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

The ESV seems to be everywhere on the Logos site, including reftagger, many (most?) training videos, etc. If you do some casual research you will come to the same conclusion as me.

However, the ESV is neither the top grossing translation or the top selling translation. It never has been the most widely used translation by Christians in general. As of June, the ESV is still stuck at number 4 and five for unit sales and dollar sales. (Ref: http://cbanews.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2014/05/BiblesTranslations201406.pdf)

Logos does not claim to take sides with any denomination, but markets to all kinds of Christians. Here are some points I would like to make:

1. They are a business, and they should be more neutral in regards to the issue of Bible translations. They should choose a default translation based on what is most commonly purchased/used by Christians.

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.

3. Many contemporary and scholarly commentaries are based on the NIV, for better or for worse. Very few that I know of are based on the ESV.

Overall, my opinion is that Logos should market to the whole church. Choosing the ESV as the default translation for the Logos website and training, etc., gives the wrong impression. (That they are promoting the Reformed faith). I am not saying that the impression is right.

All translations have weaknesses, including the NIV and the ESV. Why not make the NIV the default translation of Logos, then, starting with Logos 6?

As the market widens, just go with the numbers.

NOTE CAREFULLY: This post is NOT about doctrine or theology. It's about Logos not giving a false impression, and going with the common sense reality that the ESV is not the Bible that most Christians use.

So please do not start a theological discussion.

NOTE ALSO: I am neutral when it comes to what translation is best. They all have good and bad points. I can and will use all of them.

Since that is true, in general I use the NIV for most things, due to the points mentioned above.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600228#Comment_600228

As far as I can tell, the NIV is still used by the majority of evangelical Protestant churches.

Ironically, while that demographic (I believe) constitutes the majority of Logos' present customers, it is merely a minority group within Logos' present target audience.

If you come from a denomination which uses the NRSV regularly, I think you are even more in the minority than the ESV'ers.

The Canadian Catholic lectionary is based on the NRSV, and when American Catholics aren't using the NAB-RE, they're usually using the NRSV*. And if you're an academic who is not an evangelical Protestant, you almost definitely don't use the NIV, and you probably use the NRSV.

Not that the Catholic Church considers itself a denomination - the Eastern Orthodox don't consider themselves denominations either - but, in any case, I think you're wrong about the relevant prevalence of NIV, ESV, and NRSV.

*Or some variant of the RSV, which for most if not all intents and purposes is nearer to the NRSV than is the ESV or the NIV.

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600233#Comment_600233

OT:

On the Verbum website, feel free to use the NABre, or whatever Catholics and Orthodox use the most. That's not my business.

THIS, for the record, is my best argument against the present (comparatively lousy) Verbum website.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600228#Comment_600228

As far as I can tell, the NIV is still used by the majority of evangelical Protestant churches. [...]

If you come from a denomination which uses the NRSV regularly, I think you are even more in the minority than the ESV'ers. So if you spend all your time just traveling from church to church within your denomination, that would certainly add to the impression that the NIV is not used by many denominations.

If one looks at this list one would not get the impression that evangelical Protestant churches are in the majority. Yes, evangelical Protestants probably currently make up the largest percentage of the Logos user base, but they are trying to expand beyond that niche market.

If you're looking only at American Christianity, KJV apparently still outnumbers all the rest as a pew/pulpit Bible (and that would of course be mostly evangelical/conservative Protestants).

If you're looking at popularity by unit sale rather than existing usage, then this is useful. Makes sense that KJV wouldn't be at the top of that list, since most people who use the KJV own their one edition of it and have used it and marked it up for years and don't need to buy a new one unless it falls apart. But the NIV comes in so many different editions to try to get people to buy another one even though they already have three of them gathering dust on their bookcases.

The RVR (1960) "is the default bible translation of most evangelical Spanish speaking churches in the world" (source). The number of evangelical Christians who are native Spanish speakers is growing much faster than English speaking ones, with the rise of Evangelicalism and Pentecostalism in South America and the increase of Hispanic immigration to the U.S. I'm not sure if they have eclipsed English speakers yet or not. But there definitely are more native Spanish speakers worldwide than English.

But still, I'm assuming Logos will need to stick to an English translation as its main default version.

I couldn't find a chart listing usage figures for English translations of the Bible worldwide, but I did find this interesting chart. Wow, that represents a LOT of work!

