An open letter to Crossway re: the marketing of the ESV
November 13, 2010 22 Comments
It seems to me that from the beginning the marketing of the ESV has been somewhat divisive. Granted a lot of the divisiveness was generated by people not on Crossway’s payroll who, presumably, were not speaking for Crossway. That said, it has been no secret that some ESV supporters have been overly zealous in their promotion of the ESV, a fine translation and the one I use primarily.
Given the public nature of the anti-TNIV translation efforts that some in the ESV camp have engaged in, I think it would be wise to publicly call for an end to such hostilities. I agree with D.A. Carson when he wrote in his article The Debate over Gender-Inclusive Language:
In quieter moments, one wonders if any conceivable damage that could be done by the NIV or TNIV could be any worse than the division, bitterness, and strife stirred up by those who have made this a dividing issue.
Your recent video about trusting the ESV had a feeling of “If you’re not using the ESV you’re using a second class Bible at best.” A number of brothers and sisters in Christ were offended by that.
I hope you will consider marketing the ESV a bit differently, something like:
“The ESV is a translation similar in style to the KJV but with modern language and translated using the latest manuscript evidence and scholarship. We believe it would be easy to transition from the KJV. If you’re currently using the NIV or NLT (or any of the other more thought for thought translations) we think the ESV would nicely complement your existing translation as you explore the riches of God’s Word. Just as in an abundance of counselors there is safety (Proverbs 11:14) so too there is safety in using several English translations.”
IMHO, something like that would work a lot better and would not alienate people.
Thanks for your consideration.
About Stan McCullars
Personally, since I’m an accountant, I use the NASB. After all, FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board), GASB (Governmental Accounting Standards Board), so the next logical thing is, of course, NASB. LOL
Actually, I’m a NASB-onlyist. if the NASB was good enough for the apostle Paul, it’s good enough for me, by ned. LOL
The New Accountant’s Standard Bible. I like that.
Very nice.
Jeff
Thank you my brother!
This is an excellent idea. I do hope someone at Crossway reads it.
Thanks Gary! Let’s hope.
This is an excellent post, Stan, and I thank you for it. I’m afraid, however, that it will fall on deaf ears. There is something deeply bizarre about the ESV culture; I almost feel as though it touches, at points, that of the KJV-onlyists. (It is no coincidence that the chief apologetic for the ESV is entitled “The Word of God in English”!) Before too long, we might hear that if one doesn’t use the ESV, one does not truly believe in the inerrancy of the Bible — just as much is implied by certain complementarians, all in the ESV camp, about the understanding of gender that undergirds the ESV’s gender-related translational decisions.
Thank you sir! Hopefully both sides will realize soon that we’re all on the same side.
Great letter – I would like to think it would work but I am not holding my breath…
Thanks Mark!
Like you said at your blog, It is time for a truce.
Pingback: It is time for a truce… |
Pingback: Crossway's Marketing of the ESV | Scripture Zealot
Pingback: Is “This” Video then UnChristian? | New Leaven
Pingback: Translation Frustration « The Narrow Gate
Really appreciated this post, Stan.
Seems like we Christians can often unintentionally display an attitude of pride about good things we want to share with others. And it is sad to see how it can end up hurting and alienating others.
The reason why the Western world evangelical community is belching and undecided about which version of Bible to hold up and which one to use as afootstool is because they have not gone through persecution enough to realise that any scripture available should be guarded with with utmost sacredness. In one of the persecution stories from behind the communist curtains, christian tore up bible pages and distributed these among themselves. During times of fellowship each one came with a verse to share with the the others and hence the whole community memorised large portions and shared these during meetings. Why dont we treat these days of plenty as time to delve into which ever version you are comfortable with. Who knows times of scarcity could be around the corner. In which case, Where is that Message Bible?
Michael,
You make an excellent point!
I certainly hope it doesn’t come to the point where we cry out for the Message Bible but if it does, we will probably be grateful for it.
I spent a day with a community in northern Malawi who were copying an old version of the Bible in their language by hand into notebooks so that it would be preserved. Still over 2,200 language communities around the world don’t even have this privilege… http://www.thewordislife.net/
Mark, Thanks for stopping by. That certainly puts things in perspective.
Pingback: Video Nasty
I think this post represents a needed voice of reason. I entered the ESV camp years ago and I am guilty of the very attitude you talk about. I did a lot of research when writing a bible study a while back and over the course of its writing ESV became the backbone translation. I used KJV and NIV also and did a great deal of comparison in most of the references. When unclear I also checked NASB (loved the accounting version btw), NEB, NKJV, and if OT I’d also check my NJPS Tanakh. Since I’m not literate in Hebrew or Greek I used various interlinear tools, dictionaries, etc to try and figure out which translation was best. In the end what I can say is that none of them get it right all the time. I did discover that KJV, or at least an updated form of KJV like a (gulp) Schofield KJV, is the most accurate overall. That really pained me because I think most people today really can’t digest the old english literary form of KJV. I found ESV to be the second best translation that I put to the test, though NASB is arguably equal for overall accuracy. I found myself agreeing with the ESV people that their translation sounds better than NASB when reading in public, though I personally think that’s a very minor point. When it comes to NIV I found that while it was more “reader friendly” by a high margin, it was also far less faithful to the original languages in almost every passage I checked. I used to love NIV, but after seeing for myself how it seems to subtly (and sometimes not so subtly) changes the entire meaning of phrases or whole passages I’ve grown to really hate it. I’m glad its getting reworked and updated, but I’ll be very surprised if the updates fix the bigger problems it has. As for the gender issues, I understand the points raised by both sides of the issue, but frankly it seems to me gender is a minor issue compared with some of the larger points of doctrine that every translation screws up here or there. The ESV, for example, does not treat the Creation account with the same level of respect as NIV. I’ll give NIV higher marks on Gen 1-3 than I would ESV. That’s about the only place, and that’s an overall view not a detail view. KJV (1611) has extra verses that aren’t in any original language manuscripts, so it has major flaws beyond its literary difficulties. NASB really is an excellent translation imho, though when I found divergences between ESV, NASB and KJV careful research showed me that you could throw a dart to determine which would be “best” and have as much chance guessing which it would be. I’m no longer so dogmatic in my appreciation of ESV. Good, yes. Better than everyone else, no.
Lance,
Thanks for stopping by. I would caution you against evaluating translations if you’re not fluent in the languages. Imagine someone who only spoke Spanish trying to evaluate the translation quality of one of Shakespeare’s works using a Spanish-English dictionary. It’s not going to work. Translation is far more than replacing the word of one language with a word in another language. That being the case, I think you would be wise to scrap your comparison of the relative accuracy of several translations.
I encourage you to give another look at the NIV. It is a very faithful translation. It certainly does not alter the entire meaning of phrases or whole passages.
I would also encourage you to read How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth: A Guide to Understanding and Using Bible Versions by Gordon D. Fee and Mark L. Strauss. It is a very good introduction to what all goes into Bible translation. I found it very helpful.