ESV Apocrypha on the way
I thank Bob Burns for the news that an ESV Apocrypha is on the way. The following now appears at the official ESV website FAQ page:
Crossway will not be publishing the ESV in editions with the Apocrypha. An edition of the ESV with Apocrypha is being developed by another publisher, which we expect will be announced in mid to late 2008.
posted by Peter Kirk at 10:10 AM
11 Comments:
That is some really good news for some of us who are Catholic and are looking for additional Scripture translations with the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonicals included. I have always appreciated the NRSV team, and in particular HarperCollins, for producing editions of the NRSV without Apocrypha, full Apocrypha, and a Catholic edition. It would be great to see the ESV done in the same way.
Maybe this will spur on the TNIV folks to do the same. I recently emailed the TNIV committee suggesting they do this, and I was happy to receive a nice email stating that they would certainly take seriously the comment I sent them.
This is both surprising and welcome news! I too hope this will push other Bible translation committees to publish editions with the deuterocanon. I do hope, of course, that all of the deuterocanonical books available in the RSV will be included, and not only the 7 which the Roman Catholics accept in their canon.
This is great news. Will be nice to see some more information on this.
Kevin Edgecomb writes the following on Biblicalist:
Dave, I wrote to them a while ago asking that very question. I can't
find the response right now, but the answer was that the ESV team is
not going to do the apocrypha, but rather this non-Crossway publisher
is going to include some other version's apocrypha in their edition.
It's an interesting idea. The only complete set in English is that of
the RSV and NRSV. It'll be interesting to see if the NCC will permit
their use in combination with an ESV.
So maybe not quite as good news as Tim and Esteban thought.
Peter,
Thanks for that update. It would seem to make sense, since Crossway isn't going to do a fresh translation. I wonder which, RSV or NRSV, the would choose? At first, I would think the RSV would be a better match, but I could be wrong.
I wish the TNIV would do the same. I'll be interested in this.
Of course I would want it to do its own translation.
Blessed Easter on all! The Lord is risen indeed!!!
Hmm, borrowing another translation is not what I would consider an ESV Apocrypha. Perhaps it was too good to be true after all. Guess the only thing left to do is wait and see.
Hmm, borrowing another translation is not what I would consider an ESV Apocrypha.
But since the ESV is just a very minor stylistic revision (but more major doctrinal revision) of the RSV, I would think that someone could do a similar revision of the RSV Apocrypha to include with the ESV.
Wayne, you seem to be implying that the ESV is presenting major doctrinal error.
I am not aware of any 'major' (or minor come to that)revision of Doctrine in the ESV.
You may not like the way the ESV presents Gods word, but that is a long way from being equivalent to Doctrinal revision.
Glenn wrote:
Wayne, you seem to be implying that the ESV is presenting major doctrinal error.
Oh, not at all, Glenn. I'm sorry if my wording wasn't clearer. I was simply trying to repeat what the ESV team itself has said about its doctrinal revisions of the RSV. Conservatives had from the time the RSV was published considered several passages in the RSV to reflect liberal theology. The ESV team changed the wording of those passages to be in line with conservative theology.
I had absolutely no thought in my mind about the ESV presenting doctrinal error.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home