Is the ESV still popular?

[Xeno.of.athens]

The most popular printed Bibles in English include:

• King James Version (KJV) – A classic translation dating back to 1611, still widely used today.
• New International Version (NIV) – A modern translation first published in 1978, known for its readability.
• English Standard Version (ESV) – A literal translation rooted in the tradition of Tyndale and King James, published in 2001.
• New Living Translation (NLT) – A contemporary translation designed for easy reading, first published in 1996.
• Christian Standard Bible (CSB) – A translation balancing accuracy and readability, published in 2017.
• The Message (MSG) – A paraphrase written in contemporary language, published in 1993.
• New American Standard Bible (NASB) – Known for its accuracy, first published in 1971.
• Common English Bible (CEB) – A modern translation aimed at accessibility.

Each of these translations has its own unique style and approach to biblical text.

 

[chevyontheriver]

The most popular printed Bibles in English include:

• King James Version (KJV) – A classic translation dating back to 1611, still widely used today.
• New International Version (NIV) – A modern translation first published in 1978, known for its readability.
• English Standard Version (ESV) – A literal translation rooted in the tradition of Tyndale and King James, published in 2001.
• New Living Translation (NLT) – A contemporary translation designed for easy reading, first published in 1996.
• Christian Standard Bible (CSB) – A translation balancing accuracy and readability, published in 2017.
• The Message (MSG) – A paraphrase written in contemporary language, published in 1993.
• New American Standard Bible (NASB) – Known for its accuracy, first published in 1971.
• Common English Bible (CEB) – A modern translation aimed at accessibility.

Each of these translations has its own unique style and approach to biblical text.

Popular with me in the ESVCE, the Catholic Edition. I wish they, the owners of the text, would have allowed for producing a Catholic Study Bible, but they refused. The RSVCE now has an excellent Study Bible, and that is a once in a generation thing. That will be my next Bible.

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

The most popular printed Bibles in English include:

• King James Version (KJV) – A classic translation dating back to 1611, still widely used today.
• New International Version (NIV) – A modern translation first published in 1978, known for its readability.
• English Standard Version (ESV) – A literal translation rooted in the tradition of Tyndale and King James, published in 2001.
• New Living Translation (NLT) – A contemporary translation designed for easy reading, first published in 1996.
• Christian Standard Bible (CSB) – A translation balancing accuracy and readability, published in 2017.
• The Message (MSG) – A paraphrase written in contemporary language, published in 1993.
• New American Standard Bible (NASB) – Known for its accuracy, first published in 1971.
• Common English Bible (CEB) – A modern translation aimed at accessibility.

Each of these translations has its own unique style and approach to biblical text.

Here is a slightly different list, based on 2024 sales records... OOPs, maybe it's the same list. Sorry.

1. The King James Version (KJV)​

The King James Version remains a top favorite in 2024, with approximately 1.2 million copies sold. Its timeless language and historical importance resonate deeply with readers, particularly those who value the literary artistry of scripture. Many churches and educational institutions favor the KJV, reinforcing its continual relevance in Christian tradition. Notably, about 60% of churchgoers report reading the KJV, showcasing its unrivaled prominence.​

2. New International Version (NIV)​

The New International Version has consistently performed well in Bible sales, with about 1 million copies sold this year. Known for its balance between accuracy and readability, the NIV appeals to modern readers while preserving the essence of scripture. Widely used in churches and study groups, nearly 70% of congregations in the U.S. utilize the NIV during worship, further contributing to its enduring popularity.​

3. English Standard Version (ESV)​

The English Standard Version ranks third, selling around 800,000 copies in 2024. This version is popular for its word-for-word translation style, making it a preferred choice among scholars and those engaged in detailed Bible study. Additionally, the ESV has seen a growth in associated study resources. Many users appreciate having access to over 500 study guides and materials designed to deepen their understanding of the text.​

4. New Living Translation (NLT)​

The New Living Translation has also experienced impressive sales, with around 700,000 copies sold in 2024. Its thought-for-thought translation makes scripture more approachable, attracting new readers, particularly those exploring the Bible for the first time. Surveys show that roughly 55% of new readers prefer a version like the NLT, which uses everyday language to promote understanding.​

5. Christian Standard Bible (CSB)​

With 600,000 copies sold this year, the Christian Standard Bible is gaining popularity among various audiences. Praised for its clarity and fidelity to original texts, the CSB is suitable for casual readers as well as those wanting to delve deeper into scripture. It encourages memorization and systematic study, making it an excellent resource for personal and group exploration.​

6. The Message (MSG)​

The Message, a modern paraphrase, sold about 500,000 copies in 2024. This version uses contemporary language to engage a younger audience that prefers everyday expressions in their spiritual readings. Many readers use The Message alongside traditional translations for a fresh take on familiar scripture, with around 40% of millennials recommending this version for casual reading.​

7. New American Standard Bible (NASB)​

The New American Standard Bible remains a trustworthy choice for dedicated Bible students, hitting sales of about 450,000 copies in 2024. Its reputation for accuracy and formal equivalence makes it a staple in both academic and church settings. Approximately 75% of seminary students report utilizing the NASB as a primary study tool, illustrating its respected position in theological education.​

8. Common English Bible (CEB)​

Attracting a wide readership, the Common English Bible sold around 300,000 copies this year. Its straightforward language focuses on inclusivity, appealing to diverse audiences. This version is particularly favored in interfaith dialogues, where understanding and connection are key elements, with over 25% of users mentioning its accessibility in conversations.​

9. Amplified Bible (AMP)​

The Amplified Bible resonates with those keen to explore the nuances of biblical language, reaching approximately 250,000 sales in 2024. It provides various meanings within the text, enhancing understanding for serious study, making it a unique choice for many readers seeking depth in scripture interpretation.​

10. The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)​

The New Revised Standard Version, known for its commitment to accurate and gender-inclusive language, sold around 200,000 copies this year. Its scholarly approach makes it a favorite among academic institutions, with nearly 80% of theology professors endorsing it for study purposes. This broad approval underscores its importance in educational and religious circles.​

It includes some of my favorites (NASB, NIV, and ESV) but not others (NKJV, HCSB, and YLT). I refer to them all on a somewhat regular basis. Each one of them gives a slightly different angle, which I appreciate. Electronic versions on LOGOS software that are linked and move together are very helpful.

 

[RileyG]

Popular with me in the ESVCE, the Catholic Edition. I wish they, the owners of the text, would have allowed for producing a Catholic Study Bible, but they refused. The RSVCE now has an excellent Study Bible, and that is a once in a generation thing. That will be my next Bible.

I have one as well, but mostly use The New Jerusalem Bible, the favorite of Mother Angelica.

 

[FireDragon76]

I just stick to the Revised Standard Version.

I prefer word-for-word translations, not paraphrases. Good News (TEV) and CEB are generally decent as far as paraphrases, go, though.

 

[bèlla]

I have several versions on hand and devote a period of time to each. Often opting to use it for reading and study for a year or two. I like to quote the amplified version when sharing scripture online or with those less conversant with the bible.

~bella

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

Popular with me in the ESVCE, the Catholic Edition. I wish they, the owners of the text, would have allowed for producing a Catholic Study Bible, but they refused. The RSVCE now has an excellent Study Bible, and that is a once in a generation thing. That will be my next Bible.

I once heard the ESV was NASB lite. I sort of agree with this.

 

[FireDragon76]

I once heard the ESV was NASB lite. I sort of agree with this.

It's based off the NRSV translation, and is used almost exclusively by conservative or moderate Evangelicals. It's a good translation, and it's really a toss up between the NRSV and ESV in terms of being a resource for serious study.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I once heard the ESV was NASB lite. I sort of agree with this.

I believe you are right, in a way. Both the ESV and the NASB are evangelical dominated translations and as such, they reflect evangelical preferences in translation; for example, they retain the use of masculine pronouns, where the Greek and the Hebrew use masculine pronouns, even when it is obvious that the masculine pronouns were intended to encompass both males and females, they both have a tendency to choose evangelical vocabulary, propitiate instead of expiate, propitiation instead of expiation and so forth.

There is a difference, however. The ESV Copyright holders permitted the production of a Catholic edition while The NASB did not. I believe that The ESV has significant Anglican influences very likely Evangelical Anglican, considering The role of JI Packer in The translation, nevertheless an Anglican influence would likely mitigate in favour of the inclusion of what the Anglicans would regard as apocrypha.

