SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : General Topics : What about the New American Standard Bible (NASB)?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page )
PosterThread
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re: What about the New American Standard Bible (NASB)?

Ultimately this comes down to a matter of opinion. I think it is sad Krispy that despite the conservative and evangelical tone of the NASB- being translated by men and women who were probably of pure heart in the task they undertook, and took it with the most grave seriousness- that you should just so deeply slam something that probably was done by many of your sincere brothers and sisters in Christ. And because they are brothers and sisters in Christ, you should show them respect.

Instead, you slam them just because they happen to agree with some liberal scholars on some principles of scholarship regarding textual criticism. Just because one is liberal doesn't mean they are always wrong. Just because some people were of possibly questionable character and such doesn't mean we should simply dismiss their work for that matter. Otherwise, we should burn our KJV's, for it was funded by a man with some deep sexual problems, not to mention other political problems, and the KJV included the Roman Catholic apocrypha. Likewise, Erasmus when he produced the RT, was far from perfect character. When it comes to matters of translation, while it is horriable some people might have been of questionable character that had their hands on the text, ultimately everything boils down to the quality of their translation and the scholarly discipline in which they approached the matter. For all we get is their final product.

We don't know how any scholar might have been acting on any given day. Perhaps some were quite full of pride. Perhaps some just had a heated argument with their spouse. Who knows what hidden sins lurked in any of their hearts. If we are looking for a team of scholars who are living in sinless perfection all at the same time for the duration of time in which they are making their translation... then we should entirely doubt and shun all translations, and just stick to reading Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek manuscripts (and we should probably do away with these as well, being that they are not the original autographs, and we don't know all of who had their hands in copying them).

Which manuscripts are best? Ultimately, only God knows. There is no text in existance today that we have access to that is entirely without error. No manuscript is perfect. No translation is perfect. And people like you and me, who don't know Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, etc. (and owning a Strong's Concordinance does not count), should be very very very very very cautious in making comments on which Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts are best, and which translations are best. People like you and me are highly dependent upon the opinion's of other highly learned men whom we simply fancy for any number of given reasons. Ultimately, we can only point to them and say "they seem like a trusted authority, and their opinion seems sound, and I side with them."

Thus we should avoid blanket statements like "the NASB cannot be trusted." It can't? There seems to be much reason to trust it (though there might be many reasons to doubt it as well). Maybe I should start saying "KrispyKrittr is no scholar, and does not always show perfect character on the SI Forums, thus cannot be trusted in regard to these matters."

The NASB is my favorite of the modern translations, and I personally put a great deal of trust in it; enough so to take it with me when I stand in a pulpit, on a street corner, in a homeless shelter, and other situations in which I must speak as one who is the oracle of God, sometimes putting myself in physical danger for my Lord when I do so. If I had to, I'd die with it in my hand.


_________________
Jimmy H

 2005/9/9 16:47Profile
dohzman
Member



Joined: 2004/10/13
Posts: 2132


 Re: What about the New American Standard Bible (NASB)?

I like what Tozer said, That the NASV is great as long as you use it for its Old Testament Content but when it comes to the NT it's lacking. Good KJV for NT though :-D


_________________
D.Miller

 2005/9/9 19:37Profile
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re:

I believe Tozer was well dead when the NASB came out. Perhaps the original version with the thee's and thou's was in existance then, but the one that is currently for sale was only made in 1995.


_________________
Jimmy H

 2005/9/9 22:57Profile
dohzman
Member



Joined: 2004/10/13
Posts: 2132


 Re:

hummmm?I have an NASB published by AMG- Spiros Zodhiates in 1984. Tozer used the ASB basically the same as the NASB. Very little difference. Still the best in OT translations on the market, unless you go to one of the interlineals(sp?).


_________________
D.Miller

 2005/9/10 22:30Profile
Christisking
Member



Joined: 2005/7/20
Posts: 672
Los Angeles, California

 Re:

The NASB translation was completed, copyrighted and published in 1971. Other portions were copyrighted earlier. Here is the copyright information as given by The Lockman Foundation

New American Standard Bible®,
Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973,1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation


_________________
Patrick Ersig

 2005/9/13 22:46Profile









 Re:

Quote:
Otherwise, we should burn our KJV's, for it was funded by a man with some deep sexual problems



Care to offer some proof of this statement? Dead or not, if this isnt true, then you are bearing false witness against someone... There is a myth that King James was gay, but this has proven to be false.

"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour."

By the way, it was not funded by King James. He did nothing to fund it. Not one penny. So you're wrong on that fact. All he did was authorize the work to be done.

I'm not taking up for King James as a person. Tho he was a religious man, he persecuted many Christian groups... particularly the anabaptists, who many of us would identify with doctrinally if more of us really studied our church history. But I am saying that we cant just come on here and spout out things about people (living or dead) that we dont know is true. It discredits your entire argument when you propogate myths that are completely false.

This is but one area where your expertise on this topic seems lacking. Not sure I would trust the rest of what you say concerning this.

