Reading the Evangelical Heritage Version

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

I've recently completed reading the English Standard Version (ESV) in chronological sequence, as presented in the Today's Light Bible. The chronological order of reading is at the end of the book for those who are interested.

I'm now starting on a leisurely reading of the Holy Bible, Evangelical Heritage Version (EHV) from Northwestern Publishing House (2019). I would note my thanks to the layman who gave me this copy.

I will share thoughts about the translation and publication on this thread. If others are reading this new translation, I invite them also to share their thoughts. And as always, where persons wish to comment on topics relevant to the thread, I hope they will.

GENESIS 1
The text is published in a single column and in paragraph format with content headers in the body of the text. The Bible paper is light grey, making the print clear without glare. Very readable. The footer includes a two sentence introduction to Genesis, regarding authorship, date, and contents. There are translator notes at the foot of the page in a smaller font. If there are other features like this as I read, I may comment on them. Otherwise, this should be enough to describe the basic appearance of the text.
1:9 The text includes a sentence from the Septuagint manuscripts, marked off by half brackets.
1:27 Set as poetry.
2:1 "along with everything in them." Footnote says, "Literally all their armies." The text presents a freer translation; the footnote is more literal, though I think the word for "armies" is actually singular in the Hebrew.

[Jim Butler]

Among some of the WELS people I know, the EHV is often referred to as the "John Brug Version." A few years ago, there was an overture to their convention asking the WELS to come up with their own translation. This was voted down after Northwestern Publishing said it would be too expensive of an undertaking. Brug disagreed and launched this project. IIRC, many of the translators and editors were parish pastors. Brug was convinced that the WELS training was good enough so that their pastors could actually do this kind of work.

I used it for my devotions a couple of years ago. It struck me as a solid contribution.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Among some of the WELS people I know, the EHV is often referred to as the "John Brug Version." A few years ago, there was an overture to their convention asking the WELS to come up with their own translation. This was voted down after Northwestern Publishing said it would be too expensive of an undertaking. Brug disagreed and launched this project. IIRC, many of the translators and editors were parish pastors. Brug was convinced that the WELS training was good enough so that their pastors could actually do this kind of work.

I used it for my devotions a couple of years ago. It struck me as a solid contribution.

It is likely a very good and worthwhile translation. I was looking forward to exploring it but wanted to finish my chronological reading.

I think that capable pastors would do a good job translating, especially if they were able to consult with more expert persons. Pastors hear the lay person's manner of speaking more than the experts and I think that would help with readability.

I will also be interested to see how they handle issues and passages along the way. I'm not aware of any controversy surrounding the work.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Genesis 2:4
"Development" is a different choice for translating a key word in Genesis (toledoth). I searched on Bible Gateway and found that EHV consistently uses this translation throughout Genesis. I wonder whether anyone has seen this translation in other versions. It perhaps signals the independence these translators have for exploring possibilities.
2:7 "living being." The more widely used translations also move away from KJV "living soul" for this passage. EHV does use "soul" often throughout the work.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Genesis 3:24
EHV has "in front of the Garden" rather than "east of the garden" as in most translations. The NIV has " in front" in a footnote.

[therevev]

Please keep this up. I don't have any experience with the EHV, but I appreciate how you look at the word usage.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Genesis 4:1
Translated quite literally, "I have gotten a man with the LORD." Luther's translation is footnoted as well as a Targum about the angel of the LORD. Both hint that Eve has messianic expectations.
4:5--6 Instead of the literal "face fallen," their freer translations are, "his face showed it [anger]" and "angry look on your face?" These examples, just verses apart, show the range of the translators. They are not following one approach strictly but choose literal or idiomatic style as they consider readability.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Genesis 5:24
"Enoch walked with God. Then, he was not there, for God took him." A reasonable, conservative rendering.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Genesis 6
This section includes interpretive footnotes that go beyond the typical translation footnotes. They regard "sons of God" (2:2; Sethites) and the Nephilim (2:4), described as "powerful, famous men (v. 4c). They choose the traditional transliteration "gopher wood" (v. 14) over translating as cypress, which is footnoted as a popular interpretation.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Genesis 7:3
Half brackets here, including text from the Septuagint based on a proposed scribal error.
7:6 A footnote gives "deluge" as an alternative for "flood." Do any recent translations use "deluge"?
7:15, 21 Footnotes state the literal reading "all flesh"; the body text translates with "all the animals" and "all living creatures." Why not translate both in the same way?

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Genesis 8:19
"Species by species" in the body text; "Literally by their families" in the footnote. It clarifies that narrow scientific species are not intended but this is, I think, an unusual choice. Others have families or kinds, typically.
8:21 "the thoughts he forms in his heart." This is a freer translation. The verb "forms" is supplied. The singular noun for thought in Hebrew is usually translated "intention" or "inclination."

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Genesis 10:5
This passage is variously translated in the different versions. EHV has "peoples" where others have "Gentiles"; "ethnic groups" where others have "clans" or "families."

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Genesis 11:13
Extensive footnote about textual issues in the Septuagint. The translation team seems to show special interest in the Septuagint and its variants.
12:8 "proclaimed the name of the Lord," literally, "called on." This is a common expression in Hebrew that, I think, typically describes prayer. The EHV presents passages with this expression as examples of preaching. Cf. Genesis 4:26.

I looked over Holladay's lexicon and could not find a specific example translated "proclaimed" when the verb appears with the preposition. I searched other translations and found no other examples of translating this passage as "proclaimed." This appears to be a unique understanding of the idiom. I invite others to share further examples if they are aware of them.

[Rev. Edward Engelbrecht]

Genesis 17:12
"money." The note points out this is literally silver, which is important to the cultural setting. There was no coinage at this early time, just bit-silver or gold. I wonder whether the translation "money" is necessary.

[Harvey_Mozolak]

"silver-used-as-money"...  hyphens used as word connectors...

I suppose for an archeologist or someone studying the history of money or cultural economics... for them the distinction between translations of terms is helpful.  But some words have nothing to do with theology or any salvic content of Scripture and should be treated as such.  In fact, do we know if the material cited was actual silver, what quality of silver by our present day standards or just something that looked like silver but really was another mineral (if there is such a thing comparable to fool's gold)? 

This topic of yours is interesting to follow because it does heighten our understanding of the products of translators. Thank you.  It would also be interesting to know what standards are used and subscribed to by translators and how well they followed them and any discussion or decision making that went on as the translation was accepted for print.