NASB Update

Clay, I have used the NASB for a number of years. I do continue to use it in my studies, along with the new ESV (as I posted on that thread).

I do feel that it is an improvement over the original NASB in that it is a somewhat smoother read. Along with that, I do like the fact that it uses contemporary English throughout (IE No more Thees and Thous in prayers, as the original NASB and RSV did). Most importantly, I appreciate the fact that it is a literal translation, which IMHO is its greatest strength.

As I've stated before, my only disappointment with the update was that Kirkbride publishers decided not to update their NASB Thompson Chain Ref. Bible as well.

 

Agreed

A real mystery to me

 

There is a verse in the NASB update that just baffles me as to why they would have chosen what they did:

Ez. 1:26, "Now above the expanse that was over their heads there was something resembling a throne, like lapis luzuli in appearance . . ."

I have to admit that I had no idea what "lapis luzuli" was - I had to look it up in a dictionary. It is latin term, meaning, "azure stone, an aluminous mineral, or a rich blue color, resembling the blue carbonate of copper".

Now, how is that term more easier to read? They did not use it in the NASB 77. For me, the use of lapis luzuli is even harder to understand (from first reading) than the KJV. I don't mean to nit-pick, I realize it is just one word. Overall, I think that the NASB update is an improvement over the older version.

 

Michael Sly said:

They did not use it in the NASB 77. For me, the use of lapis luzuli is even harder to understand (from first reading) than the KJV.

I think you're mistaken on this, Michael. I have the NASB '77 and '95 open in front of me, and this verse is word-for-word identical in both, including the term "lapis lazuli."

Taking a quick look at the Strong's entry (05601)for this word, it appears as though it can mean either "sapphire" or "lapis lazuli." (BTW, the English word "sapphire" is etymologically related to the Hebrew cappiyr.)

For what it's worth, I'm sure there are plenty of women in your life with sufficient knowledge of precious and semiprecious gemstones to tell you the difference between a lapis lazuli and a sapphire.

 

Ooops, you are correct. I meant to refer to the ESV instead.

I just find it odd that there would use a latin term here.

Thanks,
Michael

 

Michael Sly said:

I just find it odd that there would use a latin term here.

Well, it is the common name by which that stone is known. (The Latin simply means "blue stone," FWIW.)

Another reason the NASB might have preferred "lapis lazuli" to "sapphire" is simple geological accuracy: lapis is indigenous to the Middle East, but sapphire is not.

 

I prefer the NASB95 to 77. Before the ESV came along, I used the NASB as my primary translation. I still utilize it, but the ESV is my #1 translation.

As we've talked about before, Kirkbride has said they will not be publishing any new versions or products other than what they already have. I am very disappointed in their choice.

 

I like the NASB 95, and feel in terms of quality of bibles, Foundation is near the top. I have a bible that Charles Stanley endorsed that is just top shelf all the way! But for whatever reason the ESV just seems to have a better flow then the NASB 95, and seems to be a better translation to use when there are various translations in use at one time.

Hey! I just figured out what IMHO means!!!!
Does this mean that people give their not so honest opinions?!?!

 

I'm not really sure that it reads better. I find it easier in certain spots. I love to use it for my devotional time. Many of the Southern Baptist preachers who've spoken at our church use the Updated NASB, and they all think it's great!

B.T.

 

I thought it meant "in my humble opinion!" I
know that I have written some very not-humble
opinions, but they are honest opinions! 8oD

 

go2church asked:

Hey! I just figured out what IMHO means!!!!
Does this mean that people give their not so honest opinions?!?!

Actually it stands for "humble," not "honest" - and yes, IMNSHO is actually a standard Internet acronym of long standing.

 

I've been using the 1977 edition of the NASB since 1993 for personal study. It actually grew on me fairly quickly.

However, when I started teaching Sunday school I realized that the English of the NASB was too convoluted. It simply didn't read well, and good readability is a must when you are reading aloud. So I switched to the NKJV for teaching and continued to use the NASB for personal study.

I picked up a copy of the 1995 update a year ago, and I was pleased with the improvements the translators had made to the English style. While it's still a bit wooden in places, the language flows a lot more smoothly, and the unnecessary Thees and Thous (used to refer only to deity) are taken out. So I switched back to the NASB for teaching. It's nice to use the same translation both for public reading and preparation.