Bible Translation Tier List

Please Don't Hurt Me

I originally planned to do a whole series of posts reviewing different Bible translations one by one. As I started down that path, I realized that it would be a lot more fun (and more helpful) to just put them all in one place and rank them.

That's what this post is about. It's a tier list of popular English Bible translations based on my experience reading, studying, and teaching from them over the years. I've read the entire New Testament in all of these, and in most cases, large portions of the Old Testament too. I've spent significant amounts of time with these translations, taught from them, tested them in real-life church and study settings, and spent years researching translation philosophy as a Bible teacher and student.

That said, this will be a combination of theological observation, practical usability, and personal preference. If your favorite translation ends up in a lower tier than you'd like, that doesn't mean it's bad. At the end of the day, the best Bible translation is the one you'll actually read. If a particular version helps you draw near to God, understand His Word, and grow in Christ, that matters far more than what any random internet guy's tier list says.

This is one person's take; hopefully informed, occasionally opinionated, and always aiming to help others think more clearly about the Bibles we use.

All that being said, here’s my list:

Honorable Mentions

These are translations I haven't read enough of to review fairly, but they've caught my attention either for their methodology or growing popularity. I'll be keeping an eye on these, and I may review them in the future as I engage with them more deeply.

Berean Standard Bible (BSB)

A layered translation project from the Berean Bible team, offering multiple levels of engagement (Interlinear, Literal, Study, and Standard). The Standard edition aims for smooth readability while retaining underlying accuracy. Early impressions are positive, especially the transparency across layers, but I haven't yet read enough to offer a confident review.

Majority Standard Bible (MSB)

A newer translation effort that builds on the Byzantine Majority Text. I'm intrigued by its approach, particularly for those who value the Majority Text without going full Textus Receptus. Still in its early development, but it's worth watching.

S-Tier

NRSV – New Revised Standard Version

The NRSV is, in my view, one of the most balanced and trustworthy English Bible translations available. It was released in 1989 as a revision of the Revised Standard Version (RSV), and it benefited from an ecumenical team of scholars across Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, and Jewish traditions. The translation reflects decades of serious work in textual criticism, manuscript discovery (including the Dead Sea Scrolls), and updated scholarship.

I consider the NRSV my personal favorite for both study and teaching. What I appreciate most is its combination of academic precision and transparency. Its use of formal equivalence preserves much of the original sentence structure and literary tone while still incorporating subtle dynamic elements where needed for clarity. Its commitment to gender-neutral language, translating terms like adelphoi as "brothers and sisters" when the context calls for it, is not a concession to modern trends but a reflection of what the biblical authors meant to communicate.

The NRSV also excels in its use of footnotes and textual variants. Readers are frequently given insight into alternative manuscript readings and translation possibilities, which encourages honest engagement with the biblical text rather than blind trust in a single rendering.

That said, the NRSV isn't perfect. It can be stiff and overly formal in places, especially in the epistles where sentence structure becomes dense. It has also not gained widespread adoption in church settings, so it may feel unfamiliar in preaching or teaching contexts. It's also not particularly accessible to those new to Bible reading or who prefer a more devotional tone.

Still, among all the English translations I've used, the NRSV stands out as the most consistent and dependable for serious biblical study. Its scholarly integrity and theological restraint make it a valuable resource for anyone seeking to delve beyond surface-level interpretation.

All that being said, I’ve moved to the next translation on the list for teaching and preaching after getting feedback from church members that the language of the NRSV is a little to elevated for the average person and hard to follow at times.

NLT – New Living Translation

The New Living Translation (NLT) was first released in 1996 as a complete overhaul of The Living Bible. While The Living Bible was a paraphrase, the NLT was built from the ground up as a true translation, drawing on the original Hebrew and Greek texts and the work of over 90 evangelical scholars. The result is a Bible designed for clarity, emotional connection, and readability; goals it achieves remarkably well.

This is my personal favorite for both personal reading and preaching. The NLT excels at making the biblical story accessible without dumbing it down. It's incredibly smooth to read, emotionally resonant, and very effective in both narrative and theological passages. When read aloud, especially in public or congregational settings, it conveys a natural and powerful message. For devotional use, it's one of the most engaging translations available.

Of course, its strength is also its limitation. The NLT employs a functional translation philosophy, meaning that the literary nuance of a passage may sometimes be sacrificed for readability. These decisions are not doctrinally problematic, but they can smooth over textual ambiguity that would be preserved in a more formal translation. For that reason, I wouldn't recommend using the NLT for detailed study or serious word-level exegesis on its own.

