There were several fresh translations I noted in this New Testament. One that I particularly liked was "emerge victorious" rather than "overcome" used in Revelation in the letters to the churches. Other than that, and a few other bright spots, the translation was generally dull and at times pathetic. I would not recommend it to anyone.

I received a review copy from the editor and it was painful to read even for a free book. ( )

A translation that has been highly publicized and promoted over the past few months. I have not found anything from the publisher that indicates whether they are suggesting that it is a formal equivalence or dynamic equivalence translation.

If I had to guess, however, I would place it firmly in the "dynamic equivalence" category. The translation is not word-for-word in many places.

The positives: there are many places where the reader who is familiar with other translations of Scripture is challenged, and while many times one will likely favor the "standard" rendering, there are other times when the rethinking is valuable. The challenge has value nonetheless. In many places the version makes the meaning clearer for some passages.

Negatives: there are some times when the decisions were not wise. Joseph not having "sexual relations" with Mary in Matthew 1:25 is rather Clintonesque. Speaking of "God's DNA" in 1 John 3:9 might give some the impression that God would have DNA, and is an evident anachronism nonetheless. Renderings in 1 Timothy 2 and 3 are intolerable. "Wife" in 1 Timothy 2:12 is interpretation, not translation. The "supervisor" (elder) is to be "faithful to their spouse" in 1 Timothy 3:2, yet the widow of 1 Timothy 5:9 was to be "faithful to her husband," and yet the Greek words in the two passages are consistent. There is no excuse for this kind of reading one's interpretation into the text. Going back and forth from rendering weights, measures, and such things in modern idiom to ancient idiom is also a bit annoying. The 90-day suggested reading program also does not seem to be the best thought out: some days have two chapters, and yet one is expected to read Philippians and Colossians (total: 8 chapters) on the same day!

If one is familiar with the text of the Bible, one might find value in the CEB and will appreciate having their thinking about how certain passages are rendered and understood challenged. Unfortunately, it is being marketed toward the "typical reader," presumably under the assumption that it will be "easier" for them than a more formal equivalence translation.

There is a great danger here. The Bible student often derives ideas, doctrines, and applications based not just on the direct meaning but also on the basis of inferences of how the text is rendered. If one were to use the CEB's rendering of the New Testament to make inferences in many places (consider above with 1 Timothy 2/3 or 1 John), s/he would be led very astray.

Therefore, the CEB is best for those who already have a decent enough understanding of what the Bible says. No inference should be drawn on the basis of its particular rendering of given verses-- consultation with the Greek and formal equivalence translations (KJV, ASV, etc.) should be made.

Nevertheless, on the whole, there's not a lot here that cannot be otherwise gained from a good formal equivalence version (like the ESV) and explanations from commentaries and lexical sources.

*--received free from publisher. ( )