What I like most about this translation is how much scholarship went behind this translation, using a vast number of manuscripts, and resources such as the Dead Sea Scrolls. I can see how it has such a following in academic circles.

But the NRSV has some troubling issues.

First, this Bible was the first to use gender neutral language, stripping all generic references of male to a gender neutral language, even when the reference refers to only males in the original languages. THe NRSV is gender-neutral, not gender-accurate. I strongly oppose this! A laughable instance is when they change "son" to "child" in Proverbs, even warning the genderless "child" about committing adultery to a "woman"! The NRSV changes "husband of one wife" to "married only once" in the passages about elders and deacons in an attempt to justify women in those offices. Often the NRSV changes singular pronouns to plural. When does the NRSV refer to males only? When does this Bible refer to singular or plural men and/or women? The NRSV goes too far with the gender neutral language!

Second, the NRSV Old Testament is translated without considering the New Testament. In other words, most New Testament fulfilled prophecies are hidden in the Old Testament, making it difficult for the reader to find prophecies of Jesus in the Old Testament. Prime examples of this are in Isaiah 7:14 and Psalms 34:20.

The NRSV was recently updated, and I found an issue in 1 Corinthians 6:9. There are two Greek words that specifically refer to the passive and active males in homosexual conduct. The updated NRSV translates it as "men who engage in illicit sex," with a footnote saying the Greek words are unclear. The Greek words are very clear. And they were clear when the 1989 NRSV used the word "sodomites." A similar occurance in the updated NRSV happens in 1 Timothy 1:10. Is the updated NRSV bowing to the LGBT+ movement?

These issues cripple what is otherwise a good translation.

Free Dramatized Apps of the NIV1984 UK NT, ESV, NRSV, WEB NT, or KJV.