00:00 Intro 02:00 1) Begotten 02:47 2) Seed 03:49 3) Textus Receptus or Majority Text in the main text in brackets (like NASB does) 05:30 4) Give us more information in the notes 06:16 5) Stable text (like NKJV) 07:25 Outro
I agree with you. There hasn't been that big of a change in English from 2016 to 2024 to necessarily need a text update but a footnote update for newer discoveries would work.
Dude! You nailed it. Every single one of these other than the last one have been my gradual beef with the ESV over the years, which is why I’ve slowly been turning over to the legacy standard Bible, which does all these things.
I have my first NASB delivering tomorrow excited to see what it's like. For me I spend a lot of time bouncing between the CSB (my current daily) and the NLT for depth and change of perspective. I also throw the NIV in just because I was raised in the NIV translation. I think having a stable of translations is a good thing when it comes to study and understanding the depth of scripture. Great vid brother keep up the good work. God Bless
I’ve been reading from the NKJV and the NLT. I had to see what the ESV is all about, ordered one, and am thoroughly enjoying it. I wasn’t going to put any markings in this book, but I had to add the “begotten” and the “seed” to my new bible! I’m enjoying your videos. Thanks for sharing your wisdom with us.
You can find a lot of what you like to change . in the LSB translation But yes it seems to early for an update on the esv ..... I agree bègotten and seed should be put into the esv.
I’ve heard that monogenes may not really be accurately translated as “begotten,” as the Gk word monogenes conveys a meaning of “unique.” The CSB and BSB translate it “one and only” instead of “begotten.” But I do agree, there seems to be something missing by translating John 3:16 as “only Son.” The BSB is currently my main translation and I supplement it with the ESV and NASB. I’ve started dabbling in the NRSV recently as well.
Very good suggestions- I think that a majority text ESV would be great- but I’m a nkjv guy since 1984 . I’ve said it before but in 1984, sitting in the barber waiting room, and my former pastor was leaving and I asked him, “ what bible translation would you recommend, he said look into the nkjv it’s new and the Greek is very good. Didn’t understand a word he said but I did know where I could find a copy of the nkjv- it’s my go to and a great translation to live your life around.
About the NASB and having some verses in brackets. It no longer applies to the NASB 2020 update. For example they removed Acts 8:37 to the footnotes. I’m not using the NASB any longer. I hope the ESV updates all the verses with ‘poor’ English. Be blessed.
I thought you were going to go big. I really wish the ESV incorporated the format from the NASB or what I call “helps.” Italicize added words, OT references in all caps, capitalize God’s pronouns. I’d be good if they just put out a single edition like that, but I’m sure that would be a major undertaking.
I would be happy if they didn’t keep making updates to it. It makes me feel like it’s a cash grab. The funny thing is I have 1 nkjv that doesn’t make updates and 5 ESVs, so I guess they know I will still buy them.
@@coltonyarbro the reason why 0 verses should be “removed” is because they pick and choose when to remove. John 19:30 “it is finished” is also not found in the earliest manuscripts but they do leave that in. Picking and choosing what to remove from God’s word is not a healthy practice. Bracketing is much more respectable.
If I may, I'd like to add some thoughts that, I think, are important: 1. In Colossians 2:8 and 2:20, stop translating the Greek as "elemental spirits" and translate it as "elementary principles." It's clear that Paul is talking about principles, much like in Galatians 4:9, and not "elemental spirits." 2. As @sandersca has stated, it would be *very nice* to see added words and phrases in italics. 3. These next two points are probably my biggest. Both are found in Hebrews. First, *please* render Hebrews 9:9 as "which is symbolic for the age then present." It's fairly clear that the writer of Hebrews is speaking of the old covenant age, and not of the present age, when he says that "the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing." Basically, he is indicating that the Lord Jesus, by His death and resurrection, *has opened the way into the most holy place* (please go read the whole chapter for context!). 4. Second, *please* render the word "will" as *"covenant"* in Hebrews 9:16-17. The writer *clearly* intends to refer to a covenant, not a "will," and if you read verses 15-19, it's plain to the reader that it makes no sense to translate "covenant" as "will" when that was never a part of the context in the first place. I understand wanting to make the text more "readable" to a wider audience, but the word "covenant" is used throughout the whole of Scripture. It seems ridiculous, to me, to break that trend in Scripture just to try and make *two verses* easier to read. I hope I haven't come across as rude or arrogant. I'm rather passionate about points 1, 3, and 4, because I'm passionate about the consistency of the language of the writers of Scripture. If anyone has bothered to suffer through my tangent, I appreciate your time!
