Answer
The Recovery Version of the Bible is a direct English translation of the Scriptures, created and published by Living Stream Ministries, a part of the Local Church movement. The association between the Local Church and the Recovery Version of the Bible might prompt inquiries about its reliability, depending on one’s perspective of this specific group. At the very least, it is advisable to approach the particular translations and footnotes of the Recovery Version with care, if not a healthy dose of skepticism.
The Recovery Version is presented as a formal translation, and most scholars would concur that it adopts an exceedingly literal approach. Objectively, the text closely adheres to recognized manuscripts of the Bible, with some editorial discretion in choosing which ones to follow. This occasionally leads to the use of phrases that are nearly incomprehensible in English. The book also contains extensive footnotes—so numerous that they could be accurately described as a commentary. The Recovery Version has raised concerns regarding specific translated passages and the content of these footnotes.
The general assessment of Witness Lee’s theology is varied, and the same applies to the content of the Recovery Version. Both present perplexing and occasionally conflicting explanations of doctrines such as the Trinity and human nature. Supporters of the Local Church argue that this is primarily due to cultural misunderstandings, and considering all the commentary in context yields an orthodox theological perspective. On the other hand, critics contend that the Recovery Version reflects beliefs that are either deviant or contradictory, or both. Additionally, the absence of publicly available information regarding the names and qualifications of the translators is a valid cause for suspicion.
Considering that the Bible was not originally documented in English, discrepancies among different versions are not necessarily problematic.
And, in comparison to cult-specific efforts like the New World Translation, the Recovery Version does not seem to have a blatantly biased approach to translation. In reality, its stated goal is to avoid such bias, leading to at times excessively literal wording. Nevertheless, there are already English translations focused on literalness, such as the NASB and the Amplified Bible, which diminish the necessity for translations similar to the Recovery Version.
As a less-known and less-studied version, it would be impossible for Got Questions to firmly endorse or condemn the Recovery Version of the Bible. However, considering some of its widely acknowledged flaws, it should be approached with caution and only in conjunction with other, less concerning translations.