Introduction: Purpose And Scope Of The UASV 2022

The Updated American Standard Version (UASV) 2022 is designed to give English readers direct access to what God said through His inspired human authors, not to what translators think He meant. Its controlling aim is formal, or essentially literal, translation carried out with more consistency and rigor than most modern “essentially literal” versions. The UASV pursues maximum transparency to the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek text, allowing readers, teachers, and students to bear the primary responsibility for interpretation.

This translation philosophy stands deliberately over against paraphrastic or highly interpretive approaches that merge exegesis and translation. The UASV recognizes that translation cannot be absolutely “mechanical,” yet it insists that the translator’s first duty is to render the grammatical forms, lexical choices, and syntactical patterns of the original as directly as possible into readable English, adding only what is truly necessary for sense.

The 2022 edition of the UASV incorporates up-to-date textual scholarship, a conservative evangelical doctrine of Scripture, and a commitment to the Historical-Grammatical method. It avoids theological novelty or ideological reshaping of the text. Its principles are ordered by the conviction that the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament critical texts are 99.99 percent accurate reflections of the original autographs, and that Jehovah, Who spoke through prophets and apostles, has preserved His Word with remarkable fidelity.

Theological And Hermeneutical Foundations

Inspiration, Inerrancy, And Authorial Intent

The UASV begins from the apostolic confession that “men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pet. 1:21). Inspiration is verbal and plenary: the very words, not merely the concepts, are God-breathed. This doctrine governs translation methodology. Because every word is God-breathed, every word matters. The translator must resist the temptation to dissolve precise vocabulary into generalized paraphrase.

Inerrancy follows directly from inspiration. Because God cannot lie and does not err, His written Word, in the form given by the prophets and apostles, is without error in all that it affirms—historical, theological, ethical, and chronological. The translator therefore does not “correct” Scripture with modern theories but instead labors to understand what the human author, under divine guidance, intended to affirm within the historical and literary context.

Authorial intent serves as the controlling principle for interpretation and, by extension, translation. The UASV does not treat biblical texts as pliable symbols whose meaning can be reshaped by contemporary philosophical or ideological concerns. Instead, it attends carefully to grammar, lexicon, syntax, and context to determine what the original author communicated to the original audience. Translation then reproduces that communication, with minimal interpretive inference, in clear contemporary English.

Historical-Grammatical Interpretation And Covenant Structure

The Historical-Grammatical method is the hermeneutical backbone of the UASV. The translator asks what the words meant in their historical situation and grammatical form. Allegorical or purely typological readings are not imported into the translation. Where Scripture itself identifies a type or fulfillment, the translators respect that divine commentary, but they do not construct additional typological layers and embed them in the translation.

Covenantal continuity is acknowledged as a major structuring feature of biblical revelation:

Abrahamic covenant (c. 2091 B.C.E.) as the foundational promise of blessing to all the families of the earth.

Mosaic covenant (from 1446 B.C.E.), temporary and preparatory, functioning as a guardian until Christ.

New Covenant in Christ’s blood, inaugurated in 33 C.E., bringing the fulfillment of the Abrahamic promise and surpassing the Mosaic administration.

The UASV’s translation choices, however, do not encode a particular system of covenant or dispensational theology into the text. Instead, terms such as “covenant,” “law,” “promise,” “inheritance,” and “kingdom” are translated with consistent literalness, allowing readers to trace covenantal development by close study of the vocabulary as presented in Scripture itself.

Textual Basis Of The UASV 2022

Old Testament Hebrew And Aramaic Text

The Old Testament of the UASV is translated from the standard critical Hebrew text, utilizing the Masoretic tradition as primary while noting significant variants from ancient witnesses such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and early versions (e.g., the Septuagint, the Peshitta, the Vulgate) where warranted. The guiding assumption is that Jehovah has preserved the Hebrew text with extraordinary accuracy, and that the Masoretic tradition normally reflects the original wording.

Nevertheless, where a variant reading is clearly superior on textual and internal grounds, the UASV translators may adopt it, especially when it resolves an otherwise intractable difficulty or restores obvious parallelism or sense. That move is never made lightly, never to harmonize away an apparent tension, and never for doctrinal convenience. The overriding concern is fidelity to the wording that the inspired prophet originally wrote.

The Aramaic sections of Daniel and Ezra are treated with the same rigor, with attention to the specific Aramaic dialect and its distinct vocabulary and syntax.

