As a church planter, I’m always looking for the best tools for new believers to begin to study God’s Word. The first place to start is what kind of Bible to invest in. For the record, there’s a lot of translations and study Bibles that are in the “not so good” category. And I’ve experimented with a bunch.
For me, and for everyone involved in the core of our young church, the ESV study Bible is the best choice. Let me put some things on the table that help one determine which study Bible is the best one for everyday use through a series of frequently asked questions.
1. Why do I need a “study” Bible? Short answer: for inductive Bible Study. Dr. Howard Hendricks from Dallas Theological Seminary has taught a course on Bible Study methods for decades and here are some basics.
A good study Bible will help you determine who is writing or speaking and to whom?
A Good study Bible will help you determine what is the passage about?
A good study Bible will help you determine when the events in the take place so that you can develop a context for the passage?
A good study Bible will help you understand geography and how this plays into a proper context.
A good study Bible will give you a sitz im laben (Sitz im Leben is a German phrase roughly translating to "setting in life". The term originated with the German Protestant theologian Hermann Gunkel. At its simplest, it describes what occasions certain passages in the Bible were written for, and is often called the “genres" of the Bible. Simple examples of Sitz im Leben include the classification of material into letters, poems of lament, parables, Psalms, and songs. However, Sitz im Leben can also involve many other considerations; who the speaker of a passage was, their role in life, the nature of their audience, and so on.
A good Bible Study will help you determine what problems were the recipients facing?
A good Bible Study will help you determine how does a passage fits in with the context and the entire Bible (What goes before and after and how does it tie in with the book and the Bible as a whole?)
2. What is the best translation? Leland Ryken has done a good job…along with others and has published book on translation theory. The bottom line is that there are two different center of gravities for translation: Literal vs. Dynamic Equivalent. WE NEED TO STAY WITH THE LITERAL TRANSLATION for our Bible Study. Consulting a dynamic equivalent for cross reference is fine, but the meat and potatoes grunt work of Bible Study needs to be in a literal translation. Here’s why in Ryken’s own words:
THOUGHT-FOR-THOUGHTOR
WORD-FOR-WORD?
How should we define dynamic equivalence? Dynamic equiv-
alence is a theory of translation based on the premise that
whenever something in the original text is foreign or unclear
to a contemporary English reader, the original text should be
translated in terms of an equivalent rather than literally. In
actual practice, dynamic equivalence goes far beyond this by
frequently making interpretive decisions for the reader and
adding commentary to the text. Dynamic equivalence is pop-
ularly known as a thought-for-thought translation instead of
a word-for-word translation.
Many readers do not realize the far-reaching significance of
what is being said by means of specialized language in the pref-
aces to dynamic equivalent translations. Here are some repre-
sentative quotations (with italics added to highlight the key
phrases):
•“[The translator’s] first task was to understand cor-
rectly the meaningof the original” (GNB).
•“... a thought-for-thoughttranslation” (NLT).
•“. . . to reclothe the meaningof the original in the
words and structure of American English” (SEB).
• “…The first concern of the translators has been . . .
fidelity to the thoughtof the biblical writers” (NIV).
It is easy to miss what is being denied in these statements.
What is being denied is that the translator has any responsi-
bility to translate the exact words of the original. I am not say-
ing that dynamic equivalent translators pay no attention to the
How Do Bible Translations Differ from Each Other?
I am saying that they feel no obliga-
tion to express the exact words of the original in English. By
contrast, essentially literal translations do strive to retain the
words of the original, as they make clear in their prefaces.
Here is my concern: Most readers of dynamic equivalent
translations do not have any understanding as to the liberties
that have been taken with the words of the original text. What
dynamic translators give us is a translation plus a commentary, but
we have no way of knowing where translation ends and the trans-
lation committee’s commentary begins.
The most revealing thing that I uncovered while doing the
research for my book was what I found in the prefaces to
dynamic equivalent translations. As you read the following
sample statements, I invite you to see if you can catch the com-
mon thread (italics have been added to highlight the key
phrases):
•This translation seeks “to express the meaning in a
manner and form easily understood by the readers”
(GNB).
