
A question I get asked a lot by my students is, “which Bible version is best?” The desire for a Bible that accurately and faithfully presents the Word of God in English (or whatever language you speak) is a noble desire. Unfortunately, the question is not easily answered. There are a number of factors that make a Bible version “the best.”
The best Bible version is one that was translated by a committee of linguists and that your home church uses. Translations that correspond to an individual’s reading level and that use the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek as their base text and not a previous English translation are ideal.
I will not be assessing every English Bible translation on the market today. Rather, I will assess the more mainstream and common versions that are translated by a committee of linguists: CSB, ESV, KJV, NASB, NET, NIV, NLT, NRSV. You may click on any version just listed to jump to that particular assessment. I will assess each version under the following headings: (1) base text and tradition legacy, (2) intended audience, (3) translation philosophy, (4) strengths and weaknesses, (5) unique features (if any), and (6) my concluding thoughts.
Three brief comments are necessary before I begin my assessment of the various English Bible versions. First, many versions use the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts. For the Old Testament, the base Hebrew & Aramaic text is the BHS (Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia). The BHS is the oldest known complete manuscripts of the Old Testament in Hebrew and Aramaic and dates from the 10th-century AD. This is the base text of most Old Testaments. Most scholars working on the translation of the OT also consult other Hebrew manuscripts (such as the Dead Sea Scrolls) and other ancient translations of the OT to help determine the original wording and meaning. For the New Testament, the base Greek text is the NA27/28 or UBS4/5. The text is the same in both the UBS and NA. This text is an eclectic text put together by scholars after sifting through the nearly 6,000 Greek New Testament manuscripts. This is the base text of many New Testaments, but every version has the right to disagree with it and adopt a variant reading (all variants are listed in the NA edition).
Second, many of my examples will come from 1 Thessalonians so that you can better see the similarities and differences between various translations and because I just finished writing a study on 1 Thessalonians, so have been in the text for a while.
Third, because I am assessing the translations produced by a committee of linguists, I will not assess single-author translations, such as The Message or The Passion Translation because these are not quality translations. I will make a brief comment on the Message here, however, because of its popularity. The Message claims to be “a contemporary rendering of the Bible” (emphasis added). As such, it is not an actual translation. The Message should be viewed as a commentary on the Bible and not a translation of the Bible. When viewed as a commentary, it is a good work that gives a pastor’s insight into the biblical text. It should never be viewed as a translation of the Bible and, as such, should not be used for Bible preaching or teaching.
Christian Standard Bible (CSB)
Base Text and Text Tradition
The CSB is an updated version of the HCSB (Holman Christian Standard Bible) that was first published in 2003. The name HCSB was changed to CSB in 2017. The HCSB is a completely new translation of the Bible. As such, it is not a revision or update of a previous version. The base text of the CSB is the BHS4, UBS5, and NA28. Because the base text is the original languages and not a previously published English translation, the CSB is not a slave to ‘popular’ words and phrases. Take John 3:16 as a great example. Instead of going with the King James version of “For God so loved the world . . . ,” the CSB can render it more accurately “For God loved the world in this way” (emphasis added).
Intended Audience
The intended audience for the CSB is the average English speaker and is at a similar reading level as the NIV, which means it is intended for someone with a 7–8th grade reading level (see my comments in my assessment of the NIV). According to the preface, the CSB is suitable for public and private reading, preaching, and devotional study.
Translation Philosophy
The CSB boasts a translation philosophy called “optimal equivalence,” which is a roundabout way of saying it employs aspects of formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. In short, the CSB prioritizes transfer of meaning based on the study of clauses, sentences, and discourses over word-for-word, but where the word count can remain the same, it will translate as such.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
At times, the CSB is not afraid to interpret the relationship between words, opting for specificity over ambiguity. For example, Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy praise the Thessalonians for their “work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess 1:3, ESV). As you can tell, there is ambiguity as to the relationship between “work” and “faith,” “labor” and “love,” and “steadfastness” and “hope.” The CSB eliminates the ambiguity by accurately translating 1 Thessalonians 1:3 as “your work produced by faith, your labor motivated by love, and your endurance inspired by hope in our Lord Jesus Christ” (emphasis added). This specificity allows the reader to better understand what is being said.
