1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

New American Standard Bible 2020 Update

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Deacon, Nov 17, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Deacon

    Deacon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    8,912
    Likes Received:
    969
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Since September 12, 2018, the Lockman Foundation has been posting passages on their Facebook page identified as NASB 2020.
    There's a nice review of the selections posted on the blog Opened Heart

    Here are some highlights with comparisons between the old and the new, New American Standard Bible.

    Gender Specificity
    One of the big, emotionally charged issues in Bible translation today is how to translate the Greek word ἀδελφοί (brothers). Updated releases of the New International Version (2011), the Christian Standard Bible (2017), and others have, in many instances, changed the historical translation of “brothers” or “brethren,” to “brothers and sisters.” The NASB 2020 is doing the same.

    Detractors of this practice see it as an effort to force a gender-neutral inclusiveness upon the Scriptures where none exists. The defenders say the practice is more accurate to the original in cases where ἀδελφοί is not being gender specific and is, instead, referring to all believers. One example is 1 Thessalonians 5:14:

    And we urge you, brethren, admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with all men. NASB77

    We urge you, brethren, admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with everyone. NASB 1995​

    We urge you, brothers and sisters, admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with everyone. NASB 2020​

    A Clearer Isaiah 53:4
    Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. NASB 1995

    However, it was our sicknesses that He Himself bore, and our pains that He carried; Yet we ourselves assumed that He had been afflicted, struck down by God, and humiliated. NASB 2020​


    A More Accurate Luke 1:26–38
    Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city in Galilee called Nazareth, 27 to a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, of the descendants of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. 28 And coming in, he said to her, “Greetings, favored one! The Lord is with you.” 29 But she was very perplexed at this statement, and kept pondering what kind of salutation this was. 30 The angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; for you have found favor with God. 31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; 33 and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end.” 34 Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I am a virgin?” 35 The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God. 36 And behold, even your relative Elizabeth has also conceived a son in her old age; and she who was called barren is now in her sixth month. 37 For nothing will be impossible with God.” 38 And Mary said, “Behold, the bondslave of the Lord; may it be done to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her. NASB 1995


    Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city in Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the descendants of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. And coming in, he said to her, “Greetings, favored one! The Lord with you.” But she was very perplexed at statement, and was pondering what kind of greeting this was. And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. “And behold, you will conceive in your womb and give birth to a son, and you shall name Him Jesus. “He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end.” But Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?” The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; for that reason also the holy Child will be called the Son of God. “And behold, even your relative Elizabeth herself has conceived a son in her old age, and she who was called infertile is now in her sixth month. “For nothing will be impossible with God.” And Mary said, “Behold, the Lord’s slave; may it be done to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her. NASB 2020​
     
  2. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,652
    Likes Received:
    2,748
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The problem has never been to say all or everyone or brothers and sisters if the Greek text clearly meant and referred it to be such, but the big problem is when clearly intended times where the specific he, him, brothers, man etc suddenly get changed to the ole they us we all everyone etc!
     
  3. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    11,121
    Likes Received:
    910
    Faith:
    Baptist
    My question would be, do they render "and sisters" in italics? That would be fine being remaining faithful to the Greek text. But is that what they did?
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Rob_BW

    Rob_BW Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    4,316
    Likes Received:
    1,234
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I figured engaged would have been more clear than betrothed, to modern ears.
     
  5. Just_Ahead

    Just_Ahead Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2018
    Messages:
    442
    Likes Received:
    151
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I have reached my limit on Bible versions and editions. I have several copies of the NASB '95 and I do not see the need to add the NASB 20.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  6. Shoostie

    Shoostie Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2019
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    66
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Given the NASB is going "gender neutral", they've obviously decided to trade literalness for political correctness. It would be naive to think that change in philosophy is limited to just gender issues.

    Three strikes for the NASB:
    1) Leaving literalness.
    2) Imposing non-Christian values on the Bible.
    3) Joining the trend of continually updated translations, making the NASB a poor choice for memorization.

    Best Bibles for memorization (including indirect memorization through study):
    1) KJV: It'll never change in your lifetime.
    2) NKJV: Conservative and modern English. There's no indication that there will be a significant change in your lifetime.
    3) ESV: Conservative and modern English. Has been changed little after it was first published in 2007. The ESV publisher announced they intended to leave the text alone in the future, calling a very minor 2016 update, "ESV Permanent Text Edition."

    The NASB use to be part of this very short list. Given the lack of updates for over two decades, and the conservative/literal nature of the NASB, it looked like they were going to leave the text alone. But, noooooo. You don't want to memorize something that could be out-of-print tomorrow. And, it's helpful to find specific verses if they've stayed worded the same way.
     
  7. Rob_BW

    Rob_BW Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    4,316
    Likes Received:
    1,234
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The ESV Permanent Text stance didn’t last long.

    Crossway Reverses Decision to Make ESV Bible Text Permanent
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  8. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    7,665
    Likes Received:
    852
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Well, the rapidity with which "WORD" meanings are being revised by our progressive friends(?), we probably need an up-dated translation at least every 10-12 months!
    (I'm sure y'all remember when GAY was an adjective & meant "happy, jubilant, bubbly personality etc." I'm telling my age now!:Sneaky) :Devilish
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Shoostie

    Shoostie Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2019
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    66
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes, apparently a lot of people disapproved of making the text permanent. That's disappointing. But, Crossway still insists their "updates will be minimal and infrequent", which still makes the ESV a better choice than anything since the NKJV regarding stability and resisting future political correcting..
     
  10. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,088
    Likes Received:
    636
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I agree with Just Ahead. I frequently use the NASV 95, along with the NKJV. The NEW NASV departs from the literality of earlier editions. Shoulda left well enough alone!
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  11. Reynolds

    Reynolds Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2014
    Messages:
    13,326
    Likes Received:
    2,383
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yep. Being the most literal was always what NASB prided itsself on. Now it's just one of the rest of the translations.
     
  12. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    22,429
    Likes Received:
    805
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The NASB95 is the best at presenting a literal translation. Yes, you must use the footnotes and insert the footnoted literal translation, and remove the italicized words if they alter the meaning. Naturally it has flaws, where other literal versions do a better job on occasion. I like the idea of replacing brethren when the reference is to fellow believers of either gender with siblings.

    I may be wrong, but I thought the ESV had been updated several times, making it less useful for memorization than the NASB95. The ESV was published in 2001, updated in 2007, 2011, and again in 2016

    I agree with the blogger, replacing "O Man" with "O Mortal" would be better than "a human."
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Reformed1689

    Reformed1689 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    9,827
    Likes Received:
    1,817
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Lexham English Bible is pretty literal.
     
  14. Reformed1689

    Reformed1689 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Messages:
    9,827
    Likes Received:
    1,817
    Faith:
    Baptist
    On the issue of Gender it depends where they make it neutral. Example in 1 Thess. 5:14:

    That being said, I prefer to keep it just brother/brothers/etc but it's not outside realm of good translation.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Shoostie

    Shoostie Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2019
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    66
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The NASB team was probably looking at the much greater sales of a half dozen other translations..
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  16. Shoostie

    Shoostie Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2019
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    66
    Faith:
    Baptist
    As Reynolds pointed out, the NASB is becoming one of the rest of the translations.

    As a new translation, a few updates is to be expected, to fix errors. The 2016 ESV update made a piddly 52 word changes (and that was before they announced a permanent text). Stability of text is a very important quality for me, which is one of my favorite things about the KJV.

    "O man" is in Romans 2:1 and other places. "O man" sounds best, and is literal if "man" is taken inclusively. "O human" is literal. "A human" is a mistranslation. Most modern translations, including the NIV, CSB, and even the supposedly literal NASB, just drop this out of the text. The ESV, and KJV-related Bibles keep it, saying, "O man".
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    22,429
    Likes Received:
    805
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It has been asserted that the 2020 revision of the NASB will result in it being no more literal than many other versions. But no evidence has been offered.
    It was claimed "O Man" was dropped out of the NASB text, but sure enough the "O Man" is provided by a footnote.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Shoostie

    Shoostie Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2019
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    66
    Faith:
    Baptist
    So what if NASB95 has "O man" is in the footnotes, of Romans 2:1. Footnotes are worthless most of the time. It belongs in the main text. The NASB2020 apparently puts it back in the main text, except as the paraphrase "you foolish person", which is far from literal.

    NASB 2020 Changing 1 Thessalonians 5:14 from "We urge you, brethren..." to "We urge you, brothers and sisters" is not the act of someone with a priority on literalism. Yeah, "brothers" will be in the footnotes, so what.

    The ESV gets these verses right, and isn't going to change.
     
    #18 Shoostie, Oct 6, 2019
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    22,429
    Likes Received:
    805
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Footnotes are essential in my opinion. Check out the NET footnotes. They are one of the best things about that version. I agree, it would be better to put the literal rendering in the main text and footnote the "interpretive" translation alternative. And I agree, brothers and sisters points to a distinction not in the text, that is why "siblings" is a better choice.

    Yes, the ESV does a better job or an equivalent job with many verses, but butchers way more than the NASB does in my opinion. James 25, 2 Thessalonians 2:13, and Revelation 13:8.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Shoostie

    Shoostie Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2019
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    66
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes, footnotes are essential. But, most people never read them, even if they have them. And, unless its your Bible in hand, you won't have the footnotes to read (e.g. verses quoted by the pastor, or printed in study guides).

    "Siblings" is a godless and false translation when he Greek word means Brothers.

    The NASB publishers have watched the sales of their translation tank, so they've decided to join the NIV, NLT, and CSB, moving in the direction of paraphrases that brings in a lot of godless values and doctrines which are popular among consumer-grade nominal Christians.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...