In the 1960s an international movement for translation of the Bible in common language in several languages began, aiming to escape the revision and updating of consecrated translations from previous centuries and to propose direct translations at a level of language that would allow reading by the greatest number of people with low schooling. In this sense, in Brazil, encouraged and supported by the American Bible Society, the final edition of the "Bible in Today’s Language" was published in 1988, whose revision gave origin in 2000 to the "New Translation in Today’s Language". However, its proposal encountered difficulties in being accepted by some of its target readers, especially among religious leaders and academics in the field of theology, precisely because it provided the reader with a domesticated translation. This paper is a critique of the aforementioned translation whose objective is to analyze its translation project based on postulates from the field of Translation Studies. The theoretical and methodological foundations of this research were: Geisler and Nix (2006), Giraldi (2013) and Raupp (2015), about the history of Bible translation, Schleiermacher ([1813], 2010), about translation methods, as well as Nida (1964), Luther ([1530] 2006) and Meschonnic (2010), about reflections coming from Bible translation. We also added the principles of Textual Criticism applied to the biblical text found in Paroschi (1993). The corpus analysis followed the guidelines of Antoine Berman’s (1995; 2002; 2013) model of translation criticism. It is, therefore, a descriptive, qualitative, bibliographic and documental research. After the description of the translation project, to analyze the textual aspect we confronted the source text and the target text in the passage from "Romans," chapter 5, observing as a reference the action of the deforming tendencies according to Berman (2013). The historical background allowed us to see that since the Middle Ages there has been a concern to make the biblical text accessible or in vernacular language or adequate to the linguistic register of less educated readers, as the reformers did, especially Luther with his translation into German. As a practice, Bible translation has also contributed to the formulation of theoretical reflections. Today’s "New Translation into the Language" is hypertextual ethnocentric because its project is aimed at adapting the source text to the linguistic, social and cultural conditions of poorly educated speakers in Brazil in the second half of the 20th century, ignoring the foreign heritage of the source language. The translation project of this work is in line with genetic and ideological aspects of the Bible itself: the authors, in their majority and especially those of the New Testament texts, were men of low education who wrote in colloquial language for people who were also poorly educated, bearing in mind that one of the theological purposes of the Bible is that the Gospel message reach as many people as possible. Thus, a cultured language would be in opposition to these two aspects. In the analysis of the text, besides formal and content aspects, we found nine of Berman’s thirteen deformations; rationalization, clarification, destruction of systematisms and destruction of rhythms were the most recurrent ones. However, these, in turn, are at the service of and justified by the translation project of the work and the translator’s position and horizon. We believe, finally, that the negative criticism this work has received may be due to ignorance of its purpose and to its misuse for purposes for which it was not intended, namely its use in public rites and in the religious instruction of the faithful.