ESV Study Bible
Sep 26, 2008 Uncategorized
You have really got to give mad props to the people behind the ESV. They have really done a great job going all Web 2.0 on the launch of the new ESV Study Bible.
They have the ESV Study Bible Blog.
They have PDFs previews of tons of the resources included in the Bible.
They have 20 different embedable videos pitching different aspects of the Bible.
They have an online version which comes free with the purchase of the Bible and of course they announced this on YouTube:
They have endorsements on their site from scholars, pastors, and you guessed it: bloggers.
It seems everywhere I look, people are talking about it.
And it hasn’t launched yet. Amazing.
Nice work, ESV team, you have some great viral marketing going on.
I ordered my copy today.
BTW, looking around, I think the cheapest place to get it is Amazon. It’s only like $30 (with Free Shipping) and I suspect it will be totally worth it.
September 26th, 2008 at 10:10 am
Does it bother you at all that the ESV is essentially the 1971 RSV, just with the bits that certain theological viewpoints objected to re-translated to match their sensibilities.
Now, I do realize that every translation is subject to the bias of the translators, but the ESV seems to take it a step further by deliberately pandering to those biases.
September 26th, 2008 at 10:57 am
I have never heard that. I will have to look into it a bit. I just know I have enjoyed the ESV as a companion to my New Living. They are kinda the bookends of my study.
October 2nd, 2008 at 9:29 pm
I have a non-hardcover The Reformation Study Bible ESV edition. I have been wondering for sometime how different this version was going to be. (checks previews) Ok, added to wish list.
October 9th, 2008 at 7:42 am
Tim,
You are correct: the ESV follows in a long tradition of translations: Tyndale (1525) > KJV (1611) > RV (1885) > ASV (1901) > RSV (1952). As you note, each of those translations did reflect the biases of the translators, a characteristic which is inevitable in translation work. I would suggest, however, that the RSV did at points move leftward in some of its translation decisions, and the ESV is an attempt to bring the translation tradition noted above back into a more conservative direction.
Yes, the ESV was a conscious reaction to trends in Bible translation: it objects to the gender-neutral philosophy which has gained popularity (e.g., NSRV), and is not enthusiastic about the Louw-Nida translation philosophy (for which “dynamic equivalence” is often used as shorthand) which characterizes the NIV. In my opinion, it doesn’t do a pendulum swing to the opposite extreme in either of those objections (e.g., it consistently notes that the Greek adelphoi can generally be translated “brothers and sisters”, and it is certainly not an excessively literal translation).
So, no, it really doesn’t bother me that the ESV uses the RSV as a key English text to inform its translation, and from my theological perspective and translation philosophy preferences, I agree with the way that the ESV translators have approached their work.
You can read more about the ESV gender translation position here: http://www.esv.org/translation/gender .
You can read more about the ESV translation philosophy here: http://www.esv.org/translation/philosophy .
And, no, I do not work for Crossway or sell ESVs