Why The ESV

John, who blogs at Locusts and Honey left a comment under my last posting about recommended books, asking if I would share some thoughts on my translation preferences.

My credentials for evaluating translations are almost non-existent. But I have several reasons for choosing the ESV to use as my preaching Bible, after almost 20 with the NIV. In no particular order, here they are:

1. I believe that the words of Scripture are important. The discussion between formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence is not going to be resolved here. But my preference is to use a formal equivalence translation because it has a greater focus on the words. As someone who is attempting to do exposition of a text, being able to deal with individual words is important. Try doing that while preaching from the New Living Translation (which I do enjoy reading) or the Message. Of course, the preacher can say, "now this literally means . . . " or "perhaps a more literal/better translation would be . . .", but that does two things. First, it conveys, perhaps subtly, that the Bible that people have is not really reliable, and second, it can lead to the preception that you can't really understand the Bible without original language knowledge.

2. The NIV was the best of both worlds for a long time. When I was in Bible College (we're talking 1971-76) , there were four choices. The KJV (or the New Scofield derivative), the RSV (which evangelicals did not use because of the apparent liberal bias), the NASB and the NIV. The NASB is hard to read. I was listening to one of our small group members read from it last week and thought, "Man is that confusing." The NIV was both accurate and easier to read. When I moved to my present church in 1980, I began to move over to the NIV. There was another reason for that as well. Most of the newer theological resources - commentaries, dictionaries, etc., seemed disposed to use the NIV as a principal translation. In addition, it enjoyed huge popularity, with numerous study Bibles, etc., being released in NIV format. So the NIV and KJV probably accounted for 90% of what our congregations were using.

3. The ESV - to me - is now the better choice for best of both worlds. I like the way it reads. It's not as easy to read as the NIV, but not that far off. And it's worlds better than the NASB, even from the 1995 NASB update. From charts that I have seen, it occupies a place of middle ground between those two translations.

4. There is no clear translational consensus in our church. Based on an informal survey that I did before preaching the other week, I would estimate that about 40% of our people use the NIV. The rest is split between the KJV, NASB, NKJV, and a few NLT and ESV'ers. Given that fact, no matter what translation I use, the majority of our people are using something different than I use.

5. With the current translational climate, I would prefer to move our people in the direction of a more formal equivalent translation. Some will disagree with me on this. That's fine. Let's just say I have concerns and leave it at that.

So that, in essence, is why I am using the ESV. There are other translations I could have chosen, I suppose, like the Holman one, or the NKJV. I use the NET Bible too, and use it with my Logos/Libronix software. But I like the fact that the Reformed community has gotten behind the ESV - that gives me hope that it will lead to resources with the ESV as the foundational translation.

I should note that only about 10 people ordered the Bible on the first Sunday. I've explained clearly that I am not out to change their translation. I am providing this for those who want to be able to follow what I am saying without the confusion of trying to jive my reading with theirs. I'm making this available for another 2 Sundays. I'm not trying to accomplish anything other than that.

I also want to say that we're not doing pew Bibles. They are great for visitors, but make today's Christians who are already disposed to be lazy even more lazy. I want our people to be acquainted with their Bible, so that it becomes a dear friend. We don't have enough of that today, and the proof of that is in the lower degree of biblical literacy that we have in our churches. I project my sermon outline through a powerpoint presentation, and only rarely will display the verses I refer to, and that only to save time if I am drawing their attention to several passages or to a passage in passing. This last paragraph has nothing to do with John's question, but they are companion thoughts. (By the way, I regularly encourage people without a Bible to share with someone who has one.)

I purchased the ESV Reformation Study Bible two weeks ago. The print was sufficient for my eyes to see while preaching, and the cursed red letters (boy is that guy gonna get it when I get to heaven *grin* - and don't be mad - it's a visual thing for me) are absent. In addition, it has a fine series of notes edited by a list of fine Reformed scholars and pastors. If you're in the market for a new study Bible, I'd recommend it. Westminster Seminary Bookstore has it for under $40 in genuine leather. You may have to call them, since the leather version is not on their website. But they have a $5 flat rate for shipping, not matter how large or small the order, for the 48 states.

Anyway, I hope that answers John's question, and yours too.