So, I’ve read so many posts about the “why” when it comes to the switching to the ESV (English Standard Version Bible) that I felt it might be a good read for others to know why I switched and why I switched my congregation.
Back in 2003, I was preaching with an NLT Bible. I thought this new translation was going to be a fresh addition to my preaching as well as spur my congregation on to read the Bible more. As a result, it backfired. Instead of people opening their Bibles more, they did it less. And when I inquired as to why, I got responses like, “Well, you’re using that ‘funky’ version and it doesn’t match the one I have.” Or even, “I don’t need to bring my Bible because you put the scripture up on the screen.”
So, that was it. I decided that in order for people to have the same passion as me when it comes to God’s Word, I’d better make a decision on a better translation. Therefore, I felt I had two choices: 1) Go back to the NIV (which to me seems to be the King James of today) or 2) Go to the NASB. Now, I had good reason to go to either one, and either one would have been fine…but when I sat down at a local Christian bookstore and began to compare translations, I picked one off the shelf that said ESV.As I began to read, I noticed two things…while there were differences in the the word structure, for the most part, it seemed that if someone had an NIV or an NASB or even a New King Jimmy…they could follow along. But what struck me and set the ESV apart was the preface. “This Book is the most valuable thing that this world affords.” I thought, “Exactly.” So I read the other translations prefaces and noted that the intent of the ESV was not to just fancy people with a new translation, but with careful reverence, they understood that this is the Word of God. Use caution in your translating of it. When I think about translations today, I think about the words of Martial’s epigram to Fidentius when he said: The work you recite is mine, O translator, but when you recite it badly it begins to be yours. I think that’s true and possibly the difficulty of translating the Bible. Still, I stand by the slogan “One church, one Bible”. It makes for less distractions in the study of God’s Word. And we all know what kinds of distractions are out there. The one lady who sits in the Bible study and pipes in with, “Well, in the commentary on my translation it says” or “My Bible says something different”. You know what I’m talking about?
Hey there, Hoop – thanks for the note. Must say that it’s odd to read of a ‘Christian Church’ fellow that’s into Spurgeon and the like…odd, and refreshing. I also use the ESV as my ‘sword’ of choice. It’s an excellent translation – literal, while maintaining some of the readability of the NIV, and the poetic wording (where appropriate) of the KJV. Good stuff.
blessings!
So, I’m curious… why does my inspiration from Spurgeon surprise you being that I’m from the Christian Church background? It may even surprise you more that I actually hail from the Church of Christ (acappella) background. But I guess the question would be…why not Spurgeon?
The whole congregation switched? Wow.
Well, most of the congregation switched. I just announced to the congregation that this is the translation that I would be using and that we were going to endorse. I’ve held a few get togethers since that have been about the differences between the translations and there are many who from that have switched.
I find it strange because Spurgeon is about as Calvinist as they come, a view that is considered rank heresy by the Church of Christ & Christian Churches.