Jake
Puritan Board Senior
Has anyone read the Evangelical Heritage Version? It is a new translation (so far NT/Psalms published) by some conservative Lutheran bodies (WELS/ELS). It's meant to fill to gap by the NIV1984 no longer being published. It mostly reads like a light revision of the NIV1984.
You can read it on Biblegateway and read more about it here: http://wartburgproject.org/
As a fan of the NIV1984 (especially for the Old Testament and reading larger portions of Scripture at a time), so far the EHV looks good from what I've read. It is about as gender neutral as the ESV (so slightly more than the NIV1984). It is also about as literal as the NIV1984, but probably a little bit more so. For example, it seems to be more careful in translating verb tenses. It mostly is fairly traditional, but occasionally it makes some good improvements on traditional readings (but not as much as the CSB for example). It also is not quite as beholden to the CT as the ESV and NIV, and for example looks more favorably on the longer ending of Mark than the ESV/NIV. Apparently they often follow the majority text, but they consult the CT as well. It also has outline style headings in the Psalms which seem very useful.
So far to me, the EHV is what the NIV2011 should have been. It is very similar to the NIV1984 (many verses are the same word-for-word) but makes some welcome changes.
You can read the NT and Psalms on BibleGateway: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm 1&version=EHV&fbclid=IwAR25z06izjFPZMmEJ6lTWYLi4D_9Xm7tFeTIv0mdTEWvqB9mWJbUqEPYq5s They have completed the OT and are working on geting it published.
See FAQ #30 for most of the information: http://wartburgproject.org/faqs/faqs-numeric/
You can read it on Biblegateway and read more about it here: http://wartburgproject.org/
As a fan of the NIV1984 (especially for the Old Testament and reading larger portions of Scripture at a time), so far the EHV looks good from what I've read. It is about as gender neutral as the ESV (so slightly more than the NIV1984). It is also about as literal as the NIV1984, but probably a little bit more so. For example, it seems to be more careful in translating verb tenses. It mostly is fairly traditional, but occasionally it makes some good improvements on traditional readings (but not as much as the CSB for example). It also is not quite as beholden to the CT as the ESV and NIV, and for example looks more favorably on the longer ending of Mark than the ESV/NIV. Apparently they often follow the majority text, but they consult the CT as well. It also has outline style headings in the Psalms which seem very useful.
So far to me, the EHV is what the NIV2011 should have been. It is very similar to the NIV1984 (many verses are the same word-for-word) but makes some welcome changes.
You can read the NT and Psalms on BibleGateway: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm 1&version=EHV&fbclid=IwAR25z06izjFPZMmEJ6lTWYLi4D_9Xm7tFeTIv0mdTEWvqB9mWJbUqEPYq5s They have completed the OT and are working on geting it published.
See FAQ #30 for most of the information: http://wartburgproject.org/faqs/faqs-numeric/
Last edited: