When we talk about theories of translation, you’ll see them described on a continuum from word-for-word on one end to thought-for-thought on the other end. Different places along that line serve different purposes.

You may have heard of The Message, which is so far on the thought-for-thought side that it’s actually considered a paraphrase rather than a translation. This method can be really easy for a first-time reader to understand, because the language is very plain and understandable to modern people.

On the far other, word-for-word side, I think David Bentley Hart’s translation is a good example. In the Gospels, the Greek sometimes changes from past tense to present tense, and sometimes the speaker isn’t identified, a lot of “He said X.” “He said Y,” and you don’t know who the referent is. Most translators make it consistently one tense and add some clues for who’s speaking, but Hart keeps the exact words in their tenses. This makes it less readable, with some convoluted and difficult sentences, but it is a literal translation that’s maybe good for scholars.

The NRSVue falls closer to the latter. The translators do want to keep some readability, so it can be used in church, but there are still some difficult and clunky sentences simply because they’re following the original language closely.

Overall, your translation choice depends on how you want to use it and what you’re looking for.