Weaknesses
The CSB does not always translate consistently, hindering the reader from easily seeing patterns in the biblical text. For example, in 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12, the Greek ἀλλά is used three times and greatly helps indicate the three main points of the passage (vv 2, 4, 7). Unfortunately, instead of translating each instance of ἀλλά the same, like most translations, the CSB uses two difference words: “On the contrary” (v 2), “Instead” (v 4), and “instead” (v 7). The same happens again in 1 Thessalonians 4:3–4 with the word ἁγιασμός being translated “sanctification” in verse 3 and “holiness” in verse 4.
I am also personally disappointed that the CSB reversed its position on God’s name, Yahweh. Its predecessor, the HCSB, would include God’s personal name at times in the translation (not consistently, however), which was a breath of fresh air since God’s personal name is in the original language. Unfortunately, the CSB now put’s God’s personal name Yahwehas “LORD”, like most translations.
Unique Features
The most unique feature of the CSB is that it boasts that all the translators and editors believe in the full inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture.
Concluding Thoughts
The CSB is a solid translation. It is good for use in reading, studying, or preaching. It is quite similar to the NIV, however, and I would be hard pressed if I had to recommend one over the other. I would say the CSB interprets a little less than the NIV, which may be desirable for some, but not for others. For those wishing to engage in serious Bible study, I would recommend the NET over the CSB.
For those wishing to purchase a CSB, click here for a standard edition found on Amazon.
English Standard Version (ESV)
Base Text and Text Tradition
The ESV uses the Revised Standard Version (RSV) as its base text and starting point, not the original languages:
“The words and phrases themselves grow out of the Tyndale-King James legacy, and most recently out of the RESV, with the 1971 RESV text providing the starting point for our work.”
(§2 of the Preface from the ESV
The translators and editors for the ESV weighed each word and phrase against the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek (BHS2 and NA27) to ensure accuracy (§2 of the Preface from the ESV), but it is not a fresh translation of the biblical text.
The ESV also sees itself in the tradition of William Tyndale’s New Testament (1526), the KJV (1611), and the RSV (1971). As such, the ESV retains many words and phrases from these traditions. For example, it retains the KJV translation of John 3:16, “For God so loved the world,” instead of the more accurate “For God loved the world in this way” (CSB, emphasis added, also see NET).
Intended Audience
The ESV claims that it is suited for public and private reading, preaching, and for both academic and devotional study. Thus, the intended audience seems to be someone with at least a 10th grade reading level.
Translation Philosophy
The ESV claims it is an “essentially literal” translation with an emphasis on “word-for-word correspondence” (§3 of the Preface from the ESV). However, as I show in my article about Bible translation found HERE, there is no such thing as a word-for-word translation or an “essentially literal” translation (whatever that means!). With that being said, I think the ESV strikes a good balance in its translation philosophy when it says,
“to the extent that plain English permits and the meaning in each case allows, we have sought to use the same English word for important recurring words in the original.”
(§3 of the Preface from the ESV
In short, the ESV does its best to keep the number of words and the word order of the original the same in its translation into English.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
The ESV does its best to translate the same words consistently. For example, in 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12, the Greek ἀλλάis used three times and greatly helps indicate the three main points of the passage (vv 2, 4, 7). The ESV translates these three terms with the same English word, “but.” Unfortunately, the better “rather” may be a better translation to show the contrastive nature of Paul’s argument.
I appreciate the ESV not bowing to the call for the elimination of the generic “he,” “son,” “brothers,” and like terms, stating,
“In each case the objective has been transparency to the original text, allowing the reader to understand the original on its own terms rather than on the terms of our present-day culture.”
(§4 of the Preface from the ESV
Weaknesses
Although the ESV says it wants its readers to understand “the original on its own terms rather than on the terms of our present-day culture” (§4 of the Preface from the ESV), it certainly abandons this when it comes to certain words, such as the Hebrew and Greek terms for “slave” (עֶבֶד/δοῦλος). The ESV rationalizes rarely using the English term “slave” when it says the word “currently carries associations with the often brutal and dehumanizing institutions of slavery in the nineteenth century America” (§5 of the Preface from the ESV). The problem with this is that δοῦλος always refers to a person who is owned by another person; a δοῦλος always has a κύριος (“master”). The Hebrew עֶבֶד also almost always refers to a person owned by another. Thus, “slavery” is the best English word for עֶבֶד and δοῦλος because “slavery” is the only word in the English language that refers to a person being owned by another person.
On another note, I don’t think the ESV goes far enough in its interpretation of various word relationships, such as genitives and participles. For example, Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy praise the Thessalonians for their “work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess 1:3). Unfortunately, the ESV does not indicate the relationship between “work” and “faith,” “labor” and “love,” and “steadfastness” and “hope.” Rather, the ESV leaves the relationship between these two words ambiguous by adding the word “of.” It is most likely that the modifying nouns “faith,” “love,” and “hope” are what produces the head nouns and should be translated something like “work produced by faith,” “labor produced by love,” and “steadfastness produced by hope in our Lord Jesus Christ.” If the ESV is going to add the word “of,” then they should add the more specific and accurate words “produced by” or something like it.
In another example, the participle “remembering” in 1 Thess 1:3 is ambiguous as to its relationship with the main verb “we give thanks.” It is likely that “remembering” is a causal participle and should be translated “because we remember,” eliminating the ambiguity altogether.
Concluding Thoughts
Overall, I think the ESV is a solid translation. I appreciate its consistency in translation, which assists in seeing patterns and structures in the biblical text that make it easier to understand and interpret. These consistencies also make the text easier to preach.
In its effort to be a “word-for-word” translation, the ESV has left many ambiguities in the biblical text that do not need to be there and (in my opinion) hinder its readers from fully understanding God’s word.
I would recommend the ESV for anyone with a 10th grade reading level who plans to preach or engage in serious Bible study.
For those wishing to purchase a ESV, click here for a standard edition found on Amazon.
King James Version (KJV)
Base Text and Text Tradition
The KJV uses two texts for its translation: the Masoretic Text (10th century AD) for the Old Testament and the Textus Receptus (16th century AD) for the New Testament. Although not a new translation to us since just over 400 years have passed since its publication, it was a new translation for its day.
Intended Audience
The intended audience was any and all English speakers in the 17th century AD.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
The KJV (like the ESV) does its best to translate the same words consistently. For example, in 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12, the Greek ἀλλά is used three times and greatly helps indicate the three main points of the passage (vv 2, 4, 7). The KJV translates these three terms with the same English word, “but.”
The KJV also employs punctuation that assists the reader in understanding passages. For example, the KJV separates each stage of Christ’s return in 1 Thessalonians 4:16–17 with colons, making the sequence of events clear.
Weaknesses
The two biggest weaknesses of the KJV are its language and base texts. The language of the KJV was great for the 17thand 18th centuries, but it is foreign to the vast majority of modern English speakers. Not only does the KJV use letters that have dropped out of use in modern English, but the spelling and sentence structure are quite foreign. As such, it could be considered a difference language than modern English.
Further, since it’s publication in 1611, many thousands of NT manuscripts and many OT manuscripts have been discovered that are older than the manuscripts that the KJV uses, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS). These discoveries have enabled textual critics to get closer to the original New Testament autographs and closer to the Bible of Jesus’ day than ever before. Unfortunately, the KJV does not incorporate these better manuscripts in its translation and as such the translation is flawed in places. NOTE: the New King James Version (NKJV) does not incorporate any of these new thousands of manuscripts in its translation either.
Unique Features
Many modern KJV Bibles italicize some of the places where the KJV has added words to the biblical text in its translation (that’s right, the KJV is not a word-for-word translation, see my article HERE about why word-for-word translations are impossible).
The KJV that one can purchase in a Christian book store or online is not the same as the 1611 version; it has been updated in various places and ways. For example, the English letters that are no longer used have been removed and replaced, and ye olde spelling has largely been updated to reflect modern spelling. These changes to the KJV (and I not referring to the NKJV) speak against its inspiration (see below paragraph). I have been a member of a KJV only church as well as preached in KJV only churches and I don’t know any church that uses the 1611 KJV; they all use the updated one.
