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!

Question about some versions

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by IFB Mole, Oct 30, 2008.

  1. IFB Mole

    IFB Mole New Member

    Aug 11, 2005
    Likes Received:
    I have some close friends that have advanced degrees in biblical languages and I recently had a discussion with them about English Translations (which ones are good which ones are bad.)

    First off, they are ALL firm supporters of the KJV, not wacko Ruckmanites at all, not even close, but they all affirm the accuracy of the KJV. They teach and preach primarily form the KJV - they are all die hard Baptists.

    They did mention that the 1901 ASV is a VERY GOOD if not better translation for 21st century Americans. I was kinda taken back since I know so little of that translation.

    Can anyone here shed some light on the 1901 ASV and also the NRSV?
  2. puros_bran

    puros_bran Member

    Aug 27, 2008
    Likes Received:
    I have a ASV copyright 1901.. My copy was given as an graduation gift in 1921,it doesn't state what they graduated from though :D

    I haven't explored it in depth but my memory verses. John 3:16, Romans 10:9-10,Ephesians 2:8-9 etc etc etc seem sound. I've been looking at some OT passages and find little difference except for the use of Jehovah anywhere God, Lord, or Lord God was used in the KJV. I don't really like this, seems like if they had wanted to use this style they would have just used whatever the Hebrew word used for God in the particular passages was.

    I do know it was a favorite (and still is in some areas) with the Jehovahs Witness until they created their own Version.
  3. Deacon

    Deacon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Aug 23, 2002
    Likes Received:
    The History of the English Bible (Part 4)

    A. The Era of Accuracy (or ‘formal equivalence’) (1881-1971)

    The Revised Version (1881, 1885)
    The American Standard Version (1901)
    The Revised Standard Version (1946, 1952)
    The New American Standard Bible (1963, 1971; revised 1995)

    B. The Era of Readability (or ‘functional equivalence’) (1970-1998)

    The New English Bible (1970; revised 1989)
    The New International Version (1973, 1978)

    C. Other Formal Equivalent Translations Since 1971

    The New King James Bible (1979, 1983)
    The New Revised Standard Version (1989)
    The Holman Christian Standard Version (2000, 2001?)
    The English Standard Version (2001)

    There have been a lot of new discoveries since 1901!

    The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls have had a role in these changes.
    Translation techniques have themselves advanced.

    #3 Deacon, Oct 30, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 30, 2008
  4. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator

    Jun 30, 2000
    Likes Received:
    Good stuff - thanks for the work. Our church housed the largest Northern Baptist seminary, so we had 15 profs in the congregation. Every student had to learn Greek and Hebrew and translate.

    But the Pastor and President of the Seminary, while lauding the AV (1769 oxford revision) as "good" and pushing the Scofield Reference Bible of that translation, required that the 1901 ASV be used in classes for English Bible since it was far more exact and detailed in verb tenses, etc.

    I was given a 1901 ASV when I started classes and it still is on my shelf. The NASB is a [poor] revision of the 1901 imho.

    I now use the ESV and Holman for a more up-to-date English translation in formal equivalency. But still translate myself every verse from Greek or Hebrew that I preach.
  5. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Feb 24, 2005
    Likes Received:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I generally respect Michael Marlowe's view of translations even though he leans towards formal equivalence more than I would. His website Bible Research is a very comprehensive resource on english translations of the bible.

    American Standard Version (1901)

    Has links to several scholarly articles about the translation.

    The ASV was notable in being the American equivalent of the RV or ERV done in england which was the first major translation not using the textus receptus for the NT and instead used the critical texts of Westcott and Hort. The ASV later became the basis for the NASB and NRSV families of translations.

    Philip Schaff was the major name associated with this translation and he is a noted translator of many ancient greek works from the early Christian church.

    It is considered to be a very literal translation and the downside of all literal translations is choppiness and difficulty of reading in the target language. I don't think it is used very widely anymore outside of academic endeavors.

    New Revised Standard Version (1990)
    The NRSV is a more recent American translation. Bruce Metzger played the lead in its development and he is one of the bigger names in the field of textual criticism.

    I disagree with Marlowe's evaluation of the NRSV's translation of Isaiah 7:14 and its use of inclusive language but his description of their existence is accurate. The NRSV is a very academically oriented translation and also leans to the literal side but less so than other translations in its family (RSV, ASV, NASB).

    It tends to be favoured by mainline and more liberal denominations and is likely not encouraged to be used in IFB churches because it does not make an effort to force the translation to fit a conservative Christian theological viewpoint. One could argue it tries to fit liberal theological viewpoints but I think that is an unfair view of its goals as a translation.

    From a scholarly viewpoint, it is up there among the best translations in accuracy and translation quality.
    #5 Gold Dragon, Oct 30, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 30, 2008
  6. JFox1

    JFox1 New Member

    Sep 4, 2005
    Likes Received: