English Standard Version
I'm thiking about getting this translation. What are some of your thoughts on it?
Thanks.
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Isaiah 22:17
ESV "... He will seize firm hold on you"
NAS95 "And He is about to grasp you firmly"
Isaiah 63:10
ESV "therefore he turned to be their enemy, and himself fought against them"
NAS95 "Therefore He turned Himself to become their enemy, He fought against them."
Jeremiah 10:25
ESV "Pour out your wrath on the nations that know you not, and on the peoples that call not on your name."
NAS95 "Pour out Your wrath on the nations that do not know You and on the families that do not clal Your name."
Jeremiah 12:6
ESV "... they are in full cry after you"
NAS95 "...even they have cried aloud after you."
Jeremiah 12:11
ESV "... but no man lays it to heart."
NAS95 "... because no man lays it to heart"
NKJV "... because no one takes it to heart"
Jeremiah 31:8
ESV "Behold, I will bring them from the north country and gather them from the farthest parts of the earth, among them the blind and the lame, the pregnant woman and her who is in labor, together..."
NAS95 "Behold, I am bringing them from the north country and I will gather them from the remote parts of the earth, among them the blind and the lame, the woman with child and she who is in labor with child, together..."
NKJV "Behold, I will bring them from the north country and gather them from the ends of the earth, among them the blind and the lame, the woman with child and the one who labors with child, together..."
kitkat60 said:and it just seems to have a little more oomph to me than the NIV. Its an easy read, but not a dummied down read like some of the other versions.
I bought the genuine leather edition, which is great, except the font size is a little too small for my aging eyes.The downside is this.....I got the Classic with bonded leather, never having had a problem with bonded leather before, and i gotta tell you, this is the cheesiest cover I have ever seen. I have seen pleather that is nicer than this. It has no sheen or flexibility and I can't imagine that it is going to last....if you look it up on Amazon, you will see others have had similar problems (although I am not sure whther their problems were with bonded leather or with leather).
Hang on, that will change soon.Other downside....no study bible option available at this time.
Wish you well on this.Having just gotten this and not written in it, I think I will be exchanging it for a hardback one. Yuck.
filosofer said:
I like that - it is exactly the sense I have when reading the NIV.
I have the hardcover. I'd like to get the genuine leather at some point. Preferably the Deluxe Reference edition. (Larger type and margins.)I bought the genuine leather edition, which is great, except the font size is a little too small for my aging eyes.
What have you heard? (Just curious)Hang on, that will change soon.
christian-only said:Do you realize that Alexandria Egypt was the hotbed and base of operations for heresy of all types (Gnostic, Arian, etc.) in the first 4 centuries of the church?
Do you also realize that Antioch was the base of operations of evangelism to the Gentile world, and was the place where the disciples were first called Christians?
2.) So do not attempt an argument that "no true Christian would do that," unless "that" is some action contrary to love. For love makes the Christian (1 John 4:16-17).Wikipedia said:Argument: "No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge."
Reply: "But my friend Angus likes sugar with his porridge."
Rebuttal: "Ah yes, but no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge."
This form of argument is a fallacy if the predicate ("putting sugar on porridge") is not actually contradictory to the accepted definition of the subject ("Scotsman"), or if the definition of the subject is silently adjusted after the fact to make the rebuttal work.
Some behaviours are actually contradictory to the label; "no true vegetarian would eat a beef steak" is not fallacious because it follows from the accepted definition of "vegetarian".
In particular, Christians are often charged with employing this fallacy when they say that no true Christian would do something. Christian is used by such a widely disparate set of people that it has very little meaning when it comes to behaviour. If there is no one accepted definition of the subject, then the initial argument should be accepted as the definition for the discussion at hand.
I thought that Matthew's Bible and the Great Bible were one and the same?christian-only said:The Byzantine Text, also called the Syrian Text or Anticoh Text. This is the text that underlies Tyndale's, Matthew's, Coverdale's, the Great Bible, the Geneva Bible, the Bishops' Bible, and the King James Bible (the 7th Byzantine translation into English), and even the New Testament of the New King James version.
Understood. I've grown more and more fond of the formal equivalence translations myself... (NASB, ESV, etc....) I will say that, as far as dynamic translation go, the NIV is the most "formal" of those that I've seen.kitkat60 said:Actually I wasnt referring to the NIV as being dumbed down - the ones I specifically didn't care for were the NLT and the CEV. NLT is ok in the OT, but in the NT it just didn't quite do it for me. And CEV, just didn't like. I come from an RSV background, so I am most comfortable with the familiar, I guess. I currently use NIV, and have actually been fine with it...I just like the ESV better.
Hopefully there will be one this summer. I've heard rumors about a Ligonier Study Bible that will be put our by Ligonier Ministries. At this point all this is is rumor though. (I've been dropping birthday hints to my wifer about a Deluxe Reference ESV.....I am going to pick up the hardcover for now when I do my exchange. Save my pennies for the leather when they come out with the most fabulous study bible ever (whenever that is going to be).
Philip said:Do you realize that Arius was trained in Antioch? Do you realize that it was St Athanasius of Alexandria that defend the doctrine of the Trinity against Arius at the Council of Nicea?