•“Metaphorical language is often difficult for contem-
porary readersto understand, so at times we have
chosen to translate or illuminate the metaphor” (NLT).
•“Because for most readerstoday the phrases ‘the Lord
of hosts’ and ‘God of hosts’ have little meaning, this
version renders them ‘the Lord Almighty’ and ‘God
Almighty’” (NIV).
•“Ancient customs are often unfamiliar to modern
readers” (NEWCENTURYVERSION).
•“We have used the vocabulary and language struc-
tures . . . of a junior high student” (NLT).
Who is calling the shots for these translations—the biblical
author or the modern reader? As John MacArthur has noted.
The ESV states there own translation philosophy very well: “The ESV is an essentially literal translation that seeks as far as possible to capture the precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer. As such, its emphasis is on “word-for-word” correspondence, at the same time taking into account differences of grammar, syntax, and idiom between current literary English and the original languages. Thus it seeks to be transparent to the original text, letting the reader see as directly as possible the structure and meaning of the original.
In contrast to the ESV, other translations, have followed a “thought-for-thought” rather than “word-for-word” translation philosophy, emphasizing “dynamic equivalence” rather than the “essentially literal” meaning of the original. A “thought-for-thought” translation is of necessity more inclined to reflect the interpretive opinions of the translator and the influences of contemporary culture.”
Every translation is at many points a trade-off between literal precision and readability, between “formal equivalence” in expression and “functional equivalence” in communication, and the ESV is no exception. Within this framework they have sought to be “as literal as possible” while maintaining clarity of expression and literary excellence.
Hands down, the ESV offers the best translation for everyday use.
3. Why the ESV Study Bible? The ESV Study Bible has truly strived not only to maintain a traditional, conservative theological perspective but also to identify and carefully critique interpretations that are inconsistent with this perspective. In the Preface, the editors definitively state,
The doctrinal perspective of the ESV Study Bible is that of classic evangelical orthodoxy, in the historic stream of the Reformation. (p. 10)
Within this broad “stream” the editors have sought “to represent fairly the various evangelical positions on disputed topics” (p. 11). Considering that many previous study Bibles, especially those by single individuals, present a distinct and sometimes inflexible position on matters disputed among orthodox evangelicals and that other study Bibles give way to some critical-liberal views, the ESVSB fills an important gap.
In regard to aberrant interpretations, the editors of the ESVSB state,
In passages where errors or contradictions have been alleged, possible solutions to these challenges have been proposed. At time the notes also summarize interpretations that are inconsistent with classic evangelical orthodoxy, indicating how and why such views are in conflict with Scripture. (p. 11)
The readability of the ESVSB is unmatched. The nine-point text type in single-column, book-text format is clear, crisp, and easy to read. The paragraphed view also aids readability and is especially helpful in the poetic sections. The cross-references (80,000-plus) are included in the inside margins. I have found them to be superior to any other cross-reference system I have used.
The comprehensive scope of the ESVSB is unmatched as well. This Study Bible hits a home run with excellent cross-references; full-color maps (200-plus); full-color dimensional views of key structures, cities, and objects; charts (200-plus); illustrations (40) spread throughout the notes; the words of Christ in black; an expansive and easy-to-manage concordance; carefully written and harmonized articles (50-plus); and the lack of a thumb index (which would take away from the little margin space available for note-taking).
Articles are scattered throughout this Study Bible. Each book is introduced with discussions of Author and Title; Date; Theme; Purpose, Occasion and Background; Key Themes; History of Salvation Summary; Literary Features; and an Outline. Study notes include a highlighted summary of each major section following the outline. Words from the text of Scripture are displayed in bold letters for easy location.
Content.
The cost is less than $35, a night out with your spouse, family, or friend. Stay home and make the purchase. It may be the best tool for understanding God’s Word that you have every invested in.
Toward Better Worship on Sunday...
15 years ago
Posts
