ESV Permanent Text Edition 2016
Comments
-
See GEN 3:16 in NET Bible
P A
0 -
I think the Genesis 3 'contrary' change is def correct!
0 -
I think the Genesis 3 'contrary' change is def correct!
I was trying to avoid receiving a gentle push toward http://www.ChristianDiscourse.com, myself... but I have no dispute with your sentiment.
0 -
Duplicate user names are not allowed. What it is displaying is my real first name. Which isn't an issue. Well as far as the software for the forums is concerned.
0 -
-
Why didn't they change this verse from:
“I am my beloved's, and his desire is for me.”
The Song of Solomon 7:10 ESV
to
“I am my beloved's, and his desire is contrary for me.”
The Song of Solomon 7:10 ESV??
It's the same Hebrew word
You should read this https://jenniferjolene.wordpress.com/2016/02/26/two-verses-i-never-understood-before-genesis-47-and-316/
0 -
It's the same Hebrew word
But different context, Jennifer.
For book reviews and more visit sojotheo.com
0 -
Explain
0 -
How does that make it ok to add words that are not in the original Hebrew text?
0 -
not in the original Hebrew text?
There are no English words in the original Hebrew text. Some contexts may require more than one English word to gloss a word from another language and some words have to be supplied for a sentence to make sense in English.
Example an infinitive verb often requires 2 English words for 1 Greek/Hebrew word. Another example is where a Hebrew word is prefixed and suffixed, both of which require extra words in English to communicate. Don't be too quick to assume that there is something twisted being done behind the scenes.
See below where the words in question have no verbs and must be supplied to make sense in English ("am" and "is" are both supplied, they aren't in the Hebrew)
Logos 10 | Dell Inspiron 7373 | Windows 11 Pro 64, i7, 16GB, SSD | iPhone 13 Pro Max
0 -
How does that make it ok to add words that are not in the original Hebrew text?
Hebrew isn't English. Greek isn't English. When you want to convey the same thing in another language, you have to make choices. There is absolutely, positively no such thing as a 1=1 correlation in any language. If you want a 1=1 correlation, you have to stick to the original languages alone.
Consider this German Word: rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz. How would you translate that into English? You can NOT translate it into a single word. Google's attempt at a "word for word" translation is "beef labeling monitoring task transfer law." A more natural english translation would be ""the law for the delegation of monitoring beef labeling."
http://theweek.com/articles/463500/8-favorite-ridiculously-long-german-words
0 -
But why add "contrary"? The preposition means "to" or "towards"
0 -
-
-
What alabama24 said.
Also, though I would share your reservations about the change in Gen 3:16, I think there's more going on linguistically than what you put forward.
0 -
Hi
it looks like it is still the case that there is no ETA.... this is what Customer Support sent me on Sunday:
"As of this time we do not have an estimated time of completion for the ESV Permanent Text Version.I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused."
A colleague of mine tells me that Accordance already has these updates.
Colin
0 -
I pray that this helps you.. This is my source.. though strictly not the best CT has never been sloppy nor played footloose with the facts.. In other words. if Ct says it then you can take it to the bank.. here's the link..
0 -
Try this one.. it goes to CT. A trustworthy Magazine that reports on all aspects of the faith and peripherals..
0 -
an update is a small change in wording here and there.. Those are supposed to be free in accordance with ebook etiquette.. hundreds or thousands of textual changes involving rewording entire sentences and or paragraphs changing meaning dramatically is considered a revision and in such cases being a new book a price will need to be payed.. though usually with the ebook versions such formalities are dispensed with.. Bibles excepted.. Mamon is very important to churches.. she is broke I guess..
0 -
I have had some strange dealing with logos in the past so I can safely say that it is totally possible that it is not the ESV publishers charging for the updates but Logos who is charging for it implying that the ESV people want the money.. perhaps I can locate the ESV phone number and ask about this.. I would not be surprised to find that it is Logos trying to make the money like when the student prophet went after the general after he was healed and told him that Elijah or Elisha had changed his mind and that now he wanted money for the healing as his reward.. Caveat emptor..
0 -
I don't have an ETA on when the update to the ESV will be finished on our end.
I can say owners of the Logos edition will receive those changes for free. As with any resource updates, once we re-publish the updated resource owners of the Bible will automatically receive a download of the updated Bible.
0 -
My concern with all this is that the ESV is no longer an "essentially literal" translation. The editor's agenda clearly influenced their translation of Gen. 3:16. Why not leave it as it was and let the reader make their own conclusion. The ESV is now just another NIV. Too bad. I really liked the ESV.
0 -
One verse?
0 -
I don't have an ETA on when the update to the ESV will be finished on our end.
Any possibility of interlinear with 2008, 2011, 2016 textual variants ?
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
I don't have an ETA on when the update to the ESV will be finished on our end.
Any possibility of interlinear with 2008, 2011, 2016 textual variants ?
THIS.
Logos has an option to really shine on this. The digital format should enable some kind of marker, or embedded commentary on changes like this.
While I think it should be part of the resource, it could be as simple as a note file that is automatically shared for all users.
Sarcasm is my love language. Obviously I love you. 0 -
My concern with all this is that the ESV is no longer an "essentially literal" translation. The editor's agenda clearly influenced their translation of Gen. 3:16. Why not leave it as it was and let the reader make their own conclusion. The ESV is now just another NIV. Too bad. I really liked the ESV.
I mostly align theologically with the publishers of the ESV, and I can see why they translate some of the things they do. But I do wish they were a bit more neutral in the translation of some things instead of imposing a reformed perspective on those translations. I don't think I'll ever forget the Bible study discussion around Gen 3:16 the first time we went through it, but the change they're making (even though I agree with their interpretation) takes that fruitful discussion away by hiding some of the Hebrew nuance.
I don't know that ESV has ever tried to be literal the way the NASB has. Everyone is on the literal to dynamic equivalent spectrum, and I believe they always knew they shaded away from the literal side. They wanted to be as literal as possible while maintaining natural readability.
0 -
I don't have an ETA on when the update to the ESV will be finished on our end.
Any possibility of interlinear with 2008, 2011, 2016 textual variants ?
THIS.
Logos has an option to really shine on this. The digital format should enable some kind of marker, or embedded commentary on changes like this.
While I think it should be part of the resource, it could be as simple as a note file that is automatically shared for all users.
We discussed something like this but unfortunately it does not look like it will be able to happen at this time.
0 -
This is a helpful summary of the situation, including a link to the academic article (by Poh) on which the translation "contrary" is based:
http://www.dennyburk.com/four-quick-points-on-the-esvs-rendering-of-genesis-316/
(It's actually 5 points.)
FYI...
Donnie
0 -
We discussed something like this but unfortunately it does not look like it will be able to happen at this time.
If this has been answered before, my apologies. Will this version of ESV be a new resource, or will it completely replace the current ESV resource? I much prefer that it be a new resource. And, if it is, the text comparison tool will make the changes pretty apparent.
Donnie
0 -
We discussed something like this but unfortunately it does not look like it will be able to happen at this time.
If this has been answered before, my apologies. Will this version of ESV be a new resource, or will it completely replace the current ESV resource? I much prefer that it be a new resource. And, if it is, the text comparison tool will make the changes pretty apparent.
Donnie
It will replace the current ESV resource.
0
