of the verses in Obadiah are essentially identical. Most of the time, the difference comes from the NRSV making a little more effort to rephrase the RSV than the ESV did.
I appreciate your fairness in the translation/version analysis. All English versions have strengths. All English versions have weaknesses. I am convinced that there are two premises from which most people choose "their" favorite and most useful version: (1) Its textual and linguistic accuracy or closeness to the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. (2) How conscientious they are about it's weaknesses.
Thank you for watching and commenting!
Hello sir, I was wondering if you have ever done a review of the NRSV? I have some issues with this version (to say nothing of the new "updated" edition) but would be curious what your point of view might be. I work at a college where the NRSV is widely regarded, as it is among academics in general. I have always found this prevalence among scholars somewhat suspect, especially since the NRSV is generally conceded to be less literal than, say, the NASB, ESV, or NKJV. Of course, "literalness" is not the only standard for Biblical excellence, but I would think it would be a high priority in academic circles. Moreover, I know several solid conservative Christians who really like the NRSV and even defend some of its more controversial translation decisions--though I am not sure they fully endorse the changes made in the NRSV-U. Regardless, I would be most interested to get your take on this translation, which, while never being especially popular, has been extremely influential, nonetheless. Thank you for your consideration and have a great day.
He has a video discussing his main issue with the NRSVue, and he generally does not recommend it.
I'm neither Reformed nor evangelical, but after over a decade of studying from the KJV, NRSV, ESV, NASB, and NET in parallel, I've found myself more and more frequently preferring the ESV's translation. It has all the solid academic/scholarly heft of the NRSV but is a little more conservative in its approach. It's easier to read than the NASB or KJV, while having the same cadence as the KJV (something the NET doesn't have). If I had to pick just one translation to read, it would be the ESV.
That cadence is something I hear, too.
As a software developer I am interested in the ESV API. I did not know about this, that seems really interesting. Thanks for sharing!
I love it! It doesn’t work quite as well with Alfred as it used to, but it’s still useful.
Love the ESV and I am a member of the church of Christ. Although I do take my NKJV to the congregation I go to, (because it was my favorite before and it’s the copy they use). Loved this video my boi.
Thank you very much for this talk about the ESV bible, Mark. My very first ESV is the brown Horween leather Omega which I bought yesterday from an Australian seller and it looks like it was the last such bible to be found anywhere right now after extensive searching for a Horween ESV in both your country and mine It should be in my hands in a few days! A bible of this quality came at a price due to the exceptional leather quality, but the type size is perfect for me and the leather will be an uique experience to handle from what I have learned from the reviews. This leather is only made by Horween in Chicago. The scenery where you are standing is stunning! I am a happy Calvinist, btw, and my new bible is from the Reformer's Bookship in Australia!
I had one of those and sold it after nearly no use. I just couldn’t justify keeping it when I already had a premium ESV. Sigh. But it surely was nice! You will love it! I have boots in that leather.
@@markwardonwords Oh...you sold yours. I feel sad for you, now. I am going to sell 3 premium bibles on my eBay today to cover the cost of this new gorgeous bible....looking forward to the ESV. Now, that means the new translations this year I am getting stuck into are LSB, NRSV, and ESV....I am a long way from KJV and NKJV now! You have been a good influence on me, Mark!
The church I was saved in used the NKJV and so that was the translation I started with. The church then switched over to the ESV and so did I. I struggled with the church's calvinistic leanings before deciding to finally leave. The Holy Spirit led me through Scripture where I just could not accept limited atonement. But I still kept using the ESV in my new church until I came across Revelation 13:8 and their insertion of the word "before" in that verse. After some research and study, I decided to move on from the ESV. It was my personal decision. I still use the study bible on occasion but am selective on some of the notes that dip its toe in calvinism. But there is still plenty in it that I find edifying and helpful.
Yeah, I was about to say the same thing. Rev 13.8 in every other translation says from the foundations and not before the foundations.
That's not the only place where I scratch my head with the direction the esv translators decided to go but they're all fairly minor points.
Over all I do like the esv but I tend to stick to nasb, but I really will use many translations during my study and I have gripes with nasb as well... 😆
Yes.. I, too, do not want to use the ESV for my personal Bible study because of how Calvinist-friendly it is in comparison to other translations. (A common note from many ex-Calvinist pastors I have listened to). Which translation did you end up going with? I'm thinking about the NASB? 1995 vs 2020? Also, praise the Lord for guiding you away from those teachings. That's great, my brother!
@@Rawkabilly57 Yes.. I, too, do not want to use the ESV for my personal Bible study because of how Calvinist-friendly it is in comparison to other translations. (A common note from many ex-Calvinist pastors I have listened to). Which translation did you end up going with? I'm thinking about the NASB? 1995 vs 2020? Blessings~
@@elaineauo I use the NASB95, NKJV, and NLT mostly.
@Elaine O NASB95 is probably my main, and sometimes I'll read the NET because they have meticulous textual notes. For a more functional translation, I like the csb as it's about "middle of the road".
I'm not a Calvinist. I'm not anti-Calvinism either. I do reject the TULIP and most of the cited foundations for it. However, I still like the ESV. I don't see it as espousing Calvinism or any particular doctrinal peculiarity. It's just a good, solid translation taken from the particular set of text sources used.
Agreed!
I joined a 1689 Reformed Baptist church last year after I moved to the next city over to be closer to work. For many years I had been an "undercover Calvinist" in an IFB church (which inconsistently held at least 3 of the doctrines of grace.) A couple of months ago I ordered an ESV journaling bible interleaved edition. I want to transfer the 11 years worth of notes and markings I have in my KJV into the ESV and the blank pages will be plenty of room for many years more worth of notes.
I am an extensive bible marker and I think you know the pastor I learned that habit from. About 85-90% of my notes are in pencil so when I learn something new or a better definition, explanation, or cross reference I can erase and replace. The other 10-15% is highlighter after I have studied something thoroughly.
I study using several versions and I will start teaching from the ESV for the sake of my brothers and sisters at my new church but it is so difficult to transfer those notes and replacing "My Bible" because there is not another one like it in the world.
I get it! This is one of the downsides of our multi-translation situation. Yes, I know that pastor! I still use his method, just via electronic tools.
KJV, NASB, ESV. Those are my favorites by far and the only 3 I really prefer to use. But you are absolute correctly in everything you've said...
I grew up southern baptist, reading KJV. I wanted an esv version because I am a very analytical person and wanted a more literal translation because that approach just resonates more deeply with me as a person. I think with a literal translation you will tend to view the implied meaning through the lens of your denomination anyway. For example, there is controversy of the word “begotten” being removed from J3:16 in the esv instead saying “only son.” To me, since we are all Gods children that implies a special relationship between Jesus and God, making Jesus of God. Also with the concept of his immaculate conception you could argue begotten is slightly out of context. Anyway sorry for the rambling, enjoyed the video.
I grew up with the NIV but switched to the ESV couple years ago. It’s my favorite translation besides the picture Bible. 😂😂😂
;)
Great video, Mark. Please also do videos on the NKJV (my favorite) and the NLT (which is a version I'm really beginning to appreciate!). Thank you.
Planned!
I appreciate the focus on more practical reasons for choosing your translation. I think that's what drives most of us to the translation we use, but we feel the need to then defend our choices using more objective criteria.
Right! And yet very few Christians have the capacity to evaluate the only objective criteria that matters: fidelity to Hebrew and Greek. This is no shame: God doesn’t call everyone to learn the original languages. But I’d like to see more Christians acknowledging that their opinions of the fidelity of various translations are taken on authority from others who can read the languages.
@@markwardonwords That's an excellent point too! I know a big part of the reason I primarily read from the NRSV is because of the influence of N.T. Wright, among others. Had I been influenced differently then who knows what translation I'd be reading from now!
Very much like the ESV, but I did run across a strange and poor translation in 2 Kings 5:13 ("My father, it is a great word the prophet has spoken to you; you not do it? Has he actually said to you, ‘Wash, and be clean’?”)
I suspect they chose a more literal translation here, but it loses the significant impact in what the servants say to Naaman. Compare this to the NKJV (NIV, NASB, LSV, & CSB do very much the same): "My father, if the prophet had told you to do something great, would you not have done it? How much more then, when he says to you, ‘Wash, and be clean’?”
It's a stark difference.
That said, it's one of the very very very few places where the ESV does poorly. My old 1984 NIV has about as few places where it falls a bit short too.
Just wanted to share that unusual choice in that verse.
I hope to see a video like this for the NIV in the future! (The NIV is my favorite translation right now)
I'm planning on it! Much of the script is written!
If you ever changed translations what would you go to?
You might have gotten the wrong impression from the title! The ESV is indeed my main squeeze, but I use tons of others!
@@markwardonwords In the video you said that You have thought of changing translations before but it would be to hard because that's what your church uses. So I was trying to ask what would you change to if your church didn't use ESV or would you still use the ESV.
@@user-me358 Ah, I see. Hmm. My circumstances have changed since then. My old church voted to close after COVID, and my new church uses the NASB-but I still use the ESV when I preach or teach there, and it causes no problems.
I have heard that the ESV handles certain verses key to reformed theology a little unfairly to reflect the reformed theology the translators hold. I haven't seen proof of this mind you, it's just what I've been told. Would you at some point be willing to do a video on verses central to Calvinism in different translations?
This is a good idea. I'm not personally aware of choices like these. I haven't seen serious people saying this. That doesn't mean there isn't a case to be made here or there. Got a link for me to an article by someone who seems reasonably conversant in the issues?
The ESV, there is a reformed bias that I've noticed in some places. For example, 1 Timothy 1:16 in many translations has something like "...for those who would believe..." or "...for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe..." but the ESV says "...to those who were to believe...". All are valid translations but only a reformed translator would choose the latter. I do like that they have so many good options like the NIV had in the 1990s so I tend to use it when the NIV isn't easily available.
Just some constructive feedback, the way you turn your back to the camera and talk feels super awkward and strange but otherwise nice video.
Agreed on turning my back. Haven’t done it since. You may be right on 1 Tim 1:16; would have to take some time to look at that.
My reason for first getting it was it was free digitally for offline in most Bible apps, others have done it since but it seems because the ESV did so first. After using it on my laptop and phone so much when it was time to get a new hard copy it was easy to chose that translation.
I’ve often thought that Crossway’s wisdom with digital tools has helped encourage paper and other adoption of the ESV. It helped me!
NKJV is my go to Bible. Although I have recently become obsessed with Bible translations since coming out of the KJVO crowd.
This is the channel for you. Obsession every Thursday morning.
I’m tempted to buy the ESV.
GIVE IN TO TEMPTATION! YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO!
I read a different version each year and am now in the NRSV. The Complete Jewish Study Bible (CJSB) is the one I study from on Saturdays, and wow; has that helped my understanding of bible prophecy!
I'm not very knowledgeable about the NRSV and CJSB.
@@markwardonwords I'm pretty sure the ESV was taken directly from the NRSV. They are very similar versions. The CJSB, with notes and articles, is a good introduction into the Jewish mind and history, for believers who want to better understand everything about Yeshua before actually meeting him. (Thanks for the work you put into your videos)!
@@barbariska757 it wasn't. The forward states the RSV 1971 was the basis.
@@Nick-wn1xw That makes sense - the RSV being the source for both the New Revised Standard Version and ESV. Thank you.
My church is a bilingual church.
We use the NKJV & the RVR60.
Love the ESV but I have a conviction for the TR New Testament.
There’s a little-known edition of the ESV that uses the TR! It’s the one the Gideons make.
Oh, a Spanish knowing person! Do you know of any Spanish translations that are a little easier than the RVR? I am hoping to improve my Spanish. I've tried the RVR and it's over my reading level. I understand spoken Spanish. I can make myself understood in general conversation. But I am not at a level where I would consider myself "bilingual", in a work situation. Outside of maybe a sign or shorts bits of a newspaper/magazine article, I have very little experience reading it. And pretty much zero experience writing it.
I know there's the NIV equivalent called the NVI. I wish there was something more along the level of the ESV. But I don't know enough about this to figure it all out.
@@Yesica1993 Yes, the NVI is what I recommend. I had one for many years but somehow lost it. The LBLA is the NASB equivalent-sort of? But my most trusted Spanish-speaking friend points to the NVI.
Apparently I am among the minority of people who really like the ESV 😁 I don’t find it clunky. I originally used the NIV when I first came to Christ. I honestly didn’t know that there was a difference between Bibles then. I just picked one up in a Books A Million that looked like it had helpful notes. That Bible served me really well and I still love it but I was gifted an ESV by my husband the first year we were married and I actually prefer it!
Both are good tools!
I got interested in the ESV version because of Deuteronomy 32:8.
“When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.”
(Deuteronomy 32:8 ESV)
Enlighten me!
How can it be the best if it was translated from the critical text ?
My friend, the New King James Version and the Modern English Version both use the same underlying Hebrew and Greek texts as the King James. And they translate those texts into fully intelligible contemporary English, which means they meet the principle of 1 Corinthians 14, edification requires intelligibility. I recommend the NKJV and MEV to you.
1) What is the most useful Bible app that you have come across. 2) Any Bible app that uses BSB? 3) What is your opinion on BSB?
1) Logos! 2) I don’t know! 3) A trusted and capable pastor friend loves it. I have not read it.
@@markwardonwords Thank you. Keep up the good work. God bless you.
The ESV is a great translation, second only to the LSB 😎
;)
Hi Mark, could you point me in the right direction as to installing the API to Alfred? I have Alfred and would love to use the crossway API you mentioned. Thanks!
Wait! I’m about to put out a video in which I show this same basic process using Raycast. I may take my Alfred video down. Raycast is far superior. But you still need the ESV API. Honestly, I don’t remember the process! I know I had to email Crossway. Now that I work here, I should know, but I don’t! Oh-send an email as instructed at this page: api.esv.org.
@@markwardonwords great I’ll subscribe so I don’t miss the video!
MEV is an Excellent Translation that you will Love
Yes, I'm familiar with it!
I'm sure Calvinist translators nailed it.
What the heck, new Christian here eating up Christian media, apologetics and my Bible. My first Bible was the ESV which I love and I lean Calvinist, did my ESV trick me?! Only slightly serious there was a lot of time watching Apologia Studios.
Ps. Saw you on Mike Winger, good stuff.
Hello Mark, I'm getting back into reading the word but I find myself blurring over words in KJV. I've been tempted to grab the ERV please share your thoughts on this. I value your insight. Thank you!
Grab the ESV or, I suggest, the CSB!
Mark, I generally like the ESV, I think of all the more literal translations it has the best “flow”, similar to the KJV.
However, I think there are a few questionable choices the translators made. One that really threw me was Galatians 1:15, “But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace,”. In the ESV , they even footnote the phrase “before I was born” as literally meaning “from my mother’s womb, which is how most translations leave it. It’s not like the phrase “from my mother’s womb” is a phrase modern people don’t understand. The choice the ESV made to use “before I was born” seems to introduce ambiguity where none existed before. Do you have any thoughts on why they did that?
Hey Mark love your video? I am an ESV fan. Would you consider the ESV the most conservative Bible translation?
No. But not because there's one that's more conservative. I just don't think that you can generalize like that over 800,000 choices. It's just too complex to be simplified to such a label. Not trying to be evasive, just truthful! The ESV was done by conservatives, some of whom I know personally and love very much. It's probably my true personal favorite. But I really think it would be a fine choice for just about any Bible-preaching church, even those who are less conservative.
i love the ESV. but recently I've been reading the LSB next to it and although i know mark didn't like the TLV i enjoy using it with the other 2 during my daily study
Fair enough! Enjoy!
I don't believe that God is limited in communicating His message to us by a Bible translation XYZ. He created language in the first place. I believe His indwelling Holy Spirit in is more than able to lead and guide us to the understanding He wants us to have at that moment. The Logos and the Rhema word of God is all we need from Him.
True, the ESV is a very accurate translation: but you need to understand the particular dialect of English that it uses. I call it ESV Bible English. So for just one example you need to know that 'stiff-necked' does not mean stiffness in the neck, a physical problem, as it does in normal English, but stubborn. For more information, see ruclips.net/video/r0140XY0H1o/видео.html.
I'm ok with this sort of thing. It has an honored tradition in the English Christian heritage-because the KJV translators chose often to do things like this. I think they chose a good balance of literal translation of idioms vs. idiomatic translation of idioms.
Even though I’m a textus receptus guy I have now thought about getting the ESV because it has a reading level of 8 compared to my main Bible Translation NKJV which is a reading level of 9 so the ESV is the easiest Word for word translation you can get I think so you reckon I should buy one for cheap to see if I love it more?
Honestly, if you're a TR guy, stick with the NKJV! The reading level is not different from the ESV; that grade-level number is artificial. For help understanding how that number was generated, watch this video: ruclips.net/video/-gnyPMuulaY/видео.html
I’ve got a question regarding a translation choice the ESV made. In Revelation 13:8 (NASB20)
”All who live on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written *since* the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slaughtered.“
I was comparing translations after looking in the ESV, and noticed most translations choose the option that the NASB does, and reads either “since” or “from the foundation of the world”. However, the ESV says something different:
Rev 13:8 ESV “and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written *before* the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.”
I couldn’t find any reason why they chose “before” instead of “from” or “since”.
Why do you think that they chose to translate “από” this way?
They didn't really choose anything here. They just left it the way the RSV had it: "and all who dwell on earth will worship it, every one whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb that was slain." (The NRSV reversed it back to "from," as it was in the ASV.) You can spot inconsistencies in the handling of "ἀπὸ the foundation of the world" in other places: the RSV and ESV both say "from" in Matthew 25.34, but "before" in Ephesians 1.4. (In the latter case, the NASB and NRSV also use "before," so the only thing that's consistent is inconsistency!)
I could use any modern standard translation - ESV, NJKV, NASB, NIV, or even Good News for Modern Man - but not the Passion Bible, New World Translation, or the Clear Word. I'm not familiar with the CSB.
Not a big fan of TPT myself…
ruclips.net/video/RXl_IljyRYo/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/2Drd7xizM5U/видео.html
The CSB is worth looking at, though.
What do you think about CPDV Bible?
Really dream to have ESV bible. Praise the Lord! May I ask if anybody have an old or used leather ESV/NIV bible? Can I buy it for cheaper price it's quite expensive here in my place. I really love to have one, a leather ESV bible, it's my dream🙏
@mark ward, as I think I've mentioned before, I've had a lot of discussions with a family member about versions and text issues. I grew up with basically KJVO teachings, but at college have been influenced towards other versions and have begun to use them. One of the main arguments is obviously the fact that many verses that appear in the KJV do not appear in the modern versions. The two main ones that have been presented to me are Acts 8:37 and 1 john 5:7. They say it affects doctrine, which in one sense appears to be true. To this I have responded that the doctrine taught in those verses appear clearly taught elsewhere in Scripture. The response i receive to this is that Satan only works to change things little by little. Another question i was asked is what would I do if preaching Acts 8 for example, and what would I say about the verse that does not appear, the response of the eunuch. What would you say to this. Another thing that came to my mind recently along the same lines, if our refute to their argument can be that the doctrines are strongly supported elsewhere in Scripture, what about versions such as the New World Translation? Obviously I know that's a bad translations, but even they don't take out every reference to Christ being God. Not sure if any of what ive said makes sense, but thanks for your videos.
I'm heartened that the conversation was apparently this reasonable. I find it hard to get this far with people. I pray that your mutual love is keeping the conversation going.
Part of me wants to say to them, "Brothers/sisters, do you really and truly understand what your brothers in Christ who prefer the critical text would say about these passages? You are concerned that Satan may be subtracting truth little by little from the Bible; they are concerned that fastidious scribes may have accidentally (or in some cases purposefully) *added* to Scripture. If it is possible that God let some manuscripts lose "verses" (though they were not called "verses" at the time-the verse numbers weren't added until the 1500s), surely it is possible that he let some manuscripts gain them. Right? And how might we know this?"
But the bigger part of me feels like these conversations almost never go anywhere, because they are held by people who, by the nature of the case, cannot look at the evidence for themselves-because the evidence is in Hebrew and Greek. So I urge people to focus on what the Bible actually says-edification requires intelligibility-and deflect all talk about something it does not directly address, namely how to perform textual criticism on variants in the manuscript tradition. This is my standard line: "My friend, the New King James Version and the Modern English Version both use the same underlying Hebrew and Greek texts as the King James. And they translate those texts into fully intelligible contemporary English, which means they meet the principle of 1 Corinthians 14, edification requires intelligibility. I recommend the NKJV and MEV to you." I want the conversation to be about dead words and false friends. I want to see some honest engagement with those points before I'm willing to proceed in talking with someone about New Testament textual criticism.
