Puritan Board Freshman
You can cherry-pick renderings with which you disagree in ANY Bible translation. For those of us who prefer a more literal Bible for study purposes, there are a number of good options (NAS, ESV, HCSB, NKJV, or KJV), ANY of which are doctrinally sound, personally edifying, and spiritually beneficial. They are ALL the Word of God in English.
And, as much as my elitist gnat-straining tendencies lead me to turn up my nose at the NIV and NLT, they are also competent translations and will lead you into reliable doctrine.
If you want a real world test of the doctrinal implications of translations upon your theology, consider this . . .
KJV - snake handling hyper-Pentecostals, mainline PCUSA Grymir, and confessionally Reformed denominations.
NIV - emergent mega churches, Arminian Free Methodists, LCMS Lutherans, AND conservative Calvinist Presbyterians
NAS - angry separatist dispensationalists AND some of our finest gnat strainers on the PB
ESV - Scruffy Mark Driscoll AND sophisticated R.C. Sproul Sr.
Asking what is the best Bible translation is like asking what is the best food.
We are SOOOOO spoiled in the U.S. Most Bible translations done on the mission field are completed by unknown ordinary people trained in a bit of linguistics. Most of our English translations are the product of armies of scholars checking the work of scholars, stylists, etc. who are pressed into service to doublecheck the work of scholar translators.
What is the best translation? Pretty much any of them.
[remember: I'm a gnat straining fuddy duddy who likes a literal translation. That does not mean that I should look down my scholarly nose at those using a NIV or NLT. My problems with the TNIV, however, touch upon doctrinal matters, not mere questions of translational philosophy.]
Not to quibble, Dennis, but the LCMS has crossed over to the dark side and embraced the ESV as well: