2007 ESV Update: The Bible Translation You Never Heard About

Posted on June 15, 2008 by Tony Kummer

I was a little surprised to learn about the 2007 ESV textual updates. Basically, there is more than one edition of the ESV being floated by Crossway. Read some of the differences here. Does this call for a 2001 ESV only movement?

This entry was posted in Bible & Biblical Studies. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to 2007 ESV Update: The Bible Translation You Never Heard About

  1. Matt Svoboda says:
    June 15, 2008 at 11:12 pm

    Why did they have to change it!?! 2001 is much better!

    Matt Svobodas last blog post..Internet problems: sorry for the lack of blogging!

  2. Stan McCullars says:
    June 15, 2008 at 11:13 pm

    It gives me no small amount of satisfactions that some, even if only a few, of the changes make the ESV more gender neutral.

  3. Stephen Newell says:
    June 16, 2008 at 12:07 am

    This just isn’t right. We need to get back to the original Bible. If the 2001 was good enough for Peter, James, and John then it’s good enough for me.

    I’m sure the editors of the ESV pee sitting down.

    Stephen Newells last blog post..Confronting Unbelievers In Our Midst

  5. Ray Van Neste says:
    June 16, 2008 at 12:35 am

    It is common for translations to update along the way. One of these updates is one I suggested. This is nothing more than the continuing work of trying to produce a good translation. Don’t make more of it than necessary.

    Ray Van Nestes last blog post..Praying Evangelistically

  6. Tony Kummer says:
    June 16, 2008 at 12:47 am

    I think the problem is having several editions of the same “translation” without knowing it. Like the story I linked above from Justin Childers.

  7. Scott says:
    June 16, 2008 at 12:42 pm

    I’m just not going to by anymore “new” Bibles. Whatever I have now in my collection will have to suffice.

    Scotts last blog post..A Study of “Latter Rain” as the Phrase Appears in the Bible

  8. Jeremy Sells says:
    June 16, 2008 at 12:49 pm

    ESV should advertise it, no sense in causing unnecessary confusion.

    Jeremy Sellss last blog post..8:45 and still light outside…

  9. Denise M. says:
    June 16, 2008 at 5:13 pm

    I just read about this the other day and it threw me for a loop.

    Denise M.s last blog post..What A Season!

  10. Tony Kummer says:
    June 16, 2008 at 9:14 pm

    I checked the mini-ESV (for people with super human eyesight) that I got from T4G and . . .

    BEHOLD, it was 2007 Text Update

  11. Adam Winters says:
    June 17, 2008 at 3:35 pm

    I guess they changed the references from “wizards” to “necromancers” so as not to suggest they were taking a stand in the Harry Potter debate. J/K ;-D

  12. Stan McCullars says:
    June 17, 2008 at 4:35 pm

    Adam,
    That was funny.

  13. Joe Miller says:
    June 18, 2008 at 11:52 pm

    I love the ESV. It has the feel of the KJV, but very contemporary and fun to read. I highly <a href=”http://www.morethancake.org/2008/02/buying-bible-translation.html”recommend the ESV.

    Joe Millers last blog post..A Sabbath Rest from Thinking!

  14. Michael Wilhite says:
    June 23, 2008 at 11:27 am

    I’m a little concerned at some of the revisions too. I don’t like some of the more gender neutral renderings, but still a solid translation over all. For me, though, the Holman CSB is by far the best on the market right now. It is the only Bible I’ve found that is willing to always translate doulos as slave and not servant. I haven’t found another good translation that is willing to take that stand and actually have the guts to translate it like it should be. The sheer fact of how conservative it is makes it top choice for me in my preaching.

    Michael Wilhites last blog post..Lordship Salvation and Repentance