NAS(95) or ESV?

And, if I may be so bold, William, Marcia asked a question in regard to the NASV vs. the ESV. It was not an invitation for KJVO folks to butt in with a blanket condemnation of MVs. </font>[/QUOTE]Your right I never read either one so I really dont have a "POINT" do I. BUT you DO. Why Do we need SO MANY BIBLES? No wonder the World is in such a dissaray we have let the world tell the church what to do and say, and compramised, and sold our birthright for a pot of porrage!

[ May 07, 2006, 12:50 AM: Message edited by: Phillip ]

 

Why do we need SO MANY CONFUSIONS?

 

well you Started it so you better pack a lunch, cause your in for a "RIDE" if you cant back up your "foot in MOUTH" SYNDROME, ALLEGATIONS ABOUT THE KJBO; which I can Prove and will!

[ May 07, 2006, 12:57 AM: Message edited by: Phillip ]

 

Do you have a PHD (Post Hole Digger) in Theology where do you get off coparing your Jewlery to the KJB? Why dont the moderators DELETE your POSTS? Ohh I see you have sold out aswell!

 

I will show courtesy if you show some respect toward the KJB which my fathers and maybe yours aswell died trying to get the word out to the uneducated, Simple, Hard working ignorrant sinners who need to get saved just like anybody else

 

Well I am to the point even if thats what you mean? My intent is not to be rude, but like I said you brought it up! I think its because I wrestled in High school or my up bringing. my Dad was around only till I was 13 or so He's still alive but I havent seen him since.Ever since I got saved I have had copies of some of the AV 1611 and revisions of that copy in the KJB which I trust with my life, I know I'm combative because all other versions do not give it justice. Therefore that is probably why, I dont really Know but all is fair when it comes to the Battle of the Mind.

 

Any more posts regarding discussions other than the subject matter of this thread will either be edited or the thread will be immediately closed.

Enough is enough.

 

Marcia,

I was an ardent KJV man for many years but the more I studied the history of the KJV and the underlying Greek text and the fact it is an old translation AND many words have changed meaning, I soon realized that the KJV is a great translation, but it is simply out-dated.

Since the KJV translation THOUSANDS of additional texts have been discovered and diligently compared allowing modern translators a "better, cleaner and more accurate" underlying text than the KJV.

Those texts are the basis for BEST word-for-word translations today: the ESV, NASB, HCSB and the LITV. These are the best modern word-forword translations using MODERN English and meanings.

I compared the ESV and the NASB and personally I chose the Reformers ESV Study Bible. I just like how the ESV reads and the study helps are great.

The New MacArthur NASB Study Bible seems to be a real good one too.

 

Brother, that is the TOTAL you should thus post on this topic. Not a word more. When someone asks for CERTAIN PEOPLE (in this case those who use the NASB or the ESV) to give input and make comparisons, what on earth would possess one to "butt in"??

We have a long-standing BB policy that if a post is made to a select group (pastors, males only, etc), then we abide by that. All other posts that are unrelated and people just unable to keep their mouths shut are deleted.

Know you are new enough that this policy might not be well known to you.

BTW, I have an ESV for personal study, but don't care for the NASB. I used the 1901 ASV (on which the NASB is based) extensively as it surpasses any English translation in translation of the Greek. </font>[/QUOTE]thank you for your comment and I will try not to Speak my mind concerning other versions although like isaid I have never read neither and probably will never wever read them unless i was on the remotest island deserted ,stranded with only that to read! thanx and god bless! P.S. I,m not impresed by what other people read, for its not what we say but what we do; I should practice what I preach the same goes for everybody else!

 

[snipped]

[ May 07, 2006, 01:02 PM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob ]

 

I am really tired of the putdowns on the BB when it somes to Calvinist-nonCalvinist views.

It has nothing to do with "Calvinist" vs. "non-Calvinist." Scofield was a Congregationalist, after all, and other prominent Dispensationalists, such as Chafer and Ryrie, were/are moderate Calvinists.

I just don't have a terribly high opinion of Scofield's notes, and I regard their inclusion as a waste of a perfectly good ESV - or NASB, for that matter, although I'm not sure if I've ever seen a Scofield edition.

 

I have both and enjoy them both.

 

Why do you dislike Scofield other than him being Dispensational and his gap theory on Gen. 1 and 2 (which I don't like at all, either, assuming you don't)?

Not "other than" his Dispensationalism, but because of it. Scofield's reference Bible carried so much authority in the early part of the 20th century that his theology, in the main, has been taken for granted amongst Evangelicals since. I don't regard the effect on theological studies very highly. Anyway, this is off-topic.