I would like The NRSV Catholic Edition a lot more if it didn't push, gender neutrality quite as far as it does. given that I can make do with The ESV Catholic Edition even though its vocabulary is still laced with quite a lot of evangelical vocabulary. I am on The whole happier with The RSV catholic edition, and The RSV Catholic Edition- 2nd edition, is fairly good.

Better still, from my perspective, is the liturgical translation that we use in Australia-it is essentially a Jerusalem Bible with Yahweh replaced by The Lord and The Grail Psalter Instead of The Jerusalem Bible psalter.

As a final thought, I think the ESV is still popular.

---

---

PS Courtesy of Microsoft copilot: J. I. Packer played a central role in the translation of the English Standard Version (ESV) Bible. He served as the General Editor and was a member of the Translation Oversight Committee, guiding the project from its inception in the late 1990s through its publication in 2001 and beyond.

Packer was deeply committed to the ESV’s philosophy of essentially literal translation, aiming to preserve the wording and structure of the original Hebrew and Greek texts as faithfully as possible while ensuring clarity and readability in English. He saw this approach as vital for theological precision and spiritual formation, often describing the ESV as standing in the tradition of Tyndale and the King James Version.

He also contributed as Theological Editor for the ESV Study Bible, further shaping its doctrinal clarity and pastoral usefulness. In his own words, he considered his work on the ESV “the most significant and gratifying” of his long public ministry.

Would you like a comparison of the ESV’s translation philosophy with other major versions like the NIV or NRSV?

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

I believe you are right, in a way. Both the ESV and the NASB are evangelical dominated translations and as such, they reflect evangelical preferences in translation; for example, they retain the use of masculine pronouns, where the Greek and the Hebrew use masculine pronouns, even when it is obvious that the masculine pronouns were intended to encompass both males and females, they both have a tendency to choose evangelical vocabulary, propitiate instead of expiate, propitiation instead of expiation and so forth.

There is a difference, however. The ESV Copyright holders permitted the production of a Catholic edition while The NASB did not. I believe that The ESV has significant Anglican influences very likely Evangelical Anglican, considering The role of JI Packer in The translation, nevertheless an Anglican influence would likely mitigate in favour of the inclusion of what the Anglicans would regard as apocrypha.

I would like The NRSV Catholic Edition a lot more if it didn't push, gender neutrality quite as far as it does. given that I can make do with The ESV Catholic Edition even though its vocabulary is still laced with quite a lot of evangelical vocabulary. I am on The whole happier with The RSV catholic edition, and The RSV Catholic Edition- 2nd edition, is fairly good.

Better still, from my perspective, is the liturgical translation that we use in Australia-it is essentially a Jerusalem Bible with Yahweh replaced by The Lord and The Grail Psalter Instead of The Jerusalem Bible psalter.

As a final thought, I think the ESV is still popular.

---

---

PS Courtesy of Microsoft copilot: J. I. Packer played a central role in the translation of the English Standard Version (ESV) Bible. He served as the General Editor and was a member of the Translation Oversight Committee, guiding the project from its inception in the late 1990s through its publication in 2001 and beyond.

Packer was deeply committed to the ESV’s philosophy of essentially literal translation, aiming to preserve the wording and structure of the original Hebrew and Greek texts as faithfully as possible while ensuring clarity and readability in English. He saw this approach as vital for theological precision and spiritual formation, often describing the ESV as standing in the tradition of Tyndale and the King James Version.

He also contributed as Theological Editor for the ESV Study Bible, further shaping its doctrinal clarity and pastoral usefulness. In his own words, he considered his work on the ESV “the most significant and gratifying” of his long public ministry.

Would you like a comparison of the ESV’s translation philosophy with other major versions like the NIV or NRSV?

Such a reply! Wow. I am going to have to re-read it to get the full grasp. I didn't know J. I. Packer was so influential with the ESV.

 

[The Liturgist]

By the way, the NRSVue should be avoided at all costs due to its attempts to downplay St. Paul’s instructions on human sexuality.

 

[The Liturgist]

I myself like to use multiple translations and not limit myself to one.

By the way, one interesting capability of some of OpenAI is the ability to translate Koine Greek, Hebrew and Old Testament Aramaic, and other languages of interest in making secondary translations, but anyone who does this should closely compare the output with existing Bibles and should also take the precaution of telling the AI not to make interpretive changes to the translation but translate literally only, because else if you make a comment with an off hand theological remark it will without fail start distorting translations based on what it believes you want from it; I made this mistake while translating liturgical texts, but the fix was easy.

 

[Shane R]

If anything, I would say the ESV is growing in popularity. I will offer a criticism though: they are falling into the same trap Holman did with what eventually became the CSB and revising too quickly. A new edition comes out before the study resource market has caught up with the last revision.

 

[DragonFox91]

I feel like people who want to use a KJV-ish version that's not the KJV use the ESV. Yes, it is still popular

 

[The Liturgist]

If anything, I would say the ESV is growing in popularity. I will offer a criticism though: they are falling into the same trap Holman did with what eventually became the CSB and revising too quickly. A new edition comes out before the study resource market has caught up with the last revision.

Also I would argue the abundance of revised editions is extremely annoying, and its what sets apart the KJV, the Challoner Douai Rheims and certain other historic translations, such as the Peshitta and the Vulgate, which were intended to be definitive.

With regards to liturgical use, I strongly favor the use of the KJV in English language Orthodox and in Anglican services, except for the Old Testament lessons in the Eastern Orthodox church, where probably the Menaion usually has these, and there is also a liturgical book called the Prophetologion, which contains the Old Testament lessons (these are read mostly at Vespers or at Vesperal Divine Liturgies such as on the morning of Holy Saturday, where there are 14 Old Testament lessons, just like how the traditional Roman Rite in its most mainstream uses, for example, the Tridentine, had Paschal Vigils on the morning of Holy Saturday with 12 Old Testament lessons, until Pope Pius XII decided to break continuity with the Byzantine Rite Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox by moving it to the evening of Holy Saturday and reducing the number of Old Testament lessons to four, and also rewriting the Mass of the Presanctified, eliminating the text which was in common with the Byzantine RIte / Eastern Orthodox Presanctified Liturgy as revised by Pope St. Gregory I the Great, the DIalogist, which was in my opinion and that of many scholars one of the three most frustrating change in Roman Catholic liturgy since Charlemagne suppressed the Gallican Rite, until the 1969 liturgical revisions of Annibale Bugnini (which was worsened by poor vernacular translations, which due to ecumenical reconciliation backfiring, were copied by the mainstream Protestant churches, even conservative ones such as the LCMS copied them, including incorrect translations of them such as the original English translation of “Et cum spiritu tuo” to “And also with you”; fortunately, probably because of the new vernacular translations mandated by Pope Benedict XVI, the most recent translations such as ACNA’s 2019 BCP have not had, instead going with “and with your spirit”, which is still technically wrong, except insofar as the second personal pronoun has disappeared from every day speech, unfortunately.

I would love to see a new flexible dynamically configured translation that preserves the second person pronoun and a range of other traditional English expressions, while removing archaicisms such as “sitting at meat”; something like the RSV, but ideally with variations in the translation so that one could compare the Alexandrian, Byzantine and Western text type (as preserved in the Vetus Latina and Vetus Syra translations) of the New Testament, and the Septuagint, Vulgate and Peshitta renderings of the Old Testament, and which ideally would include all Old Testament books canonical in all historical churches, depending on the edition, so one could get a 66 book version if one were a Baptist, or a version consistent with a full KJV if one was an Anglican, or if one wanted absolutely everything, all books from the Ethiopian, Byzantine, Slavonic, Roman and other ancient canons could be included.

This is no longer a pipe dream, because there are four areas where LLM-type AIs, and even moreso, hybrid AIs such as those offered by OpenAI (which include LLM components like ChatGPT 4o, but also reasoning AIs like o3, o3mini and o4, as well as integrated code interpreters and anatomically and spacially aware image generators), those being performing pattern recognition in text or other inputs and editing from it (in a sense, chatGPT is the ultimate successor to the UNIX/Linux text processing utilities (also available natively in MacOS and on Microsoft Windows via various official and unofficial means) - except that it is terribly inefficient, so the way to use it that way is to use it only where one is looking for uncertain patterns; for any repetitive task, use the UNIX/Linux utilities like grep, awk, sed, m4, and little perl/python/ruby scripts, which indeed chatGPT and other AIs can help you program and debug; indeed chatGPT has an integrated python execution environment), assisting in the development of computer systems by generating or analyzing code segments (this does not mean that Joe Random can write a Windows-compatible operating system in a week, but rather that an experienced programmer can develop more code, faster, by offloading certain well defined tasks), conducting advanced research projects via the Deep Research system, and translating from one language to another (whether a human language or a computer language).