New Testament Greek Text And Major Text Types

The UASV New Testament is based on an eclectic critical text, drawing primarily from Alexandrian witnesses (notably codices like Vaticanus and Sinaiticus), but evaluated in light of Byzantine, Western, and other text forms, as well as the early papyri. The translators affirm that the critical text, properly constructed, reflects the original wording of the apostles in all essential details.

Text types—Alexandrian, Byzantine, Western, Caesarean—are not treated as theological camps but as streams of manuscript transmission. A reading is favored when it best explains the origin of the others, is most likely to be original on internal grounds (style, context, scribal tendencies), and is supported by strong external evidence.

The UASV does not treat the Byzantine text as the automatic standard, nor does it embrace any doctrine of a “perfect” printed text (such as a particular edition of the Textus Receptus). Instead, it uses the full arsenal of textual criticism, under the umbrella of inerrancy, to approximate the original text as closely as possible.

Handling Textual Variants In Translation

Significant variants that affect wording or meaning are handled with sober transparency. The main text reflects the reading judged most likely original. Alternative readings that have substantial manuscript support or theological or interpretive importance are indicated in footnotes.

The translation itself does not blend readings in a way that creates a text that no manuscript ever contained. Nor does it quietly adopt minority readings that favor particular theological agendas. The translator’s task is to represent the text Scripture actually has, not to construct a desired form of the text.

Essential Principle: As Literal As Clarity Allows

Formal Equivalence Versus Functional Approaches

The UASV is formally equivalent and strives to be truly literal where English can bear the load. Formal equivalence is not understood as wooden or mechanical replication of each Hebrew or Greek word in the same order, but as maintaining the closest feasible correspondence in lexical choice, grammatical category, and syntactical relationship.

Functional or dynamic equivalence, by contrast, tends to prioritize the perceived “meaning” over the specific wording and structure, producing renderings that may communicate an interpretive paraphrase rather than the linguistic form of the original. The UASV rejects such an approach as its baseline method because it too easily merges translation and exposition.

The UASV therefore seeks to:

Reproduce grammatical forms (e.g., participles as participles, infinitives as infinitives, imperatives as imperatives) where possible.

Translate key theological terms with stable, consistent English equivalents across contexts where the original uses the same word.

Retain connective particles (“for,” “because,” “therefore,” “so that,” “but,” “and”) that show the logical structure of the argument, even when modern English style might reduce them.

Preserve the force of word order where it is pragmatically significant, for emphasis or contrast, while allowing for necessary adjustments to English syntax.

When Literalness Must Yield To English Sense

Literalness, though primary, is not absolute. The UASV recognizes that when a strictly literal rendering would obscure, mislead, or contradict English idiom, careful adjustment is necessary. For instance, Semitic idioms such as “to uncover the nakedness of” or “to lift up the face” cannot always be carried over verbatim without explanation.

In these cases, the UASV prefers to render the sense in natural English while retaining as much of the original imagery as is intelligible. Where a particularly important idiom bears theological or interpretive weight, the translators may retain the literal form and clarify in a footnote. The guiding standard is always clarity without flattening the original texture of the text.

The UASV also avoids importing interpretive adjectives or adverbs that are not in the text. Words are added only when required to form a coherent English sentence. When additional words are necessary, they are chosen to be as neutral and non-interpretive as possible, leaving exegesis to teachers and readers.

Consistent Rendering Of Key Terms

The UASV deliberately resists the modern tendency to vary English renderings of important terms for stylistic novelty alone. Words such as “covenant,” “righteousness,” “justify,” “sanctify,” “soul,” “spirit,” “flesh,” “hell,” “Sheol,” “Hades,” “Gehenna,” “kingdom,” “grace,” “faith,” and “works” are translated as consistently as context allows.

When contextual factors genuinely demand a different English gloss, the translators still note the lexical identity in study apparatus or elsewhere, so that readers can trace the use of key terms through the canon. This is especially crucial in doctrinally dense texts (Romans, Galatians, Hebrews, Johannine writings), where the same Greek word may appear in varied contexts.

Rendering The Divine Name And God-Related Expressions

Jehovah For The Tetragrammaton

One of the distinctive principles of the UASV is the decision to render the Tetragrammaton (יהוה) as “Jehovah” throughout the Old Testament, instead of “LORD” or “Lord.” This choice is grounded in several considerations.

