It might seem strange -- perhaps even blasphemous to some -- for a practicing Christian to criticize any translation of the Bible. On the other hand, there are so many translations, that to simply hand out five stars to any given translation is to blindly accept, not the inspired word of God, but, rather, the human translators and editors who inevitably bring to scripture their own agendas. And while it is hard to fault the accuracy and readability of this translation, I do have a number of criticisms. But it is also necessary to distinguish between the text and its commentary: this is, after all, a study Bible, and as such, it is meant to instruct by means of an explicit meta-text which carries with it an agenda of its own, apart from the inherent meaning of the Bible, per se.
For example, as a study Bible, this edition of the ESV suffers from a clear complementarian bias. This is only to be expected, given that its general editor is Wayne Grudem, one of the founders of the complementarian movement. One example of an obvious manifestation of complementarian theology is in the translation of the Greek word "adelphoi." When it suits the editors' purpose, this word is given a footnote which endorses its translation as "brothers and sisters." But when this would conflict with complementarian theology (e.g., James 3:1), it is simply translated as "brothers" without any qualifying footnote. This type of selectivity calls into question the ingenuousness of the translation as a whole, and clearly reveals an underlying agenda.
This agenda, which borders on an espousal of fundamentalist doctrine, is conspicuously emphasized in the "Articles and Resources" which follow the main text. Among these, in particular, are a number of assertions which would not survive a high school-level debate, such as the circular "justification" given for the inerrancy of scripture: scripture is inspired by God, which makes it inerrant, and its inerrancy is derived by its inclusion in scripture. Even more disturbing are the dogmatic assertions found in the final section on "Ethics" which, in essence, presume to speak for God in various absolutes.
In addition, these materials are rife with the sort of simplistic explanations which underestimate the audience, and are insulting to any thoughtful reader: "We need to apply the Bible in daily life because it alone is a sure and certain guide." Such assertions are thrown around without any attempt to justify or support them, and while they may be satisfactory to the least critical believers, anyone with a shred of intellectual curiosity -- let alone non-believers -- will be left with nothing to stand on. The Bible also instructs us to have a "ready answer" when asked about our faith, and this study Bible fails to provide any useful ones. It is not the text, but the commentary which mars this translation.