Try the Nkjv also!Yes, I'm pretty much sticking to the ESV and NASB95 now.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Try the Nkjv also!Yes, I'm pretty much sticking to the ESV and NASB95 now.
Not as literal though as either of those !The grammar of the 2020 NASB is superior to not only that of the 1995 NASB but to the ESV.
Have read thru both of themAnd how did you make that determination? You never do any personal investigation.
Wrong again Jeff.Not as literal though as either of those !
Your reading comprehension is very poor. And for a dozen years you have made completely unfounded accusations about the NIV with zero support for your contentions from the text itself. Therefore, you have a terrible track record and no credibility. You have demonstrated no desire to do your own homework at all. I very much doubt that you have done anything more than glance at the new NASB and ESV. Do you even own a copy of the 2020 NASB?Have read thru both of them
Yes, and the 1977 and the 1995!Your reading comprehension is very poor. And for a dozen years you have made completely unfounded accusations about the NIV with zero support for your contentions from the text itself. Therefore, you have a terrible track record and no credibility. You have demonstrated no desire to do your own homework at all. I very much doubt that you have done anything more than glance at the new NASB and ESV. Do you even own a copy of the 2020 NASB?
That was a poor article. The author (Edward D. Andrew) just made accusations (like you do) and left things hanging. He only cited four Bible references to show inclusive language. They were weak examples. He gave no support from the text of the 2020NASB to support his accusations.
Yes. I will not buy the 2020. What vss I read, can’t remember which ones to be exact, did not impress me.Did you mean go back to the NASB 1995? Because the old Holman Christian Bible came out with the full canon in 2004. That was the precursor of the current CSB.
Yes. I will not buy the 2020. What vss I read, can’t remember which ones to be exact, did not impress me.
There was no 'giving in.' It's the nature of all languages to change over time. And, as we all know, God is behind these things. There is no English Language Committee deciding what words to use and not use. But there was such a thing in France a while back. These Francophiles didn't want their citizens to use the English word 'Jumbo Jet.' Instead they wanted citizens to say "Le grande aeroplane" or something of that order. Of course the French, like any other nation will not listen to such nonsense and continue to say Jumbo jet. One can't spread a net and prevent certain words from entering a language.I'm disappointed in the Lockman Foundation for giving in to the pressure of making their translation more "gender inclusive."
There was no 'giving in.' It's the nature of all languages to change over time. And, as we all know, God is behind these things. There is no English Language Committee deciding what words to use and not use. But there was such a thing in France a while back. These Francophiles didn't want their citizens to use the English word 'Jumbo Jet.' Instead they wanted citizens to say "Le grande aeroplane" or something of that order. Of course the French, like any other nation will not listen to such nonsense and continue to say Jumbo jet. One can't spread a net and prevent certain words from entering a language.
Besides, Wayne Grudem, John MacArthur and others who have railed against inclusive language use quite a bit of it in their books and much more so in their daily conversation. It's a no-win proposition for the English protectors.
Gender inclusive? Who?I'm disappointed in the Lockman Foundation for giving in to the pressure of making their translation more "gender inclusive."
discerning whether someone is being serious or actually being sarcastic with their remarks
when a person says "irregardless," they are literally saying "not regardless."
They probably saw the annual sales of the Niv and csb compared to theirs!I'm disappointed in the Lockman Foundation for giving in to the pressure of making their translation more "gender inclusive."
Do you support translations that remove words such as justification and Propitiation then, in an attempt to be more easily read?There was no 'giving in.' It's the nature of all languages to change over time. And, as we all know, God is behind these things. There is no English Language Committee deciding what words to use and not use. But there was such a thing in France a while back. These Francophiles didn't want their citizens to use the English word 'Jumbo Jet.' Instead they wanted citizens to say "Le grande aeroplane" or something of that order. Of course the French, like any other nation will not listen to such nonsense and continue to say Jumbo jet. One can't spread a net and prevent certain words from entering a language.
Besides, Wayne Grudem, John MacArthur and others who have railed against inclusive language use quite a bit of it in their books and much more so in their daily conversation. It's a no-win proposition for the English protectors.
Gender inclusive? Who?
If they were never there, then they weren't removed.Do you support translations that remove words such as justification and Propitiation then, in an attempt to be more easily read?
Cat got your tongue?How interesting.
Cat got your tongue?
This is a non sequitur if ever I heard one. It is in the nature of morality to change over a period of time, but it does not follow that God approves. Perhaps God has 'given us over' to faulty Bible translations in the same way that he gives over sinners to their sins (Romans 1:18ff).There was no 'giving in.' It's the nature of all languages to change over time. And, as we all know, God is behind these things.