RESPONSE to DR. DAN WALLACE's Top BIBLE TRANSLATIONS

This video looks at an interview where Dr. Dan Wallace, Senior Research Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, shares about his top choices of Bible translations.

FULL INTERVIEW with Dr. Wallace available at:

Composer: Benjamin Tissot (also known as Bensound)

You can become a supporter of A Frisch Perspective at:

[dg_f_Christs]

It's because of your frisch perspective, I got me a CSB and I'm loving it. GOD BLESS!

[ArmandoBN]

I read all translations since I teach at my church. In case some member has a argument about a translation I can help explain the reason why.

My favorite are
- NASB77&95
- HCSB
- NLT

[pastor-josh]

He's 100% right, in my opinion, about language translation and accuracy. I'm American but grew up in the Philippines (my parents actually did translation work for New Tribes Mission which is very similar to Wyclif) and am married to a Korean and have lived in Korea, so translating between language has regularly been a part of my life. There simply is too high a difference between languages to equate word for word translation with accuracy. That doesn't mean more word for word meanings aren't USEFUL or you shouldn't prefer them but does mean they aren't more ACCURATE.

Although I personally find the use of italics very helpful, I don't think that the NIV or NLT are showing less respect for the plenary language. Again, some translations may be more or less useful for some readers, but I'd argue that the any translator who has devoted their life to learning the original language and wrestled with the best way to help readers understand these words in their language has given equal respect and any reader who devotes their time to studying God's word is showing equal respect regardless of translation used. Personally, some translations do seem to offer less respect for the original inspired words (ie. Passion Translation) and I'd like to avoid these translations altogether. My standard on this is I want 100% respect for the original language from any translation I read, and I think KJV, NKJV, NLT, NIV, NASB, CSB, and ESV (among others) all offer this.

Just my take- as always, I appreciate your thoughtful and respectful consideration of other's points of view as you offer a "Frisch Perspective!"

[deadmanwalkin]

This is by far the best ‘response’ video I have ever seen. You respected the other person and their opinions and didn’t go on to crush them and and say my opinion is better. You added value to the translations interview with Dan Wallace and I pray God would bless you for that.
I grew up on NIV then went on to NKJV.
I am using the verse-less ESV Reade’s bible now. I also have the Complete Jewish Bible that helps me understand more of the Jewish traditions behind the stories. I have come to prefer the Jewish book order which ends with 2 Chronicles in the Old Testament to the Christian order that ends with Malachi.
The narrative flows more naturally especially if you are reading it through nonstop.

[charleslee]

I have been a Bible reading Christian for about 40 years now. I have enjoyed the excitement of many biblical translations. The Christian Standard Bible translation with the Spurgeon Study Bible included is now my preference. This broadcast has not caused me to rethink my preference, but to constantly reassess my preference as I study. Thank you.

[shonsam]

I started using a CSB bible after listening to you, and i really found as u had implied in another video of yours it strikes a good balance between liberality and readability, I’m loving it. I used to use NLT as a companion but now i use CSB
Also thanks to you, I have a new found love for nkjv, I’ve been using ESV and kjv up until now
Anyways God bless! And thank you 😊

[PrentissYeates]

I greatly appreciate Dr. Wallace’s opinion. So with that in mind, my favorite and meaningful to my Christian growth is the NKJV, the KJV, the NASB, the ESV and for a dynamic translation I appreciate and use the HCSB/ CSB translation .

[adamcarpenter]

NASB95 is the greatest English translation in my opinion. Been using it for 11 years and haven’t really used any other. When I do use another translation, I always go right back to the NASB. It’s blessed me tremendously. But again, that’s just my opinion. But I think looking into all translations is a good idea. You tend to lean towards one over the others.

[lindasmall]

The NASB had been my favorite since 1975. I started with the KJV and still use it with the Strong’s. I have read the NIV and the ESV, but the NASB is the one I like the best. I watched the video you were discussing and I learned a lot. I appreciated your perspective. Good job.

[thejoshuatree]

Dr. Wallace has and is a wealth of information in the topic of textual criticism, and I greatly respect his more than educated opinion on the topic at hand. Having said that his bias for the NET still shows through.

The NIV, NET, ESV, KJV, along with several others are nothing less than a blessing for the English speaking world.

At the end of the day it is the same as has been said many times before, the best version for you is the one you will continue to read and grow closer to Christ in.

[scottroberts]

I am not a Greek scholar, but I do read the Greek New Testament along with several different English Translations. I use what I term as a scale working from literal to paraphrase. Being NASB to ESV to NET to NLT. I use N/A 27 (N/A 25 - 28, too. I collect old N/A editions), UBS 4, and a majority text. Sometimes I use translations such as Philips and Moffett. I find some of J. P. Green's specific verse translations profitable. I too saw a lot of the issues with the NASB that the Legacy Standard Bible group saw, but I also understand from where Dan Wallace is coming. The Legacy Standard Bible is good for seasoned Christians, but not for new Christians. I believe (my opinion) the NIV 1984 is one of the best for someone who is a new Christian. Not only will it introduce doctrinal words, but it will give them an accurate picture of the Bible. NET Bible is very good too.

[tanty]

All of us have leanings and preferences when it comes to Bible versions. Some would not touch 'Critical" manuscripts based, some don't like TR texts. Some wouldn't go near translations that is "Reformed" influence, others would go for "Dispensation" view of versions. That is why there are so many translations out there. I have KJV, ESV, NASB, NIV, NLT, HCSB, RSV (been using that for years), NKJV, GNT, and even The Living, and The Message (which I kept in bookself most of the time). I use each one once a year as daily reading, but for serious study I use ESV, NASB, and for comparison NIV. I came to faith through reading GNT 35 or so years ago. Thanks for the video.

[jeremiahreese]

I used to always want a very literal translation of the Bible, until I started learning Spanish at school. The teacher would give us stories and things in Spanish and get us to translate them into English. Now, I started finally seeing that, there was a lot of times when I couldn't translate the Spanish literal at all, even sometimes I would have to change the word entirely just to get it to make sense. So, I now have a respect and even sometimes even prefer something like the CSB and the NIV over something literal like the NASB.

[chaimrubin]

I love the Notes in the NET for its explanations of the translators. I don't believe there is a "literal" translation but I suppose you and I may define "literal" in different ways. Bill Mounce makes cogent arguments for the impossibility of a "literal" translation. There are many examples of Greek and Hebrew idioms that just do not translate word-for-word. I'm a DTS alum so also strongly agree with verbal plenary inspiration. (I also have a deep love for the KJV's sheer beautiful renderings of so many verses.) I personally <b> read </b> the NIV but <b> study </b> using <I> Logos Bible Software </I> to access the original languages with a number of translations open on the side.

I appreciate your videos and watch you on a fairly regular basis. Keep it up, my brother.

[ZenFox]

I listened to Dr. Wallace’s interview a few days ago before your response popped up on my feed (way to go YouTube algorithm). The discussion was very enlightening, although very meandering.

I appreciate your concise summary of his take and preferences, and understand where you’re coming from about respecting the original text (as best as we can identify that) as the inspired Word of God.

That’s why I like to see supplied words in italics, although I understand they’re necessary for mapping the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek into modern English (which wasn’t even a language yet when the Bible was written a couple thousand or more years ago).

[johfu]

I have been teaching Hebrew and Greek for decades. Agree very much with your sentiments. Theology plays a big role in translation. So do the ego’s of scholars. Based on accuracy and some other factors, the best translations out there are the NKJV, the ESV and the NASB.

[mikemandel]

Thanks for this, Tim. A very balanced response!

[JonStallings]

Thank you Dr. Tim (joking) The Dr. Wallace video popped up in my suggested videos yesterday but have not had a chance to take a look at it yet. As always appreciate your well balanced response and how you don't try to steer us (your viewers) in any one direction bu you do make us think.

[darthfine]

I agree with both you and Dr. Wallace. I think one should use many translations to get as best they can to the truth of scripture. We are blessed that we have so many to choose from.

[michaelnewzealand]

Very nicely explained. I don't completely agree with you but I really appreciate your style of speaking and the way you explain yourself very clearly and calmly, and why you favor the KJV for example and things that you brought up.