Recent video where Mike Licona and Mike Wallace talk about the best Bible translations.
- Study & Accuracy: NET
- Readability & Accuracy: NIV (Not sure which version?)
- Understated elegance: ESV
- Rich wording: KJV and REB (1989)
- Ecumentical: NRSV
Overall, I did like the discussion on the differences between translations and accuracy and some of the problems with the various translations. In particular, if you are looking for a new Bible, the NET seems to be the best in consensus especially since the NET has a ton of footnotes where the translators discuss why they translated things in the way they did and offer the alternative translations for passages that may exist.
If you’re looking for a new good study Bible, the NET seems like a good one.
I did post before that the newer NIV has gone to more gender/sex neutral language.
Here’s a 32 page analysis of the changes 2011 changes of the NIV which is why a bunch of the changes may be questionable.
“We expect that evangelical feminists who claim that women can be pastors and elders will eagerly adopt this 2011 NIV because it tilts the scales in favor of their view at several key verses. This is especially true because the new NIV changes the primary verse in the debate over women’s roles in the church.
- 1984 NIV 1 Timothy 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a
man; she must be silent.
- 2011 NIV 1 Timothy 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a
man; she must be quiet. (same as TNIV, but with modified footnotes)
Evangelical feminists will love this translation because in one stroke it removes the Bible’s main barrier to women pastors and elders. As soon as a church adopts the 2011 NIV, the debate over women’s roles in that church will be over, because women pastors and elders can just say, “I’m not assuming authority on my own initiative; it was given to me by the other pastors and elders.” Therefore any woman could be a pastor or elder so long as she does not take it upon herself to “assume authority.”
The NIV’s translation committee says that the translation “assume authority” is “a particularly nice English rendering because it leaves the question open.” In other words, “assume
authority” could be understood in two different ways: a negative way (meaning “wrongly assume authority on one’s own initiative”) or a positive way (meaning “begin to use authority in a rightful way”). But in saying this the NIV translators fail to understand the full force of what they have done: They have given legitimacy to a feminist interpretation that did not have legitimacy from any other modern English translation (except the discontinued TNIV).
See the above link for all of the noted changes. In particular, there is a lot of changes to avoid using male pronouns, father, brother, man, son and other things in the NT. Same with the OT.