Anyone still use the '77 NASB?

Yes, my first real study bible ws that in the Ryrie, and is my go to translation. i also have the 1995 edition, and very close, but just seems to be more formal in the older version. main difference would be to take out the thees and thous of the 1977 .

 

I also prefer the 1977 version in my old Ryrie bible.
I prefer the formal wording where it is used.
The one issue I have with the 1977 version is the poor choice of wording in Ex. 20:22.
It makes it seem like the death of a newborn is not a concern.
This is corrected in the updated version where it is a premature birth. I'm sure this was covered elsewhere, but still like the 1977 version (with my notes on this verse).

VW

 

The New American Standard Bible was the first translation I used. I loved the dark blue hardcover cover on Reference edition. I quickly changed to the updated NAS95 when it became available but still reference the original NAS occasionally.

The Lockman Foundation Translation Committee announced in July 2017 that it was in the process of updating the NASB. This update will probably happen in early 2019.

What separates the NASB from the other popular translations is its dedication to the formal word-for-word rendering of the original texts. I don't believe their translation philosophy will change.

Without any inside knowledge I'd guess that the primary changes will be:

The last update was driven by a need to incorporate more recent discoveries of Hebrew and Greek textual sources. There have been many other additional changes since that '95 update. Use of the NA28 (and more) will be included.

The '95 update noted Hebrew and Greek idioms that needed to be translated in a way identifiable to the modern reader. Most of these will not change and there probably will not be many additions however I'd guess that the new update may drift towards textually-driven gender-inclusivity.

Recent updates to other versions have included major formatting changes. The new update will probably include the identification of genre and the identification or separation of biblical quotations, and a paragraph format contrasted with a verse-by-verse separation.

I'm looking forward to the update and plan to reacquaint myself with an old friend.

Rob​

 

I prefer the 77 NASV to the update, specifically because it remains more literal (otherwise criticized as "wooden") to the underlying Hebrew and Greek. The 95 NASV and certainly the upcoming new revision keep moving away from stricter literalism in favor of stylistically more "readable" renderings (e.g. dropping the Semitic "and" at the beginning of sentences when the writers were themselves Semitic). If I merely want "readability" plus "essentially literal," I will use the ESV; when I want to know more precisely what the original languages say, it will be NASV 77.

 

I have the 77 NASB in a 1988 edition of New Scofield Study Bible. It is my go to source because of the familiarity and all of my markings. I find the stiffness causes me to reread a passage more than the others. One could say that is a good thing. I also like my ESV and the NKJV.

 

The older Nas seems to be more formal, as the team tried to reproduce to English the Greek, and lived with being more wooden!

 

The '77 version of the NASB was the first Bible given to me when I was saved back in 1984. Although I mostly read from the Holman Christian Standard Bible nowadays, I will still go back and reference some verses, as well as my many years of notes, from it.

 

I use it ('77) because it is what I have. I do not prefer it.

My main study Bible is the KJV and NKJV. I have a parallel edition. It is out of print