NIV, NLT, CSB, or ESV

[chevyontheriver]

My NIV is clunky but it’s a Study Bible so there’s a lot of info there.

I gave up on the NIV after I discovered what seemed to be translation preferences against tradition. Every positive reference to tradition used different words for tradition. Every negative reference to tradition used the word 'tradition'. Seemed to me a plain old evangelical bias. I moved on to the RSV at that point.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Nice. The ESVCE has almost no notes. A tiny bit of textual apparatus, but not even much of that. My guess is that is a bit of reaction against the NAB (New American Bible, 1970 approved Catholic Bible) having lots of notes, and some of them exceptionally modernist. Anyhow, I am liking the feel of this one. And I already liked the readability. It's a bit like the RSV in that regard, with language that is a bit sacral but not too odd and old-fashioned

Now, it might just be me, but I found that the NAB seemed almost like two different translations; one for the old and one for the new testaments. For reading, I much prefer the ESV; for listening, the RSV (Not the NRSV).

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I have to be careful here as I am a guest in the Lutheran Forum. I find serious Catholics really like the RSVCE, the RSVCE2, and now the ESVCE. The NAB gets almost zero traction even though it is the official translation approved by the USCCB, the Catholic bishop's conference. While the NAB was newer than the RSV, it seemed clunky. The NABRE was clunky AND inclusive, so two strikes. Anyhow, for now I'm happy.

Serious Lutherans like it too.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Now, it might just be me, but I found that the NAB seemed almost like two different translations; one for the old and one for the new testaments. For reading, I much prefer the ESV; for listening, the RSV (Not the NRSV).

The NAB was a translation done in segments and over a long time. Some of it was more similar to the Challoner text and some of it more current. Almost all of it was choppy.

 

[tampasteve]

I just got one and am breaking it in. ESVCE. I had an ESV from when I was hospitalized. The chaplain gave me an ESV Gideons version. I never did figure out how that differed from their base text before I lost it.

My understanding, although I could be wrong, is that the text is the same, but with the addition of the books left out of the Protestant cannon.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

My understanding, although I could be wrong, is that the text is the same, but with the addition of the books left out of the Protestant cannon.

I just got one and am breaking it in. ESVCE. I had an ESV from when I was hospitalized. The chaplain gave me an ESV Gideons version. I never did figure out how that differed from their base text before I lost it.

As tampasteve stated, this is the obvious difference considering the Gideons are a protestant organization.

The other less obvious is that there are actually two different editions of the ESV. Since most of the countries where the Catholic Church have "officially" adopted the ESV (England, Australia, India to name a few) are former British Colonies, the Catholic edition is Great Britton English, the Gideons Bible and the LCMS ESV is American English.

Almost indiscernible but for a word here an there, and some spelling variations. We have seen this at Bible Study were some of us use the Catholic Edition and others use the Lutheran Study Bible.

 

[Shane R]

I believe the Catholic edition also includes a few traditional but now disputed NT readings, such as pericope adultarae, comma Johanneum, Acts 8:37, etc. The numbering of the Psalms may diverge as well - I can't remember on that particular point.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I believe the Catholic edition also includes a few traditional but now disputed NT readings, such as pericope adultarae, comma Johanneum, Acts 8:37, etc. The numbering of the Psalms may diverge as well - I can't remember on that particular point.

Acts 8:37 in my ESV CE Augustine Bible mentions 37 in a foot note only; as does my Concordia Lutheran Study Bible. No difference in the numbering of the Psalms; CE has no Psalm 151 either. American vs. British English, and the Apocrypha are the differences. Nothing more.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Acts 8:37 in my ESV CE Augustine Bible mentions 37 in a foot note only; as does my Concordia Lutheran Study Bible. No difference in the numbering of the Psalms; CE has no Psalm 151 either. American vs. British English, and the Apocrypha are the differences. Nothing more.

Other than the CE being of better quality; it seems very little difference:

 

[JM]

As I go through catechesis I'm asked to memorize scripture along with each lesson. Rather simple, however, I use the Authorized KJV version and have for over 20 years. I have a beautiful leather bound Premier Edition, large print and versified. I love it. Now, the new guy in class with me has a difficult time understanding the KJV so I'm seriously considering switching to the ESV just to be in line with the LCMS and to be easier understood by new folks coming to faith in Christ.

A lot to consider.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

As I go through catechesis I'm asked to memorize scripture along with each lesson. Rather simple, however, I use the Authorized KJV version and have for over 20 years. I have a beautiful leather bound Premier Edition, large print and versified. I love it. Now, the new guy in class with me has a difficult time understanding the KJV so I'm seriously considering switching to the ESV just to be in line with the LCMS and to be easier understood by new folks coming to faith in Christ.

A lot to consider.

Interesting anecdote, and a bit off topic but...

I work with a Muslim guy, and while his English is very good, he often struggles when composing reports and writing emails, frequently turning to me to review and edit his communications. For him, it is not so much the words and what they mean, but the syntax of the language. (Which is likely what your friend struggles with the most) I am no English scholar, but having grown up with the KJV being read in Church, at home, and used in our Catechetical materials and liturgy, i credit that exposure, and my love of reading to the formation of how I speak and used language.

I suggested to my colleague to read the Psalms in both the KJV and ESV along with those in their language. Not sure if he is doing so, but he was in awe when I got him to read Psalm 130:


130 Out of the depths have I cried unto thee, O Lord.

2 Lord, hear my voice: let thine ears be attentive to the voice of my supplications.

3 If thou, Lord, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?

4 But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared.

5 I wait for the Lord, my soul doth wait, and in his word do I hope.

6 My soul waiteth for the Lord more than they that watch for the morning: I say, more than they that watch for the morning.

7 Let Israel hope in the Lord: for with the Lord there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption.

8 And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities.