This review has been relocated here:

http://thislamp.com/?p=182

Please continue any further discussion at the new location.

Tags: NLT, Tyndale, Wide-Margin

Note: for the sake of clarification, I’ve offered a few footnotes since the original posting of this article a few hours ago.

Consider this a mild follow up to my post “The Rise of the New Living Translation,” but I’ll keep this one short and to the point.

Notice the graphic which I’ve swiped from the Tyndale website. Here the NLT is described as “The standard in scholarly translation with rich, clear language.” I have no real argument with this description. The NLT’s language is certainly richer and clearer than the NIV/TNIV, ESV, HCSB, and other contemporary translations. I’ve described the NLT as having phrasings closer to natural, conversational language than any other translation.

But is the NLT scholarly? I’d point to the translators involved and the continued fine tuning of the NLT through three revisions in 12 years to say, yes.

Granted this is the real question. We probably haven’t always thought of the NLT as a “scholarly” translation, and perhaps its status as such was more questionable in 1996, but it has continued to improve. As I pointed out in my “Rise” post, the creation of an NLT-dedicated commentary series such as the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary series, the tying of the translation to the original languages through the newly formulated “Tyndale Strong’s Numbering System,” and the publication of an NLT Study Bible at least on par with--if not slightly more academic than--the standard NIV Study Bible, all point to Tyndale’s repositioning of its flagship translation as a translation intended to be taken very seriously.

The link to the Tyndale Strong’s Numbering System in the paragraph above will take you to a post on the NLT blog asking if the NLT, as a dynamic translation, is suitable for word studies. The newest post on the NLT Study Bible Blog asks “The NLT: Good for Study?”

If you haven’t already guessed--YES, Tyndale is serious about this.

Look, I don’t know what it will take for the NLT to become a standard English translation in seminaries one day, but it’s not beyond imagination considering the NIV has held that spot for over two decades.¹ But let’s put seminaries aside for the moment.

I currently teach in church and in the college classroom. My desire is for the people that I’m teaching to (1) understand the Bible, (2) take what they understand seriously, and (3) let the Bible transform their perspective on life and the world. However, I’ve often noticed when watching others teach the Bible that eyes glaze over when the Scriptures are being read. Reading from the Bible is often a cue to zone out. Why is this? Is it perhaps because we’re too used to what we’ve heard in Tyndale-family translations,² and even from the NIV?

Granted, it never hurts to read the Bible with a little expression, and sadly many preachers and teachers don’t have a clue as to how to effectively read from the scriptures; but it may just be that it’s time for a new kind of translation to catch people’s attention. Maybe it’s time to use a translation that is fresh enough and bold enough to capture the spiritual imagination of people again.

As for the scholarly angle, there are a few things that Tyndale will have to do if they want to take things to the next level.

1. Beef up Tyndale’s academic catalog. This is where Zondervan, primary US distributor of the NIV, has excelled. Tyndale has a few academic offerings, but there’s much room for improvement.
2. Continue to connect the NLT to the original languages. I would suggest that Tyndale should immediately launch a project to publish a NLT/Greek diglot. Include notes that offer explanations behind particular NLT renderings from the Greek. Transliterate nothing. This should be a volume strictly for those who have a background in original languages.
3. Publish a series of articles (maybe an ongoing series of books?) by the translators of the NLT regarding translational challenges and decisions behind the translation.
4. Publish a series of preaching resources that use the NLT as a basis.
5. Offer some serious gatekeeper editions: traditional format preaching editions, wide margin editions for study and teaching.
6. Renew attention to the NLT apocrypha/deuterocanonicals. Publish an edition of the NLT with these books that is not labeled a “Catholic edition.”
7. Make good use of testimonials from both academics and popular pastors.
8. Hold off on any further revisions for at least a decade. Three editions in 12 years is unprecedented. The updates to the NLT have been warranted, but readers need to know that the text has been established/set--at least for a while.

I do believe that Tyndale is smartly doing most things well in their promotion of the NLT and repositioning it as a translation both for serious study and one for scholarly pursuits, but there is still a lot of work to done creating a suitable scholarly context for the NLT before it is completely there. Nevertheless, as I originally pointed out in the “Rise” post, Tyndale is not going to be content to sit back and let the NLT continue to be seen as secondary translation to be read alongside supposedly more scholarly ones. Rather, the message being proclaimed is clear: the NLT can serve these purposes as well.³

---

¹I’m referring primarily to conservative/evangelical schools, but the NIV has also gained acceptance beyond these circles where translations like the RSV and NRSV are considered standards.

²This can quickly become confusing. When I use the designation “Tyndale-family translations,” I’m referring to versions of the Bible that follow in the lineage established by William Tyndale including the KJV, RSV, NASB, NRSV, ESV and others. Obviously, the reader should not confuse this with the fact that the company, Tyndale House Publishers, publishes the NLT.

³As I’ve discussed before, my greatest challenge in using the NLT for teaching would come when discussing poetic passages. Although the second edition of the NLT is an improvement here, I still struggle with wanting to hold on to the beauty of some Hebrew metaphors that often become flattened out a bit in the NLT. However, that is not to say that I couldn’t use an approach such as that in Tom Gledhill’s helpful commentary on the Song of Solomon (The Message of Song of Songs [Bible Speaks Today], IVP) in which he uses both a free translation as well as a literal translation to get the meaning of the Hebrew text across.

Tags: NLT, Tyndale

For anyone who follows advances in Bible translations, it’s been no secret that Tyndale has continued to fine-tune their flagship New Living Translation. The NLT, originally released in 1996, received a major update in 2004 resulting in the New Living Translation, second edition (NLTse). Although still referred to as the “second edition,” the NLT received a less extensive update over the last year resulting in the year “2007” added to the copyright pages of the most recent printings. Some have referred to this as “NLT 2007” when distinguishing it from the 2004 NLTse.

Unlike some publishers [*cough*Crossway*cough*], Tyndale has graciously agreed to make the changes in the 2007 update of the NLTse public. A complete list of changes in the 2007 text can be accessed from a PDF file posted on Tyndale’s website. I’ve not had a chance to look at the changes in depth yet, but a cursory survey demonstrates a continued “fine tuning” of the text for the sake of accuracy. The PDF file released by Tyndale highlights changes to the text in red so that they are easier to spot and examine. Changes made to footnotes are included as well.

My thanks goes out to Mark Taylor and the team at Tyndale House Publishers. In recent weeks they’ve created a team blog and allowed readers to offer feedback via comments. They’ve even been gracious enough to field critical comments, something in the past that few publishers have been brave enough to do in such a public forum. Allowing the changes in the NLT 2007 text to be made public on their website is yet another example of Tyndale’s transparency in recent days, something I believe readers greatly appreciate.

You can view the 2007 changes to the NLT text either at the link I provided above, or go to www.newlivingtranslation.com, click on “Discover the NLT/FAQs,” then pull down the list of FAQs all the way to the bottom. Embedded in the article (“My NLT has copyright dates of 1996, 2004, and 2007 . . .” ) is a “click here,” which takes you to the pdf.

Tags: NLT, Tyndale

“But my child, let me give you some further advice: Be careful, for the publishing of new study Bibles is endless, and carrying more than one in your book bag wears you out”
(modified from Ecclesiastes 12:12, NLT).

When I first heard that Tyndale was publishing a new study Bible, I admit that I was a bit ambivalent. There are scores of study Bibles on the market--some very good ones in fact. I was glad to see Tyndale continue to support the New Living Translation, but do we really need another study Bible? And isn’t there already a study Bible for the NLT--The Life Application Bible?

I received the Genesis sampler of the NLT Study Bible (NLTSB from this point forward) a few weeks ago. I literally read every word of it (the same as I had done to the Life Application Bible Gospel of
Mark in the Living Bible way back in the late eighties!) to get a feel for the direction this new study Bible takes. Since last Friday, upon receiving an advance copy of the entire Bible in the mail, I have spent a good bit of time reviewing the full product as well. At this point I can readily suggest that the NLTSB really does bring something new to the already crowded study Bible table.

The NLTSB contains lots of great features that I’m not going to spend a whole lot of time discussing since a number of other reviews are starting to show up on the web that do a fine job covering these. You can “Tour the Features” on the NLTSB website. Also, you can see a list of the contributors at the website as well--a veritable “who’s who” of Evangelical scholarship, but one that represents mainstream thought and offers a variety of perspective within certain boundaries.

IN KEEPING WITH WHAT HAS GONE BEFORE. I have no doubt that study Bibles are big business. And it seems to me that a translation has reached a certain level of acceptance when it begins to show up on shelves in study Bible forms. Study Bibles come with different approaches. There are study Bibles written from the viewpoint of an individual (Scofield, Ryrie, Dakes, MacArthur). Recently there has been a trend for study Bibles to come wrapped around a particular subject (apologetics, archaeology, literary features) or even specific theological perspectives. These two categories are fine if a reader really like the viewpoint of a particular individual or if the reader has interests in a particular subject and wants to discover how that subject relates to Scripture. But for me, I’ve always felt a bit more comfort in study Bibles that offer information of a more general nature and ones that have the perspective of not one particular writer or theological viewpoint, but from from the work of many individuals. In the last two decades, the NIV Study Bible has reigned supreme in this realm as a kind of standard that most study Bibles most often get compared to. The NIV Study Bible has even been adapted to three other translations: the KJV, NASB, and TNIV. Other committee-produced study Bibles in this kind of category include the New Oxford Annotated Study Bible, the Life Application Study Bible (also adapted to numerous translations) and the Jewish Study Bible, to name a few.

2008 sees two new study Bibles in the multiple-contributor category, and that is the NLT Study Bible, the subject of this review as well as the forthcoming ESV Study Bible. And in addition to the kind of standard (at least for Evangelical circles) set by a work like the NIV Study Bible, I would suggest that although it may not be at first apparent, there is another study Bible that is influential upon the NLT Study Bible. I’m referring to the NET Bible with its 60K+ notes. Although as of yet, not widely accepted, he NET Bible raised the bar in a number of ways for study Bibles, and in my opinion its influence is seen in at least three areas in the NLTSB.

The first is the NLTSB’s greater interaction with the original languages. It’s not uncommon to see transliteration of Greek and Hebrew words in the NLTSB’s study notes, even transliterated words beyond those defined in the NLTSB’s brief word study dictionary (more about that to come). Any reader familiar with the NET Bible knows that original language words are regularly incorporated into the notes both in their Greek and Hebrew form as well as a transliteration. The NLTSB offers only transliteration, but this probably suffices for the majority of its target market.

Second, like the NET Bible [print version], the NLTSB intermixes textual notes of the translation with its other notes. This is actually my largest criticism for the NLTSB. The NET Bible can get away with intermixing its textual notes because ALL of the notes came from the translation committee. Reading the NET Bible’s notes is like sitting in on an extended translator’s meeting. As with any translation, I’m very much interested in the footnotes added to the NLT text by the translators as a completely different level of authority and importance from the commentary of the study Bible itself. So the fact that the new 2007 edition of the NLT has a footnote in Gen 10:15 for “Hittites,” reading “Hebrew ancestor of Heth” is totally lost on me because I can’t distinguish it from the rest of the study notes. Even though the study notes in the NLTSB offer an explanation of the footnote, I have no indication that the original footnote itself is from the translation committee. There’s not even an indicator within the text itself that the word “Hittites” required clarification by the translators. If there was one major feature I’d recommend changing in the NLTSB in subsequent printings, it would be to separate the translator’s notes from the commentary.

Another influence of the standard set by the NET Bible: while the number of notes are at a greater number than some study BIbles (the NLTSB boasts 25,900 vs. the NIV Study BIble’s 25,000), these notes in the NLTSB are shorter and more to the point.

But what kind of notes are these? A few weeks back, I asked Tyndale if the study notes in the NLTSB were merely a condensation of Tyndale’s Cornerstone Biblical Commentary series which is also based on the NLT. I was told that it is not, and in fact the study notes in the NLTSB are entirely new, written specifically for the NLTSB (plus, the Cornerstone series is not complete yet).

SO WHAT’S DIFFERENT HERE? One of the promotional charts for the NLTSB compares the approach of it to other popular study Bibles. This is marketing copy, of course, so its value to you will vary, but the various study Bible approaches described this way:

“Using the NLT Study Bible is like being led through Scripture by a caring Bible teacher.”
“Using the NIV Study Bible is like being led through Scripture by a historian.”
“Using the Archaeological Study Bible is like being led through Scripture by an archaeologist.”
“Using the MacArthur Study Bible is like being led through Scripture by a theologian.”

Now, some may argue with any of those explanations on a variety of fronts, but the one major-selling study Bible I saw missing from this list was Tyndale’s own Life Application Study Bible. So I asked Tyndale how the two Bibles differed. I was told that “The Life Application Bible is like being led through Scripture in a discipleship program or by an application-oriented exegete.”

Okay, so the NLTSB is different because, to quote Sean Harrison from the NLTSB Blog,

“Basically, the NLT Study Bible focuses on the meaning and message of the text as understood in and through the original historical context. I don’t see other study Bibles focusing so fully on that. Some study Bibles focus on helping people to accept a particular doctrinal system, while others focus on “personal application.” Others simply provide interesting details about the context, language, grammar, etc., without asking how that information will impact people’s understanding of the text. Still others focus on a particular type of study methodology—topical study, word study, etc. Our goal, by contrast, was to provide everything we could that would help the readers understand the Scripture text more fully as the original human authors and readers themselves would have understood it.“

Of course these kind of descriptions can often overlap. I can see the difference from the Life Application Study Bible, but is the NLTSB all that different in approach from the NIV Study Bible (and its cousins)? Well, you will have to decide for yourself, but I do think it does a few things better, and I will describe those below.

And on a related note, in spite of distinguishing the NLTSB from the Life Application Bible, some notes such as the one discovered by blogger David Ker would make one wonder if there’s not an overly homiletical interest in some of the notes. So, maybe there actually is here and there, but they aren’t necessarily the norm. In fact, as I pointed out in the comments to David’s blog, if you turn to the notes at the other end of the Bible in a book like Revelation, I don’t see any of these kind of preachy statements such as in the last sentence of David’s example. In fact, to quote myself, “[the notes in Revelation] tend to stay with the text, illuminating yes, but not falling into homiletical application. The notes on Revelation also refreshingly tend to avoid any overt connections with interpretational schemes.” The Revelation notes, by the way, were written by Gerald Borchert.

Since the study notes for different biblical books were written by different writers, there may be some consistency issues, but David’s example does not seem to be the norm.

Really, there’s not going to be an unexpected twist to my review. I believe the NLTSB is a solid product. Having said that, however, there are a number of areas in which I believe the NLTSB does things exceptionally well. These are described below.

INTRODUCTIONS WITH SUBSTANCE. Anyone familiar with study Bibles expects to read a one to two page introduction before each biblical book. Included in that introduction are the obligatory sections of author, time of writing, type of literature and an outline. This is where the NLTSB goes above and beyond. Before one ever comes to the introduction to Genesis, the reader will find a four-page, three-column introduction to the Old Testament as a whole. Following that is a four-page essay and table on archaeological sources for Old Testament background. Then the reader finds a separate three-page, three-column introduction to the Pentateuch. Only then will the reader find the expected introduction to the book of Genesis. Thus the NLTSB begins to approach the state of not only functioning as a study Bible but an introduction to the Bible as well.

Of course since study Bibles are usually aimed at a more mainstream audience, I’m always interested to see how such resources handle discussions such as authorship. It doesn’t surprise me for an Evangelical resource such as the NLTSB to reject Wellhausen’s Documentary Hypothesis (my own study and convictions reject it as well). However, I remember being gravely disappointed that in the original 1985 NIV Study Bible that this major theory of Pentateuchal origins could be so easily dismissed in one short sentence. Taking a much different approach, I was pleased to see that in the NLTSB, the issue is not so easily swept under the rug. Although the Documentary Hypothesis is rejected, it is rejected with seven paragraphs of explanation as to why.

On the other hand, Evangelicals always seem more comfortable (for the most part) with source criticism in the New Testament. So, for instance, in the introduction to the Gospels (which is one of four articles before ever reaching the introduction to Matthew), Markan priority for the Synoptics is accepted as probable and credence is also given to the Q source:

“There are also 250 verses of Jesus’ sayings that are shared by Matthew and Luke but not found in Mark, so most scholars believe that they both used a common source, perhaps oral, referred to as Q (from German Quelle, meaning ‘source’ ).”

Some may be interested to know that there is also a separate introduction to Paul’s pastoral epistles in addition to a general introduction to his work.

REINVENTING THE CROSS REFERENCE SYSTEM. I’ll be honest, I don’t use cross reference systems in Bibles all that often because most cross reference columns have more references than I really need. I’m not impressed with big numbers, and I don’t want to waste time looking up insignificant connections. Further, I feel Bible pages look peculiar in which the cross references are so numerous that they no longer fit in a center column, but pile up at the bottom right of the page. To me, that’s overkill. Here’s what I generally need in a cross reference system: parallel passages, intertextual connections, quotations, and maybe a minimum number of significant thematic references. If I need anything more than that, I can consult a topical Bible.

The NLTSB reinvents the cross reference column making it much more useful than merely offering other verses to look up. There are these basic kinds of cross references included, but just enough--not too many. Parallel passages are indicated by two double forward slash marks (//). Asterisks mark intertestamental quotations.

Another new feature in the cross references relate to word studies tied to the original languages. Certain major Hebrew or Greek words are transliterated within the reference column along with its Tyndale-Strong’s number. A reader can look these words up in the “Dictionary and Index for Hebrew and Greek Key Word Studies” in the back of the NLTSB. This dictionary serves as a brief lexicon for about 200 major biblical words. Underneath the reference, a triangled bullet indicates the next occurrence of the particular word much like a chain reference Bible.

Thus the NLTSB manages to combine in its reference system the best qualities of a reference Bible as well as the features of other works such as The Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible and The Thompson Chain Reference Bible.

RANGE OF SOURCES. Often study Bibles tend to come across as closed systems of reference rather than leading the reader to further information. Many study Bibles simply don’t refer the reader to other works at all. Perhaps this is another influence of the NET Bible which offers references to books and articles right within its notes. While the NLTSB doesn’t do this in the study notes, there is a “Further Reading” section in each introductory article. I was both surprised and delighted to see such a wide range of selections.

These recommendations aren’t relegated to simply Christian writers. Robert Alter, a well known scholar in the Jewish Studies department at Berkeley is recommended further reading for 1 & 2 Samuel. And even among Christian writers, there is a great deal of diversity. Take for instance the introduction to the Book of Psalms. Familiar readers will know there is a VAST difference between the work of James Montgomery Boice on the Psalms and that of Marvin Tate from the Word Biblical Commentary (the latter of whom wrote one of my two recommendation letters to the doctorate program). And in the introductory article on the Book of Daniel, a very traditional scholar like E. J. Young is listed right along with John Goldingay who dates the Book of Daniel much later than the events described therein.

Now, I have to admit that I believe that such diversity among recommended sources is too often sadly rare in some Christian circles. But this demonstrates a confidence in the editors of the NLTSB that readers can make their own informed decisions in regard to the biblical writings. Frankly, such openness is both surprising and refreshing.

Unfortunately, full bibliographic information is not included with the list of further reading recommends, but simply the name of the author and the title of the work--with the exception of volumes from the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary. All completed volumes of the CBC are included in the appropriate lists as would be expected from a Tyndale publication, and the CBC is the only series that enjoys the mention of its name in the “Further Reading” lists. As for the other recommendations, an author’s name and title of the work is probably all one needs to track down any of these volumes at most online resellers.

ACKNOWLEDGING OTHER TEXTS. The writings of the Bible were not written in a vacuum, of course. But from many study Bibles on the market the reader wouldn’t necessarily know otherwise. Sometimes a study Bible will have an included article on the books of the Apocrypha and reasons why Protestants don’t read them, but very little more attention is paid to these books. Most study Bibles include a begrudging reference to 1 Enoch in Jude, but offer little more.

So I was quite amazed Sunday when looking at the article on “Circumcision” that accompanies Acts 15 to read this statement: “For Jews, it had religious significance as the sign of the covenant that God had established with the people of Israel (7:8; Gen 17:9-14; Josh 5:2; John 7:22; Sirach 44:20).” Yes, right along with references to other biblical books was a reference to the Apocrypha. So I looked further, and I found that references to other Jewish literature abounds in the study notes! The note for Romans 4:1 refer the reader to the Prayer of Manasseh, Jubilees, 1 Maccabees and Sirach by way of background. The note for Matt 5:31 quotes the Mishna! I can’t recall seeing so much interaction with extrabiblical Jewish literature in any other study Bible from an Evangelical publisher ever before.

Two more features of note: (1) a five-page, three-column article with timeline titled “Introduction to the Time After the Apostles” follows Revelation describing the process of canonization; (2) the “NLT Study Bible Reading Plan” incorporates all the additional articles and introductions and if followed five days of the week can be completed in five years.

WHAT’S NEXT? The NLTSB won’t be widely available until it hits the retailers mid-September. However, Tyndale has quite a few events coming up in conjunction with the release of the NLTSB. In August, the complete text and all the features of the NLTSB will be released on the internet. This will include fully searchable text with hyperlinked cross references. Unlimited access comes with the purchase of any NLTSB, and others can obtain a 30-day free trial.

Also in August, NLTSB General Editor Sean Harrison will host live “webinars” demonstrating features of the Bible and answering questions.

Simultaneous with the release of the NLTSB on September 15, software editions of the study Bible will be made available for three platforms (Libronix, PocketBible, and WORDSearch (What? Where’s the Accordance module?!).

The NLT Study Bible website is great place to keep up with these developments and to explore the features of the NLTSB. There’s an engaging blog at the website and an errata page has already been started. I commend Tyndale for the errata page as there’s bound to be errors in a project of this scale, and they’re honest enough to make them known (if only this had been done for Zondervan’s Archaeological Study Bible which was rife with errors).

And if you weren’t able to get your hands on one of the early copies of the NLTSB, be sure to place yours on pre-order.

Overall, I’m impressed with the features of the NLT Study Bible, and I truly believe it is yet another step in facilitating the New Living Translation as a choice for serious Bible study.




ONE MORE THING. I failed to mention that the NLTSB breaks with the recent trend for small type in study Bibles by offering a surprisingly larger and readable typeface. The type in the NLTSB is larger than the typeface in the Archaeological Study Bible, the TNIV Reference Bible and even the TNIV Reference Bible. Tyndale was able to do this by opting for a more traditional two-column biblical text instead of a single-column as with most recent study Bibles. Single-column text requires more pages because it does not use space on the page as efficiently as double column text--especially in poetic passages.

Although I’m a fan of single-column text, the larger typeface in the NLTSB is a welcome “feature.” The study notes conserve space even further by using a triple-column layout and thus are easier on the eyes as well.

Tags: NLT, Tyndale

Go get yourself a cup of coffee. This is going to be a long one.

Originally, this week, I was planning to post a preview of the upcoming NLT Study Bible based upon the Genesis sampler I received in the mail over a month ago. I was informed yesterday however, that I would be receiving an advance copy of the entire Bible sometime within the next few days, so that review can wait and I will expand it to cover the entire Bible. Nevertheless, there have been a number of NLT-related issues and trends I’ve been noticing and a number of thoughts have been going through my mind lately. I wondered initially whether I should include them in the review of the NLT Study Bible or treat them separately. I’m going to use this post to do the latter.

THE ELUSIVE COMMON BIBLE. I’ve been collecting and comparing translations of the Bible since my early teenage years. Even after studying biblical languages, I still have a love for English translations, carrying both an English Bible and a Greek New Testament to church on Sundays. Related to that, I’ve watched the trends of what Bibles people carry and read, and I’ve studied the history of English translation development. We live in an age in which we are spoiled by so many translations of the Bible--from every translation methodology and for every niche market. The offset of this fact is that it is now nearly impossible for the church as a whole to embrace ONE Bible as a “common” Bible in the way that the venerable King James Version reigned supreme for nearly three centuries.

And yet even without a common Bible, there is always a preferred Bible, a most often selected, best-selling Bible version. The first Bible version to dethrone King James was the Living Bible in the 1970’s. But this coup was short-lived and the KJV soon regained its kingdom. Nevertheless, it’s interesting to note that the first contender to the KJV for best-selling translation was a Bible that was its complete opposite. The Living Bible wasn’t actually a translation at all, but a paraphrase produced by one man (and later checked by a committee) who had no direct knowledge of the biblical languages. But by the 1970’s the King’s English was quite foreign to the average Christian. Although the Living Bible had many critics at the time, no one argued the fact that it was much easier to understand. And at the time, most Christian homes contained one of those green hardback paraphrases whether it was carried to church or not (and many of them were carried to church).

The Living Bible was certainly not the first Bible to come along with more readable English. Many Bible versions were produced throughout the centuries claiming to the successor to the 1611 “Authorized Version.” Noah Webster and J. N. Darby both attempted to improve upon the KJV in the 19th century. Both of their Bibles were improvements, in the opinions of most, but they never saw widespread acceptance. The 1881 Revised Version and 1901 American Standard Version both sought to replace the KJV as the standard translations for English-speaking Protestants, but while technically translated with more accuracy than the KJV, they did not reflect the beauty of the KJV’s style and never gained wide reading outside primarily academic circles.

In the mid-twentieth century, the Revised Standard Version replaced the KJV for many mainline Protestants, but most Evangelicals looked upon certain renderings in the RSV with suspicion. Thus, the KJV was still able to retain its dominion for a couple of decades more, but its reign as best-selling and most read translation was drawing to a close.

ROYAL DETHRONEMENT. Ultimately, it was the 1978 NIV that would finally and permanently unseat the KJV from the #1 spot. The NIV had a number of things going for it that made it successful where other contender translations had failed. Unlike the Living Bible, the NIV was an actual translation from the Greek and Hebrew texts and was produced by a committee of translators. Reading level was seriously taken into consideration in developing the NIV. The average American reads at a 7th grade reading level and newspapers generally read at that level, too. Considering the fact that the New Testament was written in Koine (common) Greek, why should a Bible be difficult to read? Why should it sound like it was written in a bygone era? Further, unlike the Modern Language Bible, the NIV committee employed stylists that helped keep its translation consistent. While not trying to achieve the majesty of the KJV necessarily, the NIV committee did achieve something that other contenders had not: an accurate, consistent, and readable translation of the Bible. I don’t remember now exactly when it occurred--either in the late eighties or sometime in the nineties--but the NIV became the best-selling, most-used, and most read translation. For millions of people, it opened up the Scriptures and made them readable for the first time.

But let’s be realistic. The NIV is not going to be the Bible of choice for the next three centuries like the KJV was. No translation will ever last that long again because the English language changes too quickly in the modern age. Sadly, the 1978 NIV already sounds a bit dated. And although it is still the best-selling English translation of the Bible, I would suggest that over the next decade another translation is going to replace it in the top spot. I don’t have access to NIV sales figures, but I would guess that its sales are already on the decline. If they aren’t, they will be soon.

WHAT’S NEXT? So what are the contenders? The English Standard Version, Holman Christian Standard Bible, Todays New International Version, the New Living Translation (second edition)--these are all major 21st century translations. If I had been propheticlly looking at this list twenty years ago, it would have been easy to suggest that the TNIV, as an update to the NIV, would be the inheritor of the NIV’s mantle. Even up until recently, I thought it still could be. But I’m less and less certain of that fact.

The TNIV suffers on two fronts: (1) It was the target of a major disinformation campaign that has led to its rejection by many of those who should have been in its target audience; and (2) neither the TNIV’s copyright owner, the International Bible Society, or its major United States distributor, Zondervan, have ever given it precedence over the original NIV in terms of promotion and emphasis.

In regard to the first issue, 50% of stores that belong to the Christian Booksellers Association, including major chains such as Lifeway, refuse to carry the TNIV. Supposedly the TNIV’s primary offense is inclusive language; however, these same stores that won’t carry the TNIV will carry the NLT, the Message, the NCV, the NRSV and others that do contain inclusive language. Further, translation such as the ESV, NASB95, and the HCSB all contain more inclusive language than even the original NIV. This is a heinous double standard. Changing these misconceptions will also require a major re-education campaign on the part of Zondervan and the IBS.

As for concerns with the International Bible Society’s and Zondervan promotion of the TNIV, in March of 2007, I wrote an open letter to both organizations here on This Lamp expressing my concerns. IBS never responded, but Zondervan flew me up to its headquarters in Grand Rapids, Michigan, where I met with editors and marketers--all warm, friendly, and welcoming. I didn’t meet anyone who wasn’t absolutely adamant that the TNIV was the future. I also came to understand better why the company was not in a position to completely remove the NIV from the market. Fine. But there’s evidently a breakdown somewhere.

Run this little experiment. Go to Amazon.com and search for “New International Version.” Then to narrow your results, click on “Books” under “Any category” on the left. Now, change the drop down on the top right to “Publication date.” I count 29 new NIV Bibles already projected for 2009. Run the same search for “Today’s New International Version.” The result? Nothing. You will find results counting new editions for 2008, but in comparison to the new NIV editions for this year, you’ll definitely see where Zondervan’s emphasis is. You ask anyone at Zondervan and they will tell you that the TNIV is the future. But the company simply doesn’t seem to be willing to put that into practice. I’m certain that they fully intend to eventually switch emphasis to the TNIV, but my fear is that by the time they do this, it may be too late for it to matter.

INTERESTING RECENT DEVELOPMENTS. Now, let me show you another interesting indicator of what may be the shape of things to come. Below is the August 2008 translation bestseller list from Christian Booksellers Association. These figures reflect sales from the month of June, 2008.

Now, anytime I show CBA translation charts, I always feel obligated to offer a disclaimer. These charts do not reflect the huge number of Bibles sold in non-member stores and bookstore chains including Barnes and Noble and Borders and such. They do not include the sales of retail outlets like Wal-Mart and online retailers like Amazon.com--all of which sell large numbers of Bibles, also. Although some Catholic stores are CBA members, the majority are not; so Catholic translations are never well-represented here. Also, keep in mind that as I have already pointed out, roughly 50% of CBA stores refuse to carry the TNIV, so although it does not show well here, that doesn’t mean that it’s not selling elsewhere. Translations such as the NRSV may also have higher sales that are simply not reflected here. The JPS is a fine translation, but it’s never going to make this list. Okay...

Nevertheless, the above figures do represent an extremely large number of Bibles sold in stores, especially Bibles that Evangelicals are buying. Since we don’t have any actual numbers, obviously the charts are open to a good bit of interpretation. Years ago, while working in a bookstore, I saw a document with some actual numbers. The first three entries counted for the vast majority of all sales. And by the time a translation ranks in the bottom half, we’re usually talking about sales in the single digit percentages.

First let’s look at the charts in regard to the TNIV. The fact that it ranks on dollar sales, but not on unit sales probably means that there aren’t that many inexpensive TNIVs in bookstores. So there aren’t many people buying low cost editions in CBA stores for evangelistic purposes. But what’s surprising is that the TNIV has completely dropped off the units sold chart. So, while it is not carried in every one of these stores, it at least used to still show in the units sold list. The August chart doesn’t mean that the TNIV is not selling in the stores that are carrying it, but it does mean that it has recently been selling less. And I’m sorry, but it boggles my mind that the International Children’s Bible would outsell the TNIV!

But now, let’s look at the chart in regard to the New Living Translation. For the last few years, the NIV, KJV, NKJV and NLT have remained in the top four positions (the HCSB was in the 4th spot after its release for a little over a year). The KJV and NKJV often go back and forth between second and third place, but the NLT is usually ranked fourth.

The unit sales chart has the most significant change. For the first time to my knowledge, the NLT has topped both the KJV and NKJV in unit sells, setting it second only to the NIV. And in dollar sales, it is ranked third and above the NKJV. To my knowledge, the NLT--which has always done fairly well on these charts anyway--has never done this well.

This week, I noticed another interesting development. Over at the NLT Blog, in what was almost an aside comment, it was noted that “Christianity Today, International will be making the NLT the default translation on their websites.” I assume that the NLT is replacing the NIV as the default translation. In my mind, this is an incredibly significant development as Christianity Today, in many ways, represents mainstream Evangelical thought. So it speaks volumes not only to the fact that the NLT was chosen as default translation, but also in regard to the versions that were passed over.

NLT UNDER THE RADAR. Suddenly and seemingly unexpectedly, signs are starting to point to the New Living Translation as a major contender for the spot of top English translation that the NIV has held onto for the last two decades. How did this come about?

Perhaps the success of the NLT can be chalked up to the patient persistence on the part of Tyndale House Publishers as well as near nonstop fine tuning of the translation itself. When the New Living Translation was initially released in 1996, it was far more to the right on the dynamic equivalence scale than it is now. The first edition had many phrasings that still echoed Ken Taylor’s original Living Bible. But with the release of the second edition of the NLT in 2004, a lot of the more dynamic readings were tightened up, active voice replaced passive voice in many passages, and the more questionable renderings were mostly removed. Echoes of the original Living Bible are now all but gone from recent editions of the NLT. I still consider the NLT a dynamic translation, and the best of its breed, but it has now moved much closer to the middle, much closer to the kind of translations I would normally categorize as median translations, containing elements of both formal and dynamic methods, based upon the communicative issues of a particular passage.

In 2007, the NLT was revised yet a third time. But the changes are not as startling as the shift between the first and second edition (see my review of the NLT for discussion of the changes in the second edition). In fact, Tyndale is still referring to the 2007 edition as a second edition, but adding 2007 to the 1996 and 2004 dates. With each revision, the NLT has become...well, I don’t want to say “more literal,” because it’s certainly not a literal translation in the traditional sense of meaning. But it has certainly become less dynamic.

I do not yet have a full 2007 text of the NLT, but when I received the Genesis sampler of the NLT Study Bible, one of the first things I did was to compare the changes in the text from the 2004 edition. As already mentioned, the changes are not on the same level of the change between the 1996 and 2004 editions, in which the NLTse was almost an entirely new translation in my opinion. But the changes reflect a honing of the translation, a fine-tuning of the details if you will. Consider that in Genesis 1-12, there are only 7 verses out of 287 that have been changed from the 2004 edition. That results in a 2.4% change from the 2004 NLTse.

	1996	2004	2007
1:14	And God said, "Let bright lights appear in the sky to separate the day from the night. They will be signs to mark off the seasons, the days, and the years.	Then God said, "Let great lights appear in the sky to separate the day from the night. Let them mark off the seasons, days, and years.	Then God said, "Let lights appear in the sky to separate the day from the night. Let them be signs to mark the seasons, days and years.
1:16	For God made two great lights, the sun and the moon, to shine down upon the earth. The greater one, the sun, presides during the day; the lesser one, the moon, presides through the night. He also made the stars.	God made two great lights, the sun and the moon--the larger one to govern the day, and the smaller one to govern the night. He also made the stars.	God made two great lights--the larger one to govern the day, and the smaller one to govern the night. He also made the stars.
1:26	Then God said, "Let us make people in our image, to be like ourselves. They will be masters over all life--the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, and all the livestock, wild animals, and small animals."	Then God said, "Let us make human beings in our image, to be like ourselves. They will reign over the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, the livestock, all the wild animals on the earth, and the small animals that scurry along the ground."	Then God said, "Let us make human beings in our image, to be like us. They will reign over the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, the livestock, all the wild animals on the earth, and the small animals that scurry along the ground.
2:5	there were no plants or grain growing on the earth, for the LORD God had not sent any rain. And no one was there to cultivate the soil.	neither wild plants nor grains were growing on the earth. The LORD God had not yet sent rain to water the earth, and there were no people to cultivate the soil.	neither wild plants nor grains were growing on the earth. For the LORD God had not yet sent rain to water the earth, and there were no people to cultivate the soil.
2:10	A river flowed from the land of Eden, watering the garden and then dividing into four branches.	A river watered the garden and then flowed out of Eden and divided into four branches.	A river flowed from the land of Eden, watering the garden and then dividing into four branches.
11:26	When Terah was 70 years old, he became the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran.	When Terah was 70 years old, he had become the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran.	After Terah was 70 years old, he became the father of Abrah, Nahor, and Haran.
12:14	And sure enough, when they arrived in Egypt, everyone spoke of her beauty.	And sure enough, when Abram arrived in Egypt, everyone spoke of Sarai’s beauty.	And sure enough, when Abram arrived in Egypt, everyone noticed Sarai's beauty.

Interestingly note that in Gen 2:10, the NLT reverts back to the original 1996 reading. Since writing my initial review of the NLT, I’ve been contacted by a number of NLT1 holdouts. Some people simply prefer the 1996 edition, and my own wife is one of them. Overall, it is more dynamic (though not in Gen 2:10) and that speaks to some people in a greater way. Personally, I have no problem with that, although I believe the changes made in the 2004 edition and now the 2007 revision as demonstrated above are changes for the better.

Over the last few years, I’ve found it quite interesting to watch the TNIV receive criticism in regard to inclusive language when the NLT had used much of the same kind of language almost a decade earlier. I even asked one of the NLT translators about this--why the NLT had remained virtually unscathed while the TNIV took a beating from its detractors. He felt that the TNIV had been a lightning rod for controversy and this allowed the NLT to scoot by a bit under the radar.

And under the radar it is. The NLT has continued to gain readers while improving the translation itself while many have really not realized such changes were going on. Consider that the 2004 update, as radical as it was, barely received mention by Tyndale itself. In fact, when I began planning my review of the NLT in 2006, I was totally unaware the extent of the changes. And I would not have even known about the 2007 revision had a reader of This Lamp not informed me by email.

But if I’m a proponent of the NLT and have been slow to find out about changes to the text, evidently it’s even harder for the detractors. Tim Challies sought to further propagandize the ESV earlier this month by knocking down a few translations he doesn’t like. Evidently, though, he had no idea that the copy of the NLT he was quoting was two editions out of date.

Want further evidence of the NLT’s under-the-radar status? Check out the Wikipedia entries for the ESV, TNIV, and the NLT. The NLT is older than the ESV by five years and the TNIV by nine. The articles for the ESV and TNIV are substantive because they have both been magnets of controversy and have each had their share of supporters and critics. The NLT, on the other hand, doesn’t even have a full article. It’s a stub, and an out of date one at that. Some of the links don’t even work.

