Featured The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

A more dynamic version of the Rsv compared to Esv, and is into gender inclusive renderings!

 

According to D.A. Carson it is "A jolly good translation."

 

"Like its predecessors, the NRSV is a formal equivalent version." (from How to Choose A Translation for All Its Worth by Fee and Strauss, page 148)

 

"It still lies in the broad range of literal translations."(taken from How to Choose a BIBLE Version by Robert L. Thomas, page 148)

 

More akin to Niv 2011 and Csb, those "mediating"versions!

 

Key phrase there is "broad", as its not as formal as either Nkjv or the nas!

 

The word 'broad' is not a phrase; it's a single word. If the NRSV is in the broad range of literal versions, then so is its sister --the ESV.

 

Think that the esv would be more formal though....
Due to it being 'essentially literal"

 

That's just a marketing slogan like 'optimal equivalence.' At least no translation marketing team has used the phrase 'exact equivalence.'

 

I believe though that'optimal equivalence" is a real translation principle!

 

From SBTS professor Robert L Plummer's The Story of Scripture: How We Got Our Bible Study Guide :

formal equivalence translation: NRSV, ESV
balanced: NIV
functional equivalence: NLT

 

Think that the Nrsv much more into Inclusive language though!

 

It's just as much jibber jabber as the slogan 'essential literal.'

 

And so? Is that news?

By the way, since it uses more inclusive language than the NIV or the TNIV and NLT --why haven't you made up any fairy tales about it extolling female pastors and heads of homes and all the other junk you attribute to the NIV?

 

The Nrsv to me would be on same par as those translations you listed here.

 

No, the term Optimal equivalence actually is used in translation!

 

Why didn't you answer my question?

Why haven't you made up any fairy tales about the NRSV in which it advocates female pastors and heads of homes along with all the other junk you attributed to the NIV?

 

It is a term that is used as a translational philosophy. However, it's merely a blend of functional and formal equivalence. It's nothing new. It's not a magical formulation.