The ever changing "literal" NASB

[Guest brandplucked]

The ever changing "literal" NASB

There are a multitude of examples found in the New American Standard Version where it is far less "literal" than the King James Bible or, for that matter, the previous Revised Version of 1881 and the American Standard Version of 1901.

The following is a very incomplete list of some of the examples I have found in my personal studies over the past few years. This list could easily be three times as long, but these few should be sufficient to refute the oft repeated claim that the NASB is the most literal of the modern versions.

The NASB gospel of John came out in 1960. The complete New Testament in 1963, and the whole Bible in 1971. Since then the NASB has come out with five different editions (1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, and the Updated 1995). Each of these editions differs from the others in both it's English translations of many verses and some even differ in the underlying Greek texts of the New Testament.

Brother Laurence M. Vance has written a book called Double Jeopardy, in which he documents word for word the changes made in the 1995 NASB as compared to the previous 1977 NASB. The 1995 NASB now has almost 7000 fewer words in it than did the previous 1977 edition.

The NASB often rejects the Hebrew readings, but they never tell you this in their footnotes. You have to consult other versions like the RSV, ESV, and NIV to verify this. Many examples of the NASB not following the Hebrew texts are found here:

http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/NIVapos.html and here:

http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/NIVapos2.html

The NASB is also based on different Greek texts than are such versions as the Geneva Bible, Tyndale, Young's and the NKJV. These different texts omit, change or add some 5000 words to the traditional New Testament text.

For a very easy to follow chart showing some of these omissions, see this site. Please look at both parts.

http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts/themagicmarker.html

And see this article about the so called "oldest and best" manuscripts upon which many modern versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV and ESV are based.

http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/oldbest.html

Part One - SOME examples of how the NASB continues to change from year to year.

Amos 3:2 "You only HAVE I KNOWN of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities."

"You only HAVE I KNOWN" is the reading of the RV, ASV, RSV, ESV, Holman Standard, NKJV, Darby, Young's, Geneva Bible and the Jewish translations. The word "to know" is # 3045, and means to know, as is Genesis 4:1 "And Adam knew his wife Eve"; Genesis 22:12 "Now I know that thou fearest God"; and Jeremiah 1:5 "before I formed thee in the belly, I knew thee."

However the NASB of 1972 said: "You ONLY HAVE ME of all the families of the earth." Then in 1977 the NASB changed to read like the NIV:'"You only HAVE I CHOSEN among all the families of the earth." Both readings are wrong.

Revelation 14:4 "These are they which were not defiled with women; for they ARE VIRGINS." So read all Greek texts, and the RV, ASV, NKJV and ESV. However, the NASB of 1972 says: "for they are CELIBATES", and then footnotes that it literally says "virgins". A person may be celibate but not necessarily a virgin. Then the NASB 1977 changed this to read: "they HAVE KEPT THEMSELVES CHASTE." Neither rendering is "literal" or even accurate.

Proverbs 30:3 The King James Bible as well as the RV, ASV, NKJV and the NIV say: "I neither learned wisdom, NOR have the knowledge of the holy.

The NASB of 1972 says: "And I have not learned wisdom, BUT I HAVE knowledge of the Holy One." - The exact opposite meaning. Then in 1977 the NASB changed this to read: "Neither have I learned wisdom, NOR do I have the knowledge of the Holy One."

Proverbs 30:26 in the King James Bible reads: "The CONIES are but a feeble folk, yet make they their houses in the rocks." A coney is a type of rabbit, and conies or coneys is the reading found in the RV, ASV, Geneva Bible, Young's, and even in the NIV.

However the NASB 1972-1977 editions say: "The BADGERS are not mighty FOLK; Yet they make their houses in the rocks." Then in 1995 the NASB once again changed their texts to now read: "The SHEPHANIM are not a mighty PEOPLE, Yet they make their houses in the rocks."

Isaiah 21:8 in the King James Bible reads: " Go, set a watchman, let him declare what he seeth." Then verse 8 reads: "And he cried, A LION : My lord, I stand continually upon the watchtower in the daytime, and I am set in my ward whole nights: And, behold, here cometh a chariot of men, with a couple of horsemen. And he answered and said, Babylon is fallen, is fallen: and all the graven images of her gods he hath broken unto the ground."

It is very clear that the Hebrew Masoretic text says A LION. "a lion" is the reading found in the 1917, 1936 Jewish translations, the Geneva Bible, Young's, Darby, the RV, the ASV, Third Millenium Bible, the KJV 21, and the Catholic Douay version. The NKJV reads A Lion, but has a footnote telling us the Dead Sea Scrolls read "The Observer".

The NIV reads: "And THE LOOKOUT shouted, Day after day, my lord, I stand on the watchtower." The NIV rejects the Hebrew text which reads "a lion", and imports a variant reading from the Dead Sea Scrolls.

The new English Standard Version, follows the RSV with "Then HE WHO SAW cried out..." with a footnote telling us this reading comes from the Syriac and the Dead Sea Scrolls, but the Hebrew says A Lion.

In the 1972 NASB edition we read: "Then THE SENTRY called LIKE A LION, O Lord, I stand continually..." Here the NASB 72 put both readings in. They added "The Sentry", which is not found in the Hebrew Masoretic text nor in the RV or ASV, but comes from the DSS., but they also kept the word Lion. But then in the1995 NASB they now have: "Then the LOOKOUT cried, O Lord, I stand..." Now the NASB scholars changed Sentry to Lookout, and this time omitted the word Lion.

Isaiah 26:3 in the King James Bible reads: "Thou wilt keep HIM in perfect peace, WHOSE MIND IS STAYED ON THEE, because HE trusts in thee."

This is also the reading found in the RV, ASV, the Jewish translations, NKJV, Darby, the RSV and the ESV, to name a few. But, the 1971 NASB reads very differently with: "Thou wilt keep THE NATION OF STEADFAST PURPOSE in perfect peace, because IT trusts in Thee." Then in 1972 the NASB changed this to now read: "THE STEADFAST OF MIND Thou wilt keep in perfect peace, because HE trusts in Thee." The 1995 NASB reads the same as the 1972 but it has now replaced the "Thou" and "Thee" with the generic "You" in both places.

I Samuel 13:1 reads in the King James Bible:"Saul reigned ONE YEAR; and when he had reigned TWO YEARS over Israel, Saul chose him three thousand men of Israel...and the rest of the people he sent every man to his tent."

[NITE OWL]

When I look at other bibles ( I read King James and NKJ ) I turn to John 3:16. That passage tells me how much that version is watered down.

Most of them are, in one way or another.

[apothanein kerdos]

The flaw in all the logic of comparing the NASB to the KJV? It assumes that the KJV is absolutely flawless.

As for the multiple editions...about about the KJV and it's editions? It goes so far as to removing the entire Apocrypha.

[Guest yod]

there is only one perfect translation...

But that is the original language. All other attempts to put it into other languages will have their biases. The NASB is perhaps the best attempt to be true to the literal meanings of word usage.

None of them are perfect but they are all mostly good for a different perspective of what the original "could" be trying to communicate.

[other one]

There are two NASB's and the later has some changes that I don't think are proper. John 3:16 is one of those changes that can greatly affect doctrine of salvation. This difference is where some of my good baptist brothers/sisters tell me that one only has to believe to be saved...... I think this is very dangerous doctrine for it leaves much not resolved with other scriptures.

[halifaxchristian]

The flaw in all the logic of comparing the NASB to the KJV? It assumes that the KJV is absolutely flawless.

As for the multiple editions...about about the KJV and it's editions? It goes so far as to removing the entire Apocrypha.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The original KJV Bible contained the Apocrypha but only as history and it was even labelled as such in a separate section. It was never considered Holy Writ by the Puritans.

[halifaxchristian]

There are two NASB's and the later has some changes that I don't think are proper.  John 3:16 is one of those changes that can greatly affect doctrine of salvation.  This difference is where some of my good baptist brothers/sisters tell me that one only has to believe to be saved......  I think this is very dangerous doctrine for it leaves much not resolved with other scriptures.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you don't "only have to believe to be saved" then what must you do??? Are you Catholic??? What do you mean?

[Joy in the Journey]

There are two NASB's and the later has some changes that I don't think are proper.

[Kansasdad]

I like the Douay-Rheims Bible oops here comes a can of worms.

God Bless,

Kansas Dad

[Joy in the Journey]

I like the Douay-Rheims Bible  oops here comes a can of worms. 

God Bless,

Kansas Dad

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What's the Douay-Rheims Bible

Be blessed,

Tim