By the way I should reach out to you; I would have done so already this week but it has been very busy and very difficult.

 

[The Liturgist]

Would you like a comparison of the ESV’s translation philosophy with other major versions like the NIV or NRSV?

This is a classic “Anti-Turing Test”: AIs by default will prompt the user with suggestions like this one at the end of the prompt. I find this annoying and so when training a custom GPT on chat GPT I will tell it to only make suggestions if it deterimines there is an extremely compelling reason to do so, among other changes to default behavior.

That said, the default behavior is helpful for a lot of end users, and is occasionally helpful for me, so the way I implement this is to tell it to, by default, not do that, unless commanded otherwise.

 

[ViaCrucis]

It's based off the NRSV translation, and is used almost exclusively by conservative or moderate Evangelicals. It's a good translation, and it's really a toss up between the NRSV and ESV in terms of being a resource for serious study.

I primarily use the ESV, though I do really like the NRSV too. It's easy, of course, to find things wrong with any translation, because as the old Italian proverb goes, traduttore traditore, roughly: "the translator is a traitor". All translation is flawed, because it's impossible to perfectly translate anything, not just with the Bible, but literally anything. I really like my ESV, but as someone who does like looking at the Greek and Hebrew source material, it gets to be pretty obvious that even at best nuances are bound to get lost in translation.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[FireDragon76]

I primarily use the ESV, though I do really like the NRSV too. It's easy, of course, to find things wrong with any translation, because as the old Italian proverb goes, traduttore traditore, roughly: "the translator is a traitor". All translation is flawed, because it's impossible to perfectly translate anything, not just with the Bible, but literally anything. I really like my ESV, but as someone who does like looking at the Greek and Hebrew source material, it gets to be pretty obvious that even at best nuances are bound to get lost in translation.

-CryptoLutheran

That Italian phrase is why I prefer more literal translations. Transliterations, or "thought for thought" translations almost always have theological bias, sometimes heavily so in difficult-to-translate passages.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

This is a classic “Anti-Turing Test”: AIs by default will prompt the user with suggestions like this one at the end of the prompt. I find this annoying and so when training a custom GPT on chat GPT I will tell it to only make suggestions if it deterimines there is an extremely compelling reason to do so, among other changes to default behavior.

That said, the default behavior is helpful for a lot of end users, and is occasionally helpful for me, so the way I implement this is to tell it to, by default, not do that, unless commanded otherwise.

Agreed, it is an annoying feature of COPILOT. One worth ignoring

 

[ViaCrucis]

That Italian phrase is why I prefer more literal translations. Transliterations, or "thought for thought" translations almost always have theological bias, sometimes heavily so in difficult-to-translate passages.

I agree. But even the most literal word-for-word translation still has this issue. The translator still needs to choose what they believe is the most appropriate word in the target language for a word in the source language.

I'll admit that sometimes this is not going to be a problem at all, the Latin word cattus means "cat". But things get more complicated when we have a word like כַּפֹּ֫רֶת (kapporet) which going back to Luther has been called "mercy seat" (Luther used the word gnadenstuhl or "grace-seat"); the word kapporet comes from the root kaphar meaning "to cover", so would it be more accurate to translate it as "the covering"? This was the place where the blood of the sacrifice was sprinkled, between the cherubim on the Ark of the Covenant, when the high priest entered into the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur, "Day of Covering"?) . But because the act of sprinkling and covering this kapporet wrought forgiveness of sins to the nations, a reconciling of the people to God, we use words like atonement (a Tyndale coinage literally at-one-ment, to bring together as one, the state of being at one, united, reconciled, etc). And that concept then gets applied to the Greek word hilasterion, the same word which the Septuagint uses to translate kapporet, and which often is translated as expiation or propitiation (though, again, Tyndale coined atonement to translate this word).

There are layers of nuance, complexity, and historical factors all that need to be balanced, and no shortage of debates to be had. So even in a word-for-word, literal translation we still have to answer the difficult and not altogether precise question of "what is the literal translation?" Is there a literal translation of kapporet that satisfies the meaning and intent behind the original Hebrew word? If so, what is it? And to what degree are we importing our own philosophical, cultural, and theological biases to the text?

-CryptoLutheran