Friday, September 19, 2008


Anonymous said:
is this a fresh and new translation?

Did you watch the video? The ESV has been talked about a lot over the years. Are you asking a real question or is your question meant to show some kind of sarcasm?

Since you asked:

Altogether the ESV translation work involved an exceptional team of more than 100 worldwide, including: (1) the twelve-member Translation Oversight Committee, led by Dr. J. I. Packer as the General Editor; (2) sixty leading Bible Scholars; as well as (3) a sixty-member Advisory Council—all of whom are committed to historic Christian orthodoxy and to the timeless truth and authority of the Bible.
First published in fall of 2001, the ESV Bible has been widely embraced by churches, ministries, and denominations around the world—and by millions of individuals who believe and know, as Jesus said, that “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4).

The ESV is an “essentially literal” translation that seeks as far as possible to capture the precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer. As such, its emphasis is on “word-for-word” correspondence, at the same time taking into account differences of grammar, syntax, and idiom between current literary English and the original languages. Thus it seeks to be transparent to the original text, letting the reader see as directly as possible the structure and meaning of the original.

In contrast to the ESV, some Bible versions have followed a “thought-for-thought” rather than “word-for-word” translation philosophy, emphasizing “dynamic equivalence” rather than the “essentially literal” meaning of the original. A “thought-for-thought” translation is of necessity more inclined to reflect the interpretive opinions of the translator and the influences of contemporary culture.
Every translation is at many points a trade-off between literal precision and readability, between “formal equivalence” in expression and “functional equivalence” in communication, and the ESV is no exception. Within this framework we have sought to be “as literal as possible” while maintaining clarity of expression and literary excellence.

Therefore, to the extent that plain English permits and the meaning in each case allows, we have sought to use the same English word for important recurring words in the original; and, as far as grammar and syntax allow, we have rendered Old Testament passages cited in the New in ways that show their correspondence. Thus in each of these areas, as well as throughout the Bible as a whole, we have sought to capture the echoes and overtones of meaning that are so abundantly present in the original texts.

As an essentially literal translation, then, the ESV seeks to carry over every possible nuance of meaning in the original words of Scripture into our own language. As such, it is ideally suited for in-depth study of the Bible. Indeed, with its emphasis on literary excellence, the ESV is equally suited for public reading and preaching, for private reading and reflection, for both academic and devotional study, and for Scripture memorization.

Each word and phrase in the ESV has been carefully weighed against the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, to ensure the fullest accuracy and clarity and to avoid under-translating or overlooking any nuance of the original text.
The words and phrases themselves grow out of the Tyndale-King James legacy, and most recently out of the RSV, with the 1971 RSV text providing the starting point for our work.

Archaic language has been brought to current usage and significant corrections have been made in the translation of key texts. But throughout, our goal has been to retain the depth of meaning and enduring language that have made their indelible mark on the English-speaking world and have defined the life and doctrine of the church over the last four centuries.

The ESV is based on the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Bible as found in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (2nd ed., 1983), and on the Greek text in the 1993 editions of the Greek New Testament (4th corrected ed.), published by the United Bible Societies (UBS), and Novum Testamentum Graece (27th ed.), edited by Nestle and Aland.
The currently renewed respect among Old Testament scholars for the Masoretic text is reflected in the ESV’s attempt, wherever possible, to translate difficult Hebrew passages as they stand in the Masoretic text rather than resorting to emendations or to finding an alternative reading in the ancient versions.

In exceptional, difficult cases, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syriac Peshitta, the Latin Vulgate, and other sources were consulted to shed possible light on the text, or, if necessary, to support a divergence from the Masoretic text. Similarly, in a few difficult cases in the New Testament, the ESV has followed a Greek text different from the text given preference in the UBS/Nestle-Aland 27th edition.

The footnotes that accompany the ESV text inform the reader of textual variations and difficulties and show how these have been resolved by the ESV Translation Team. In addition to this, the footnotes indicate significant alternative readings and occasionally provide an explanation for technical terms or for a difficult reading in the text.

Throughout, the Translation Team has benefited greatly from the massive textual resources that have become readily available recently, from new insights into biblical laws and culture, and from current advances in Hebrew and Greek lexicography and grammatical understanding.

So does that answer your question?
Bookmark and Share
> posted by Trevor Hammack at


Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, I'm stupid and not as smart as you are.
I went to the website after watching some of the video.
I spent some time searching on the site trying to answer my question.
No I haven't heard of it, I don't hang out a Christian book stores or on the internet for hours at a time like you get to.

Sorry for asking such a stupid question... pastor

September 21, 2008 at 12:00 AM  
Blogger Trevor Hammack said...

Ok, let's back up and look at this issue carefully.

I create a post called, "Introducing the ESV"

You post a comment asking, “Is this a fresh and new translation?”

If I am introducing something that is usually a good indication that it is something new.

I don't hang out at Christian book stores either. In fact, I have not been to one in years.

I am on the internet a lot, so you got me there :)

I never said it was a stupid question, I asked:
Are you asking a real question or is your question meant to show some kind of sarcasm?

The answer is either yes or no.

We get a lot of people who stop by the blog and post anonymous comments, usually the comments are of a negative nature. Your comment sounded to me as if it was posted by someone who holds to a KJV only position and was trying to be sarcastic. If you are not a KJV only person and was not trying to be sarcastic then the answer to my question would have been a simple no,I was not being sarcastic. When visiting a blog here are a few suggestions:

When you post a comment leave your name.

In your comment add a little more information. This will make your intentions clear.

When you get upset at the answer ensure your response deals with what was actually said. I never said your question was stupid, I simply asked if you were being sarcastic.

I would still like to know:

Were you trying to be sarcastic?

Do you hold to a KJV only position?

I look forward to receiving your answers.

I apologize for any unnecessary offense my answer may have caused.

Trevor Hammack

September 21, 2008 at 7:58 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home