That said, it's an honest translation. The NLT doesn't pretend to be something it's not. While some critics have accused it of inserting theological assumptions, the translation remains remarkably neutral in tone, mainly due to the ecumenical composition of its translation committee. It knows what it's trying to do and it does it well. For anyone seeking a Bible that resonates emotionally, reads smoothly, and conveys Scripture clearly, the NLT is an excellent choice. Just pair it with a more formal version when digging into complex or controversial texts.

CSB – Christian Standard Bible

The Christian Standard Bible (CSB) was released in 2017 as a revision of the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB). Its goal is to strike a careful balance between formal equivalence and functional equivalence, a philosophy it refers to as "optimal equivalence." The translation committee comprised a diverse group of evangelical scholars, resulting in a Bible that aims to be both faithful to the original text and readable in modern English.

What I like about the CSB is how well it succeeds at this balancing act. It's remarkably clear and readable, especially in narrative and epistolary sections, without giving up accuracy. It doesn't feel overly formal or artificially modern. Its sentence structure flows well, and yet it often adheres closely enough to Greek and Hebrew that serious readers can still rely on it for teaching and exegetical work. It's a strong candidate for both preaching and personal reading and is my most recommended translation in general.

It's not perfect, of course. There are times when it smooths over awkward or ambiguous Greek constructions that deserve to remain complex. And while the translation is very readable, it doesn't quite carry the literary weight or cadence of something like the NRSV or even the ESV.

Still, these are relatively small concerns in the big picture. The CSB stands out as one of the most balanced and accessible modern English Bibles available today. It rarely feels clunky, never feels doctrinally aggressive, and is committed to both precision and clarity. It has been well received in a wide variety of church settings and has avoided many of the controversies that plague other translations. I highly recommend it for those seeking a reliable, all-purpose Bible that reads well without compromising substance.

A-Tier

NRSVue – New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition

The NRSVue was released in 2021 as a long-anticipated update to the 1989 NRSV. Produced under the direction of the National Council of Churches, the NRSVue reflects three decades of advances in textual criticism, manuscript discoveries, and modern scholarship. While it retains the core structure and integrity of the original NRSV, it introduces thousands of minor updates in wording, grammar, and translation clarity.

What I like about the NRSVue is that it stays true to everything the NRSV got right: it's transparent, formal, and committed to accuracy. The updates are modest but meaningful. In many places, the NRSVue improves readability without sacrificing its scholarly tone. Certain awkward or obscure phrasings from the 1989 edition have been clarified, and idioms are rendered more naturally. Footnotes have also been updated to reflect current manuscript evidence and alternative readings, helping readers understand where interpretive decisions are being made.

The translation's treatment of gendered language has also been refined. It continues the NRSV's approach of translating gender inclusively where the original text warrants it but with slightly more precision and care. Contrary to what some critics claim, the NRSVue does not alter male-specific references to God, nor does it "erase" the meaning of Scripture. The language updates are responsible, restrained, and grounded in sound linguistic reasoning.

One controversy worth noting is the translation of 1 Corinthians 6:9, where arsenokoitai is rendered as "men who engage in illicit sex." This has drawn criticism from those who claim it's a softening of Paul's condemnation of homosexuality. In reality, this rendering is more theologically neutral and better reflects the complexity of the Greek. It avoids importing modern categories into the text while still clearly referring to sexual behavior outside the bounds of biblical marriage. Any responsible exegete will still reach the same moral conclusions. The translation enables the interpretation to emerge from the text itself rather than from preconceived notions rooted in the modern English language.

What I don't like is that, despite the improvements, the NRSVue hasn't gained widespread adoption. Many institutions and publishers continue to use the 1989 edition, and awareness of the update is still relatively low. And while some clunky phrases have been smoothed out, it still retains the formal density that can make the NRSV a slower read. It won't win over casual readers or gain traction in evangelical churches.

Still, as an update, the NRSVue is faithful, responsible, and theologically sound. If you already use the NRSV, there's no reason not to adopt the updated edition. And if you've never considered the NRSV family before, the NRSVue might be a good place to start. The NRSV will not be published ever again after June 2025, so the NRSVue will be the only option moving forward regardless.