First, the Tetragrammaton is a personal name, not merely a title. Substituting a title obscures the distinction between the Name and terms like “Adonai” (“Lord”) or “Elohim” (“God”). Translating it consistently as “Jehovah” preserves the covenantal personalness of Israel’s God and His self-revelation.

Second, the use of a typographical convention such as “LORD” in small capitals depends on readers noticing fine print and typographic signals. Many readers never grasp the significance. “Jehovah” is unambiguous and immediately recognizable as the divine Name.

Third, the consistent use of “Jehovah” aids in tracing theological themes. When the prophets speak of knowing Jehovah, calling upon Jehovah, or sanctifying Jehovah’s Name, readers see that the same specific Name is involved, rather than an interchangeable title.

The UASV therefore uses “Jehovah” wherever the Tetragrammaton occurs in the Hebrew text, while translating titles such as “Adonai” as “Lord” and “Elohim” as “God,” retaining their lexical distinctiveness.

Titles, Pronouns, And Christological Terminology

Titles for God and Christ—“God,” “Lord,” “Father,” “Son,” “Christ,” “Messiah,” “Holy Spirit”—are rendered in ways that respect both their original languages and their established usage in English Bible tradition. The UASV does not experiment with novel or ideologically driven terminology.

Christological titles such as “Son of Man” and “Son of God” are preserved as-is, without attempts to soften the filial language or substitute abstract expressions that might avoid offense but distort meaning. The translator’s task is to present what the inspired author wrote, not to adapt Christ’s titles to modern sensibilities.

Masculine pronouns referring to God, Christ, or the Holy Spirit are treated with reverence in explanatory material and surrounding discussion. Within the biblical text itself, the UASV follows the capitalization practice appropriate to a modern literal translation, without imposing a later convention back onto the inspired text.

Gendered language referring to humanity—“man,” “brothers,” “fathers,” “sons”—is not systematically neutralized. When the original language clearly includes both males and females, the translators may reflect that sense by contextually appropriate English, but they do not erase masculine forms as a matter of ideology. The priority is accuracy to the original grammatical and semantic range, not conformity to contemporary social pressures.

Anthropological And Soteriological Terminology

Soul, Spirit, Flesh, And Heart

Anthropological vocabulary is a major testing ground for translation faithfulness. The UASV maintains the underlying Hebrew and Greek patterns rather than importing later philosophical frameworks.

Hebrew נֶפֶשׁ (nephesh) and Greek ψυχή (psychē) are consistently rendered as “soul” where English allows, preserving the biblical conception that a human is a living soul rather than possessing an immortal soul as a separable entity. Contexts that clearly use “soul” to mean “person,” “life,” or related notions are handled with sensitivity, but the translators are cautious about abandoning the term itself.

Hebrew רוּחַ (ruach) and Greek πνεῦμα (pneuma) are generally translated as “spirit,” with contextual adjustments such as “wind” or “breath” where the original demands it. Distinguishing between the human spirit and the Holy Spirit is left largely to context, not to added interpretive language.

The term “flesh” (Hebrew בָּשָׂר, Greek σάρξ) is preserved as “flesh” wherever feasible, especially in Pauline contexts where σάρξ denotes mortal, vulnerable human nature, often in its weakness and susceptibility to sin. The UASV avoids interpretive paraphrases like “sinful nature,” which suggest an ontological evil substance rather than mortality and corruption.

“Heart” (לֵב, לֵבָב; καρδία) is generally rendered as “heart,” not replaced with “mind” or “inner self” unless context clearly demands emphasis on cognition. This respects the holistic biblical use of “heart” as the center of thought, will, and emotion.

Sin, Justification, Sanctification, And Salvation

Key soteriological terms are handled with doctrinal and lexical precision. The Greek ἁμαρτία is translated “sin,” including where it denotes both specific acts and the dominating power of sin. The translators do not blur the distinction with softer terms such as “failings” or “weaknesses,” unless the context clearly points to a non-moral shortcoming.

The δικαιό– word family (δικαιόω, δικαιοσύνη, δίκαιος) is rendered with a cluster of related English words that correspond to forensic righteousness: “justify,” “righteousness,” “righteous.” The UASV avoids substituting relational or transformative terminology like “make right” where the forensic, judicial aspect is central.

“Sanctify” (ἁγιάζω) and “holy” (ἅγιος) are preserved in their traditional English forms, giving readers continuity with the historic vocabulary of Christian theology and reflecting the biblical emphasis on consecration and separation to God.

“Salvation” (σωτηρία) and the verb “save” (σῴζω) are translated consistently, with their range from temporal deliverance to eternal salvation signaled by context, not by introducing qualitatively different English terms. This allows readers to recognize that the same underlying vocabulary can refer to different dimensions of God’s rescuing work.

Death, Resurrection, Gehenna, And Gravedom

The UASV affirms that death is the cessation of conscious human life, not transition to a disembodied state of immortal soul existence. Translation choices reflect this conviction, while still letting the text itself speak.

“Death” and “die” are translated directly, without euphemistic glosses that might suggest continued conscious existence in an intermediate state. The hope of resurrection—God’s act of re-creating and raising the dead—is reflected in consistent translation of ἀνάστασις and related terms as “resurrection,” not softened or metaphorized.

Sheol (שְׁאוֹל) and Hades (ᾅδης) are often transliterated or rendered with wording that preserves their identity as the realm of the dead, gravedom, rather than being collapsed into “hell.” Gehenna (γέεννα), by contrast, is transliterated or rendered in a way that indicates the place or state of final destruction, distinct from Sheol/Hades as the common destination of the dead.

By carefully distinguishing these terms, the UASV protects readers from traditional confusions that have conflated Sheol, Hades, and Gehenna into a single undifferentiated concept.

Handling Difficult Constructions And Figures Of Speech

Hebraisms And Semitisms In The New Testament

The New Testament, though written in Greek, exhibits many Semitic structures and idioms. The UASV acknowledges this and seeks to preserve that Semitic flavor where English readers can still follow the sense.

Expressions like “answered and said,” “lifted up his eyes and said,” and “having answered” are often retained, both to reflect the underlying Semitic rhythm and to preserve the narrative style familiar from the Gospels and Acts. While some modern translations flatten these into bland contemporary English, the UASV allows the ancient voice to be heard.

At the same time, the translators evaluate each construction for intelligibility. When a strict reproduction of a Semitic idiom would mislead or confuse modern readers, careful adjustment is made while seeking to remain as close as possible to the original resonance.

Idioms, Metaphors, And Non-Literal Language

Scripture abounds in metaphor, simile, hyperbole, and other figures. The UASV’s primary approach is to retain the figure rather than reduce it to a paraphrased meaning. For example, “walk” as a metaphor for conduct is usually left as “walk,” rather than being systematically changed to “live” or “behave.” This allows readers to experience the imagery the inspired writer chose.

Hyperbole—such as “hate” in comparison to love (e.g., “hate his own father and mother”)—is not toned down to avoid offense. The UASV will preserve the stronger expression and allow explanatory notes or teaching to clarify the Semitic idiom of preference and priority.

Comparative expressions, symbolic numbers, and apocalyptic imagery are likewise translated with maximum literalness compatible with English grammar. Interpretation of imagery in books like Daniel and Revelation is left to commentary and teaching, not embedded into the translation through paraphrase.

Participles, Word Order, And Logical Connections

Greek participles present special challenges. Many modern translations simply turn them into independent finite verbs, losing the nuance of time, manner, or cause that the participial construction can convey. The UASV aims to preserve participles as participles where possible, often using English participial phrases (“having said this,” “going, he spoke,” “having believed”) to reflect the structure of the original.

Word order in Greek and Hebrew is often used for emphasis, topicalization, or contrast. While English demands adjustments, the UASV attempts to reflect emphasis—such as fronted words or clauses—by natural but intentional English structures. For example, when “God” or “Christ” is placed emphatically at the head of a sentence, the translation may similarly bring that term forward.

Logical connectors are meticulously preserved. Tiny words such as γάρ (“for”), οὖν (“therefore”), δέ (“but/and”), and ἵνα (“that/so that”) are not casually dropped for smoother English. Instead, they are retained to reveal the argument’s structure. Readers who follow these connectors can better see how one statement supports or explains another.

Chronology, History, And Proper Names

Maintaining Biblical Chronology In Translational Notes

While the primary task of a translation is not historical reconstruction, the UASV recognizes that biblical chronology is not peripheral. The dates of Creation (4026 B.C.E.), Flood (2348 B.C.E.), Abraham’s covenant (2091 B.C.E.), the Exodus (1446 B.C.E.), the destruction of Jerusalem (587 B.C.E.), the return from exile (537 B.C.E.), the rebuilding of the Temple (515 B.C.E.), Jesus’ birth (2–1 B.C.E.), baptism (29 C.E.), and death (33 C.E.) form a coherent framework for understanding redemptive history.

