Featured Nasb

I shall. Give me a week or so to put it together. In the meantime you can check the archives where I tackle similiar themes.

 

That won't happen. Your views are not on such an high plane that it would compel me to search the archives in search of your opinions.

But please do spend a week or so and share your garnered conclusions.

 

Your patronizing tone has been duly noted mr.preacher.

 

Likewise...

 

Now Now Boys.....no cat fighting. BTW, there are available something called testosterone supplements for that... :laugh: :tongue3:

 

Touche and good response. Your poster has never agreed with anyone. If I said the sky was blue in a thread, he would start a new one saying the sky is green.

 

I never particularly bonded with the NASB, and made the mistake of spending over 200 bucks on an Allan edition from evangelicalbible.com, which has been sitting in the box since practically day one. I prefer the ESV, and Crossway's top-of-the-line Large Print Thinline, black-letter text fills the bill. I also was lucky to pick up an 1901 ASV new edition off e-bay. IMHO, the NKJV is slightly more literal than the NASB, and the Scuyler edition is excellent. LCBP has beautiful Bibles, but, unfortunately they only print the KJV, which I do not use. I have been moving in the dynamic equivalence direction, and my Bible of choice is becoming the 1984 NIv, and have also been using a new copy of the large print Living Bible, which Tyndale is now printing again. I much prefer it to the inclusive language NLT.

 

I've not bonded with it as well and have it in an Allan.

Those Schuyler Bibles look very nice! Thinking of getting an ESV with confessions. The only thing I don't like about them is the printed cover.

 

I see I am late to this topic, sorry.

My favorite version is the NASB95, which removed the "Thee/Thou" archaic words. I have the Zondervan Study Notes version, which I like better than the Life Application Study Notes Version. But I also use the Ryrie Study Notes in another older NASB.

I would not recommend either the ESV or NIV for a study bible, but either would do fine as a sharing the word bible. And as pointed out by others, the NKJV, HCSB, NET, WEB provide differing literal translations for comparative study efforts.

 

Afraid someone will know you're carrying a Bible? :laugh:

:saint:

 

Uh...lol!

Real funny. :tongue3:

On that topic I really wonder why so many men do not bring Bibles to church. I never understood that.

 

have you studied and read the Nas 1977 edition? that would be the mor eliteral version, but also more 'wooden" edition!

 

The Esv to me is a good study edition to use, would recommand it over the Niv for that purpose...

prefer the nas 1977 edition....

 

When you say that the NET is a literal translation what do you mean by that? Are you speaking of the translation or the footnotes? Just about all translations,even the NLT have more literal rewnderings in their footnotes.

When you say that the HCSB is literal translation just what do you mean? It is slightly more literal than the NIV many times;but is less literal than the ESV often.

 

Please give some specifics about your charges regarding the supposition that I have been wrong about the KJV;let alone other versions.

 

Folks, did I say the NET was a literal translation? Did I say the HCSB is literal translation? What I said was, "And as pointed out by others, the NKJV, HCSB, NET, WEB provide differing literal translations for comparative study efforts."

Lets use Galatians 1:15 for comparative study efforts.

The ESV has Paul set apart before he was born.
The NET has Paul set apart from birth
The HCSB has Paul set apart from birth
The NASB, NKJV, WEB and NIV have the ambiguous but literal "from my mother's womb."

 

Well,as long as you put the NET Bible and the HCSB in the mix --the NIV should go in there as well.

The ASV,Darby (which is even more literal over all than the NASB or NKJV) joins the club for the latter reading as well as the KJV,and LEB. So what?

 

So What? Comparative study helps unpack scripture. Here we discover some scholars think the phrase means before a person is born, while still in the womb, like Jeremiah. Others think Paul was set apart from birth, perhaps alluding to his circumcision. By considering the differing ways a passage or verse can be understood, we can grow in our understanding of scripture.

Nothing wrong with looking at the ESV and NIV in a comparative study, but I would not recommend basing a study of a passage on either version. Much better to base study on the NASB because of the superior adherence to word meanings and underlying Greek grammar.

If the more literal versions differ, then an expanded look/see is called for. Sometimes the difference is based on using a different variant of the text, sometime it is driven by translator choice. Here, Galatians 1:15, we see that the ESV translators made a choice not shared by the other translations. However, the ESV may be right. Thus the comparative study helps us grow in our understanding of when and why God sets people apart for His purposes.

 

The NASBU certainly has its place. But it is not necessarily more accurate because it is somewhat more literal than the ESV and NIV. It does not rank so high in contextual meaning. You tend to isolate individual words;unnecessarily so. I like to see the meaning expressed in combinations of words,phrases,sentences etc. Purvey expressed the same sentiments when he said the sense is key. The words serve the meaning in other words. (Pun intended.)

 

Somewhat is a good word, it might mean a little or a log. Thus the NASB being somewhat more literal means to me there is no comparison, the NIV and ESV are liberal translations, playing fast and loose with the text. The NASB should be used for study, rather than something that grinds up the grammar in the name of doctrine.

I think the ESV is less literal than the HCSB, the NET, the WEB, and the NKJV, let alone the NASB. Perhaps you would like to study the matter and compare the same verses you used to show the NASB is far more literal than either the ESV or NIV.