List of English Bible Versions, Translations, and Paraphrases

Philip Larson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600109#Comment_600109

The following is from the ESV introduction. Apparently, both the ESV and the NRSV are downstream from the RSV-1971.

"To this end each word and phrase in the ESV has been carefully weighed against the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, to ensure the fullest accuracy and clarity and to avoid under-translating or overlooking any nuance of the original text. The words and phrases themselves grow out of the Tyndale-King James legacy, and most recently out of the RSV, with the 1971 RSV text providing the starting point for our work."

Paul C

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600241#Comment_600241

I'm going to step boldly out on a limb. I believe the release of L6 will be marked by the beginning of a transition away from ESV. ... And toward LEB.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600228#Comment_600228

If you come from a denomination which uses the NRSV regularly, I think you are even more in the minority than the ESV'ers.

Do you have statistics to back this up? The lectionaries online for mainline Protestant groups are strongly skewed towards the NRSV but with a noticable NIV and ESV presence. For example LCMS uses ESV in their educational material; ELCA is generally but not exclusively NRSV. I agree that the NIV is widely used.

Kendall Sholtess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600240#Comment_600240

@Rosie

Well, Rosie, I think I am going to have to give up on this one. Now I perceive more clearly that the church is more fragmented than I thought it used to be.

@SineNomine

Do you mean that you would prefer there be one website for all, and all for one?

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600244#Comment_600244

If you come from a denomination which uses the NRSV regularly, I think you are even more in the minority than the ESV'ers.

Do you have statistics to back this up? The lectionaries online for mainline Protestant groups are strongly skewed towards the NRSV but with a noticable NIV and ESV presence. For example LCMS uses ESV in their educational material; ELCA is generally but not exclusively NRSV. I agree that the NIV is widely used.

The NRSV is probably the most widely accepted English version, thus strategic if Logos wants to expand to a broader customer base. From the National Council of Churches of Christ website (one of the many denominations that endorses the NRSV):

The NRSV stands out among the many translations available today as the Bible translation that is the most widely "authorized" by the churches. It received the endorsement of thirty-three Protestant churches. It received the imprimatur of the American and Canadian Conferences of Catholic bishops. And it received the blessing of a leader of the Greek Orthodox Church.

The NRSV is truly a Bible for all Christians!

Kendall Sholtess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600242#Comment_600242

I'm going to step boldly out on a limb. I believe the release of L6 will be marked by the beginning of a transition away from ESV. ... And toward LEB.

I hope so!

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600233#Comment_600233

On the Verbum website, feel free to use the NABre, or whatever Catholics and Orthodox use the most. That's not my business.

The Orthodox community is being supported on the Logos site not on the Verbum side. While they have their own translations in progress (Logos has recently released the New Testament of the Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible, the common English Bible while waiting for a satisfactory translation has been a modified King James.

Furthermore, the Catholics and Orthodox share Faithlif'e, Biblia, Forums ... so you can't reasonably ignore them.

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600244#Comment_600244

Ii have only skimmed through this discussion since I am quite tired this eve. In the end Billy Graham was right, the best translation of the Bible is the one you will read. That said I have my favourites, i will say most translations have their good points and their down sides. As pointed out it is not hard to change the default for our own personal use.

Kendall Sholtess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600247#Comment_600247

I concede! [:)]

If that is true.....

We definitely need the Oxford Annotated Study Bible in Logos!

Kendall Sholtess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600250#Comment_600250

On the Verbum website, feel free to use the NABre, or whatever Catholics and Orthodox use the most. That's not my business.

The Orthodox community is being supported on the Logos site not on the Verbum side. While they have their own translations in progress (Logos has recently released the New Testament of the Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible, the common English Bible while waiting for a satisfactory translation has been a modified King James.

Furthermore, the Catholics and Orthodox share Faithlif'e, Biblia, Forums ... so you can't reasonably ignore them.

Rest assured I do not wish to ignore anybody. I apologize if my thread has caused that kind of misunderstanding. The problem is undoubtedly my ignorance.

If you knew my background, you'd understand that I really do not wish to leave out Catholics or Orthodox.

I appreciate that we can have a nice discussion on the forums, learn from each other (as I have learned from you) and decided whether to ask Logos to change something. I hope you will consider me your friend. Thanks!

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600240#Comment_600240

If you're looking only at American Christianity, KJV apparently still outnumbers all the rest as a pew/pulpit Bible

Note that the scripture used in a service is often made available in a manner other than pew Bibles.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600246#Comment_600246

Now I perceive more clearly that the church is more fragmented than I thought it used to be.

Fragmented only in the Western Church and only recently - with a special American emphasis on fragmentation. Parts of the third world are rebelling with "uniting churches".

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600246#Comment_600246

@Rosie

Well, Rosie, I think I am going to have to give up on this one. Now I perceive more clearly that the church is more fragmented than I thought it used to be.

@SineNomine

Do you mean that you would prefer there be one website for all, and all for one?

I'm merely saying what is, not how I wish things were. And yes the church is quite fragmented. Mind you "fragmentation" doesn't necessarily equate to not having unity. Though there is substantial fragmentation beyond mere inessentials and geographic/ethnic differences, many of the differences like what Bible version one uses do not prevent believers from sharing communion together and worshiping the same Lord in one Spirit. For example, I'm fine dropping in for a Sunday service on a historically black Baptist church in the South that uses the KJV (if they'll have me), for example the church where Martin Luther King preached which I visited once with my brother.

I'm fine with there being multiple websites. Not sure what that's got to do with the rest of this thread.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600254#Comment_600254

I hope you will consider me your friend. Thanks!

Definitely. [:D]

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600247#Comment_600247

The NRSV is truly a Bible for all Christians!

If I ever left KJV I would go with NASB. I don't mind ESV in ReTagger popups.

Ken McGuire

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600244#Comment_600244

If you come from a denomination which uses the NRSV regularly, I think you are even more in the minority than the ESV'ers.

Do you have statistics to back this up? The lectionaries online for mainline Protestant groups are strongly skewed towards the NRSV but with a noticable NIV and ESV presence. For example LCMS uses ESV in their educational material; ELCA is generally but not exclusively NRSV. I agree that the NIV is widely used.

In my ELCA experience, most official stuff has been NRSV since it came out. A few youth things have been Good News or CEV. But many members use whatever they can find at the local "Christian" bookstore - and so often it was NIV and a few NLT since there are usually few (if any) RSV or NRSV available there. And of course some old KJV holdovers - especially in old family bibles.

There are many non-theological reasons in bible marketing and sales... I know that I got my first print ESV because it was "close" to NRSV and it was available in attractive (and inexpensive) pocket editions, while the actual NRSV was not at that time...

Kendall Sholtess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600257#Comment_600257

@Rosie

I agree 100% with you, Rosie.

So my OP was really meant in a spirit of love. I meant to widen the appeal of Logos, that's all. I am concerned that some people might get the wrong impression about Logos Bible Software. I believe that Bob and Dan's hearts are in the right place. As I have seen time and time again, Logos doesn't run by just a cold business model.

I love diversity, and that's why I have learned 8 languages, and currently no longer live in the US.

I am looking for the goal of having the widest appeal to the widest number of people. That's my clarification.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600309#Comment_600309

@Rosie

I agree 100% with you, Rosie.

So my OP was really meant in a spirit of love.

Thanks, Kendall.

I love diversity, and that's why I have learned 8 languages, and currently no longer live in the US.

Me too, except I've only studied 4 languages (besides English) and only know one of them still.

Kendall Sholtess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600318#Comment_600318

@Rosie

I think I can still make myself understood in 2 of them (French and Vietnamese), in a rusty manner, and currently am speaking Chinese on a daily basis. [:)]

It's just a hobby some people have. [:)]

Oh, I forgot...Low German[;)]

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600326#Comment_600326

@Kendall:

I am pretty conversant in French, both spoken and written. I took a year of Russian in college but can only remember a few phrases now, including the very useful sentence "Осторожно, двери закрываются" ("Caution, the doors are closing" -- heard ubiquitously on the subways in Moscow). I also took one semester of ancient Greek in college but can only remember one sentence: "τὸ πλοῖον πλεῖ πρὸς τὰς Ἀθήνας" which means "The ship is sailing towards Athens" (thanks to Logos's transliteration tool I was able to figure out the spellings with accents, I think). And I took a year of biblical Hebrew in grad school, got A+ in both semesters, but have forgotten most of it.

Those four are the only languages I've ever studied formally. But I've also picked up a smattering of Spanish, Italian, and German from being around my siblings who have studied and/or are fluent in those languages, or from using software to cram in preparation for a trip. And I know a word or phrase here and there in other languages from countries I've traveled to or from which I know someone (Turkish, Finnish, Swedish, Mandarin, Portuguese). I make it a point to try to learn at least one word or phrase wherever I go. My father, who just retired (reluctantly, due to a stroke) this year at 80 after 52 years of practicing medicine, made a practice of learning to greet each of his patients in their native language, and he had patients from all over the world! He's who taught me my one word of Portuguese ("Obrigado" = Thank you.)

Oh, I forgot...Low German

I hear a word in Low German every once in a blue moon. I go to a Mennonite Church where many of the oldsters grew up speaking it. So I know what Faspa is, for example. Can't remember any others.

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600246#Comment_600246

Do you mean that you would prefer there be one website for all, and all for one?

Not necessarily. But if there are going to be multiple websites, they must be on par with each other, so that comments (like yours) about you not caring what happens another (in this case Catholic) website do not appear to be relegating others (in this case, Catholics) to the status of second-class citizens. And I write this knowing that such relegation was not your intention!

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600228#Comment_600228

As far as I can tell, the NIV is still used by the majority of evangelical Protestant churches.

a) You mean American Evangelical Protestant churches.

b) Which NIV?

c) Even if true (and that's a big if), Evangelical churches, contrary to American Evangelical belief, only make up a small fraction of Christianity.

d) There is a reason presidents, bishops and the like are often elected through a system of multiple ballots. It's generally better with a leader who's loved by 10%, somewhat pleasing to 60%, and acceptable to 10%, than one who's loved by 30% and hated by 50%. The NIV may be loved by many, but it's rejected by far more. The NRSV may be loved by fewer, but it's pleasing or acceptable to far more.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600362#Comment_600362

Kendall ... accepting your frustration, what would be your solution, if you were Bob? I know it's easy enough to paint a perfect world (in theory).

You have to 'pick' relative to royalties, ability to do it internationally, support Logos marketing (meaning something well-known), and doesn't have clear no-go's for broad groupings of conservatives, liberals or Catholics.

Although my 'pick' would be NABRE (which would be a no-go above), I really don't see any solution other than what they're doing. Maybe a choose-able popup version depending on what contract terms they've got.

The basic problem is ESV's a fairly literal translation, easily deliverable, and 'hungry'.

Kendall Sholtess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600405#Comment_600405

I have learned a lot from everybody. I was wrong in my original post. Please forgive my ignorance.

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600441#Comment_600441

I have learned a lot from everybody. I was wrong in my original post. Please forgive my ignorance.

I've been away from the internet this past week and am just getting caught up on some reading. Thanks for taking time to make your original post which resulted in a good conversation. Hopefully we are all continually learning.

Bob Pritchett

However, the ESV is neither the top grossing translation or the top selling translation.

I'm sorry I'm a couple days late to the conversation...

The simple answer is: Crossway has been the quickest to respond to requests to do new things with their translation and the easiest to work with.

The NIV is one of the most locked-down on rights/permissions/costs. The NRSV is also very difficult to do anything else with.

The publishers of newer/smaller-market-share translations have a good motivation to act fast, be flexible, etc. so that they can get more exposure. The publishers of the more widely used/established texts have less incentive.

Of the 'new and flexible' translations, the ESV is also relatively word-for-word compared to other options, which happened to be well suited to our word-level tagging projects.

That's it -- there's no theological bias or conspiracy. It was all practical issues.

(FWIW, the question of 'what's the most widely used Bible?' is interesting -- and we care about that -- but not as interesting as 'what's the most widely used Bible by our users?' And NRSV isn't it; our largest denominational group by far is Baptist, and NRSV isn't strong there. Now you can say there's a chicken and egg issue -- and if we preferred NRSV we'd have a smaller percentage of Baptists and more of other groups, etc. and that may be true... but we've got to work more from where we are then were we might theoretically be if things had been different earlier. We are, of course, trying to expand our audience and support more people, and we're adding reverse interlinears to more translations, and doing most of our data work on the Greek and Hebrew so it works on any translation, but it's simply convenient to always use the same Bible in videos, training, etc. especially when we have a lot already based on it, and know we won't have any publisher interaction/permission/complaint issues.)

-- Bob

Veli Voipio

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600482#Comment_600482

I found 17 English Bible versions in my Logos library, and I am not a version collector. It seems to cover the whole spectrum from NASB to Message. Anybody knows how many versions are potentially available in Logos?

I also found one review https://bible.org/article/net-niv-esv-brief-historical-comparison which seems to appreciate both ESV and NIV while still trying to sell NET version. So it looks like the difference is more like a matter of taste than a matter of life?

Kendall Sholtess

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600482#Comment_600482

Thank you for responding, Bob, with an updated answer!

I opened this thread with a mild concern about perceptions. However, it turns out that my own perception needed to be widened. I appreciate the opportunity to learn. And for Logos to have a chance to respond to those, who like me, might question the choice of the ESV.

I'd like to state, for the record, that I don't believe Logos has a theological agenda. I trust you guys.

I myself list my denomination as Baptist. Hopefully I am not a narrow-minded one. But I am not the kind that tiptoes around the tulip, so to speak, though I respect my friends who do.

Bob, I am happy that you have done what's best for the company. Keep up the good work, I have a lot of money invested in it (though not as much as some, a few thousand is a heck of a lot to me.)

Dan Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600482#Comment_600482

We are, of course, trying to expand our audience and support more people, and we're adding reverse interlinears to more translations, and doing most of our data work on the Greek and Hebrew so it works on any translation,

And thank you for the NRSV being completely tagged (of course 2 Esdras is not tagged since it is translated primarily from Latin since it is not completely preserved in greek).

-Dan

David Thomas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600482#Comment_600482

our largest denominational group by far is Baptist,

-- Bob

I suppose full RI tagging for HCSB may be coming soon

Keith Larson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600588#Comment_600588

I myself list my denomination as Baptist. Hopefully I am not a narrow-minded one. But I am not the kind that tiptoes around the tulip, so to speak, though I respect my friends who do.

Watch out for the "Free Will" Baptists as well, they sometimes bite harder than the TULIPS. [;)]

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600482#Comment_600482

our largest denominational group by far is Baptist,

It would be nice to see Baptist base packages. Even if we don't get a product manager.

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600506#Comment_600506

Anybody knows how many versions are potentially available in Logos?

Bibles 198 resources.

Granted, not all listed resources are Bible versions but you can count them if you want. [8-|]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600506#Comment_600506

I found 17 English Bible versions in my Logos library, and I am not a version collector. It seems to cover the whole spectrum from NASB to Message. Anybody knows how many versions are potentially available in Logos?

Given that a number are translations of a single book, it's hard to say. My collection based on type:Bible and language:English has 116 volumes.

David A Egolf

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600482#Comment_600482

The NIV is one of the most locked-down on rights/permissions/costs. The NRSV is also very difficult to do anything else with.

o o o

Of the 'new and flexible' translations, the ESV is also relatively word-for-word compared to other options, which happened to be well suited to our word-level tagging projects.

To the first point, the NIV has been this way for a long time. My recollection is that my first Libronix disks came with the NIV on its own separate disk due to publisher requirements.

To the second point, I would suggest an experiment which I performed a few years ago. After I stumbled onto the morphological filter for Greek imperative mood on this forum, I decided to use it while reading the book of James. Just for fun I turned off the filter and highlighted what I thought would be imperatives in several chapters of James. I did this for the ESV, the NIV, and the NASB. After my highlights were in place I turned on the filter for each version. (I realize the the writer can imply an imperative without the use of the imperative mood, but the results were still pretty illuminating.) I found that my highlights were not very good for the NIV. They were much closer for the ESV and almost precise for the NASB.

Based on that experiment I use the ESV for reading and the NASB for word studies.

Randall Cue

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600616#Comment_600616

I found 17 English Bible versions in my Logos library, and I am not a version collector. It seems to cover the whole spectrum from NASB to Message. Anybody knows how many versions are potentially available in Logos?

Given that a number are translations of a single book, it's hard to say. My collection based on type:Bible and language:English has 116 volumes.

Mj, I just wanted to take this opportunity to tell you how much I appreciate you and Rosie and the way you express your opinions. I am from a different theological perspective than both of you, but I am grateful for you both.

Soli Deo Gloria,

Randy

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600714#Comment_600714

Thank you Randy. Its nice to know my contributions are appreciated.

Frank Sauer

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/600832#Comment_600832

I'm a user who is very thankful that Logos started defaulting to the ESV. I never could connect to the KJV's Olde English personally, no problem with those who love it at all. I started with NKJV, tried NASB for a little while, started back and forth between the NIV84 and HCSB then due to Logos jumped into the ESV. It (ESV) has becomes my personal favorite and at least one other user I know had the same discovery of the ESV. Kudos to Logos on this one.