And you know I like ya, KJ... I'm not attacking you. Just surprised at your lack of knowledge when you're trying to sound so knowledgable.

Krispy

 2005/9/14 8:31
freedbyjc
Member



Joined: 2004/7/29
Posts: 204
Jacksonville. Florida

 Re: What about the New American Standard Bible (NASB)?

For those seeking to draw closer to God, I humbly post for your edification, an excellent article that may help shed some light on the discussion.

King James Only, Sometimes, Never:
Examining the Modern Versions of the Bible
William D. Barrick
Professor of Old Testament, The Master’s Seminary

What Bible translations are best for use in the pulpit? Which ones are best for private Bible
study? Good questions like these are the reason for this seminar.

Contrary to the impression that
the seminar title might give, I will not be lecturing on the “King James Only” debate. Our
purpose is to answer the preceding questions about Bible translations.

Pastors and churches ask about modern Bible translations because they want to use the most accurate Bible translation available for preaching, teaching, and personal devotional reading.

With the plethora of so-called
“literal” Bible translations available on the market, how is a pastor or church member to know
which is the best choice? We will not look at obviously inappropriate Bible translations in this
seminar (e.g., Revolve New Testament). Instead, we will focus on the following versions: King
James Version (KJV), New King James Version (NKJV), New American Standard Bible
(NASB), New American Standard Bible Update (NASU), English Standard Version (ESV), New
Revised Standard Version (NRSV), New International Version (NIV), and the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB). These eight versions have the greatest potential of being chosen by evangelicals for pulpit, pew, or personal use. For those of you who are already wondering why the more dynamic NIV is listed with the seven more formal translations, just stick around. There is method to my madness.


To read the rest ofthe article you must go here.[url=http://www.gracechurch.org/shepnew/2005notes/BarrickKingJamesOnly.pdf]Shepherd's Conference 2005 Notes[/url]




Barrick astutely concludes: This brief and limited analysis is but an example of the type of research that one needs to pursue in order to decide on a particular Bible translation for pulpit, pew, or personal reading.

One might choose the easy road by just accepting the conclusions of excellent volumes like
Thomas’s How to Choose a Bible Version. Or, one might choose to look even deeper into the
matter and involve others in his search for the best translation.

For churches, this process should not be hasty. One to two years for church leaders to research and discuss the matter will prove well worth the effort. Personal Bible study can more readily adopt a variety of translations without causing division and confusion if the individual is willing to tie himself to solid literal translations and sound exegetical commentaries during the process of study.

No Bible translation is perfect. Many translations are disturbingly imperfect—above and
beyond what one might expect out of an objective, original text-based translation. Evangelicals
need to stay vitally involved in the production of Bible translations and evangelical churches need to make wise choices with regard to pulpit and/or pew versions. Lazy translations produce lazy expositors and lazy readers. Imperfect translations can contribute to the production of imperfect interpretation and flawed theology. Do not take the task lightly.


_________________
bill schnippert

 2005/9/14 9:44Profile
Manfred
Member



Joined: 2005/4/4
Posts: 342
Continental Europe

 Re: NASB

Greetings,

I think that the best way to solve this never-ending discussions about Bible translations, versions, manuscripts, etc. would be to learn Greek. It is not difficult, and courses are offered for all levels.

I remember reading that someone like A. T. Robertson would lecture, and teach his classes using his Greek New Testament.

I think that most of us are young enough to start such a venture. I dare say that there would be no better way to use some of our free time.

Manfred

 2005/9/14 11:46Profile
letsgetbusy
Member



Joined: 2004/9/28
Posts: 957
Cleveland, Georgia

 Re:

"No Bible translation is perfect."

I don't want to stir up trouble, but with that statement, you are basically saying that we don't have an accurate translation today.

That would mean either God cannot preserve His Word, or chose not to. By saying it is even 99.5% pure, is saying it is .5% corrupted. I believe God to be a God of absolutes.

Everyone in the world is learning English. I was just in Korea where the locals will go out of their way to have a conversasion with an English speaking person.

Disagree if you will, but it seems reasonable to me that God would purposely have a translation ready for a world that is moving toward a particular language. Many families from other cultures don't even teach their children their native language, in hopes that the children would be accepted in the English-speaking 'business' world.

I believe God has preserved His Word, and my faith is not in the translators, the men that funded the translation, or any other person, but God only. And if he were giving us a roadmap to live by, shouldn't it be 100% trustworthy.

Matthew 4:4 "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."


_________________
Hal Bachman

 2005/9/14 12:30Profile









 Re:

Quote:
I think that the best way to solve this never-ending discussions about Bible translations, versions, manuscripts, etc. would be to learn Greek. It is not difficult, and courses are offered for all levels.



This would not solve the issue because the question then must be asked: Which Greek NT? The one that the KJV, and all the Reformation Bibles were based on? ..or the one that all the modern versions since 1881 are based on?

Most folks either are ignorant of the fact that there are two streams of very different Greek texts, or they chose to ignore the fact.

Krispy

 2005/9/14 13:33





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy