Update (3/7/07 6:40 PM CST): I stand here with egg on my face. The trackback appeared on the ESV blog. I apologize for my insinuation that they would not do so. I was wrong.
The folks over at the ESV Blog say that “[a]s always, we appreciate everyone who blogs about the ESV.” They were responding to the palmertree endorsement concerning which I blogged yesterday. Shall I hold my breath waiting for my link from them? š
I have heard many good things about Mars Hill Church in Seattle, despite some theological disagreements (with whom do I not have such disagreements?) so I was disappointed to receive the following via e-mail from a friend: Theological reasons for why Mars Hill preaches out of the ESV. This isn’t intended as an attack on…
I started carrying the TNIV recently. I had been using it only in electronic form to do some studying and comparison, but I decided to see how it would work as a “carrying” Bible. That means I take it to church, Sunday School, study groups, and I keep it at hand during my study time…
In my materials for my Bible Translation Selection Tool, I only have one entry for the New American Standard Version even though that version was revised in 1995. The major change was the removal of archaic language in prayer–no more thee’s and thou’s. A few other changes were made. In preparing an entry on exegesis…
One of the great problems I find in teaching biblical languages, or in explaining Bible translation to lay audiences, is that people don’t understand meaning very well. They assume that words have fixed, narrow ranges of meaning, and that if you search carefully, you can find a word or phrase to precisely represent that word…
Besides doing my morning reading from various versions, on those days when I read from the original languages, I sometimes have one of the English versions out for comparison. Today I noticed something rather interesting. In Acts 17:26, where the Greek reads ex henos, the HCSB reads “From one man”. In addition they footnote it,…
Bill Mounce discusses the evidence that the added trinitarian formula in 1 John 5:7-8 is not original. This is a summary of well-known evidence, not breaking new ground, but is one of the clearest presentations I’ve seen.
Comments are closed.
Well, Henry, they put up your trackback, but they have closed the post to pings as well as comments, which doesn’t suggest very much appreciation of those who link to it.
Actually, Peter, the trackbacks were closed before I tracked back, I believe. They apparently put up mine as a special case. My thought would be that discussion on a translation is a good thing. I don’t particularly dislike the ESV–I do dislike the reasoning of many of its proponents. Nonetheless because of my particular focus in terms of Bible translations I wouldn’t recommend the ESV as a pew Bible, for example.