@@markwardonwords thank you for your reply. My desire is to avoid carnality in the conversation, but i am afraid at times we have both responded carnally in a desire to be right. However, I am still glad we are able to have these conversations and I strive to be loving and I know he does as well. In reality, this person does not say he is strictly KJVO, rather TR only. I have asked which TR he prefers but have yet to receive an answer. While he focuses on the many diferences between the texts, I think we can and probably should focus on the vast number of similarities. There is still a lot I dont understand on the subject, of course, and there are still some questions in my mind, but I appreciate your videos and your loving spirit.
@@jamespolk4322 I may do some more videos on New Testament textual criticism. Until then, I urge you to read Dirk Jongkind's Crossway book introducing the THGNT and then go through Dan Wallace's free Credo House course on textual criticism. Those are my top recommendations. More recommendations here: byfaithweunderstand.com/2020/09/03/answering-a-question-i-get-all-the-time-the-places-to-start-in-studying-new-testament-textual-criticism/.
@@markwardonwords thank you much
Beautiful video i subbed. GOD Bless
Thanks for the sub!
Waiting for one on the MEV. I want to hear your thoughts on it.
I was writing some of the script this very day!
@@markwardonwords That's great! It's a very obscure translation but I like it. (No, I was never a TR/KJV only person, I just legitimately like the MEV's translation).
@@markwardonwords I would love to see a video on the Berean Study Bible (BSB)!
MEV is An Excellent Translation!
Hi Mark, I'm now reading from the ESV after 30 years reading the NIV and liking it, just a question regarding Matt 7:40 the use of the word hard regarding the narrow gate, this word is not used in most if not all versions, salvation is simple and not hard or is this referring to the life of a Christian?
The Reformation Study Bible has a helpful note on the matter:
*Presenting a rosy picture of the Christian life and minimizing that it is filled with trouble does not follow the lead of our Lord (Acts 14:22). It may be that the "false prophets" of v. 15 are especially those who deny that the way is narrow and hard.*
Here is Acts 14.22 in both the ESV and NIV:
- ESV: *strengthening the souls of the disciples, encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying that through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God.*
- NIV: *strengthening the disciples and encouraging them to remain true to the faith. “We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God,” they said.*
The word translated "tribulations" or "hardships" in Acts 14.22 shares the same Greek root as the word translated "hard" or "narrow" in Matthew 7.40, so it might be especially helpful in interpreting the meaning of the "narrow road" metaphor.
Brother I would love to see you do a video of the current 2015 NLT translation. I have been reading from it and trying to figure out why some are so negative towards it?
I've been reading through the new testament with my NASB and then reading it again directly after with the NLT. To be honest it's actually a very good translation so far . My only issue is that sometimes certain words or terms are to modern BUT, that doesn't make it wrong just weird to my ear.
Anyways I'd be very interested in hearing your opinion. Other vids I've watched on this are frustrating cause they used the first version and not the latest 2015 update.
I just got the 2015, I believe. The NLT is one I haven’t read all the way through; I’ve only checked it (but I have done that many times).
I like to call the NLT a para-translation cause it’s a paraphrase that got turned into a more accurate translation. Definitely nowhere close to a literal translation, written at a 6th grade reading level it’s great to read to kids.
I love the ESV, especially the study version. Even though it does have strong Calvinist leanings, it's a good Bible.
I don’t think those leanings show up in the translation, and if they do, only in obscure and minor places. But I could be missing something!
I read the Literal Concordant translation. It is word for word from the Hebrew and Greek. Translations that have lineages back to the Latin translations seem to be less accurate.
I don't know how many are familiar with the old Douay Rheims Catholic Bible, but I also use it in my studies from time to time. It's actually a pretty good translation, even though it's translated from the Latin Vulgate. It's also similar to the ESV in a few places. For instance in Jude vs. 5 they both say Jesus instead of Lord, which indicates to me that the Greek manuscripts that Jerome used to translate into Latin were probably closer to the original writings than what were used later by the TR translators. I'm open to correction though.
The HTB uses "God" haha. That's a Dutch translation.
I’ve spent very, very little time in the Douay-Rheims Bible. This is interesting. Thanks for this!
Opening line soo funny .. OK more serious thought the principle of accommodation does that apply to Bible translations - does God accommodate within reason (i.e. New world translation is out).
Not sure what you mean: elaborate?
I just don't vibe with the ESV. I've tried, but I'm more of a KJV/NKJV/NASB guy. I think highly of the ESV, I find it to be a fine translation, it's just not for me...and I'm also a Calvinist lol
All the translations you mention are good; I’m glad you make use of them!
Crossway is awesome quality. Closer to premium quality than any other less expensive Bible's.
I love Crossway!
I enjoy your video Mark ‼️
That makes two of us.
@@markwardonwords keep up the dope work much love from the Chicano community.
I really appreciate this!
You mentioned Don Carson as part of the New Calvinism which is true. Ironically though Carson prefers the NIV. This doesn't change anything you said but I thought I'd mention it for those who might not be aware.
Does he prefer it? Good point either way. But if he’s made a statement, I’d like to see it!
I’m in the ESV tribe. But I have a secret fondness for the NIV 😅. Sometimes I let it slip in conversation and get looks of disapproval.
Ha! Me too!
I’ve kind of struggled with some of the ESV’s renderings...like the one below that gives the idea that repentance is a work and not a gift. Your thoughts? Good vid btw
2 Peter 3:9
[9] The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should REACH repentance.
Brother, I get it! Be a Berean! But let me ask you two things…
1) Do you consider it likely that the bunch of Calvinists who created the ESV (from the RSV) were trying to sneak works righteousness into their translation in places? Is that a John Piper thing to do? A J.I. Packer thing to do? I’m asking seriously: what do you think?
2) If you wanted to know whether or not the word “reach” is an accurate translation of the Greek word (or words) here, how would you go about finding that out? What study tools would you reach for?
@@markwardonwords Is the word “come” a false friend? When Calvinist embrace ESV, trust is an issue. Man has a way of skewing that’s the fear. Trusting man is the false friend. Because we don’t see their hearts. Who can we trust, not to skew?
@Mark Ward calvinists don’t believe in works righteousness. That’s a misrepresentation. There are always bad examples, but J.I Packer for instance would never say we are saved by our works.
As Mark Ward subtly suggested, the ESV simply stuck with the RSV's wording here. Conversely, the NRSV parted ways with the RSV and reverted back to the Geneva/KJV/ASV wording of "come to repentance," which is also the wording found in the NASB, NKJV, and MEV.
@@markwardonwords No I don’t believe a bunch of Calvinists sneaked works righteousness into the text...my question is...knowing that we reformed folk are believers of grace through faith, why go with this rendering that isn’t in any of the main translations? Why go with a rendering that seems to imply works righteousness?
I believe, in overlaying all translation over the Hebrew meaning, since the translation was translated from Hebrew to Greek, then Greek to Latin, then Latin to English. Huge difference, considering over different time periods through 4 totally different cultures, at different point in times in explanation of the translation. Look at how our grand fathers think to how we think to how our nephew and nieces think on a small scale. You can accidentally deviate if you don't understand the Hebrew meaning. That is my datum point of understanding. Just as long as nothings removed, added or changed completely.
I like the NET Bible with the explanation alongside of it of the translators themselves why they use certain words. There are no missing words or phrases I have found, except for one. Always I use the KJV which seems to say things the best way possible. After all, translating is an art form, and not an applied certainty in all cases. Also I use the NKJV and a few others, but always refer back to KJV or the NET with notes.
All are good tools for understanding God’s word!
I wish I could purchase the NET notes as a stand-alone book without the NET text.
You can Logos!
Wasn’t that a beautiful weekend at Joel and Leannes wedding?
We enjoyed meeting and fellowshipping with you all.
Yes it was! What a fantastically beautiful spot! That was a special time.
Well, I'm Lutheran(LCMS), we're ESV lovers. Lol
Nice! I’m glad to hear this!
I have tried many different translations, but lately I keep thinking about the fact that I bought an esv thinline when I became a Christian over 10 years ago, and I still use it to this day. When I think about scripture, it’s always in the esv. Why change at this point?
More power to you! Nothing wrong with using the ESV only or mainly, as long as you don’t turn it into a doctrine! I encourage the use of other translations, of course, but I don’t see that use as a biblical requirement.
I'm curious, how many (presumably modern) English translations do you include in "all" when you say you've used them all? Biblegateway has 61 translations (including very old ones) though some are identical except for Anglicised spelling.
When I get a chance to clarify which are "all the good ones," I say that I trust the major modern evangelical English Bibles. These are the ones I've used the most over the years, the ones I know-and whose translators I know. I just got off the phone with one of them!
LEB
NKJV
NASB
ESV
CSB
NIV
NET
NLT
I'll use others on occasion, just for an opinion. But these are the ones I personally trust.
They are all so confusing. The KJV has the power and tells the true story when translated with strongs concordance
You know I was just thinking.
About Bible translations and the manuscript controversy.
Well you know how we as Christians are supposed to compare everything we believe and do to the scripture to see if it lines up with what God taught?
How every tradition every leadership role every Doctrine has to be compared to the scripture?
I was just thinking what if that's what the textual critics are doing?
What I mean is.
What if in rediscovering the original manuscripts we're comparing and contrasting them to our current manuscripts and just as we as Christians would change things in our lives and our churches and our beliefs if it doesn't line up with scripture what if that's what the textual critics are doing that they're changing translations and the manuscript because they're not lining up with scripture aka the original manuscripts?
And besides that losing portions of scripture and then rediscovering them is not substantially different how King Josiah rediscovered the Torah in the temple after it was lost for hundreds of years and how he needed to change literally everything about Israel so they could be in lineman in Scripture
Great camera person.
Roped in my dear wife!
I am reformed but not a Calvinist. Here in South Africa we dont hear too much that a reformed person is a Calvinist, most of the older Afrikaner (white people from Dutch descent living here in South Africa) people here who are Christians came out of the Dutch Reformed church, but few are what would be considered a 5 point Calvinist, or even know what Calvinism is.
Boy-you’ll have to explain this to me! Reformed but not a Calvinist? My friend Matt Pinson is a Reformed Arminian-is that what you are?
I have the ESV Archeology Study Bible that's very nice. I also use NASB. I'm having a hard time deciding which I prefer! I also have a 1984 NIV archeology study bible & couldn't resist the ESV version when it came out.
I love the study notes in the Archeology Study Bible. If you get the chance pick up a Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible. It's a great companion to the Archeology Study Bible.
@@johnmcafee6140 Thanks! I'm interested in one of those too.
You don’t have to decide! They’re all useful!
@@markwardonwords Thanks & agree! I think mostly the difficulty for me was deciding which is easier for memorization - probably ESV mostly but could mix with other versions.
Do you think you could further elaborate on what you mean when you said that the ESV is the most obvious choice to be the heir of the KJV? I'm not saying I agree or disagree with that. I'm just curious as to what you mean.
Literal, higher register, direct heir of KJV, reflects KJV word order and word choice often, uses a different Greek text but does so in line with the proclivities of the KJV translators (in my opinion).
@@markwardonwords so you would agree with many Bible reviewers pastors and even lay Christians who would say that the ESV is the King James Bible of our day? Again not saying I agree or disagree I just want to know your thoughts that's all.
Yes. But our day is so different than 1611.
@@markwardonwords how do you mean?
@@markwardonwords are you referring to the fact that we're not ruled by kings anymore and so therefore any translation we make will receive more opposition in the King James Bible did?
One of the verses that I like to check in a Bible is I Corinthians 16:13-14, specifically the line "Act like men."
I made a video about that verse: ruclips.net/video/BbD9EtlWDLw/видео.html
@@markwardonwords great video.
Why?
@@joegame4576, can you please clarify something for me. Are you asking "Why is it a good video", or "why do I like to consider the interpretation of a verse like I Corinthians 16:13"?
Sorry, what i mean is, what’s wrong with the line “act like men”? And what does the version that you support say instead?
Why does everyone think that you’re either a Calvinist or Armenian? As if there isn’t something in between. Confessional Lutheran theology (LCMS) is neither.
If you accept the framing of TULIP, the main points are binary: election is either conditional or unconditional. But not everyone accepts that framing.