Matthew's Lectern

Over the last few years, I have come to really love the English Standard Version (ESV). In my journey of “preaching Bible”, I have moved from the NIV to the NASB and have now settled on the ESV. In my journey of “devotional Bible”, I have moved from NIV to NASB to NLT to the Message to ESV. It is also the version I use with my children (aged 7 to 13, although, to be fair, the 7 year old is very capable intellectually). Here are nine reasons why I use it. Please do not read into these reasons criticism of other versions. While I clearly believe the ESV is the “best” English translation available today, I would affirm all versions mentioned in this post as good or reasonable translations through which God has and does work.

1. The ESV comes from the KJV-RSV “line” of English translations. The ESV translators did not think of themselves as starting with a blank canvas, but founded their translation on the work of the Revised Standard Version (RSV) which in turn had founded itself on the KJV (King James Version). I think this is important as it maintains the heritage of our English translation going right back to Reformation times.
2. As a result, it is a beautifully “written” translation. While it doesn’t have the overly poetic nature of the KJV, nevertheless it is lovely to read. This is the main reason that I moved from the New American Standard Bible (NASB) as my main “preaching Bible”. The NASB, while technically more accurate, is a wooden version that is not a joy to read. The ESV is far more enjoyable to read and it does so with only a marginal reduction in accuracy. This really is the unique genius of the ESV- word for word accuracy brought together with beautiful language.
3. It has been translated by a broad group of men and women who all believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God. This is important. The problem with the RSV was that it had been translated by a group that included theological liberals and, as a result, they felt quite at liberty to reflect their theology in the translation (rather than letting the clear meaning of Scripture affect their theology!). The great English, Anglican theologian J.I. Packer had a great fondness for the RSV but desired to “redo” it without the liberal bias. This is the ESV. Packer, who has accomplished so much in his life, was the driving force behind this translation, chairing its translation committee, and called it his life’s greatest achievement.
4. It lets the Bible speak for itself and leaves ambiguity where there is ambiguity. There are two “philosophies” of Bible translation. One is called “formal equivalence”, the other “dynamic equivalence”. Those in favour of formal equivalence argue that translation should usually be word for word. They argue that every word proceeds from the mouth of God and so translation should seek to reflect this by faithfully translating every word unless there is a very good reason not to. Those in favour of “dynamic equivalence” argue that translation should be “thought for thought”. The essence of God’s word, they say, is not the words themselves, but what the words mean. This can make the translation a lot more “readable” and easy to understand. For a number of years, I have been wholly persuaded that my “preaching Bible” should be one that was translated using the “formal equivalence” approach. The main reason for this is that this kind of Bible leaves ambiguity in the English text where there is ambiguity in the original. A classic example of this is Romans 1:5 where the ESV translates: “we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith“. What is the “obedience of faith”? It could mean the obedience to believe in the first place, the obedience to continue in faith or as the NIV translates “the obedience that comes from faith”.  The ESV maintains the ambiguity while the NIV makes an interpretative decision.  The NIV may well be right, but what if its wrong?  On a personal level, I find this important as the ambiguities makes me ponder and meditate and think deeply about what a particular passage is saying. As a preacher, I now find my self rarely saying something like “our version says x, but I think its more likely from the Greek, that it means y”. I used to say that regularly when I used a dynamic equivalence version for preaching. My concern is that saying this can have a serious affect on people’s confidence in their English translation. The ESV maintains ambiguity where there is ambiguity; it is the job of commentators to interpret, not translators.
5. The ESV refuses to miss out important words for the sake of “readability”. For example, one very popular dynamic equivalent translation leaves out scores of connective words (for, because, so, etc) in the Book of Romans alone. Paul’s argument in Romans often depends on these words. They are an important part of Scripture if we are to grasp the flow of Paul’s argument.
6. The ESV, I think, has got the balance right in terms of being “gender-accurate”. Where, for instance, Paul uses the word adelphoi which means “brothers”, but in the context of his letters to the church clearly included the “sisters” (adelphoi was often used generically), the ESV translates “brothers” and puts “brothers and sisters” in the footnote. Really clear and helpful without cluttering up the text, in my view. Even more importantly, the ESV maintains the male meaning in passages where important theological points are being made that depend on gender. For instance, in Galatians 4 when Paul calls all believers, men and women, slave and free, “sons of God”, the ESV resists the temptation to translate this as children of God. The key point he is making in this passage is that, in a culture where the inheritance of sons was far greater than the inheritance of daughters, male and female believers alike receive the full inheritance as all are “sons” of God. Far from Paul being sexist here, he is actually affirming in the most striking of ways, the spiritual equality before God of men and women alike.
7. To date, at least, the ESV hasn’t been “marketed” as a product in the same way that some other versions have. One modern translation has recently been pulled because it hasn’t gone down well and hasn’t sold as well as hoped. While some people will make money from the ESV, it doesn’t seem to be viewed as a commercial product in the way that some other versions seem to have been. A bit subjective, I know, but that’s how I see it. Time will tell.
8. The ESV Study Bible is simply the best Study Bible out there. By miles. If you want to have a study Bible, nothing compares to it. When you buy the paper version, you get access to the online version for free. Very good value for what you get.
9. The ESV continues to use important, even if “old-fashioned”, biblical words that are packed with theological meaning. “Propitiation”, “justification” and even “grace” have been removed from some recent versions and replaced by alternatives that don’t quite reflect the nuanced theological meaning of the original. The ESV retains these words and so encourages further study into the rich meaning of the word. Google it or read a commentary or a Bible dictionary or the study Bible. If all else fails, you could even ask your pastor!

So, there goes. Nine reasons why, for me, the ESV is my Bible of choice, both personally, as a family Bible and as my preaching Bible. If you haven’t done so yet, I encourage you to check it out.