A friend sent me your post regarding the translation known as ISV. I, like you, do not believe the ISV to be a consistent or accurate translation of the originals. I would like to ask you, what translation errors have you noted in your research of the ESV text? Finally, what seems to be more accurate in the WEB Bible than the ESV?
The ones I noted are:
Matthew 5:17 it uses the word abolish, instead of destroy. It is a minor complaint, but it causes an appearance of conflict when compared to Ephesians 2:15 where a different word is also translated as abolish. Interestingly, it translates the same word from Matthew 5:17 differently in Matthew 24:2.
Philippians 2:6 it uses the past tense where the Greek is written in the present tense. This can make it appear that Jesus was deity before coming to the world, but stopped while he was here -- an idea not supported by the Greek.
Romans 4:3, 9 the word eis which is forward looking is translated as "as" instead of the usual "for" or "unto" which makes it appear that Abraham's faith was equated to righteousness instead of leading to righteousness.
In I Corinthians 11:3-15 I really don't like their treatment of man and woman. Though the Greek uses consistent terms in this section, the ESV makes it appear as if there are four terms being used (man, husband, woman, and wife). It is quit clear that flexible treatment of the terms shows the translators opinion that women in general are not submissive to men in general, yet they could not change all instances of woman into wife and all men into husbands because the passage become nonsensical. For example, the choice is clearly opinion when they used the general man in "the head of every man is Christ" but then immediately switch to the specific in saying "the head of a wife is her husband."
It is not consistent in its translation of "hades" for no apparent reason. Compare Matthew 16:18 to Acts 2:27.
In Matthew 16:18 the footnote says "Peter sounds like the Greek word for rock" but it fails to note that the two words are for different size or quantity of rock.
In Matthew 16:19 and Matthew 18:18, at least the more literal reading of Jesus statement is marked in the footnotes.
In comparison of these passages:
||Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.||Don't think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn't come to destroy, but to fulfill.
||And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.||I also tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my assembly, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.
||I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.||I will give to you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will have been bound in heaven; and whatever you release on earth will have been released in heaven.
||But he answered them, "You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down."||But he answered them, "Don't you see all of these things? Most certainly I tell you, there will not be left here one stone on another, that will not be thrown down.
||For you will not abandon my soul to Hades, or let your Holy One see corruption.||because you will not leave my soul in Hades, neither will you allow your Holy One to see decay.
||For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness."||For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness."
||Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness.||Is this blessing then pronounced on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness.
|I Corinthians 11:3-15
||But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head--it is the same as if her head were shaven. For if a wife will not cover her head, then she should cut her hair short. But since it is disgraceful for a wife to cut off her hair or shave her head, let her cover her head. For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God. Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering.||But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. But every woman praying or prophesying with her head unveiled dishonors her head. For it is one and the same thing as if she were shaved. For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to have his head covered, because he is the image and glory of God, but the woman is the glory of the man. For man is not from woman, but woman from man; for neither was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. For this cause the woman ought to have authority on her head, because of the angels. Nevertheless, neither is the woman independent of the man, nor the man independent of the woman, in the Lord. For as woman came from man, so a man also comes through a woman; but all things are from God. Judge for yourselves. Is it appropriate that a woman pray to God unveiled? Doesn't even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her, for her hair is given to her for a covering.
||by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,||having abolished in the flesh the hostility, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man of the two, making peace;
||who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,||who, existing in the form of God, didn't consider equality with God a thing to be grasped,