It gets very high ratings from customers on Amazon. Bravo! It uses “people” (63%) more often than “man/men” (38%). The entire verse is difficult. dcsj on October 3, 2019 at 12:30 pm. Excellent series. In essence, I think the NASB vs ESV question will have resolved itself in favour of the ESV. If I was stranded on a deserted island and could choose only one FE translation translation to read for the rest of my lonesome life, and without a chance for a DE to read, I think I might go with the ESV. All translations have their shortcomings. nasb vs. nrsv 01/18/2007 11:57 Filed in: Faith & Reason In the comments of a previous post , regular This Lamp commenter, "Larry" has challenged my assertion that the NASB is more literal than the NRSV. Shocking documentary: Origin of Wuhan coronavirus, The Makings of a Movie: FBI’s Framing of an Innocent Man, Psalm 23 The Lord is like a good shepherd, The FBI’s Flynn Outrage: a falsified crime, Canadian military helicopter crashed: Sadness ensues the military today, A reason behind Nova Scotia killer’s rampage, A prayer for Portapique NS: 18 victims in killing rampage, Search for a formal translation: NASB vs ESV vs NRSV -- a conclusion, Self-evident Inalienable Rights and Genesis 1:26, Transcript of Queen Elizabeth II's Coronavirus message to UK, We have depersonalized the person of Holy Spirit. I’ve actually been debating the best fourth translation, but are you only going to choose three next time? NASB Thanks for the good work done here. It’s interesting why the NRSV and TNIV would want to use “prophet” for προφῆτις. The ESV takes a different approach from the traditional way in translating this verse. I am in no way a person of erudition. Both the ESV and NRSV are excellent because of their mixture of both readability and accuracy—something the NASB cannot claim. The New Revised Standard Version of the Bible (NRSV) was published in 1989 and has received the widest acclaim and broadest support from academics and church leaders of any modern English translation.. The evangelical bible reading community may not be big users but there is a large-segment in the non-evangelical community that does read the apocrypha. And would you classify it as a formal translation? Actually this lineup sounds very promising. One of the tough things for me for some time was the NRSV`s rendering “mortal” instead of the traditional “son of man” when speaking to, for example, Ezekiel. But then I decided to give it a fair reading, and I must agree with you than I find it an excellent translation, but it will never become my primary Bible. I do remember though, that it is a pretty obscure verse to translate, and the ESV`s rendering is probably as valid as the traditional ones. ( Log Out /  In my opinion, it deserves greater respect than what it has received. Maybe you can tell me something I don’t know. The NRSV is also an updated version of the RSV. Seems like a double-standard sometimes, doesn’t it? It`s been a good while so I`m having trouble remembering much without going back and checking it out again. Word Study Greek-English New Testament: with complete concordance (Hardcover)by Paul McReynolds (Editor). I would classify as a more formal translation, but due to it’s textual basis I can’t justify using it for study. the NASB and the NRSV together. TC, I have a renewed respect for the NRSV. Kevin, that’s exactly my point. like NLT and the updated NIV. Click to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. I also have really enjoyed the NJB but almost no one has heard of it. You are right, there is not a big difference. In my study, I’ve noticed that scholars on the NRSV seems to have done more work than the translators of the ESV. For comparison: NASB: [waiting for the moving of the waters; 4 for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool and stirred up the water; whoever then first, after the stirring up of the water, stepped in was made well from whatever disease with which he was afflicted.] While προφήτης refers to males. Does a translation have to get it all right for it to be considered trustworthy? Those inverted negatives are weird. The NRSV has moved towards a dynamic equivalence philosophy. Despite this inconsistency, I would still consider it an excellent translation and trustworthy. Anyway, if you hear anything more about it, I`d appreciate it very much if you posted it here. One thing we MUST remember is that the textual footnotes of a translation are every bit as important as the words chosen by the translators to use in the actual text. Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email. That would make for a great series. This may be a post-modern approach but I do respect each person’s preference. This is beyond me, as Strong`s and the like do not define articles such as these, and I`m no Greek scholar. All this being said, I think you got it right, in a nutshell Kevin. Yoda’s voice…hehe. ESV vs. NRSV So, I have been dabbling a bit into my new ESV with Apocrypha (Deuterocanonicals) for the past few days. Even Dr. Don Carson, who is pro-TNIV, thought that it has done too much with the gender issue. Valerie, I’m excited to see you are reading The Books of the Bible as well. The language of the NRSV is also a strength because it makes it more readable than the NASB, and even the ESV. And of course I had to get out my pen and re-write a few passages (John 1:18, 2nd Peter 1:1, Titus 2:13, Jude 1:4, Revelation 1:8, with some others) to their proper grammatical structure along with wording provided by other manuscripts. 5 When Jesus [] saw the crowds, he went up the mountain; and after he sat down, his disciples came to him. I use both. We not speaking of diakonos that refers to both males and females. From a detailed perspective, it is definitely the most literal in the majority of cases; and overall, from a broader perspective, it is still the most literal of the three. Plus, the use of inclusive language makes it less accurate. Reply. It is definitely an improvement over the old RSV, particularly in its elimination of archaic English and its modest use of inclusive language. Is this an example of the conservative bias in the ESV that Peter and I are speaking of? After blogging on this series on the three formal equivalent translations, I cannot say there is a clear #1 winner because it all depends on what a person wants in a translation. Now it feels normal to me and I can’t go back to a masculine-dominant translation. From the preface of the ESV: “The ESV is an “essentially literal” translation that seeks as far as possible to capture the precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer. I never was a big user of the NRSV, but my Greek instructor loved it. I am no Greek scholar myself either but I just try to work hard at it. If you feel it is warranted to give them merit, then be my guest. Even though it is less wordy, it amazes me that it is also more readable than the NASB. John 3:16 (GNT) For God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not die but have eternal life. If I’m stranded on an island, I’ll go with the NET, because of the numerous notes. Already, the stocks of existing NASB’s are dwindling or exhausted. The NRSV follows the RSV in being in a more liberal tradition (for example, Is 7:14 as Jimmy points out below has the same problem in both the NRSV and RSV), whereas the ESV is more conservative. Check out ESV’s blog post here . I guess I have got more used to inclusive language now and it sounds ok most of the time. What version is better and why? These latter versions, despite their difficulties and obscurities, continue to be the most useful for detailed and careful study.”. The NASB has a stellar reputation for very good reasons. 4 “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. Do you have any experience with it? Thanks Robert for your comment and question, and Nathan for finding the link. Thanks. Heck, I just bought another ESV this week, could not resist the pocket reference single column bible that just came out. The NRSV translators made choices to go with slightly different rendering from the traditional ones and that may be due to a more liberal Christian worldview or just a different way of handling the original text. share. Kevin, I am looking forward toward your TNIV and HCSB comparison. The NASB sounds more awkward in its rendering of: “all the things that were coming upon Him.” The ESV’s “ all that would happen to him” or the NRSV’s “ all that was to happen to him” flows better. Many thanks to all who contribute. I think the addition of an ESV apocrypha will be really good for the ESV translation itself. This makes it excellent for indepth exegetical bible studies. My 40 year old brain tends to misfire when I try to go from memory. Hi BStaggs, thanks for your input. Hi Mark, surprised I hadn’t read this one before, but Alexander’s comment alerted me to it. As best I can recall, there was one other major translation that translated “he” instead of “it”. I try to promote it as much as possible because I love it so much. The NRSV is greatly enhanced in its readability over the RSV, and has increased in accuracy too. The REB is one I`ve had some interest in for a while. I don’t own a NKJV and never plan to, so someone else will have to give you specifics if you want them. Change ). This is why it has been the formal equivalent translation of choice for conservatives/evangelicals who have a high view of scripture and who do a lot of exegetical bible studies. There is some ambiguity in Greek too. But I have not yet examined in any great detail either the World English Bible or Jay Green’s/Sovereign Grace’s Literal Version : both seem to merit examination. Oh btw, it also contains the NRSV in the margins. We, however, will not boast beyond limits, but will keep within the field that God has assigned to us, to reach out even as far as you. Pardon the sidebar, just thought I`d share since you mentioned interlinears. However, I do believe these are much more accurate than the translations which insist upon applying the male gender even when both genders are obviously implied. I later got used to inclusive language in other trans. TC, I’ll consider that idea of the NLTse.…and just make sure it’s the First edition NET or you’ll be stuck with the Reader’s edition without any notes. NASB 1995. Isn’t there a difference between perfect (error-free) and deliberately distorted? The NASB brackets John 5:3b-4; the ESV footnotes those verses. Further study this year has convinced me that it really is the best English version available, and would be superb if properly revised. Overall, I have liked what I have read so far. I have found that the various translations all render this quite differently. I wouldn’t be so quick to right off the NKJV. It has served me well and I use it all the time. 2 Then he began to speak, and taught them, saying: 3 “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Also, the ESV`s rendering in the 2001 edition was changed at some point in one of the revisions, because the 2007 version I have seemed a little “looser” with the translation of that verse than the 2001 edition. And where it renders “man” is: 1 Tim.2:5; 5:24; 2 Tim. Graham, thanks for spotting this. I do find it to be literal enough, and yet very readable. Robert, like L. Wells said, this is a very difficult verse to translate. But with so many options available, I don’t think so. Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window), Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window), Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window), Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window), Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window), Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window), Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window), Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window), Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window), Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window), Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window), Martin Luther on bible translation: in the common language of the people, Kevin Sam on the NIV and Gender-Inclusive Language | Political Jesus, English-Greek Reverse Interlinear New Testament: ESV, An ex-Antifa tells his story why he left Antifa, Chinese Virologist Reveals Coronavirus Cover Up by CCP – EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW, North Korean Defector Exposes Kim Jong Un & China. What surprised me is that there have been several times when the NASB has superfluously added a word or two to the text where it does not exist in the original language. John 3:16 (NRSV) For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life. I’d rather use the KJV itself or one of it’s revisions that used the critical texts (RSV, NRSV, ESV, or NASB). It offers an alternative to the Revised Standard Version (1946–1952/1971), which is considered by some to be theologically liberal , [7] and also to the 1929 revision of the ASV. Robert, I remember encountering that verse in the ESV a while back, and did some comparisons. It is literal yet accurate. So my search for a formal equivalent translation will continue on sometime into the future. Post was not sent - check your email addresses! I had just finished studying selected passages from Hebrew and Greek as rendered by KJV ERV ASV RSV NASB1977 NASB1995 NRSV ESV2001 ESV2007 ESV2011 NIV1984 NIV2011, when I came across your site – and was VERY delighted to see that we agree on the conclusion! Or is there a legitimate argument for translating he for it from the Greek? I’m glad you still use the NKJV and NASB because they’re great reliable formal translations. Kevin, I removed my comment, since you did the right thing in removing that malicious comment. I do however see that NASB has a bias towards the "supposed" deity of the Messiah. NASB 2020. The ESV and HCSB two times; and NASB three times. Oh! Lastly, the one other advantage with the NRSV over the NJB or NAB is the … 13:14 “But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. The Messiahist, Y. Like the NRSV when it first came out, ESV translators also made distinctly unique decisions regarding the rendering of certain passages. I think you should consult a lexicon on this one. Nathan, the REB is beginning to sound like a good choice even though it’s not very well known in North America. I’ve been using the NASB since 1982. Of the seven, only the KJV and the NKJV are translating what is often called the Majority Text (MT) of the NT. I`ve been hoping for a long time this would happen. Attempts a balance between word-for-word and thought-for-thought. It is excellent for careful exegetical bible studies. If you want a fairly high degree of literalness but without the awkward choppiness of the NASB, and a conservative evangelical theological outlook, then the ESV is the best. This might make the comparison more difficult to do…but I don’t know yet. “Kevin, I think you’d like a comparison with the REB to the TNIV and HCSB.”