Want more? Consider the interview with J. I. Packer from 2006 in which he heartily endorsed the NLT. He even described the NLT as “brilliantly done.” This should be ironic considering Packer was the general editor of the ESV, a translation which in many ways was created to be everything the NLT is not. But it’s not ironic because Packer is not really recommending the NLT as a primary translation. Rather, he thinks of it as a secondary translation, something perhaps to be read beside a more traditional translation like the ESV. He may even think of it in the same vein as the original Living Bible which many used as a simple commentary to the KJV. But the people I see using the NLT are not reading it as a secondary translation. And I can guarantee you that Tyndale is not promoting it to be anything but a primary Bible.

What made the NIV king of the hill beyond its merits as a translation? Well, there were a number of significant editions of the text that were released in the eighties including the NIV Study Bible, the NIV Student Bible and an NIV version of the Thompson Chain Reference Bible. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, written by top Evangelical scholars demonstrated that the NIV was worthy as a commentary base. The Goodrick-Kohlenberger numbering system tied the NIV’s text to its Greek and Hebrew roots and paved the way for resources like the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Today, there are more modern commentaries based upon the NIV than any other translation.

But now, Tyndale is setting the NLT up for the same kind of reference integration that the NIV has enjoyed. A system known as the “Tyndale-Strong’s numbering system” has been developed to connect the text of the NLT to the original Greek and Hebrew text. In the forthcoming NLT Study Bible, these Tyndale-Strong’s numbers are included right along in the cross reference column next to the text. The Cornerstone Biblical Commentary series and the expanding Tyndale Reference Library relies on the NLT text as well.

Another healthy sign for the NLT can be found in the two NLT-related blogs that have appeared recently. One blog is related to the NLT in general and the other specifically for the forthcoming NLT Study Bible. This is an excellent idea and a wonderful way for Tyndale editors to interact with NLT readers. I made similar recommendations to Zondervan regarding the TNIV as early as two years ago, but an ongoing publisher-based TNIV blog has never become a reality.

Personally, I’ve stated for some time that the NLT is fully capable of being used as a primary English translation for serious study and teaching. Steps are now in place with the growing number of NLT-related resources to make this a reality. And as has been pointed out recently, the NLT translators are no slouches themselves, but rather the cream of Evangelical academia.

LOOKING TO THE FUTURE. In discussing some of these observations with Wayne Leman via email yesterday, he stated “A major translation comes along every few generations and it can become a default translation. The KJV was one of these. The RSV was one, at least for NCC churches. The NIV was one. Now, [in my opinion], the NLT is one. I know that many will disagree with me, but that's okay.” Wayne, who gave me permission to quote him, knows what he is talking about as he is a Bible translation consultant himself and a founder of the Better Bibles Blog.

In my experience, the average Christian really doesn’t pay that much attention to translation issues. I’ve discovered that many people carrying a Bible often can’t tell me what translation they are using without looking at the spine. So, what makes a translation like the NLT rise in popularity, especially among a dozen or so other Bible versions vying for acceptance? I have a hunch that when a person walks into a store looking for a new Bible, he or she opens them up and simply reads various passages. This is where the NLT has the advantage. Without a doubt, of all the major contemporary translations, the NLT’s English sounds the closest to contemporary speech. While some would criticize the NLT for this, we must again remember that the New Testament was originally written in the common speech of the day, not the more formal styles that were used for other, more “official” purposes.

Wayne also wrote yesterday that, “Christian readers today appreciate a Bible version that actually reads as they write and close to how they speak. There have been enough idiomatic English versions around for several decades, so that Christian readers know what good English sounds like in a Bible. If Christian readers have a true choice to purchase a Bible--and don't have to follow the dictates of some ideology--they will often purchase a Bible with good English, at least as a supplement to one that has worse English and is used as their church's pew Bible.”

Readers of This Lamp know that over the past few years when asked for a recommendation for a primary English Bible, I’ve suggested the HCSB, TNIV or NLT. In my own use, the TNIV has been my primary Bible over the last two years, although when I give a Bible to someone who tells me the Bible is difficult to understand, I find that most often I give the NLT. And I’ve done this for well over a decade. In fact, now that I think about it, I’ve given away more NLTs than any other translation in the last ten years, and I have done so because of its superior readability.

I have been teaching from the TNIV the last two years because 70% of those whom I instruct are carrying NIV Bibles. That’s in addition to the fact that I find the TNIV to be an excellent translation. Further, I’ve found that usually a median Bible is best for teaching; although I’ve said that I could use the NLT if enough people in a Bible study or classroom also had the NLT. I’ve often used the NLT in formats that were less interactive such as sermons and devotionals. But the day may be coming in which a majority carries the NLT. If that happens, it would only make sense that I would teach from the NLT. Of course, Tyndale currently lacks a decent NLT reference Bible for teaching or preaching akin to something like the TNIV Reference Bible.

This coming Sunday, I still plan on teaching from the TNIV. But I really wonder what I’ll be teaching from in five years. Could it be that the majority of us will study with the NLT in hand?

---

I’d really like to have a discussion about this. Let’s avoid the “my translation is better than your translation” kind of nonsense. I don’t believe that for one Bible version to succeed another one must fail. I still recommend reading translations in parallel. Regardless, I believe current trends point to the NLT continuing to gain momentum which may eventually lead to its place as the most used Evangelical translation in a number of years. And it may even be able to reach beyond the walls of Evangelicalism. What do you think? Let me know in the comments.

Tags: NLT, Tyndale, TNIV, Zondervan

In case you missed it, earlier this week, Tyndale launched a new blog devoted to the New Living Translation. I had actually missed it as we’ve been traveling since July 2, but from reading all the new posts (six in less than a week) in one sitting, the blog looks as if it’s off to a strong start.

I especially appreciated Keith Williams’ “Words in the New Living Translation.” This post directly addressed a recent post by Tim Challies that took swipes at the NLT (and the Message and CEV) in order to prop up the ESV. I found it interesting that Challies would quote from the 1994 edition of the NLT when the translation has seen a significant revision in 2004 and then another minor revision last year. I felt that Challies’ post was primarily another attempt to promote the value of the ESV by attacking Bible versions that use a different method of translation. In the end, such comparisons are apples and oranges, translationally speaking. I don’t see why ESV readers can’t simply applaud their favorite Bible without attempting to knock other versions down, but the internet is full of such posts. Williams’ rebuttal avoided the trap of pitting one translation against another and instead approached the real issue of translational method and the challenge of communicating meaning from one language to another.

The NLT is one of three primary translations (along with the TNIV and HCSB) that I suggest when asked under general circumstances for a translation recommend. Translations, in my opinion, have to be evaluated on their own merits regarding how well they achieve their translational goals. There is no “one size fits all” translation, but the NLT communicates in a style that is more in keeping with contemporary, conversational English than any major translation I know of.

The NLT Blog is described as “Issues, perspectives, and news related to the New Living Translation and Bible Publishing.” A glance at the contributors suggests that this blog will serve as a great way to interact with the keepers of the NLT. They are off to a good start, and I will be interested to see what future posts hold. While I assume they will highlight specific editions of the NLT, I would hope also to see much discussion about the uniqueness of the NLT itself and further discourse on translation method.

---

Other publisher-based Bible translation blogs:
ESV Blog
NET Bible Revolution (last updated April 30, 2008)
TNIV Blog (defunct? not updated since November, 2006)

Tags: NLT, Tyndale

For those of you who have been holding out for a wide margin edition of the New Living Translation, there's a strong possibility that one may be in your future.

This past week I received correspondence from Kevin O'Brien, Director of Bibles and Bible Reference at Tyndale House Publishers. Although there is no timetable at the moment, the folks at Tyndale are evidently considering taking an existing edition of the New Living Translation and making a wide margin Bible out of it.

O'Brien's question to me, and one that I'm passing on to you is, "Is there is a specific edition of the NLT that you would prefer to see used for such a Bible?" Leave your thoughts in the comments. I'll make sure to pass them on.
_________________________________________________________________

I also heard from Laura Bartlett, who is a marketing manager at Tyndale. Some of you may remember my review of the NLT Premium Slimline a few months back. Although overall, this was a nice text edition of the NLT with a readable font, but it was marred by text that was way too close to the inner margin. It's hard to read without pressing the Bible flat in the middle.

Well, Laura tells me that there's a new NLT Personal Size Large print coming out that includes a larger font (12 pt.) and an inside margin that is a tenth of an inch wider than the previous edition. This might not sound like much, but it's enough to make the Bible much more usable than the earlier edition I reviewed. The new NLT Personal Size Large is also a good bit thicker than the other edition (2128 pages vs. 1560 pages!).

Here are the ISBN's for the new edition:
ISBN-13: 978-1-4143-1405-1 Hardcover
ISBN-13: 978-1-4143-1401-3 Bonded Black
ISBN-13: 978-1-4143-1402-0 Bonded Burgundy
ISBN-13: 978-1-4143-1403-7 LeatherLike Black
ISBN-13: 978-1-4143-1404-4 LeatherLike Burgundy
ISBN-13: 978-1-4143-1871-4 LeatherLike Brown/Tan

To access a PDF sampler of the new NLT Personal Size Large Print Bible, click here.

Laura also mentioned the new Discover God Study Bible:

Our big new deal in NLT Bibles right now is the Discover God Study Bible. The premise is that it’s the only study Bible in which the notes all focus on the person of God, what he has revealed to us about himself in the Bible, and how we can be in relationship with him. It’s not primarily for new believers, which the title can imply. Most of the notes are from Bill Bright’s ministry. It has an innovative topic system that some people are calling the “Thompson Chain of the 21st Century.

And then finally, Laura told me about an upcoming product that sounds extremely interesting. Unfortunately, it didn't make it into the Fall catalog, so I can't talk about it...yet.

Tags: NLT, Tyndale

In a recent comment, Larry brought to my attention that a NKJV Wide Margin Bible just sold on eBay for $318!

Although I've provided the link above, it won’t remain active after a few weeks, so I’ll include a screenshot below:



It boggles my mind really to think that someone would pay $318 for a wide margin NKJV--and a bonded leather one at that! But Larry summed it up quite well in his comments when he said this:

This must be proof positive that people are passionate about wide margin Bibles. More than $300 for a bonded leather cheapo Bible from Nelson? A NKJV?

And the fact that Nelson allowed this to go out of print while Crossway is publishing multiple note-taking Bibles may perhaps play some role in the NKJV's fall and the ESV's rise. (Certainly, there are other factors, but given the investment that publishers claim to make in new Bibles, why wouldn't they want to make their franchises available in every format that there is demand for?)

I think you put your finger on it a few months ago when you pointed out that while sales of wide margins may appear weak, they are sold to opinion makers -- and thus influence many more sales.

I've had representatives from three different Bible publishers tell me that wide margin Bibles just don't sell well. But it's that last statement made by Larry that I believe most Bible publishers just don't get. But Crossway gets it. They know that the teachers, preachers, and other serious Bible students want wide margin Bibles. And even if these particular buyers don't represent a large market, the fact is that this is the group that influences the purchases made by those sitting under their instruction. The fact that Crossway gets this is evidenced by the fact that they offer four different ESV Bibles with wide margins: The Deluxe Reference Bible, The Journaling Bible, The Single Column Reference Bible, and the Wide Margin Reference Bible.

But where are the decent wide-margin Bibles from the other 21st century translations (NLTse [2004], HCSB [2004], NET [2005], TNIV [2005])? Let's run through that list real quick.

New Living Translation
The original NLT1 (1996) had one of the best wide margin Bibles I've ever seen in terms of the Notemakers Bible. It had a healthy one and a half inches of space in the margins of a single-column text and two inches of lined space at the bottom for journaling. But since sells weren't that great, Tyndale has decided not to release an edition in the NLT second edition.

But why didn't the Notemakers Bible sell? The Living Bible and its inheritor, the New Living Translation have always been a bit of a populist Bible. While scholars put down the original Living Bible, Christians bought them in droves, and many testified that this was the first Bible they ever really understood. But these were probably not the kind of folks--for the most part--who would have been interested in a wide margin edition for their own notes.

The 1996 NLT wasn't that far removed from it's predecessor--especially in the public's eye--in spite now being called a translation rather than a paraphrase. Regardless, the top notch team of Evangelical scholars who produced the 1996 first edition reconvened to tighten up the translation, bringing it closer to the autographs and hopefully bring about the respect the NLT deserved. That resulted in the 2004 NLT second edition, which although quietly introduced was radically different than the first edition.

To gain even greater credibility, Tyndale has begun the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary Series, based solely on the NLTse. From the two volumes I have so far in the series, I can say that it's an excellent evangelical commentary series on the Bible. And I'm not sure it could have been based on the earlier NLT1 (let alone the Living Bible) without a great amount of work. But the NLTse is a different creature! And now that a commentary series is based on it, what would be a better match than an NLTse Bible with wide margins to study along with it and make notes? It seems to only make sense to me.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
There is only one wide margin HCSB Bible available: The HCSB Minister's Bible. So far it has received mixed reviews (see my review here). The main complaints stem from paper that is too thin and wide margins that really aren't that wide. Plus I've had more than one person email me who was not a minister saying they would like to use it simply to have a wide margin HCSB, but have been reluctant to do so because they feel funny carrying around something with that title on the spine. I'm really surprised there aren't more offerings here from Holman considering the HCSB is now the default translation in all of Lifeway's Sunday School curriculum. It would seem to me that a decent wide margin HCSB would be a perfect match.

NET Bible
I'm not totally surprised that the NET Bible has not seen a wide margin edition yet. Certainly with 60,000+ notes, one would wonder what could be added. Plus, the NET is still trying to gain the attention of the larger Evangelical world. Selling through more than merely mail order might help them out some. To me of all these Bible translations listed here that don't have wide-margin editions, the NET is the only one that gets a pass.

Today's New International Version
I would guess that the possibility of a TNIV Wide Margin Bible primarily suffers from the mixed track record of Zondervan's wide margin NIV and NASB Bibles. But if these editions have not sold quite as well as Zondervan would have liked there might be a reason why. Last year when I posted a Survey of Wide Margin Bibles by Version, I counted two other publishers of wide margins NIV's besides Zondervan and and three other NASB offerings. Could it be that the market for NIV and NASB wide margin Bibles is simply flooded? Consider also that most NASB aficionados have been using the classic single-column reference edition since the 1971 NASB. Foundation Press now offers a variety of high quality leather bindings in the classic reference edition, while Zondervan only offers hardback and bonded leather. There is a similar weakness for Zondervan's wide margin NIV: Cambridge offers a variety much higher quality bindings (scroll down to the bottom of the page for the previous link).

I'll come back to this, but one thing I believe that publishers like Cambridge and Crossway might get and Zondervan might not, is that people who buy a Bible for taking notes in want to use this Bible long term. Generally, there's going to be a preference for higher quality bindings. And if there's a choice, quality will trump cost--at least for these buyers.

The TNIV does have a wide margin represented in the "Squared" Bible. However, the TNIV Squared Bible breaks two cardinal rules of wide margin Bibles: (1) It is a thinline Bible, so the paper is not suitable for heavy annotations, and (2), as a two-column text, it does not allow any margin for the inner column. Ultimately, this Bible misses its intended market.

There is a TNIV Reference Bible coming out later this year, and many of the "gatekeepers" will use it as the best option of what's available, but I get emails and comments on this blog every week bemoaning the fact that it's not a wide-margin TNIV Bible. I would hope that eventually Zondervan will offer the TNIV Reference in a wide-margin offering.

Here's what most publishers are missing...
Most publishers don't get two things about wide margin Bibles:

• Despite lower sales, wide margin Bibles are for gatekeepers, and gatekeepers influence the translation choice of others who will buy the more popular editions.
• People who are in the market for a wide margin Bible want a quality Bible: genuine leather or better and a solid stitched binding. A wide-margin Bible is going to be considered by most to be a long term investment.

Finally, there's another little secret that Bible publishers don't realize, and I almost even hate to bring it up. But as evidenced by the sale of a $318 wide margin NKJV on eBay, people who want wide margin Bibles are willing to pay extra for them. It is well known that publishers make limited printings of some Bible editions. Why can't this be done for wide-margin Bibles, too? Heck, I imagine most of us would even be willing to order them straight from the publisher if there's some fear they wouldn't sell in stores. But most of us who would like to use a wide margin Bible would be willing to pay upwards of $100 knowing that it would be a long term investment, knowing that it should be a publication made with the utmost standards in binding and materials.

The wide margin survey that I posted last year remains one of the most popular pages on this blog. It gets hits everyday. There's a market out there. The products just need to match the demand.

Tags: Translations, Crossway, Zondervan, Holman, Tyndale, Wide-Margin

Excerpted from the press release:

Tyndale Español, the Spanish publishing division of Tyndale House Publishers, announces the launch of a new Spanish translation of the Bible—the Nueva Traducción Viviente (NTV). This Spanish counterpart to the New Living Translation (NLT) is being developed by Tyndale Español in partnership with the Luis Palau Association and the Spanish publishing house Editorial Unilit. The Spanish language is considered to be the third most spoken language in the world, and the intent is for the NTV to have the same ministry impact in the Spanish-speaking world that the NLT has in the English-speaking world.

The Nueva Traducción Viviente (NTV) is an entirely new translation of the Bible with roots in the original Hebrew and Greek texts and the style and dynamic approach of the NLT. Phase One of the NTV project was the creation of a Spanish translation from the English NLT and the original Hebrew and Greek texts. The translation went through a rigorous theological, grammatical, and stylistic review under the supervision of Jaime Mirón, Bible Project Director, from the Luis Palau Association in Portland, Oregon. In Phase Two, now in process, the NTV is undergoing an additional theological, linguistic, and stylistic review with emphasis on the original Hebrew and Greek texts. The NTV development is being overseen by Andres Schwartz, Publishing Director of Tyndale Español, and Dan Elliott, Editorial Director of Tyndale House Publishers. Tyndale Español is also working with Melvin Rivera, president of Intermaná, on various projects supporting the release of the NTV. Intermaná is a consulting organization headquartered in Pembroke Pines, Florida, providing global services to reach the Latin world.

See also Tyndale Español.

Tags: NLT, Tyndale

In 2004, Tyndale released the second edition of the New Living Translation (commonly abbreviated NLTse). The second edition was not a minor revision as I demonstrated in my review of the NLT. And at the time of my review, a number of people contacted me saying they preferred the original 1996 release, although in general, I would recommend the 2004 second edition. In my opinion, they're both good translations, with slightly different flavors and very significant differences. In upcoming posts, I'm going to demonstrate some more differences between these two editions.

Anyway, I notice now and then when I'm in a bookstore that NLT1 Bibles are still on the shelves, although their numbers are understandably becoming fewer as they are all out of print. Regardless of whether you are looking for a new copy of the NLTse, or if you want to find that specific edition of the NLT1, how can you tell the difference without opening the Bible and looking inside at the copyright page? Well, the answers pretty easy--look at the logo. If you see the squared off logo (shown on the left), it's the NLT1 (1996). If you see the diamond logo (on the right), it's the NLTse (2004).

Tags: NLT, Tyndale

A few weeks ago in December, Laura Bartlett, Bible Marketing Manager for Tyndale House Publishers contacted me regarding my review of the New Living Translation. Below are some highlights from our email correspondence that I thought might be of interest to the Bible translation aficionados who frequent this site.

First of all, Tyndale offers a nifty booklet, Text and Product Preview of the New Living Translation that provides an overview of the translation philosophy behind the NLT and sample text. You can get this mailed to you for free simply by requesting one from Laura Bartlett. Email her at LauraBartlett@tyndale.com. The Text and Product Preview is more in depth than anything at the Tyndale House NLT website. Here's a list of subjects from the Table of Contents:

- What People Are Saying About the New Living Translation
- Bible Translation Team
- Questions and Answers
- New Living Translation compared with the King James Version
- New Living Translation compared with the New King James Version
- New Living Translation compared with the New International Version

Following the above topics comes 30 pages of texts from the Old and New Testaments. What's really interesting about these sample passages are the "Distinctive Features of the NLT" section at the end of each text. This is a commentary of sorts that explains translational decisions in the NLT often in comparison with more traditional translations. For my interests, this is one of the most intriguing parts of the booklet. It allows the reader to step inside the mind of the translation committee in the context of the scriptural passages.

Regarding my original review of the NLT, Laura Bartlett corrected my reference to the second edition of the NLT (2004) as the "NLT2." The correct abbreviation, I was told, is NLTse. Actually, I know that, but when comparing the first and second editions of the translation, it seems to make sense to use NLT1 and NLT2. Otherwise, what do you call the first (1996) edition? To simply use NLT would be misleading since it can refer to either version.

I asked her about the mysterious "New Translation" released by Tyndale in 1990, six years before the NLT. I had always been under the assumption that the New Translation was an early version of the NLT. No so. Bartlett explained:

Although Ken Taylor was the primary translator, the New Translation does not have much to do with either the Living Bible or the New Living Translation. It was a project of Dr. Taylor's which he was working on with scholars simultaneous with but independent of the work that the 90 scholars on the NLT translation committee were doing on the NLT. Dr. Taylor's passion was understandable, usable, trustworthy rendering of Scripture, so he worked on translation projects for most of his life, this being one of them. This was really a new work, not based on the Living Bible. It was a scholarly translation of the epistles on which he had a lot of input from other scholars. As the NLT was in progress already as a full Bible, I believe that not many copies of the New Translation were ever distributed.

I still believe the NLT Notemaker's Bible is the best layout I've ever seen for a wide-margin Bible of any translation, but unfortunately it was NLT1 and therefore out of print. I asked if there was a wide-margin edition in the works for the NLT2 but was told that there's no plan for one currently. That's a shame. I firmly believe that if Bible publishers want people to really study, teach and preach from a translation, there needs to be editions available for those who wish to include their own notes.

Short of a wide-margin edition, I asked which of the many NLTse Bibles out there would be suitable for preaching. Laura Bartlett suggested two. First, the Personal Size Large Print. Of this edition she says that "It's a nice size for carrying and the large print makes it easier to read if it's sitting on a pulpit." Another suggestion is the Large Print Slimline Reference Bible. "It's available in LeatherLike in addition to the bonded leather--I think LeatherLike has a better feel than bonded--more like genuine leather. But the font is a little bit smaller than the Personal Size LP. 'Large Print' isn't printed on the cover, just the box it comes in, which is also nice."

One final note. I mentioned in my earlier review of the New Living Translation that it is the Bible of choice for my wife Kathy. Her primary Bible for study and carrying to church is an NLT1 Life Application Bible. She has not yet warmed to the NLTse. So when I got the package from Laura Bartlett, I could feel that there was a Bible inside. I naturally assumed that it was for me--perks of blogging and all! However, it turned out to be a burgundy leather copy of the Life Application Bible in the NLTse not for me but as described in the accompanying note "an 'update' for Kathy." That was an extremely thoughtful gift for her and attentive to the remarks in my review. Thanks, Laura.

Tags: NLT, Tyndale