Version |
Publisher |
Translation Type |
Basis |
Accuracy |
Style |
Clarity |
Weakness |
Strength |
King James Version
KJV
1611. 1769 |
Public Domain |
Literal
“Formal” |
Textus Receptus |
Excellent |
Excellent |
Good |
Archaic Language |
Beauty; true to original |
American Standard Version
ASV
1901 |
Public Domain |
Literal
“Formal” |
Revised ERV
Westcott-Hortt
Textus Receptus |
Excellent |
Poor |
Good |
Readability, style |
True to original |
Revised Standard Version
RSV
1952 |
Thomas Nelson |
Formal |
Eclectic |
Good |
Fair |
Good |
Considered liberal, often wooden |
True to original text |
New American Standard
NASB
1971, 1995 |
Lockman Foundation |
Literal
“Formal” |
Revised ASV
Critical
Nestle 23 rd |
Excellent |
Fair |
Good |
Literary style |
True to original |
New International Version
NIV
1978 |
Zondervan |
Dynamic Equivalent
“Functional” |
New Translation
Critical
Eclectic |
Good |
Good |
Excellent |
Sometimes inaccurate |
Modern linguistic style |
New King James Version
NKJV
1982 |
Thomas Nelson |
Literal
“Formal” |
Revised KJV
Textus Receptus |
Excellent |
Good |
Good |
Revision of KJV |
Improved KJV revision |
New Revised Standard
NRSV
1990 |
Oxford |
Literal/Free
“Formal” |
Revision of RSV
UBS 3 rd |
Deficient, Fair |
Fair |
Good |
Gender Neutrality |
Can be faithful to original |
The Message
1993, 2002 |
NavPress |
Paraphrase |
“Original Languages” |
Does not attempt to be true to Greek |
Good |
Excellent |
Often quite loose with translation |
Response oriented; seeks to be more relevant than accurate |
New Living Translation
NLT
1996, 2004 |
Tyndale |
Dynamic Equivalent |
Revision of the LB
Nestle-Aland 27 th |
Good, Excellent |
Good |
Excellent |
Leeds to some inconsistency |
Reading ease |
English Standard Version
ESV
2001 |
Crossway |
Literal, “Formal” |
Revision of RSV
Nestle-Aland 27 th
UBS |
Excellent |
Good |
Good |
Some inconsistency |
More literal than NIV. Better style than NASB |
Holman Christian Standard Bible
HCSB
2004 |
Broadman & Holman |
Optimal Equivalence |
Nestle-Aland 27 th |
Excellent |
Good |
Good, Excellent |
Occasional inaccuracies |
Modern Style |
Today's New International Version
TNIV
2005 |
Zondervan |
Dynamic Equivalence |
Revision of NIV
Critical
Eclectic |
Good |
Good |
Excellent |
Gender Neutrality |
Modern Language, More Exegetical than NIV |
NET Bible
NET
2005 |
Bible.org |
Literal
“Formal” |
Nestle-Aland 27 th |
Excellent |
Good |
Excellent |
Artificial in places |
Notes explain choices,
Accurate |
Sources: (Brake 293-295) , (Marlowe) |