The translation itself does not insert these dates into the biblical text, but translational notes, introductions, and related materials will respect this chronological structure rather than replacing it with critical reconstructions that contradict Scripture’s own internal indicators.

Historical references in the text—kings, empires, battles, decrees—are translated with precision in titles and names, so that readers can correlate them with the historical record. The UASV does not flatten titles or offices into approximate equivalents that might obscure original political or social realities.

Transliteration And Translation Of Names And Places

Personal names, place names, and ethnonyms are rendered with transliterations that reflect their original pronunciation as closely as possible within established English tradition. The UASV does not attempt a radical overhaul of familiar biblical names, which would create confusion, but modestly corrects forms where clarity benefits and tradition does not demand otherwise.

Terms that are both chronological and cultural—such as “Sabbath,” “Passover,” “Pentecost,” “Feast of Booths,” “Pharisees,” “Sadducees,” “scribes,” “synagogue,” “Sanhedrin”—are transliterated or translated in ways that allow readers to recognize them as technical or semi-technical terms, not generic categories. This is especially important for the Gospels and Acts, where misunderstanding of such terms can distort interpretation.

The UASV 2022 In Comparison With Other English Versions

Differences From Essentially Literal Translations

Versions such as the ESV or previous NASB editions are often described as essentially literal, and they share many goals with the UASV. However, the UASV 2022 concludes that these versions frequently relax literalness for stylistic or interpretive reasons. The ESV sometimes adopts smoother English at the cost of grammatical transparency, and the more recent NASB revisions incorporate dynamic tendencies in places where earlier editions were stricter.

The UASV presses literalness further. It resists stylistic reshaping unless required for intelligibility, preserves more of the connective tissue of the original, maintains a stricter one-to-one mapping between key terms and their English equivalents, and refuses to import theological interpretations that are not clearly present in the text.

Where essentially literal translations sometimes adopt paraphrastic solutions to difficult phrases, the UASV prefers to retain the difficulty and let the reader wrestle with Scripture in context, perhaps with the assistance of notes or external study helps.

Differences From Dynamic And Paraphrastic Versions

Dynamic equivalent and paraphrastic versions (such as some popular “thought-for-thought” Bibles or free renderings) take a fundamentally different approach. They prioritize conveying what translators believe is the functional meaning of a passage in contemporary idiom, even if that requires substantial rewording, additions, or cultural substitution.

The UASV regards such methods as useful for commentary and teaching material, but not as faithful translation. Paraphrases and dynamic renderings too easily import the translator’s theology, cultural assumptions, and limited understanding into the text itself. They may obscure important ambiguities, lexical patterns, and syntactical structures that the Holy Spirit used to shape the inspired Word.

Accordingly, the UASV rejects paraphrastic strategies as its baseline. Its role is to provide the solid, literal foundation upon which teachers, preachers, and commentators can build, not to pre-digest Scripture in a way that hides the original wording.

Practical Outworking In Selected Textual Examples

Example: Genesis 1–3 And Creation Terminology

In Genesis 1–3, the UASV preserves the lexical and structural features that anchor the doctrine of Creation and the fall. The repeated formula “And God said … and it was so” is maintained with minimal stylistic softening, allowing readers to feel the cadence and authority of divine speech. Terms like “kind,” “day,” “image,” and “dust” are translated consistently, without speculative glosses that align with modern theories.

The narrative structure—six days of creative activity, followed by the seventh day of divine rest—is translated plainly, without recasting the days as vague epochs or metaphors. The simple narrative past of Hebrew is represented as straightforward past tense in English, preserving the historical character of the account.

In Genesis 2, the covenantal Name “Jehovah God” appears, and the UASV retains this combination instead of replacing the Name with a title. The formation of man from dust and the breathing into his nostrils “the breath of life” is translated with literal vocabulary, resisting attempts to embed philosophical dualism into the text. Man becomes “a living soul,” not an immortal soul housed in a body.

In Genesis 3, the dialogue between the serpent, the woman, and Jehovah God is rendered with close attention to the Hebrew wording, especially in the subtle distortion of God’s command by the serpent and the woman’s reply. The curse and promise are translated in a way that allows readers to trace the protoevangelium without interpretive additions in the body of the text.

