New Revised Standard Version...

No, although it is the most popular translation among mainline Christian groups (Episcopal, Methodist, Presbyterian (USA)) and mainline seminary faculty. It's one of the three translations I refer to most often (alonside the REB and the NASB), and the one our church uses in worship.

The New American Standard Bible is probably the closest thing to a verbatim English translation. I use it when I want to double-check my Hebrew translation.

Joshua

 

THe NRSV is a highly-accurate translation, used, for example, at the conservative Asbury Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky. It's attempts to make language 'gender accurate' may be commendable, but at times, something is lost in translation. The ASV is accurate, but not very readible. For me, I'll stick with the old RSV as my primary source. One downside to the NRSV is the lack of a good conservative Study Bible. The Oxford and Cambridge Study Bibles reflect a more liberal approach to Scripture. Another interesting translation (freer in translation than the RSV) is the Jerusalem Bible. I use it occasionally as well. The NIV is popular, and I use it occasionally, but frankly, I don't find it very-accurate. Don't be afraid of the NRSV -the OT is highly accurate- but just keep in mind that with it's 'gender accurate' translation philosophy, some things will be lost or blurred.

 

Since this is supposed to be a Baptist only forum, I have to ask is there any out there who still use the kjv which served our ancestors so well? Or are we so educated that we no longer have a simple faith in the Holy Writ? But, for all that education I don't see us doing the kind of works they did we are a weaker group of believers with less faith in our God and His wonderful Word. The infusion of so many modern English translations has not helped us but hindered our walk with Jesus and each other.
My advice young Brother is to go back to the basics even if it requires a little extra homework on your part. But our Lord reward diligent work in His Word.

 

Still using the true word of God....the King James. It was good enuff to show me the way to Christ it is good enuff to live by.

 

We have a simple faith in the Holy Writ. At our church, we use the New American Standard Bible as our translation of the Holy Writ. The KJV was a fine translation of the Holy Writ but since language has changed, and since we believe that God still desire to communicate to people in the modern day, we believe that a modern language version best enables us to carry out our mission.

I find my walk with God tremendously improved with a modern language translation. I made the switch about 6 years ago and reading the Bible came alive for me.

 

Good comments. But with the arrival of the ESV, there is no need to use the NRSV

 

I agree with Chris that the English Standard Version is better than the NRSV. In fact, I would argue that it is far superior. I would also agree with the warning about its so-called "gender accurate" translation philosophy, except that I would be stronger in my criticism of the NRSV. It is anything but accurate in hundreds of places where masculine language has been altered. If you want a good source of information on the problems with such gender-neutral "translations", I would recommend THE GENDER-NEUTRAL BIBLE CONTROVERSY; MUTING THE MASCULINITY OF GOD'S WORDS, by Vern Poythress and Wayne Grudem. If you want to read something more accessible and less technical, I would recommend a visit to the website of The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. I believe the address is www.cbmw.org.

If you are looking for a good translation, I would suggest the NKJV, the NASB, or the ESV as the three best from which to chose.

Your Brother in Christ,
Pastork

 

As has been stated above, the NRSV is clearly not the most accurate or literal. The NASB holds this title, followed closely by the ESV. The NKJV is more literal to its parent mss. I would strongly urge you use the ESV.

 

Pastork:

Agreed.

 

I should have mentioned the ESV. It is an updating of the old RSV, and a good one at that. Unfortuately, currently, their is little in the way of software support. And the print in the Bible currently published is too small (Yes, I'm old). If the ESV would publish a Study Bible, similar to the popular Zondervan NIV Study Bible, I'm convinced it would be a best-seller. I do predict that the ESV will be THE translation of the 21st century. I certainly don't want to start a 'KJV-only' debate...but, I will say that while I respect this 1611 book, a Book that has had a profound impact on western European culture, it is a Book, after all, that is nearly 400 years old! Try using it in the under 55 age group, try using it in youth ministry, for gosh sakes, and see how long you're ministering! For very young people, I would highly recommend the 'GOOD NEWS' Bible, the TEV. It is a highly accurate 'free' translation. For young people, I usually use the NIV, as the translation is at a reading level they can understand, and, there are a number of good conservative study Bibles out there. If the ESV comes out with a Study Bible, I'll likely switch to that.

To see American bible sales figures, type 'Christian Booksellers Association' in your search engine.

 

The ESV will be available in a study Bible sometime in the near future.

 

I agree; The ESV will eventually prove to be THE English Standard. It will soon come out in various formats, including a wide-margin, large print this fall.

Here is where I part with you. I would definitely not consider teh TEV "highly accurate". This is the translation edited by Robert Bratcher, who later proved to be a less than conservative Baptist. My seminary prof Maurice Robinson called The GNB/TEV the "bloodless Bible", for Bratcher attempted to remove references to the bloody sacrifice of Christ, which he called a "barbaric concept".

The young can and do use the NIV, but I feel the ESV is equally as readable, and far more accurate. Starting the young on an "easy" version will prove to be impossible to move them to a harder version later. (My own daughter has read the NASB since age 7 and would not think of using another version. I guess she's NASB-only!)

 

We tend to use the NIV a lot, though my favorite is the NKJV. We're by no means a KJV only congregation. There can be no arguement that the English language has changed dramatically since the KJV was written, and there is room for possible misinterpretation of the context of Elizabethan phrases. Don't forget, the KJV has only been around for a few hundred years, while Christianity has been around for two thousand.

 

The word 'blood' occurs (NT) in the...

NRSV 94 times
RSV 97
NIV 92
GNB 74
NJB 90
KJV 101

Chris, you may or may not have a point regarding the translation philosophy of the GNB. I'll need to do a bit more research. It will be interesting to see what words were used in the GNB in lieu of 'blood'.

 

I forget the particular references Dr. Robinson mentioned, and its not the word "blood" itself necessarily. Rather it is a "dynamic" rewording so that the death of Christ was not a bllody sacrifice.

 

Just stick to the Good Old KJV.

 

Or stick to the good new ESV

 

The NRSV is good...but not as good as it could
have been. In fact I think the RSV is still
very good and the ESV is outstanding. The
ESV has become my default translation. But
the NRSV is certainly useful.

 

I'd have to say that the NRSV is a good
translation after using Comfort's interlinear
for many months now. Yes, it has its
quirks, but I must say I have been impressed
in places. It is less literal than the
RSV or ESV, but it is still good.

For study purposes here are the following
translations I recommend: ESV/RSV, NASB,
NRSV, and NIV.

Clay