Why is the ESV the default translation for Logos (the company)?

Page 2 of 5 (92 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next >
This post has 91 Replies | 3 Followers

Posts 207
Kendall Sholtess | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 6:12 AM

It sounds to me like the KJV is the definite winner in popular usage and admiration. Smile  One cannot deny the facts.

 Thanks for pitching in your thoughts, y'all.

Posts 5600
SineNomine | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 6:19 AM

Kendall Sholtess:
2. In addition, they should choose a default version that was translated by a team from all different theological perspectives, not only, for example, the Reformed perspective. (I am not saying anything against the Reformed perspective, that is not my concern here). If one examines the translation and review team of the ESV, one can see clearly that nearly all of the involved come from Reformed institutions or ones closely associated with the Reformed perspective.

Your reasoning here, if adhered to, conclusively excludes the NIV from consideration, because neither Catholics nor Eastern Orthodox use any edition of the NIV; to my knowledge, there isn't even an NIV translation of the whole Catholic (or Eastern Orthodox) canon of Scripture.

Posts 207
Kendall Sholtess | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 6:29 AM

SineNomine:

Kendall Sholtess:
2. In addition, they should choose a default version that was translated by a team from all different theological perspectives, not only, for example, the Reformed perspective. (I am not saying anything against the Reformed perspective, that is not my concern here). If one examines the translation and review team of the ESV, one can see clearly that nearly all of the involved come from Reformed institutions or ones closely associated with the Reformed perspective.

Your reasoning here, if adhered to, conclusively excludes the NIV from consideration, because neither Catholics nor Eastern Orthodox use any edition of the NIV; to my knowledge, there isn't even an NIV translation of the whole Catholic (or Eastern Orthodox) canon of Scripture.

I agree with what you say. Then the KJV would work for most, since it has been used by all groups concerned. Perhaps the Queen wouldn't mind, and hasn't it been given an imprimatur of some kind?

Perhaps I should have remained Nameless, as well.

Posts 406
Paul C | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 6:29 AM

Kendall Sholtess:

It sounds to me like the KJV is the definite winner in popular usage and admiration. Smile  One cannot deny the facts.

 Thanks for pitching in your thoughts, y'all.

I would like to point out something. I hope you can look at what I say objectively. I do not wish to engage in a debate, And I surely don't want to offend you. One could surmise that it is YOU who has an agenda. Reading over the whole thread, I see no consensus that KJV is the best/accepted translation, as you propose here. On the contrary. I see a consensus that seems to suggest using many and varied translations. I cut my teeth on KJV. It is deeply entrenched in my memories. I still respect it as "One Of the Best" But not "the definite winner in popular usage and admiration" as you would have us believe.

Posts 5600
SineNomine | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 6:55 AM

Kendall Sholtess:
I agree with what you say. Then the KJV would work for most, since it has been used by all groups concerned.

The biggest problems there are, I think, that it really is less readable than more modern translations - including the ESV and NIV - and its present non-use in academia, except for poetic effect. The present cultural bias against things that are older - a bias that has more-than-seeped into many if not most Christians' thought patterns, also militates against the KJV.

Frankly, I think that the best translation choice from both ecumenical and scholarly perspectives is almost certainly the NRSV, although I personally prefer the RSV. Both translations were ecumenical in creation, ecumenical in use, literal in intent, and are widely used in academia.

That said, Logos's choice to use the ESV and its reasoning for that is fine by me.

Posts 5430
David Paul | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 7:18 AM

I don't like the KJV, though as I mentioned in a thread from a month or two back, I'm glad I cut my teeth on the KJV because there are hundreds of passages from the KJV that have entered into the cultural and social conversation. Not being privy to those references (i.e. not recognizing what "mote and beam" means) makes a person conversationally hobbled and impoverished. But...the KJV is both awkward and often just plain wrong at times. I read it now and find that all kinds of concepts that are clear and comprehensible in the NASB are practically invisible. That said, I know of a handful of places where the KJV (and NKJV) provide a more accurate translation (Rev. 13:8, for example), so I still feel it has its place. I'm just not awed by the majesty of the king's English. I'm more concerned with what the original languages say.

ASROCK x570 Creator, AMD R9 3950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, Asus Strix RTX 2080 ti, 2tb m.2 Seagate Firecuda SSD (x2) ...and other mechano-digital happiness.

"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not."

Posts 406
Paul C | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 7:26 AM

David Paul:
I read it now and find that all kinds of concepts that are clear and comprehensible in the NASB are practically invisible
If I absolutely had to choose just one version for everyday use, It would be NASB hands down.Besides being a precise translation, It has many features not offered by others. One that gives me that warm fuzzy feeling is Old Testament Quotes in All Caps. 

