Top Ten Bible Versions: Revisited (2010)

In 2006, I created a top ten list of my favorite versions of the Bible. It was partly based on preference and partly categorical. Then, over the next year, I attempted to write meaningful reviews as to why these selections were chosen. Some liked my selections and some didn’t, but they were mine. See “Top Ten Bible Versions: The Complete Boxed Set” at my old site.

As I’ve written many times before, collecting English versions of the Bible has always been a bit of a hobby for me—going back to my teenage years. I was fascinated by even the minute choices that translators could make. Studying Greek and Hebrew in seminary, and incorporating original languages into my own personal study of the Bible gave me even greater insight into my fascination. In other words, one might think that learning biblical languages would negate any need for translations, but rather it made my interest deepen.

Further, I still use English translations in front of an audience. It takes a lot of time to create good translation that is better than what a committee has spent a few years on. And this is made even more clear when I attempt to translate a passage from Greek on the fly (previously unprepared), so I usually have both original languages and translation with me.

When not in the classroom or not in church, my study of the Bible comes mostly from electronic platforms such as Accordance on my Mac and Olive Tree’s BibleReader on my iPad. Electronic platforms especially accommodate the use of comparative readings of the Bible, much easier than laying out multiple physical copies side-by-side.

I occasionally get asked if I would update my top ten list now that a few years have gone by. Well, these kinds of preferences are always open to change. So, in light of that, here’s my list for 2010. The first five or so are actually ranked more or less. The latter five are more categorical in nature.

1. Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

See original review here. I still find this translation to be the most significant version of the Bible to arrive in decades. I chose it in the first place because of what I called “technical accuracy” in translation and the willingness to break with traditional renderings for the sake of correct meaning. The HCSB is essentially a median translation (the best kind in my opinion), sometimes more literal and sometimes more dynamic according to the need.

Since I placed the HCSB at the top of my list in 2006, I drifted from it a while, but last year while teaching a series on the Psalms I came back to it, and I haven’t left since. Yes, there are some renderings I don’t always agree with, but I reserve the right to “correct” on the fly if necessary.

This is the primary translation I’m currently using in public, and having just recently bought a new edition with the revised text, I don’t expect that will change for a long time.

If you’ve dismissed the HCSB because you think it’s a “Baptist” Bible, you’re selling it short (half the translation committee, including the general editor, are not Baptist) and both you and your audience are missing out.

2. New Living Translation (NLT)

See original review here. Continually improved since its debut as an actual translation (as opposed to its predecessor’s status as a paraphrase) in 1996, the NLT remains the best example of contemporary, conversational English language of any translation. It’s a great choice for both new believers as well as seasoned Christians who might have heard the Bible so many times in traditional terms that they no longer hear it so clearly.

The narrative portions are the best. If you’re preaching through the gospels, I don’t have a better recommendation than the NLT. However, by the same token, I don’t find it as helpful in poetic sections as metaphors are often flattened out a bit more than I’d prefer. Nevertheless, even this has been improved in recent years.

I still haven’t found a good “carry with me” copy of the second edition text, although I had a couple of favorites in the first edition.

3. NET Bible (New English Translation)

See original review here. Note that I switched title and abbreviation order for this version because it’s known better by its acronym which also makes a play on the word internet, where the NET Bible was first released. This version didn’t even make my original list because I was still in the process of familiarizing myself with it. But a few years later, after using it extensively in personal study, in the classroom, and from behind the pulpit, I can recommend it without hesitation.

As I said in my long-delayed review, “I recommend the NET Bible–especially the standard edition with 60,932 notes–to all believers.” Hands down, the complete NET Bible has the best set of notes I’ve ever seen in any study Bible. The translation, while still having a few rough places, is solid, too. Ultimately, this is simply a translation of the Bible in need of better exposure.

4. New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

No official review, but see NRSV tags on both the classic and current This Lamp site. This is another translation that didn’t make my original list. While I had used the NRSV a good bit in the early nineties, I’d neglected it afterwards. But in recent years, I find myself referencing it more often and have come to appreciate it again.

