English Translations
Compare & Weigh Trade-offs
Every translation makes choices — text base, translation philosophy, and how to handle disputed passages. Here they are laid out.
TranslationYearText BasePhilosophyCommonly discussed issue
KJV
King James Version
1611 · Formal Equivalence
Formal Equivalence
Archaic language: Thee/thou and outdated vocabulary hinder modern comprehension.NKJV
New King James Version
1982 · Formal Equivalence
Formal Equivalence
Still based on Textus Receptus: Same underlying Greek text as KJV; modern critical editions differ.NASB
New American Standard Bible
1971 · Formal Equivalence
Formal Equivalence
Less smooth English: Literal renderings can feel stilted or awkward in reading.ESV
English Standard Version
2001 · Essentially Formal
Essentially Formal
Male-oriented language: Retains 'brothers' and generic 'he' where inclusive language is disputed.NIV
New International Version
1978 · Balanced
Balanced
Dynamic renderings: Sometimes smooths over ambiguity present in the originals.CSB
Christian Standard Bible
2017 · Balanced
Balanced
Male-oriented in places: Retains traditional forms where other modern translations use inclusive language.NLT
New Living Translation
1996 · Dynamic Equivalence
Dynamic Equivalence
Interpretive: Chooses one meaning where the original is ambiguous.NRSVue
New Revised Standard Version (Updated)
2021 · Formal Equivalence
Formal Equivalence
Less common in evangelical churches: More frequent in academic and mainline settings.NET
NET Bible
2005 · Balanced
Balanced
Notes can overwhelm: Full-notes edition is dense and reads more like a commentary.MSG
The Message
2002 · Paraphrase
Paraphrase
Paraphrase, not translation: Should not be used as a primary study text.