It should also be said that the KJV is not inspired by God any more than any other translation is. There is nothing in the KJV that suggests that this particular translation is inspired by God. Those who claim the KJV is inspired by God more than any other translation have released themselves from the shackles of biblical authority and have set themselves up in the place of God by determining what is inspired and what is not, rather than relying on the Bible (that’s right, I said it!).
Concluding Thoughts
The KJV was a good translation for its day and had a major impact on the English language and Western society. However, it is outdated and I don’t recommend it to anyone who hasn’t grown up using it.
For those wishing to purchase a KJV, click here for a standard edition found on Amazon.
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Base Text and Text Tradition
All versions of the NASB use as their base text the American Standard Version (ASV), published in 1901, which is an update on the KJV. Thus, the NASB stands in the tradition of the KJV and ASV. The translators consulted the latest available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts of the Bible to update the ASV. The final production was the NASB.
Intended Audience
The intended audience is all English speakers. However, the English level is around a 12th-grade reading level, so those who struggle with reading should choose a different translation. The NASB is also intended to be used by pastors, for preaching, and for serious study of the Bible.
Translation Philosophy
The NASB does not attempt a word-for-word translation, understanding the impossibility of the task (for a brief summary as to why it is impossible, see my article here). According to the NASB itself,
“The attempt has been made to render the grammar and terminology in contemporary English. When it was felt that the word-for-word literalness was unacceptable to the modern reader, a change was made in the direction of a more current English idiom.”
NASB Introduction
With the above being said, most would label the NASB as attempting a word-for-word translation where possible.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
The NASB attempts to retain the word order of the Hebrew and Greek where possible. Although this results in some awkward reading at times, it can be helpful for seeing literary features, such as inclusio, chiasms, and other features that aid interpretation.
Weaknesses
Like the KJV and ASV, the NASB rarely interprets adverbial participles, leaving them quite vague. For example, in 1 Thessalonians 1:4, the NASB leaves the participle εἰδότες as “knowing” instead of interpreting it as a causal participle, showing the relationship to the main verb “we give thanks” in verse 2.
Concluding Thoughts
I find the NASB a good Bible to use in serious study of the Bible and for strong readers. If you are the type of person who mainly reads the Bible without formally studying it (such as going through a study guide of certain books) or you are not a strong reader, I would recommend another version, such as the NIV or CSB. I also do not recommend it for preaching because of the awkward and at time difficult English.
For those wishing to purchase a NASB, click here for a standard edition found on Amazon.
New English Translation (NET)
Base Text and Text Tradition
The NET is a completely new translation of the Bible. As such, it is not a revision or update of a previous version. The base text of the NET is the BHS4, UBS5, and NA28. Because the base text is the original languages and not a previously published English translation, the NET is not a slave to ‘popular’ words and phrases. Take John 3:16 as a great example. Instead of going with the King James version of “For God so loved the world . . . ,” the NET can render it more accurately “For this is the way God loved the world” (emphasis added).
Intended Audience
The NET’s intended audience is pastors and those engaged in serious Bible studies. The extensive translator and interpretation notes would make this edition too cumbersome and overwhelming for some readers (see my comments about the notes in the section on Unique Features). The NET is the best English version for students at Bible College or Seminary (with the Hebrew and Greek being better versions).
Translation Philosophy
It should first be noted that the NET rightly understands that all translation is interpretation. Thus, the translation philosophy of the NET is faithfulness. The NET strives to be faithful to the meaning of the biblical text by translating each passage “consistently and properly within their grammatical, historical, and theological context” (netbible.com). For the NET, “the real question in translation is not whether it is literal, but whether it is faithful” (netbible.com). At times, the NET will go for accuracy over elegance if a choice must be made, but the beauty of the NET is that the translator notes offer explanations regarding translation choices.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
The NET will consistently interpret adverbial participles in translation, such as translating the participle “remembering/recalling” in 1 Thess 1:3 as “because we recall.” Even where there is ambiguity left in the translation, there will frequently be a translators note explaining the interpretive possibilities. Thus, the NET is less ambiguous than most other Bible translations.
