Comments on: THE ENGLISH STANDARD VERSION | @ terra nova

By: sandeep

sandeep — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 20:28:48 +0000

I have been visiting sources like that lately. That’s the most important point of everything. That’s why I can professionally say that this information is objective and sounds true to me

By: Phil Taylor [executive pastor]

Phil Taylor [executive pastor] — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:43:24 +0000

At least 25 in regular use today. Historically speaking–hundreds.
I use ESV or NET for solid study, I read NLT quite often because I like the way it flows. I keep “The Message” next to my favorite chair and read it several times a week.

By: Blunder1

Blunder1 — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 22:08:14 +0000

Phil
About how many translations are there in English? I used to swear by the NIV but read the NKJV and obviously the ESV since Terra is using it now. I still have The Way that my mother gave me when I was 10. (The hippie bible paraphrase) It’s a trippy bible.

By: Phil Taylor [executive pastor]

Phil Taylor [executive pastor] — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 22:59:21 +0000

Clay,
You are correct in saying that the message is not a translation in the strict sense of the word. You and I are seminary buddies, so we know the full lingo, but I think the average person at church is unaware of the difference between a word for word translation, dynamic equivalence, paraphrase, etc. When I’m talking to a wider audience, I don’t typically refer to the message as a paraphrase.

By: clay

clay — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 03:46:02 +0000

Phil, Rich post. I too am an ESV early-adopter. I noticed you mentioned “The Message” (which I love… and have great respect for Eugene Peterson’s translation work) as a translation. I’ve often referred to it as a paraphrase. Do you think the differentiation is necesary or helpful. Just wondering?

By: Rachael

Rachael — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 03:11:29 +0000

Right on, Dudes! I’m all about that.