LSB – Legacy Standard Bible

The Legacy Standard Bible (LSB) was released in 2021 as a revision of the NASB 1995, developed under the leadership of John MacArthur's Grace Community Church and The Master's Seminary. Building on the NASB's reputation for literalness, the LSB takes that commitment even further, aiming for maximum precision and consistency in word-for-word translation. One of its most distinctive features is its decision to restore the divine name "Yahweh" in the Old Testament rather than using the traditional "LORD." This move alone adds theological depth and clarity to many passages, reflecting a deliberate effort to bring the reader closer to the original Hebrew text.

There's a lot to appreciate in the LSB if your priority is technical accuracy and consistency. It's ideal for word studies, particularly for those doing original language work or serious exposition. It retains many of the strengths of the NASB 1995 while refining and tightening the language even further. For those in Reformed or conservative theological circles, it offers a translation that aligns well with doctrinal convictions and rigorous study.

However, the LSB's strength is also its greatest limitation. It is very wooden in places. The English often sacrifices natural readability in favor of exactness, which makes it challenging for public reading or devotional use. This isn't a translation you hand to someone new to the Bible as it reads more like a reference tool than a living text. Additionally, while the translation itself is technically solid, it's closely tied to MacArthur's theological world, which includes strong complementarian and cessationist leanings. It feels built for a niche audience rather than the broader church.

The LSB is also clearly associated with a specific theological camp. While it doesn't overtly inject doctrine into the translation, the slant is noticeable in how it's framed, promoted, and received. It's impossible to separate the translation entirely from the doctrinal positions of those who produced it. That doesn't make it unusable, but it does mean it should be approached with awareness.

For readers within that tradition, the LSB may be exactly what they're looking for. For others, it's a valuable reference Bible, but not one I'd recommend as a primary translation for preaching or teaching in most contexts.

B-Tier

NIV – New International Version

The New International Version (NIV) is one of the most widely read and commercially successful English Bible translations in the world. First released in 1978 and revised in 1984 and again in 2011, it was produced by a large international team of evangelical scholars. The translation was designed to be clear, accessible, and readable for a general audience, serving as a kind of middle ground between more literal and more dynamic translations.

There are things to appreciate about the NIV. It reads smoothly and clearly, making it particularly suitable for public reading and casual study. It's widely available in countless formats and study editions, making it extremely convenient and accessible. For many evangelicals, especially those who came to faith in the 1980s and 90s, the NIV has become a familiar and trusted companion. Its tone is natural and modern, and it does a decent job of conveying the overall meaning in both narrative and epistolary sections.

That said, the NIV often feels awkward in its attempt to split the difference between formal and functional translation philosophies. It lands in a middle zone that frequently comes across as bland or imprecise. It attempts to be readable and faithful at the same time, but other translations, such as the CSB and the NLT, achieve what the NIV sets out to do but do it better. The CSB achieves a clearer balance between readability and accuracy, while the NLT has a more consistent editorial voice and greater polish in expression. In comparison, the NIV often feels like a compromise that just isn't very satisfying.

The NIV has not been without controversy. The 2011 revision adopted more gender-neutral language, which drew criticism from some conservative groups. Ironically, others have critiqued it for still being too complementarian in tone, showing that the translation sits awkwardly in the middle of a cultural and theological divide. On top of that, the NIV has been the subject of countless online memes claiming it "removes verses," though these complaints usually reflect ignorance of textual criticism rather than any actual problem with the translation.

Overall, the NIV is not a bad translation. It's simply one that no longer stands out. If you're already deeply attached to it, there's no need to abandon it. However, if you're choosing a translation for the first time, consider alternatives like the CSB or NLT, which achieve similar goals with greater consistency and clarity.

NKJV - New King James Version

The New King James Version (NKJV) was released in 1982 with the goal of updating the archaic language of the original King James Version while retaining its structure, cadence, and textual base. It was produced by Thomas Nelson Publishers and remains committed to the Textus Receptus (the same manuscript tradition behind the KJV), which sets it apart from nearly all other modern translations that rely on the broader critical text tradition.

There's something admirable about what the NKJV tries to do. It preserves the literary beauty and rhythm of the KJV while using modern vocabulary and spelling. It's significantly more readable than the original KJV and remains popular among those who appreciate the KJV tradition but want a version that doesn't require a dictionary to understand. The NKJV is still used in many conservative church settings and is often regarded as a respectful alternative to the older version, particularly for public reading and liturgical purposes.

However, there are some limitations. By adhering to the Textus Receptus, the NKJV continues to reflect a limited manuscript base, thereby bypassing the advances in textual criticism of the last few hundred years. This means that in some places, it preserves readings that most scholars agree were later additions or alterations. While the translation itself is generally clear and well-executed, its reliance on outdated textual foundations can be a concern for serious study.

In addition, the NKJV sometimes feels caught in two worlds: too modern for those committed to the traditional KJV, yet too old-fashioned in tone and textual base for those who want the most accurate and up-to-date scholarship. It doesn't quite stand out in any one category. If you're committed to the King James tradition but want something more accessible, the NKJV is a decent choice. However, for those seeking the optimal balance of accuracy, clarity, and readability, better options are available.

NASB - New American Standard Bible

The New American Standard Bible (NASB) has long been known as one of the most literal and precise English translations available. First released in 1971 as a revision of the 1901 American Standard Version (ASV), it aimed to be as close to the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts as possible while still using contemporary English. The 1977 and 1995 editions gained popularity among scholars and Bible students for their word-for-word accuracy, and the 2020 revision attempted to smooth out some of the stiffness for readability while maintaining the original philosophy.

The NASB excels in contexts where technical clarity and faithfulness to the original languages are the primary concerns. It's excellent for deep study, teaching Greek or Hebrew students, and doing serious exegesis. The 1995 edition, in particular, earned a loyal following for its balance of literalness and usability and is still widely cited in academic writing, seminaries, and study materials. It also provides helpful footnotes, often flagging alternate readings or literal renderings where the main text smooths things out.

That said, the NASB has its drawbacks. While it's one of the best study tools available, it has never been great for public reading or casual use. Its rigid sentence structure and occasionally awkward English can make it feel clunky, especially in poetic or narrative passages. The 2020 revision attempted to address this by introducing more gender-neutral language and simplifying certain constructions. Yet many felt that it had softened the NASB's identity too much, leading to some pushback from long-time users.

Overall, I appreciate the NASB, especially the 1995 edition, for its clarity and transparency. It's a fantastic study Bible, but not one I'd use for preaching or general reading. If your goal is to get as close as possible to the original wording, this is a solid choice. However, for most people, a more balanced translation, such as the CSB or NRSV, may be a better all-purpose tool.

C-Tier

ESV – English Standard Version

The English Standard Version (ESV) was released in 2001 as a conservative evangelical revision of the Revised Standard Version (RSV). Developed by a team of largely Reformed scholars, the ESV was intended to preserve the literary cadence of the KJV-RSV tradition while affirming traditional theological commitments. It quickly became the preferred Bible in many evangelical circles, primarily due to support from ministries such as Crossway, Desiring God, and The Gospel Coalition.

There's no denying the strengths of the ESV. It's a polished and readable translation that sounds natural in public reading and preaching. It retains the literary tone of the RSV and KJV, which gives it a sense of formality and tradition that many readers appreciate. For those in conservative churches, the ESV provides a sense of familiarity and consistency, and it performs reliably in straightforward narrative and doctrinal passages.

However, despite its strengths, the ESV also has significant issues, especially in how it handles theologically sensitive texts. It consistently tilts toward complementarian and Reformed interpretations, even when the original text allows for more nuance. Passages like Genesis 3:16, 1 Timothy 2:12, and Romans 16:7 are all rendered in ways that reflect a particular theological agenda. And while I personally hold complementarian views, I'm not a fan of bias in my Bible translations. I'd rather wrestle with the text than have it pre-interpreted for me.

The ESV also avoids gender-neutral language even when the Greek clearly refers to mixed audiences. For example, translating adelphoi as "brothers" rather than "brothers and sisters" ignores common-sense context in favor of preserving a specific traditional tone. That may appeal to some, but it ultimately obscures the meaning for modern readers. And while the ESV is often marketed as "essentially literal" and theologically neutral, the reality is that it's not neutral; it's carefully framed through a conservative lens.

One of the more controversial moments in the ESV's history occurred in 2016, when Crossway announced that the ESV would become a "permanent text," effectively freezing it in its current form. This move was widely criticized and eventually reversed. A new revision is being released this year (2025), which reverts some of those changes, such as the problematic rendering of Genesis 3:16, aligning it more closely with other major translations.

The ESV remains popular, and I understand why. It's clean, formal, and doctrinally reassuring to many. But as a translation, it's not transparent about interpretive choices, and it too often flattens ambiguity to protect a specific theological framework. I respect its influence, but I don't recommend it for study or teaching where interpretive honesty and openness are essential.

RSV – Revised Standard Version

The Revised Standard Version (RSV) was released in 1952 as a modern update to the 1901 American Standard Version (ASV). Its goal was to retain the formal structure and dignity of traditional English Bible translations while making the language more accessible to mid-20th-century readers. In many ways, it served as a transitional bridge between the literary tradition of the King James Version (KJV) and the emerging wave of modern scholarship. It eventually became the parent text for two very different translations: the NRSV and the ESV.

There's a lot to appreciate in the RSV historically. It preserves the cadence and elegance of older translations but avoids the heavily archaic English that characterizes the King James. For those who want a Bible that still sounds formal but is easier to understand, the RSV offers a middle path. It's still usable today in liturgical or traditional church settings, particularly where continuity with older English phrasing is valued.

That said, the RSV feels dated by today's standards, both linguistically and textually. It lacks the benefit of more recent manuscript discoveries. It doesn't reflect the advances in textual criticism that later translations, such as the NRSV and CSB, incorporate. While its structure was stable enough to serve as the foundation for newer translations, it's clear that the RSV itself has been surpassed. Both the NRSV and the ESV improved upon it, though in very different ways.

It's also worth noting that the RSV was quite controversial when it was first released. Many conservatives objected to perceived theological liberalism, particularly in Isaiah 7:14, where almah was translated as "young woman" rather than "virgin." This choice reflected sound Hebrew scholarship, but it was interpreted by some as a denial of the virgin birth. Ironically, decades later, the RSV would become the foundation for the very conservative ESV, showing just how solid and adaptable its core structure really was.

Ultimately, the RSV is more of a historical milestone than a practical choice today. It paved the way for better translations, and it still holds value for comparison and tradition, but it's unlikely to be anyone's first choice for serious study or modern teaching.

KJV – King James Version

The King James Version (KJV) was commissioned by King James I of England and completed in 1611. It was based primarily on the Textus Receptus (which is a text-base from a handful of late medieval Greek manuscripts) and became the dominant English Bible for centuries. The KJV has had an unmatched influence on English-speaking Christianity and culture. Its literary cadence and poetic rhythm have shaped English hymnody, theology, and even the development of the English language itself.

There's no denying the KJV's historical and literary significance. It stands as a monumental achievement, with deeply memorable phrasing and a majestic tone that still resonates in many traditional contexts. For those who grew up with it, the KJV remains beloved and familiar, and its role in preserving and disseminating Scripture throughout the English-speaking world cannot be overstated.

That said, I have to acknowledge a strong personal bias against the KJV; though of course I believe it's well-founded. I grew up using the KJV in the Mormon church. As I began to understand the true gospel and mature in my faith, I found myself increasingly disenchanted with its archaic and often confusing language. Words like "suffer the little children" or "quit you like men" no longer carry the meaning they did in 1611, which makes the KJV a serious barrier to understanding for modern readers.

Beyond the language, the KJV is based on outdated manuscript evidence. It was completed more than 400 years ago, long before the discovery of thousands of older and more reliable manuscripts, including the Dead Sea Scrolls. Modern translations benefit from far more textual data and a much deeper understanding of the biblical languages and context.

Perhaps most concerning is the way the KJV is weaponized in certain theological circles, particularly within the KJV-only movement. This group promotes the KJV as the only trustworthy English Bible, often accompanied by divisive and anti-scholarly rhetoric. Such a stance is historically and textually indefensible, and it causes unnecessary division in the body of Christ.

To be clear, the KJV deserves deep respect for its legacy, and there's no harm in appreciating it as a work of literature or in recognizing its place in the history of the church. But it should not be treated as the standard of accuracy today. There are better tools available for serious study, preaching, and discipleship in a modern context.

Read The Bible

It’s easy to get caught up in debates over which Bible translation is “best,” but those conversations only matter if they help us actually engage with Scripture. At the end of the day, the goal is to know God, grow in faith, and live out His Word. Some translations are better suited for certain tasks than others, and it’s wise to choose carefully and even consult multiple versions during study. But don’t let the search for the “perfect” translation keep you from actually reading your Bible.

Whatever version you use, read it often and know it well.