The NRSV often gets a bad rap as a “liberal” Bible in some conservative circles. And while there are certain renderings that I would translate differently, I find the NRSV to be quite reliable. Its senior editor was the late, great Bruce Metzger, and because I trust him, I trust the NRSV. It’s the current de facto standard translation in academic circles, and the NRSV contains the widest selection of apocryphal/deuterocanonical literature of any English translation.

5. New American Standard Bible (NASB)

See official review here. For better or worse, I doubt I’ll ever escape the NASB (and don’t necessarily want to). This was the first Bible as a teenager that I could understand (claims of woodenness be hanged!). The NASB was the first translation I read from cover to cover. I taught from this translation for almost two decades. Most scripture I have memorized is in the NASB. In many ways it is still standard for me, even if it is a bit dated these days. If someone wants a formal equivalent translation in the Tyndale tradition ,this is still the version I recommend.

6. Good News Translation (AKA Today’s English Version; GNT/TEV)

See original review here. I can remember looking at Annie Vallotton’s simple, but profound line drawings, even before I could read, in my parents’ paperback copy of Good News for Modern Man. I’m very thankful to have access to this translation in Accordance, but I wish I had the pictures, too!

After reading Eugene A. Nida’s book, Good News for Everyone: How to Use the Good News Bible, I gained new respect, not only for this translation but also for the method of translation. While somewhat dated, the GNT remains the best pure dynamic equivalent (DE) Bible in my opinion, perhaps closely challenged by the Contemporary English Version. However, the CEV removes most parallelism in poetic passages (making them quite unpoetic), so I still give favor to the GNT. Plus, I still like the pictures; I don’t care what you think.

7. The Message

See original review here. While I would never recommend it as a primary Bible, the Message is easily the best pure paraphrase of the entire Bible ever produced. Those who detest it don’t “get” it, in my estimation. Eugene Peterson essentially redefined the word paraphrase, which had previously been applied to works reworded from existing translations, since Peterson created his paraphrase directly from the Hebrew and Greek texts.

Some parts of the Message are admittedly troublesome and some parts are genius. I particularly like the Old Testament wisdom literature (especially Proverbs) in the Message.

8. New Jerusalem Bible (NJB)

See original review here. Essentially, a Catholic Bible, this translation is far superior to the “official” Catholic New American Bible. I like to say that if I were Catholic, this would be the Bible I would use. I don’t keep up with the NJB’s wider use much these days, but I’ve heard for a long time that a third edition was in the works. I wouldn’t doubt with the Catholic Church’s recent disallowance of the use of the Divine Name in worship services (which the NJB uses almost exclusively over the traditional LORD), the NJB may have fallen on even harder times than before. This is another translation I’m fortunate to have access to in Accordance.

9. Revised English Bible (REB)

See original review here. While not as risky or quite as dynamic as its predecessor, the New English Bible, the REB is still the best literary translation of the entire Bible since perhaps the King James Version. It never quite caught hold in the United States but had a small following in Great Britain. I continue to read it for my own enjoyment. It still surprises and delights me at times. And this might still be the only Bible I’d take to the desert island. As far as I know, Accordance is the only software to offer the REB in electronic form.

10. Today’s New International Version (TNIV)

See original review here. There’s not much more I can say about the TNIV that I haven’t already said. I’ve called it “the best translation no one ever read.” While it received the worst (and often mean-spirited) attacks of any modern translation since the RSV, I blame the real demise of the translation on its handlers: Biblica (formerly the International Bible Society) and Zondervan. There was too much money to be made on the NIV, and the TNIV was never fully backed or promoted as it should have been. I used it for quite a while as a primary public translation. The folks at Zondervan used to keep in pretty good contact with me while I was writing about the TNIV. They even flew me up to Grand Rapids for a day once for meetings and conversation. Funny that I don’t hear from them anymore. Well, the NIV 2011 is coming. Knowing who is on the translation committee, I assume it will be a solid translation, but the real test of the NIV 2011′s endurance will come down to whether or not Zondervan and Biblica can finally let go of the NIV 1978.

HONORABLE MENTIONS

The King James Version. No one is fully culturally literate without reading the entire KJV Bible at least once. And you should probably read it twice.

The English Standard Version. Some will be surprised that I put this here. But I’ve mellowed, and I also realize that quite a few folks really hear God speak to them through this version. I’ve privately used it a little bit myself now and then over the last couple of years, and I do admit the ESV can start to grow on a person.

The Modern Language Bible. See original review here. This is the Bible that “could have been.” If you read my review, you’ll see why it almost could have been what the NIV is/was. I’m not certain that it couldn’t be updated and regain its voice, but we do have enough English translations, don’t we? I do wish I had the MLB electronically, though.

God’s Word. I’ve received two review copies of this Bible and what I’ve had time to read, I like; but reviewing an entire translation takes time. Nevertheless, this will be my next major translation review.

---

So there it is. Perhaps I’ll update the list again in 2013 or 14. Feel free to discuss the particulars in the comments below. And consider offering your own top ten (or even top five, maybe) list yourself.

Comments

[R. Mansfield]

I haven't had an opportunity to spend enough time with it yet. I'll eventually post a review, but it will probably be later this year.

[Haavard]

Hi!

I know this is an old post, but I wanted to send you a comment, and I found no where else to put it, so I'll just post it here.

I just wanted to thank you for your very thorough and useful review of English language Bible versions. A short note about myself: I am a native Norwegian and lay pastor at my local church in Oslo, Norway. I don't know how familiar you are with European and Scandinavian church life, but the conditions in my country are in many ways quite comparable to the situation in England. By that I mean that our church life revolves around a very dominant state church - altough in our case it is Lutheran, not Anglican. It also means that evangelicals for the most part are to be found in the evangelical movement within that church, not in different denominations, like the situation in the US. I am part of such an evangelical congregation within the state church.

I have for some time considered buying an English language Bible for my personal Bible studies and sermon preparations. The reason for that is that there exists a very limited selection of Norwegian Bible versions, at least compared to the situation in the US. It may sound strange, but I have always envyed you this wide selection of versions. Even though it can make it harder to choose one, I have always considered it to be a blessing, because of the possibility to compare different versions and translations.

In Norway, basically three versions of the Bible exists. First, there is the version from Det Norske Bibelselskap (part of the United Bible Societies). Their version was updated this year, and is known as NO. The NO is comparable to the American NIV, both when it comes to profile, translation philosophy and popularity. It uses the same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts as the NIV. Like the NIV, it has a broad protestant thelogical profile. It is this Bible version that is the offical Bible of the state church, used in their liturgy. It is also the reference Bible in academic circles. Like the NIV, it is quite popular among evangelicals, also in other denominations outside the state church. Also like the NIV, it is a fairly conservative translation, which gradually has adopted gender-neutral language. It has an even bigger market share than the NIV, around 60%, and is also the Bible that unchurced people most often buy. It is widely considered a very solid translation, and the comitee behind it consists of the most prominent scholars in Norway.

Secondly, there is the version from Norsk Bibel, published in 1988. It has later been lightly revised, and is known as the NB. It was produced by a small comitee of conservative scholars and pastors using the same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts that the NO. This version is however a more literal and conservative translation, probably more comparable to the American ESV. It is also comparable to the ESV in that it makes some of the same traditional translation choices, like traditional gender language and the use of "virgin" i Isaiah 7. This Bible has a market share of about 20%. It is predominately used by evangelicals, but has also found some use in the general population. Like the ESV, it is readable but known for a somewhat "old-fashioned" style and some antiquated phrasings.