Posts 249
DHG | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 7:26 AM

I wonder about those stats from CBA. Are those numbers just from Christian retailers? And if so, how much of the market do those stores actually account for?

Posts 11433
DMB | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 7:59 AM

I always like these threads that introduce a user issue or thought, and then caution not to theologically debate.  What planet are we on?  Goodness.

Of course ESV is theologically driven; at our church when they buy new pew Bibles, they chat (being nice here), and then the pastor indicates which one he'll be quoting from (hello!).  I can guarantee, when the pastor chooses a version to quote, there's a reason.  I've no doubt, every church is the same. There is no possible way they say ... 'Well gee, they're all pretty much alike.'

And there's no way a large digital re-seller is naive.  If NRSV had been the cheapy, no way.  Logos IS a theological tool for strongly religious people.

Now, I'll be the first to admit, whenever I see ESV as the base for a Logos product, I generally pass. Never happen. I made an exception on OT-Discourse only because I thought the OT-Discourse wasn't up to par, and a major discount.  Any translations that pander to a specific view, I pass on.

Now if they had the JSV, of course, it'd be different (that'd be the Julia Smith Version .... CP!!!).

"God will save his fallen angels and their broken wings He'll mend."

Posts 406
Paul C | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 8:28 AM

Denise:

Any translations that pander to a specific view, I pass on.

Now if they had the JSV, of course, it'd be different (that'd be the Julia Smith Version .... CP!!!).

Because she panders to your specific views? ... Or your specific sex? Stick out tongue

Posts 29887
Forum MVP
JT (alabama24) | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 8:30 AM

Denise:
Any translations that pander translate a specific view

All "translators" are "traitors" is a common saying in translation circles. The only way to get a 100% accurate translation is to <wait for it> not translate! That isn't, of course, possible. Even if you were to REALLY learn Greek or Hebrew, you would STILL be translating... for there are cultural and historical barriers as well. 

I love the debate of which is "more accurate": a "word for word" translation or a "thought for thought." The answer isn't so simple. Take this as an example:

"Bradley is borrowing the cat’s paws." What in the world does that mean? If I told you that the speaker was Japanese, does that help? No? The phrase "borrowing the cat's paws" is more of a "word for word" translation of a Japanese saying. In American English (because we do have to distinguish), we might say "Bradley doesn't have time to breathe." Which is more "accurate"? The answer is that they both are! If your goal is to help an english speaking person of non-japanese heritage, there probably isn't a good reason to keep the "word for word" saying intact and the second translation would be preferred. On the other hand, if your family is Japanese, and you were translating a child's non-english speaking grandmother to her non-japanese grandchildren, there might be some value in keeping the "word for word" translation for cultural reasons.

macOS, iOS & iPadOS | Logs |  Install

Posts 501
SteveHD | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 8:39 AM

Let's look for a possible logical result of this thread. As a software Project Manager I conclude that there is an issue with having the ESV as the default Bible since it harms or offends some users who think there is a better source of truth (or possibly only one source of truth). I determine that though the existing tool gives quick and easy access to choice of default translation by putting it on the front page; that is not sufficient to keep some users from harm or offense.

Now a project kicks off and the team determines that the KJV (NRSV, NIV, NKJV, NASB, Message, Voice, Jerusalem or whatever else) should be the default Bible for Logos users when they first install and use the software or venture into any other forum of the Logos software world. A solution should also fix this problem for all existing users by switching out their default setting at least once following the update. Following the update they can change their default setting to something else.

The dev team completes their project and following rigorous testing on Wednesday they release a new update and it changes everyone's default Bible selection to the KJV (NRSV, NIV, NKJV, NASB, Message, Voice, Jerusalem or whatever the dev team was told to use).

What would be the outcome?

Posts 2040
Unix | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 8:43 AM

alabama24, isn't the solution to just look up things in the NIDB from our formal-equivalent versions?

Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 11

Posts 5573
Forum MVP
Rich DeRuiter | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 8:48 AM

alabama24:
"Bradley is borrowing the cat’s paws." What in the world does that mean?

A "cat's paw" is a tool used by contractors to remove nails. Everybody knows that, 'bama. All that cultural background stuff is just smoke and mirrors for promoting your own agenda about Bradley being tired, when this is really about him going to work.

[;-)]

 Help links: WIKI;  Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)

Posts 11433
DMB | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 9:04 AM

I can't imagine anyone having an older deck, and not having a cat's paw.  Talk about efficient. Plus if you turn it over, it's a great hammer too.  For many years, we used hammers; big mistake.

Paul C ...  let's be objective (and as the OP suggests, go with majority-rule).  Women are the majority of God's creation (for sure after 5 years old). And women make up by far the majority of pew-sitters.  So it should eminently obvious, a translation that pleases the women is called for.   Again, using the OP's logic.  Now Julia Smith, from a translational perspective, is somewhat of an embarrassment.  But I love her drive;  she'd of loved Logos.

And as for 'translation is translation', throw me a bone. Woof, woof!  ESV is one of worst pander-ers. NRSV isn't far behind.  And as regards for crocodile tears for developers, that's a no-brainer.  You design for your target customer .... conservative protestants .... ergo ESV.   I've no complaints; I just avoid the Logos ESV-based tools.

"God will save his fallen angels and their broken wings He'll mend."

Posts 1691
Forum MVP
Veli Voipio | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 9:06 AM

What's the problem? I've set the Net Bible as priority and its shows up in the right-click menu? I am not a native English speaker, thus I don't care about the English translations anyway

Gold package, and original language material and ancient text material, SIL and UBS books, discourse Hebrew OT and Greek NT. PC with Windows 8.1

Posts 406
Paul C | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 9:13 AM

Denise:
And as for 'translation is translation', throw me a bone
I was just woofin Ya about the Julia Smith "Translation"

I tend to view these works as a paraphrase/commentary. You may remember we discussed this a while back when we chatted about J.B. Phillips. I have bookmarked the online Smith Bible, and do enjoy consulting her "Views".

Posts 8899
fgh | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 9:20 AM

• The NIV can't be used, for publisher reasons, and because it's anything but neutral.

• The KJV can't be used if Logos is serious about internationalization. The text needs to be understandable by people who aren't native English speakers. (Plus it's not only biased, but also antiquated.)

• I would prefer either the NRSV, because it has the full canon and a wide use, or the LEB, because all further discussions can then be answered with a simple "we use it because we made it and have full control of the rights to it". I don't think it includes the Deuterocanonicals, but it could be supplemented with the LES for those.

MJ. Smith:
As it is simple to change to the default of your choice, I can't get too concerned about the default.

You missed what the thread is about. It's impossible to change the translation you get in the popup if I write Jn 1:1, nor can you change what is used in the videos or the discourse Bibles.

"The Christian way of life isn't so much an assignment to be performed, as a gift to be received."  Wilfrid Stinissen

Mac Pro OS 10.9.

Posts 2040
Unix | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 9:29 AM

What English version does everyone use in Libronix/Logos 3? I have it currently set to NRSV for the NT and 4 Ezra, 3-4 Maccabees and the odd portions of the Deuterocanonicals not found in almost any other versions, and NJB for the rest of the OT. Too bad I didn't have more to choose from. I don't have NABRE or the CEB:

Denise:
And as for 'translation is translation', throw me a bone. Woof, woof!  ESV is one of worst pander-ers. NRSV isn't far behind.

Disclosure!
trulyergonomic.com
48G AMD octacore V9.2 Acc 11

Posts 207
Kendall Sholtess | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 8 2014 9:52 AM

Paul C:

Kendall Sholtess:

It sounds to me like the KJV is the definite winner in popular usage and admiration. Smile  One cannot deny the facts.

 Thanks for pitching in your thoughts, y'all.

I would like to point out something. I hope you can look at what I say objectively. I do not wish to engage in a debate, And I surely don't want to offend you. One could surmise that it is YOU who has an agenda. Reading over the whole thread, I see no consensus that KJV is the best/accepted translation, as you propose here. On the contrary. I see a consensus that seems to suggest using many and varied translations. I cut my teeth on KJV. It is deeply entrenched in my memories. I still respect it as "One Of the Best" But not "the definite winner in popular usage and admiration" as you would have us believe.

 You would be right that I have an agenda. You are not offending me, friend. My agenda is to encourage Logos to change the default version to one that is less sectarian, more widely used among as many denominations as possible. Of course, no Bible translation is used by all denominations. There is clearly a Protestant/Catholic divide for instance, among translations.

 The issue is not which translation is better, or more accurate, etc. Obviously if they were able to choose the NIV, that would be favoring Protestants over Catholics, in some respect. But a translation such as the ESV, which is really produced and used intensively by a small sliver of the Protestant camp, is rather extreme, and promotes a specific theological agenda.

What I hope for is a Bible that as many denominations as possible use.  So far the only a few translations have fit that description, i.e. the NIV, KJV, and others I may not be fully aware of (LEB?). Is unity among brethren too much to hope for?

I'll tell you this: when I see the ESV promoted everywhere, which has not gained wide acceptance in the church, I personally don't feel very unified. As you can see from this thread, I am not alone.

 So if my friends on the other side can be happy, and my friends from afar as well, without stepping on toes, that is the best outcome.

Page 2 of 5 (92 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next > | RSS