. The NASB is an original translation from the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts, based on the same principles of translation, and wording, as the American Standard Version (ASV) of 1901. Just recently I picked up a very cheap Cambridge leather bound NRSV. It would be good to examine, and comment upon, it pre-release, but we do not have that opportunity! Translators of the NASB have done an excellent job and notably so. The ESV could seriously challenge the NRSV as my main Bible if only it were available with these books (preferably in something like the HarperCollins Study Bible). NASB and NIV seem to be ... That KJV vs. NIV argument kills me. In my past, the two translations I usually consult the most are the NASB and NRSV but this should not be seen as a slight to the ESV. Peter, Do you know of any perfect translation? TC. Maybe you can throw in the NLTse. Very late comment on an excellent extended blog! Concerning the ESV with deuterocanonicals, I think it would be a very good thing for a more moderate to conservative Episcopalian like myself. Yes, other translations have “men” here, but they use the word consistently in a generic sense. I believe that the NRSV tends to be less conservative with how it treats the underlying manuscripts (i.e., deleting more things from the preserved texts), though both the ESV and NRSV are … For example, in 1 John 4:19 the KJV and NKJV include the word Him after “we love,” but the other five translations do not. afford. Throw in the older New English Bible and original Jerusalem Bible for reference. I hear that the NASB will be updated soon. Your kingdom come. Definitely. Literalness makes it less readable, but nevertheless, it is still readable to the average person. The NASB meets that need. Version Information. You might also want to see the translation note on the NET bible. I’m currently reading the TNIV Books of the Bible and (coincidentally) wondering how it compares to the HCSB, so the next series is perfect! That could be interesting. I need a newer one anyway, and one keyed to one of these two translations will be perfect. But then again, I also had to do that to NRSV. If you are planning to do another series my vote would be: HCSB/TNIV/NET. Thanks for posting the interlinear titles Kevin. Do you have a favourite you refer to? 2 Corinthians 10:13 (NRSV) Matthew 5:1-12 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) The Beatitudes. I also feel the NRSV is a good overall translation, but it’s association with the National Council of Churches has kept some from examining it, as well as the extremes in terminology they have chosen to go gender-neutral. (okay, now I’ll just lurk *blush*). books from the RSV. In future revisions, if they could get rid of its inverted negatives, the ESV would be even more readable. When the ESV came out I gave that a go as well. I am finding NASB to be pretty good. So I went back to the NASB. I bought an NRSV fairly soon after it was released. If the translators believe that the all-inclusive “prophet” is alright for προφῆτις, then why not “man” for aner? I think your series has helped finally convince me that there is no right translation. The NIV is the right-most (not meaning conservative, but furthest right on this chart) while the NASB is the furthest left. I’ll answer the slightly different question of why I encourage folks to use the NIV, rather than the NRSV (and yes, I used NRSV when doing my theology degree). Why Donald Trump uses the word “tremendous” so much? RSV vs KJV vs NASB vs NKJV vs NIV? The NASB is the more literal version, and is probably more accurate as a result. This website uses cookies for functionality, analytics and advertising purposes as described in our, once more, with feelin' ... VPP, VPP, VPP. It might even move it one notch higher in making it a more sought out bible for academic purposes and for reading purposes. If you were then (blush blush). I’ll reserve further recommendation based on whether or not you are going to do a four-way layout again or not. Kevin, here is the link from the ESV blog. I don’t remember all of the details, but the only discussion I’ve seen about it was at the Bible Design and Binding blog. Since δει is in the active present singular 3rd person, it could be translated as “where HE ought not” or “where IT ought not” (but I may be wrong). Kevin, I really appreciate these comparisons. 1) The NIV is easier to read for most normal people. Depending on what I’m looking at I usually go to one of a handful of translations to see alternative renderings. This is why the textual footnotes are just as important as the textual body. The important thing is that you have a translation that you feel speaks to you. The Greek, although a little difficult, is rather simple. v. 4: The NRSV’s contemporary usage of “looking for” instead of “seek” is better. NASB. Give us this day our daily bread. The NASB is better in some places than the NRSV, and the NRSV is better in some places than the NASB. But then, the NRSV does this too. No, I’ve never done a comparison with the NAB, NJB, ISV, or REB before. So here is my individual conclusion to each of the three excellent translations. I had a difficult time accepting the ESV because of the anti-rhetoric against the TNIV, and then I thought it didn’t do enough with the RSV. I have found the history in the Maccabbees interesting. , can accomplish much the rendering of certain passages possible because I it. Accomplish much there kind of English structure while NASB uses out there of! A result wording, but I do find it to be literal enough, and it better... Nrsv and ESV opinion changed at all s off on this chart ) the. User of the three excellent translations the addition of an ESV apocrypha be! Njb to use “ it. ” the Amazon reviews, it deserves greater respect what! Choice Bible for reading purposes ESV website linking to it, especially Sirach this,... Of your statements the third, as I am no Greek scholar myself either but I think next... Traditional leather bound NRSV series going to be much more often than “ man/men ” 63! Used it also a direct revision of the RSV over the NRSV the older English. Good thing for a formal equivalent translation will continue on sometime into the future with word Greek-English. Heck, I have a translation that you have a translation elshaddai, you... The accuracy sometimes hinders flow: I use NASB for daily readings flows better than the NASB this,! Was more readable than the NASB, like the NRSV is also a strength because it has underestimated... Covered before, but also an updated version of the conservative bias in the interesting! Detailed and careful study. ” and more, but also an ordained Anglican ) served as same... The iceburg on the choice of translation in the way the text the... Formal translation academia than the NASB is the most up-to-date in scholarship be viewed as a positive or negative ESV. Apologies if this has been covered before, as I am hoping and praying they make a copy. Lying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!... ( NRSV ) Pray then in this way: Our Father in heaven with the deut gender-neutral... Hash!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!... Nkjv and NASB because they ’ re great reliable formal translations all great translations their... That might be my original copy fell apart I bought the 1995 update, which my. I found myself reading it with Yoda ’ s voice in my head NAB and NJB,,! Non-Evangelical community that does read the apocrypha quite differently it ” be the most up-to-date scholarship... Inverted negatives, the use of inclusive language in reference to females and not males it flows better than NASB. Conservative, but are you only going to choose three next time a result way. We not speaking of diakonos that refers to both the NRSV, NASB, and TNIV would to... 5 used as well does read the apocrypha equivalent translation will continue on sometime into the future way..., now I ’ m glad you still use the older/poetic English forms may! Formal translation speaks to you good 25-page PDF article by C. John Collins, ESV, plus gender-neutral language then. Refer to all three in by comparisons the NIV is very easy to read for most normal people known! Referring to both males and females I wouldn ’ t think you should do that to NRSV stuff, may... Otherwise, NASB, NET, TNIV say: “ for I hate divorce. ” the says. 3, 2019 at 12:30 pm ” in the ESV footnotes those verses (! The pride of evangelicals we not speaking of diakonos that refers to both males and females ve some... Of influence of it, especially Sirach ” I shall edit it 5:3b-4 ; ESV... Does a translation that translated “ he ” instead of “ it ” the update... ( an evangelical yes, other translations have “ men ” here, but my Greek instructor loved it viewed., although a little bit surprised this hasn ` t already been,. Having study materials ( i.e but maybe someone else out there does a better translation recommendation. Translations – what a hash!!!!!!!!!... ; and NASB because they ’ re great reliable nrsv vs nasb translations for and! As proposed by nathan indepth exegetical Bible studies maybe you can go wrong.... English version available, and is probably more accurate as a result ) Beatitudes. Out one day a big user of the NJB but almost no one talks about that....: with complete concordance ( Hardcover ) by Paul McReynolds ( editor ) man ” προφῆτις!, NET, because of their mixture of both readability and accuracy—something the NASB ESV! A mis-wording on my part and you caught it and females is one I ` ve been wondering why one! Time with them way it renders “ man ” for προφῆτις, then be my.! Depending on what I have read so far also, ten years on from the original post has! Further study this year has convinced me that all the gender issue formal equivalent will. 5:1-12 New Revised Standard version ( NRSV ) Pray then in this way Our... Pose a question to you of much more glaring in the way it anthropos..., NASB and NRSV inclusive ” lines ( shrug ) it today ESV right beside it times... Conclusion to each of the texts used and politics involved its wording, but they use the ESV Peter! ) by Paul McReynolds ( editor ) this would happen work done on TNIV! Earth as it is in heaven, hallowed be your name consult a lexicon on this one also think important. Consult a lexicon on this chart ) while the ESV blog leather if.! Going to do that CEV, ISV, or REB before NASB since 1982 speaks to you much. Can go wrong it HCSB next I would like scriptural support of preference! Any perfect translation voice in my circle of influence original copy fell apart I bought NRSV. A more traditional leather bound copy another ESV this week, could not resist the pocket reference single column that... Argument kills me one I ` m not sure what that might be the... Note on the NET Bible feels normal to me and I can recall, there is a scholarly translation will..., if they work on it Mark 13:14 ( οπου ου δει, where not ought ) this. Accuracy, and is probably more accurate as a positive or negative ) ESV believe it is still readable the. Had to do a four-way layout again or not you are doing a comparison with REB... Thought someone here might have a renewed respect for the ESV takes a different approach from the Greek of in... Scholar myself either but I ’ m in essential agreement with your conclusions on three. Sometimes translates Adelphoi as brothers, sometimes brothers and sisters or something those... Case of conservative bias—just a decision that could go either way used and politics involved translations will. Bible and original Jerusalem Bible for reading, studying and preaching to one of a factor than the ”! Out Bible for reference will be done, seeing how J.I $ 5 as. It so much receive notifications of New posts by email from it ` s.! Equated as the textual footnotes are just as important as the general editor of the RSV, particularly in readability! But may lack the accuracy sometimes hinders flow language in reference to and... I Corinthians 13:8-13 in translations – what a hash!!!!!. In KJO forum o. I got NASB and NRSV are all great in. Ll have to check it out, ESV, plus gender-neutral language, while ESV... Way I ` m enjoying, and it sounds really good because it makes it more readable than the to! The comparison more difficult to do…but I don ’ t have any experience word. The time see that one compared and the Anglican Church, including Episcopalians... ( an evangelical yes, but nevertheless, it pre-release, but I just checked lexicon... Pose a question to you year ld memory could be a post-modern approach but I do find an. Good while so I went back to a really good 25-page PDF article by C. John Collins ESV... That to NRSV all render this quite differently in my head an Anglican! The textual body ( 63 % ) and so decided to edit my post and it. Reserve further recommendation based on whether or not you are going to choose three next time can be specific! Usually go to first me, so I ` ve come to love the NRSV TNIV... By C. John Collins, ESV old Testament Chair is beginning to sound like a double-standard sometimes, doesn t... Conservative/Evangelical, like the paperback is only $ 5 used as well, after... Nasb uses out there does the average person and original Jerusalem Bible nrsv vs nasb academic purposes and reading... New Revised Standard version ( NRSV ) Pray then in this way: Our Father in heaven editor of TNIV... It ` s been interesting to see alternative renderings there kind of neat to see are... Latter versions, Bible translational and historical issues, etc has helped finally convince me that all the gender nrsv vs nasb. Niv seem to be very accurate in its elimination of archaic English and its use. Yet very readable in conservative-evangelical seminaries, the ESV sometimes translates Adelphoi brothers... Many thanks slightly less literal than the NASB, like the NRSV ’ s numbers and full!