The last major version in Norway, accounting for the last 20% market share is a translation that appeared in 1997, lightly revised in 2007. It is known as Bibelen Guds Ord (BGO). The BGO differs from the other two versions in that it uses the Textus Receptus as its text base, probably making it most comparable with the American NKJV. It was translated by a small comitee of conservative pastors belonging to charismatic and pentecostal churches in Norway. That has made the BGO the version of choice for many charismatics and pentecostals. Like the NKJV, it has a traditional profile and style of language.

Personally I own copies of both NO and NB. These are both good versions, but they aren't really that different when it comes to translation philosophy, event though the wording differs a bit. The BGO is not that different from the NB, if you count out the differences in text base. After reading your reviews I have realized that what we are lacking in Norway are strictly literal translations like the NASB and much freer translations like the NLT and GNT/TEV. That is, our Bible versions all make some kind of comprimize between these two philosophies, and end up in the middle of the spectrum.

Based on your reviews I now plan to purchase copies of the NASB and the NLT, thereby complementing my Norwegian translations. I speak english as my second language and understand it fairly well, so I expect that the NLT will be fairly easy to understand. The NASB will probably be more challanging, but its literalness is also what gives it its value.

Let me conclude by once again thanking you for your blog - I have found it to be a wonderful resource, and will continue following it.

[Jim]

What do you think about the Common English Bible (CEB) and the NIV2011?

[JG]

Rick,

Have you read/reviewed the International Standard Version (ISV) Bible? It is currently available only in electronic format. How would you rate this translation?

Thanks.

JG

[Silver]

I very much appreciated your review of The Berkeley version and its revision. The Berkeley version became one of my go-to secondary translations.

My primary translations are mostly Textus Receptus-based. (I was brought up with the KJV and the RSV):

Tyndale's 1526. The one published by the British Library in 2000. Though I not a ploughboy, his consecrated work and courage move me tremendously each time I read it.

Here is a Bagster edition:

http://archive.org/stream/newtestamentofou00tynd#page/n9/mode/2up
A pdf can be downloaded:

http://ia600301.us.archive.org/11/items/newtestamentofou00tynd/newtestamentofou00tynd.pdf

Here, a Tyndale Pentateuch:

http://www.archive.org/stream/williamtyndalesf00tynduoft#page/14/mode/2up

----
KJV (I often use the Hendrikson facsimile, which they call the KJV 1611, although it used the text of an 18th century edition.)
----

Bagster's Hexapla, which is a great help. "This volume contains the New Testament in six important translations. They are John Wycliffe's translation from 1380, William Tyndale from 1534, the Great Bible from 1539, the Geneva version of William Whittingham from 1557, The Rheims from 1582 and the King James or Authorised from 1611. "
To read online:

http://bible.zoxt.net/hex/hex.htm

or here:

http://archive.org/details/englishhexaplaex00schouoft

Pdf also at that link, to download.

Here is also a Hexaplar Psalter, publ. by Cambridge. It has the Revised, rather than Wiclif (Wycliffe):

http://www.archive.org/stream/hexaplarpsalterb00wrig#page/n13/mode/2up

----

One of my favorites is that of Myles (Miles) Coverdale:

http://www.archive.org/stream/holyscriptures00cove#page/n29/mode/2up

Anglicans and Episcopalians are familiar with his translation of the Psalms in the Book of Common Prayer.

----

And Martin Luther's. Here is his 1545, very nicely done at this site:

http://lutherbibel.net/

I also use various editions of John Wiclif (Wycliffe), which, of course, is not a Textus Receptus translation. But, I group his with the TR because his work shone so very brilliantly. I find his choice of words and phrases often piercingly accurate and beautiful.
Here is one edition:

http://www.archive.org/stream/holybiblecontain01wycluoft#page/78/mode/2up

-------
-------

Secondary Bibles:

Berkeley edition (Gerritt Verkuyl). The MLB is en route as I type! :)
Moffatt, both the original and the revised

J. B. Phillips, revised. Here is his NT, to read online:

http://www.ccel.org/bible/phillips/JBPNT.htm

William Barclay

Twentieth Century New Testament

RSV, original and revised. Also, the RSV Apocrypha

I tried the NASB, both the original, when it came out, and later, the revised. Also tried several versions of the NIV, and tried the NRSV. I enjoy the formality of using Thee, Thou, Thy, and Thine. I miss it in the new translations. I also prefer to read books which were printed before the days of computers, when letters were cut and the ink put into the those indentations. The irregularity of the ink density makes the words easier to read than the way books have been printed since computer printers became the standard.

I compare verses and chapters in several translations, thinking through what the various choices of words and phrases mean in my own thinking and living. I really enjoy having several translations, concordances, dictionaries, etc., open all around, to aid in thinking prayerfully about the meanings.

This is an example of information on various translations and editions, should it be of help to someone:

http://bibles.wikidot.com/hexapla

Archive.org has many translations, also some things on audio and video files.
http://www.hathitrust.org/ also has much.

Hope this helps someone. It's interesting to read about which translations others use and what appeals to them.

Thanks very much.

[Silver]

Sorry about the missing word. That ought to have been, "Though I am not a ploughboy..."

I have a bit of a Tertiary group, as well:

The RV and the ASV go in that group, and an old Nestle interlinear, Greek, English, with the KJV in parallel. I apologize, I don't remember when it was published. It is Nestle, not Nestle and Aland. I use these when looking at a new translation to see what the basis of the translation might be, comparing three groups: the Nestle/RV/ASV, the new translation, and the KJV/Tyndale/Coverdale/Luther 1545.

Also in the Secondary group: The Schlachter 2000 NT, in German.

Hope this is of use to someone. :)

[Clark Coleman]

Got here from Google after Wikipedia links from the Revised English Bible page failed. Your reviews and previous top 10 list are all now bad links. That site appears to be defunct. Can you resurrect the original list and full reviews? Thanks.

[R. Mansfield]

Clark, sorry to take so long to respond. Yes, the original site is now temporarily gone because Apple pulled the plug on MobileMe, where the old site was residing. The good news is that I've got all the posts. The not-as-good news is that I don't have the time to solve the problem quickly. I may work on getting the links in this post working first and then concentrate on the other ones.

Stay tuned.

[Jak]

Some of your webpages aren't working (e.g. http://homepage.mac.com/rmansfield/thislamp/files/071806_revised_english_bible.html ). Please try to correct this!

[R. Mansfield]

Jak, it's definitely one of my priorities. Look for major posts to begin reappearing this month, and hopefully all the old posts by the end of the year.

[Jak]

Thank you! I've been wanting to re-read your review of the HCSB and REB. I was going to do a paper consulting your reviews and now I'm waiting for you to re-post them. Please update this page, leave another comment, or email me (jstephens2009@yahoo.com) when you have done it. Thanks Rick!

[John Hopkirk]

Rich have you reviewed the "International Standard Version"

[R. Mansfield]

Sorry for the delay. The REB review is back up. I'll gradually continue to work on the others as I have time.

See http://thislamp.com/posts/2006/7/18/the-revised-english-bible-top-ten-bible-versions-6.html

[squibbon]

I would be most interested in your review of the Common English Bible (CEB).

[A.C. Ratone]

REB. would not be my desert island choice only because the first edition New English Bible is better.
1) NEB is the most literary modern Bible ever and slightly less PC than REB

2) The GNB (Good News for Modern Man, updated) has the most soul.

3) KJV is my 3rd, just because.

4) RKJV (Restored name KJV) is 4th.
Word for word KJV but with the Hebrew 4 letters for Lord (both OT and NT), Yehushua for Jesus, and Elohim for God (OT and NT).
What a joy to see the real names, and having the Hebrew 4 letters is more respectful than Yahweh.
Also "Jesus Christ' is always "Yehushua the Messiah"

5) HCSB Best for a preacher at the pulpit to be using. And also a good base for a study bible software.