Weaknesses
Because of the 60,000+ translation notes, text critical notes, and study notes that accompany the biblical text, there isn’t much to fault in this translation. However, the sheer number of notes can be overwhelming and can distract from simply reading the Bible.
Unique Features
As I have alluded to above, the greatest unique feature of the NET is the 60,000+ translation notes, text critical notes, and study notes that accompany the biblical text. These notes are invaluable for anyone who desires to know how/why the translator chose such a translation. For example, the NET rightly translates Isaiah 7:14 as “this young woman is about to conceive” instead of “the virgin shall conceive.” The translator’s note explains why this is the accurate translation. Personally, I find the notes in the NET more helpful than any study Bible. For more information on why the NET’s translation of Isaiah 7:14 is accurate, click HERE.
Concluding Thoughts
The NET is one of the best and newest translations based on the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts available today. It was first published in 2001 and a second edition was published in 2019.
I believe the NET is the best translation available today because it is not a slave to any one tradition, allowing it to more accurately translate the Bible, and because it includes the translators’ notes, which aid in understanding the meaning. Thus, I recommend the NET for pastors, Bible teachers, or anyone in Bible College/Seminary.
However, the sheer number of notes can be overwhelming for some and I wouldn’t recommend the NET for those who don’t want to know how or why the translators came about their translations.
For those wishing to purchase a NET, click here for a standard edition found on Amazon.
New International Version (NIV)
Base Text and Text Tradition
Like some of the other translations above, the NIV is a new translation based on the best available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts. The base Old Testament text is the BHS in consultation with other manuscripts and ancient translations of the Old Testament. The NIV created its own eclectic Greek text from the thousands of manuscripts available.
Intended Audience
The intended audience is English speakers at a 7th-grade reading level. The NIV desires to be readable by most English speakers throughout the world. Through their research, they found that the average native English speaker reads at a 7th-grade level, which is why their translation targets such a demographic. Throughout my time at Bible College and Seminary, I would hear Bible college students complain about the NIV as a ‘weak’ translation that is focused more on interpretation than translation. The problem is that these students do not realize the intended audience is not them and the importance of interpretation for comprehending what God is saying.
Translation Philosophy
There is a great article by Douglas Moo (who was part of the translation committee for the NIV) that summarizes the translation philosophy of the NIV, entitled “We Still Don’t Get It.” I highly encourage you to read it HERE. In short, the NIV recognizes that meaning resides at “the level of collocations of words in clauses, sentences, and ultimately, discourses” (Moo, 3–4). What this means is that the NIV seeks to translate the meaning of the biblical text into understandable English at a 7th-grade level. This usually results in using more words than are in the original languages.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
Personally, I agree with the NIV’s translation philosophy. A great example of conveying meaning by adding an extra word or two is found in 1 Thessalonians 1:3. Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy praise the Thessalonians for their “work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess 1:3, ESV). As you can tell, there is ambiguity as to the relationship between “work” and “faith,” “labor” and “love,” and “steadfastness” and “hope.” The NIV eliminates the ambiguity by accurately translating 1 Thessalonians 1:3 as “your work produced by faith, your labor prompted by love, and your endurance inspired by hope in our Lord Jesus Christ” (emphasis added). This specificity allows the reader to better understand what is being said.
Weaknesses
At times I don’t agree with the NIV’s interpretation in their translation. I won’t cite any examples here because all the interpretations in translation are legitimate, even if I don’t agree. For the Bible College/Seminary student or pastor, you may want to make the interpretive choices yourself and, so, this would be a weakness to you.
Also, the NIV sometimes sacrifices clarity for short sentences (which is necessary for a translation at a 7th-grade reading level). For example, in 1 Thessalonians 3:11–13 the apostles make two petitions to God: (1) that God and Jesus guide the apostles to the Thessalonians (3:11) and (2) that the Lord cause the Thessalonians to increase and abound in love for all people (3:12). The NIV (and CSB), however, have the apostles making three petitions with verse 13 being a third: that God strengthen the Thessalonians’ hearts. The NIV is clearly wrong here as verse 13 is a clear purpose clause in the Greek text stating the purpose for the increased love (see most translations of this verse).
The NIV (and CSB) most likely began a new sentence in verse 13 for the sake of readability by making a long and complex sentence shorter and easier to read. The downside to this translation decision is that it obscures the close relationship between loving others and a blameless heart. Through their prayer, the apostles have indicated that loving others establishes a blameless heart—an important point lost in the NIV translation.
Concluding Thoughts
I am a fan of the NIV. It has resulted in many people throughout the world reading the Word of God! For the average Christian who does not do serious Bible study or the Christian who is a poor-moderate reader, this is the version for you. However, for those at a higher reading level and who seriously study the Bible, I recommend another translation, such as the ESV, KJV, NET, or NRSV.
For those wishing to purchase a NIV, click here for a standard edition found on Amazon.
New Living Translation (NLT)
Base Text and Text Tradition
The NLT uses the BHS4 for the Old Testament and the UBS4 & NA27 for the New Testament. As such, the NLT is a new translation, not based on a previously published English translation.
Intended Audience
The NLT’s intended audience is the same as the NIV—the majority of the English-speaking world. As such, it is written at a 6–7th-grade reading level because the majority of English speakers read at a 67th grade level. Personally, I would say the English is slightly simpler than the NIV.
Translation Philosophy
The translation philosophy is much the same as the NIV (see above). According to Tyndale (the publishers of the NLT), “The translators of the New Living Translation set out to render the message of the original texts of Scripture into clear, contemporary English. As they did so, they kept the concerns of both formal-equivalence and dynamic-equivalence in mind” (https://www.tyndale.com/nlt/translation-process).
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
Like the NIV, the NLT is not afraid to interpret the biblical text in its translation instead of leaving texts ambiguous. I return to 1 Thessalonians 1:3 as a chief example. Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy praise the Thessalonians for their “work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess 1:3, ESV). As you can tell, there is ambiguity as to the relationship between “work” and “faith,” “labor” and “love,” and “steadfastness” and “hope.” The NLT eliminates the ambiguity by accurately translating 1 Thessalonians 1:3 as “your faithful work, your loving deeds, and the enduring hope.” Note that this interpretation is different from the NIV, but still legitimate. The specificity allows the reader to better understand what is being said.
Weaknesses
In its effort to be readable for poor-moderate readers, the NLT has abandoned most theological words in its translation. For example, the word “propitiation” in Romans 3:25; 1 John 2:2; 4:10, which refers to the removal of God’s wrath from upon those who believe in Jesus is reduced to “the sacrifice for sin” or “the sacrifice that atones for sins.” Certainly, propitiation includes atonement, but it is atonement to remove the wrath of God.
Concluding Thoughts
The NLT is a great translation for weak readers or those not engaged in serious Bible study. If you are at Seminary/Bible College or are seriously studying the Bible, a translation such as the NASB, NET, or NRSV would be better for you.
For those wishing to purchase a NLT, click here for a standard edition found on Amazon.
New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
Base Text and Text Tradition
The NRSV is an updated version of the RSV, which uses the ASV as its base text, which uses the KJV as its base text. As such, the NRSV text tradition is as follows: KJV–>ASV–>RSV–>NRSV. As such, the RSV and the NRSV are not wholly new translations. With that being said, the NRSV does incorporate the latest manuscript and inscription findings to bring the text up date with the latest finds and make changes where warranted. In its own words, the NRSV is,
“Rooted in the past, but right for today, the NRSV continues the tradition of William Tyndale, the King James Version, theAmerican Standard Version, and the Revised Standard Version. Equally important, it sets a new standard for the 21st Century.”
https://www.zondervan.com/p/nrsv-2/
Intended Audience
The NRSV is the English translation most widely used by scholars when they are not using the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. As such, the intended audience is those with a high reading level and who are engaged in serious Bible study. It was also created for use in and by churches of the three major Christian traditions (Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox), boasting the following:
“The NRSV stands out among the many translations available today as the Bible translation that is the most widely ‘authorized’ by the churches. It received the endorsement of thirty-three Protestant churches. It received the imprimatur of the American and Canadian Conferences of Catholic Bishops. And it received the blessing of a leader of the Greek Orthodox Church.”
https://www.zondervan.com/p/nrsv-2/
Translation Philosophy
The NRSV claims to be a literal translation: “Unlike many of the translations available on the marketplace today, the NRSV is a literal translation. . . . [it] is a word-for-word translation of the original text” (https://www.zondervan.com/p/nrsv-2/). However, this is false in that it is impossible to have a “literal translation” (see my article on this topic HERE).
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
One of the biggest strengths of the NRSV is that it seeks to preserve the word order and poetic features of the original texts as much as possible, which aids in accurate interpretation. In relation to this, the NRSV does its best to translate words consistently so that the reader can observe the theme or pattern that the biblical writer is drawing (although it is impossible to do this in all cases).
The NRSV is also not afraid to update the KJV and ASV translations with more accurate, yet controversial, translations, such as translating הָעַלְמָה in Isaiah 7:14 as “the young woman” instead of virgin (although it really should be translated “this young woman”). The Isaiah 7:14 translation is the reason that many conservative churches and denominations reject the RSV and the NRSV. To understand why הָעַלְמָה in Isaiah 7:14 should be translated “this young woman” and how it predicts the virgin birth of Christ in Matthew 1:22–23, see my article HERE.
Weaknesses
Like many of the so-called literal translations, the NRSV does not interpret the text enough for me, leaving the translation ambiguous in many places that isn’t necessary, such as leaving the relationship between adverbial participles and the verbs they modify vague (see “remembering” in 1 Thess 1:3) and not interpreting the relationships between genitives and the nouns they modify (see “your work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope” in 1 Thess 1:3). Since the NRSV is adding extra words to the biblical text in order for it to make a semblance of sense to the English reader, I don’t think it is too difficult to add an extra word or two so that the English reader understanding the meaning of the biblical text (see my article on ‘literal translations’ HERE)
Unique Features
The NRSV is unique in that it comes available in multiple editions with the canonical books of different Christian traditions, such as the Protestant edition, Catholic edition (with Apocrypha), and the Orthodox edition (with their set of canonical books):
“The RSV was the only major translation in English that included both the standard Protestant canon and the books that are traditionally used by Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christians (the so-called ‘Apocryphal’ or ‘Deuterocanonical’ books). Standing in this tradition, the NRSV is available in three ecumenical formats: a standard edition with or without the Apocrypha, a Roman Catholic Edition, which has the so-called ‘Apocryphal’ or ‘Deuterocanonical’ books in the Roman Catholic canonical order, and The Common Bible, which includes all books that belong to the Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox canons.”
https://www.zondervan.com/p/nrsv-2/
The second unique feature of the NRSV is that it boasts a diverse translation committee, with men and women from Protestant denominations, the Roman Catholic church, the Greek Orthodox Church, and one Jewish scholar (https://www.zondervan.com/p/nrsv-2/). This may be important for some. For me, I just want the members of the translation committee to be the best Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and English linguists in the world.
Concluding Thoughts
The NRSV is a good translation. I recommend it for those engaged in serious study of the Bible, pastors, or preachers. I also think it is a fine translation for conservatives. However, if you are a conservative using the NRSV (or RSV), you must be aware of the negative stigma that has been attached to the NRSV and RSV. If you don’t want to be answering questions about why you chose this particular translation, then I recommend a different one.
For those wishing to purchase a NRSV, click here for a standard edition found on Amazon.
Summary and Concluding Thoughts
There is a lot to commend the above translations. As expected, however, there are also some weaknesses to each translation. This is the nature of Bible translation. No version will perfectly capture the meaning of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. The best solution is to study the biblical languages yourself. However, if you haven’t the time, money, or desire for that, any translation above will do fine in conveying God’s message to his people and the world.
So, which translation should you choose? The answer is quite simple really. I recommend adopting whatever translation your church uses. For my Catholic and Orthodox readers, you will probably choose the NRSV. For my Protestant readers, your church may use any one of the above, in which case you should use whatever your church uses, unless it is a translation by a single person (like The Message).
If you were to twist my arm and force me to decide which is the best Bible translation on the market today, I would have to say the New English Translation (NET) because it does the best job of interpreting the text in its translation and because of the translation notes that accompany the biblical text.