Why use a Bible that constantly needs updating? Not updating for changes in English usage, but because the translation was not done accurately as it could be? I have not found the ESV to be all that accurate overall and do not use it any longer. The marketing given to it is way overblown and even misleading.
00:00 Intro
02:00 1) Begotten
02:47 2) Seed
03:49 3) Textus Receptus or Majority Text in the main text in brackets (like NASB does)
05:30 4) Give us more information in the notes
06:16 5) Stable text (like NKJV)
07:25 Outro
@@philtheo thanks!
I wish at least one edition of the ESV had supplied words in italics.
That's something the LSB does, it doesn't italicize them but it puts an astrix. That is something I really enjoy about it
I agree with you. There hasn't been that big of a change in English from 2016 to 2024 to necessarily need a text update but a footnote update for newer discoveries would work.
I have to agree on all your points!
Dude! You nailed it. Every single one of these other than the last one have been my gradual beef with the ESV over the years, which is why I’ve slowly been turning over to the legacy standard Bible, which does all these things.
I agree with 100% of this!!! God bless!
I have my first NASB delivering tomorrow excited to see what it's like.
For me I spend a lot of time bouncing between the CSB (my current daily) and the NLT for depth and change of perspective. I also throw the NIV in just because I was raised in the NIV translation. I think having a stable of translations is a good thing when it comes to study and understanding the depth of scripture.
Great vid brother keep up the good work. God Bless
Thanks man. I love the NASB95!
I’ve been reading from the NKJV and the NLT. I had to see what the ESV is all about, ordered one, and am thoroughly enjoying it. I wasn’t going to put any markings in this book, but I had to add the “begotten” and the “seed” to my new bible! I’m enjoying your videos. Thanks for sharing your wisdom with us.
Thank you so much for watching! Glad you are enjoying the ESV.
Completely agree with your thoughts here.
I agree with all of you suggestions.
Particularly the foot note upgrade, and to just leave it alone for a while!!
You can find a lot of what you like to change . in the LSB translation
But yes it seems to early for an update on the esv .....
I agree bègotten and seed should be put into the esv.
Thanks brother, appreciate your thoughts.
Thank you for watching 😃
I would add to your list to add reclined at THE table.
OMG yes!! 😂
I agree with all 5, and would add to it the added words for clarity in italics.
Nooo! Colton, what have you done?! Now the ESV is going to release 5 new text updates 🥺
🤣 nah man. I have no power here 😅
I can get behind these recommendations!
so.... in other words, just read the NKJV folks
Or NASB…
@coltonyarbro Except that NaSB reads awkward in many places and it doesn't contain all of the debated passages (like 1 John 5:7)
Hi, I'm from Brazil. I've recently bought the ESV and NKJV from Logos and I've been loving to read and study my Bible with the ESV.
I’ve heard that monogenes may not really be accurately translated as “begotten,” as the Gk word monogenes conveys a meaning of “unique.” The CSB and BSB translate it “one and only” instead of “begotten.” But I do agree, there seems to be something missing by translating John 3:16 as “only Son.”
The BSB is currently my main translation and I supplement it with the ESV and NASB. I’ve started dabbling in the NRSV recently as well.
@@lunchandlearn I recommend Simply Trinity by Matthew Barrett. He argues a good case for it being translated as “begotten”
Very good suggestions- I think that a majority text ESV would be great- but I’m a nkjv guy since 1984 . I’ve said it before but in 1984, sitting in the barber waiting room, and my former pastor was leaving and I asked him, “ what bible translation would you recommend, he said look into the nkjv it’s new and the Greek is very good. Didn’t understand a word he said but I did know where I could find a copy of the nkjv- it’s my go to and a great translation to live your life around.
Sounds like you should just read the NKJV.
I do read it. But yeah I have contemplated switching to it as a main translation….just haven’t been able to do that for some reason.
5:38
Cool
Sounds like you should use the NASB! 🤪
Right! I love the NASB, but I prefer the ESV prose.
Has anyone heard anything new on whether the update is going to happen or not? It’s been a while since Grudem mentioned it.
@@magnumpa6644 haven’t heard anything since
Hi I very good 👍 job.
The NASB2020 went the way of the other bibles and removed the bracketed text .😢
😞
About the NASB and having some verses in brackets. It no longer applies to the NASB 2020 update. For example they removed Acts 8:37 to the footnotes. I’m not using the NASB any longer. I hope the ESV updates all the verses with ‘poor’ English. Be blessed.
Didn’t realize that about the 2020. I haven’t really looked into that much. Thanks for the info.
I thought you were going to go big. I really wish the ESV incorporated the format from the NASB or what I call “helps.” Italicize added words, OT references in all caps, capitalize God’s pronouns. I’d be good if they just put out a single edition like that, but I’m sure that would be a major undertaking.
All hail NKJV! LOL. I love NKJV. Very stable and great translation.
All of this is why I went back to the KJV. Yes, it has some parts that are hard to understand, but it is worth it.
Foot noting is same as removing for 99% Bible readers. Also NASB doesn’t leave all in the text.
Yea, the 2020 update removed some verses from the text even thought hey were previously in brackets.
@@Eddievilar and the 1995
The only thing I’d like to see besides a more stable text is that they revert to using the word “for” instead of “contrary to” in Genesis 3 and 4
Understandable
I would be happy if they didn’t keep making updates to it.
It makes me feel like it’s a cash grab.
The funny thing is I have 1 nkjv that doesn’t make updates and 5 ESVs, so I guess they know I will still buy them.
They should make a TR ESV
That would be awesome
@@coltonyarbro i just saw your comment at 3:58 about bracketing the TR verses. 100% agree.
@@coltonyarbro the reason why 0 verses should be “removed” is because they pick and choose when to remove. John 19:30 “it is finished” is also not found in the earliest manuscripts but they do leave that in. Picking and choosing what to remove from God’s word is not a healthy practice. Bracketing is much more respectable.
If I may, I'd like to add some thoughts that, I think, are important:
1. In Colossians 2:8 and 2:20, stop translating the Greek as "elemental spirits" and translate it as "elementary principles." It's clear that Paul is talking about principles, much like in Galatians 4:9, and not "elemental spirits."
2. As @sandersca has stated, it would be *very nice* to see added words and phrases in italics.
3. These next two points are probably my biggest. Both are found in Hebrews. First, *please* render Hebrews 9:9 as "which is symbolic for the age then present." It's fairly clear that the writer of Hebrews is speaking of the old covenant age, and not of the present age, when he says that "the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing." Basically, he is indicating that the Lord Jesus, by His death and resurrection, *has opened the way into the most holy place* (please go read the whole chapter for context!).
4. Second, *please* render the word "will" as *"covenant"* in Hebrews 9:16-17. The writer *clearly* intends to refer to a covenant, not a "will," and if you read verses 15-19, it's plain to the reader that it makes no sense to translate "covenant" as "will" when that was never a part of the context in the first place. I understand wanting to make the text more "readable" to a wider audience, but the word "covenant" is used throughout the whole of Scripture. It seems ridiculous, to me, to break that trend in Scripture just to try and make *two verses* easier to read.
I hope I haven't come across as rude or arrogant. I'm rather passionate about points 1, 3, and 4, because I'm passionate about the consistency of the language of the writers of Scripture. If anyone has bothered to suffer through my tangent, I appreciate your time!
KJV
So what?
Why use a Bible that constantly needs updating? Not updating for changes in English usage, but because the translation was not done accurately as it could be? I have not found the ESV to be all that accurate overall and do not use it any longer. The marketing given to it is way overblown and even misleading.
1 John 5:7 doesn't even get a footnote.
Yeah that’s true. It’s a controversial one.