ESV

One of the McKays musicke at ozemail.com.au
Sat Jan 5 01:28:41 EST 2002


Ted Mann said:
One of the list members introduced me to the recently published English
Standard Version ...I'm curious about the reactions of any of you who are
familiar with this version.
--------------------------------------------------
I wasn't sure whether this is an appropriate topic for the b-greek list, so
I emailed Ted privately.

However, now that a fellow Aussie has written on the topic, I will add my 2
cents worth. [About 1 penny, to our American friends]

I agree with George that this version "stands in the tradition of the RSV",
in fact it is really only a light revision of the RSV. The revisers have
removed the thees and thous and some language that now sounds archaic, fifty
years later. They have also made the language more inclusive, where the
original is not gender specific.

However, where the original word is masculine, even where it is clear the
author means to include men and women, the revisers have kept the  gender
masculine. One example of this is the ADELFOI in Romans 1:13, where the ESV
revisers have added a footnote pointing out that the word is meant to be
inclusive. However, they didn't feel they should make it clear in the text!

People are saying that this version is more  literal: I guess it is, if you
call the RSV a literal version. But it is not nearly as literal as the NASB.

People are also saying that it is a great version because it preserves the
ambiguities of the original, but this is true only to a degree. In many
places they have made the meaning explicit, despite the publicity that they
do not.

It seems to me that this version is so simialr to the RSV that it should be
called The Extremely Similar Version.
David McKay
musicke at ozemail.com.au
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~musicke





More information about the B-Greek mailing list