Example: Romans 5 And Adamic Consequences

Romans 5:12–21 is a crucial text for understanding sin, death, and the work of Christ. The UASV preserves Paul’s careful language. Phrases such as “through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death passed to all men, because all sinned” are translated in a way that reflects the Greek causal and comparative structure. The UASV does not covertly insert the notion of inherited guilt into the wording; rather, it maintains the explicit clause “because all sinned,” letting the reader grapple with Paul’s explanation of how Adam’s trespass affects his descendants.

Terms such as “many,” “the many,” and “all” are translated with lexical precision, not adjusted to fit a preconceived theological system. “Justification of life” is preserved as such, reflecting the judicial and life-giving dimensions of Christ’s work. The parallelism between Adam and Christ is made visible by consistent translation of recurring vocabulary.

By resisting interpretive paraphrase, the UASV allows readers to see the exact contours of Paul’s argument and to correlate Romans 5 with texts such as Romans 3, Romans 6, and 1 Corinthians 15.

Example: John 3 And The New Birth

In John 3, the dialogue between Jesus and Nicodemus hinges on nuanced terms like ἄνωθεν (“from above” / “again”) and the dual meaning of “wind” and “spirit” in Greek (pneuma). The UASV respects these lexical features as much as English permits.

When Jesus speaks of being “born from above” or “born again,” the UASV chooses the rendering that best fits John’s usage and context, while noting the lexical range. The imagery of wind/spirit that “blows where it wishes” is kept intact, with “wind” and “Spirit” distinguished where context requires but not flattened into a paraphrase that loses the wordplay.

The famous statement that “God so loved the world” is translated in a way that respects both the degree and the manner signified by “so,” preserving the original balance without reducing it to a paraphrased explanation. Terms like “world,” “eternal life,” “believe,” and “condemn” are translated consistently with their broader Johannine usage, enabling readers to trace themes across the Gospel and the Johannine epistles.

The Role Of The Reader And The Limits Of Translation

The UASV acknowledges a crucial reality: no translation can do everything. A Bible version that tries to interpret, apply, paraphrase, and simplify all at once will cease to be a faithful representation of the inspired text and become a commentary disguised as Scripture.

Therefore, the UASV intentionally leaves much interpretive work to readers, teachers, and students. It provides:

A highly literal, textually responsible rendering of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts.

Consistent translation of key theological and anthropological terms.

Transparent handling of textual variants.

Faithful representation of grammar, syntax, and logical connectives.

Respect for the historical and covenantal framework of Scripture.

Within these boundaries, the UASV does not attempt to decide every exegetical question in the reader’s place. Ambiguities present in the original remain visible. Difficult constructions remain challenging. Theological synthesis is not encoded into the translation, but must be pursued through inductive study across the canon.

In this way, the UASV 2022 serves as a trustworthy, conservative, text-driven instrument that magnifies the authority of Scripture rather than the preferences of translators. It equips serious readers to hear what God has actually said, in the words He chose, through the prophets and apostles, so that they may then interpret, believe, and obey under the guidance of the Holy Spirit working through the written Word.

The UASV Is Available As of the Date of This Article HERE …

• e-Sword Bible Software for Free
• Logos Bible Software
• Kindle Direct Publishing (eBook and Audio) [With KDP you can now get UASV and eBook discounted to read and listen.]

The Updated American Standard Version was initially released in a hardcover edition through a print-on-demand provider; however, the resulting quality fell short of the high standards desired for this significant project, and the partner subsequently imposed a policy against books exceeding 1,000 pages—our Bible totals 1,450 pages—leaving us without a suitable printing option. Securing that original provider required six years of effort, as most Bible printing companies mandate large upfront orders of 1,000 to 5,000 copies, which involves substantial inventory storage and shipping responsibilities—requirements that have remained financially unfeasible for our self-funded ministry, which developed the translation over 16 years with minimal donations totaling approximately $200. Despite these obstacles, the digital edition has consistently earned five-star reviews, with numerous individuals earnestly requesting a premium physical copy that reflects the dedicated scholarship invested. Producing such a durable, high-quality printed Bible remains a primary goal; we have explored partnerships with several major Christian publishers for printing and distribution rights, though these inquiries have not yet succeeded. Progress depends on improved financial resources or identification of a capable print-on-demand service equipped for this volume, and we anticipate potential advancement as early as late 2028 or sooner through divine provision. Your continued patience and donations, encouragement, and support are profoundly appreciated during this process.

DONATION

See more

You May Also Enjoy

The King James Bible’s Hidden Agenda: How Tyndale’s Translation Was Rewritten to Empower the Church and Crown

See more

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS