Modern English Version: A Bible Translation Review 

I LOVE this version! I wish there was more out there on this translation. I do very much hope the update will actually come out this year. Thank you for the review. I hope more people seek this translation out and get it aome traction.

Great video, and thanks for getting the MEV out there. I love the translation and I've been reading it now for over a year, I've even bought copies for the family. I'm praying the 2nd edition comes out soon with a huge marketing push, but their track record hasn't been very promising.

If you can find it, the work of Wilber Pickering on developing an accurate Greek text from which to translate is very valuable. He's comparing 300 or more extants, to come up with the most like the original. I don't think his translating ability is exceptional, but his methodology for determining what's the best in the Greek is outstanding. He considers the critical texts but shows through their own lack of internal consistancy, that they're not to be trusted. Generally they are only 66% percent consistent between themselves. Whereas the majority text is around 98%

Unfortunately it has typos in several places. They have been saying for years that they are going to fix some of the mistakes in the 2nd edition. But literally for years they keep pushing back the publishing date, Ive been seeing them push back the update every 6 months since like early 2020. Sadly, the publisher is just managing the translation very poorly. As you said, taking way too long to fix typos, not promoting the translation, offering limited formats (No wide margin, no premium editions, no leather editions, no conservative evangelical study bible editions) and their lack of communication with the users of the translation. If they fix the typos and produce a wide margin I would probably switch it as my main english translation. Till then, I prefer the NKJV.

Have you looked at the Majority Standard Bible? It is put together by the same group (Bible Hub) doing the Berean Standard Bible. It is in first draft and digital only at this point but I am interested in reading it. I would be interested in your thoughts on it. Thanks for the great content!

I’m reading through it on Logos and am really enjoying it. There are hardly any editions available anymore. If they printed an update I would buy a hard copy.

I really like the MEV. This would be my primary translation if the publisher would finally complete the update and print new editions. I like how it reads and where it falls on the formal/functional spectrum. (P.s. where did you find that red one?)

I am going to re-post this message as I did on Shawn's interview with Dr. Brug. """With your permission, Shawn, I will post a message for both of you. I did not know about your organization, EHV, Dr. John Brug, and interestingly enough I am also working on a revision (not a translation !) of the KJV. I am not a scholar, but I have studied some of these things since childhood. I also saw the need for some revisions of the biblical text. And my intent was to make use of the Paleo Hebrew text as much as possible, and especially the Aramaic Version of The New Testament. However there are a few other finer points that we need to make. First, however popular the idea is among scholars, and however useful it is for us today, Lord Jesus, Paul, the rest of the New Testament writers would have NEVER quoted from the Septuagint ! There is not shred of evidence of that happening. Second, I have read that the authentic Septuagint burned down in a fire at Ptolemy's library in Alexandria. Third, luckily, apparently a copy of The LXX managed to go to the Greek world, before the fire. Fourth, The Greeks "sanitized" it quite a bit, and that is why we have some strange additions to it that do not add up at all as Scripture. Fifth, and MOST IMPORTANT, The ORIGINAL Septuagint was translated from the ORIGINAL HEBREW TEXT, penned down in the PALEO HEBREW SCRIPT, which at some point is some 2500 years older than the Masoretic Text, not to mention that The MT was "sanitized" as well by the Judean scribes. HOWEVER ALL the New Testament citations of Lord Jesus, Paul and the rest of NT writers are in perfect concordance with the records of The LXX, just because it was translated from scrolls much closer to authenticity. As I said above, I am working on an edition of The Bible and I am making full use of both the records of The Paleo Hebrew, as found in a few still extant ancient translations of the Old Testament, and a few fragments found among the Dead See Scrolls, - AND the Aramaic Version of The new Testament - and in certain paces a great difference will be seen. Yes, it will look strange at first, but I am sure the honest believers will love it. It is now in a "beta" stage, I will most probably be ready by the yearend, but if you want it right now, I can send it to you both. Please send me a message at nairelavataoldotcom, subject "2024 Beta Digital Bible" and an electronic copy is yours for the asking - thus we might have a chance to exchange notes. But the final copy that I am working on will be ready by the New Year. Absolutely free. Choicest Blessings !"""

I like the MEV. I got one as a creative journaling bible & didn't realize it was that translation. The issue now is they're getting hard to find so I'm guessing they're no longer printing them.

Thanks for the review! I'm a "free grace" guy and I'm kind of an odd duck as I have used the ESV my whole Christian life. Seems to be a bit unpopular in those cirlces. I have read the MEV some and thought it quite similar to the ESV in style.

As an adherent of the Majority Text, I use the WEB translation for the New Testament and the MEV translation for the Old Testament. That combination seems to be the true Majority Text in translation.

Posting as Jon Tretsven--thanks, Shawn. For my writing with Cuurio, I had to choose a Bible translation that was accurate, that I was comfortable with, and yet used modern language and read well because our target audience comes from both believers and unbelievers throughout the world. This is the one I chose, and I've been happy with it. Thanks for encouraging others to use it. The only area I disagreed with you on this review was the ending of Mark. There should be a note. The long ending destroys Mark's literary device and therefore his main lesson for the readers of the church in Rome that was facing persecution. And as a writer, that troubles me. Anyway, another timely review with a needed recommendation: use this translation. Thanks!

There are a few places where I see the MEV folks did a sloppy job, BUT I spent some time really reading it today and it is a good translation

So what is the substantive difference between the MEV and the NKJV? It seems to me that most of the differences are minor. Do you think it would be a better use of resources to update/revise the NKJV instead of coming out with other translations based on the TR? FYI I would be in favor of a major translation based on the Robinson/Pierpont GNT.

Agreed, second only to the KJV