1995 NAS vs 2016 ESV - a Translation Comparison

  Рет қаралды 18,651

R. Grant Jones

R. Grant Jones

Күн бұрын

To clear up the typos and technical glitches in this video, I repaired it and broke it into two parts.
Part I may be viewed here: • 1995 NAS vs 2016 ESV, ... and
Part II, here: • 1995 NAS vs 2016 ESV, ... .
This video compares the 1995 New American Standard Bible to the 2016 English Standard Version.
Errata: Please overlook the embarrassing typos on the title chart ('1877' should be '1977', '2019' should be '2020')! Also, the ESV and NAS texts are in the wrong columns in the Luke 10.1 entry at about the 18:25 point, the screen goes black at two points in the video, and '1P' should be corrected to '2P' on the summary chart.
Here's a table of contents to the video:
Detailed Contents
00:00 Background
00:40 A partial family tree of KJV descendants
01:00 Details on the history and translation philosophy of the NAS
02:35 Details on the history and translation philosophy of the ESV
03:53 Well-known teachers and authors who use each translation
04:10 General differences
04:46 Differences in vocabulary
05:12 Acts 13.35 - You will not let your Holy One see corruption/undergo decay
06:13 Reliance on the Dead Sea Scrolls and ancient translations
06:30 The ESV shows more willingness to use the Dead Sea Scrolls and ancient translations
07:22 Reliance on the Dead Sea Scrolls in Deuteronomy 32.8
07:54 Reliance on the Dead Sea Scrolls in Deuteronomy 32.43
08:35 Reliance on the Dead Sea Scrolls in Psalm 144.2
09:31 Reliance on the Dead Sea Scrolls in Isaiah 21.8
10:24 Reliance on the Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint, and Vulgate in Genesis 47.21
11:18 Reliance on the Septuagint in 1 Samuel 9.25
12:00 Reliance on the Septuagint in 1 Samuel 10.1
12:41 Reliance on the Vulgate and Septuagint in 1 Samuel 14.41
13:12 Reliance on the Septuagint in Psalm 138.1
13:29 Reliance on the Septuagint in Psalm 145.13
14:29 Differences due to the underlying Greek text (New Testament)
14:39 Were dining couches baptized? Mark 7.4
15:46 Will the wrath of God come upon the sons of disobedience? Colossians 3.6
16:25 Appointed over the works of God’s hands? Hebrews 2.7
17:14 A haunt for every unclean and detestable beast? Revelations 18.2
20:47 Overall, the NAS is more literal than the ESV - but not in every verse
20:59 The NAS is more literal in Romans 1.5-6
22:02 The NAS is more literal in Matthew 10.41
22:25 The NAS is more literal in 1 Corinthians 11. 30
22:50 The NAS is more literal in John 12.16
23:43 The ESV is more literal in 2 Peter 1.10; the NAS is more Calvinistic
25:07 The ESV is more literal in Acts 2.42
25:52 A translation continuum chart
26:49 How the two translations evolved from the ASV
27:05 How the ESV evolved from the ASV through the RSV
29:00 How the 1995 NAS evolved from the ASV through the 1963 NAS
30:16 An overlay from the introduction to the NAS on the topic of Greek tenses
33:23 Differences in approach to Gender
40:18 Other noteworthy differences and similarities
40:34 General differences
40:38 ‘The only begotten God’ or ‘the only God’? John 1.18
42:35 Titus 2.13 - the ESV is less literal, but both translations affirm Christ’s deity
42:59 ‘Over all, God’ or ‘God over all’? Romans 9.5
43:48 Galatian 3.22, ‘by faith in Jesus Christ’ - each translation should give an alternate rendering in a footnote
45:55 The NAS’s awkward translation ‘with a view to’ in Ephesians chapter one
46:45 Colossians 1.28-29 - the ESV’s ambiguous translation and struggling with insomnia
47:35 Interpretive insertions and the use of the italic font
47:43 ‘The spirits now in prison’, 1 Peter 3.18-19
48:36 ‘The gospel preached to the dead’ in their lifetimes, according to the NAS footnote - 1 Peter 4.6
50:04 Did Paul serve in the gospel solely by preaching? An insertion in Romans 1.9
50:39 Shouldn’t ‘a call for’ be in italics? The ESV’s translation of Revelation 14.12
51.42 Shouldn’t ‘only’ be in italics? The ESV’s translation of Galatians 5.6
51:52 Shouldn’t ‘of God’ be in italics? The ESV’s translation of Romans 5.9
52:38 Shouldn’t ‘public’ and ‘of Scripture’ be in italics? The ESV’s translation of 1 Timothy 4.13
53:27 St. John Chrysostom on 1 Timothy 4.13
54:18 Plural pronouns
54:44 John 1.51 - the NAS doesn’t tell the reader whether ‘you’ is singular or plural
55:32 Acts 5.8-9 - the NAS doesn’t tell the reader whether ‘you’ is singular or plural
56:01 Acts 5.8-9 - the footnotes in the NAS say the ESV is more literal here
56:14 Luke 22.31-32 - the NAS doesn’t tell the reader whether ‘you’ is singular or plural
56:52 Other considerations
59:51 How I would improve the ESV
1:01:09 How I would improve the NAS
1:01:56 Summary, and
1:01:59 Side-by-side comparison chart

Пікірлер: 120
@dustinburdin9620
@dustinburdin9620 4 жыл бұрын
Thank you for this detailed analysis and comparing these two translations makes a lot of sense to help people, including myself.
@bstring3967
@bstring3967 4 жыл бұрын
I been waiting for this one, excellent Mr Jones
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks! Hope you enjoyed it.
@nojustno1216
@nojustno1216 4 жыл бұрын
Once again, you hit a homerun brother. I enjoy these comparisons immensely. I usually do a split screen comparison of two different translations on Blue Letter Bible, but the enormous amount of information you give is much better. Thank you 👍
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the encouragement, Steve! I'm happy you found it useful.
@rangertube45
@rangertube45 3 жыл бұрын
Outstanding explanation. Thank you so much for this academic effort. Very informative and functionally helpful.
@gunnartesdahl9347
@gunnartesdahl9347 4 жыл бұрын
This was great! Do you plan to do one on the NKJV vs the NASB? That would be interesting, as well.
@jameskosch4052
@jameskosch4052 4 жыл бұрын
Thank you so much for giving us something more useful to contemplate than today's news. This should keep me busy for a few weeks.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
You're welcome! Thank you for the view and comment!
@BiblicalStudiesandReviews
@BiblicalStudiesandReviews 4 жыл бұрын
One of the best Bible reviewers on KZfaq! Thanks!
@DavidNWalker
@DavidNWalker 4 жыл бұрын
Actually The Best. In a class of his own!
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thank you for the encouragement!
@jaynelsestuen9038
@jaynelsestuen9038 4 жыл бұрын
Excellent analysis. As a user of the ESV for many years, I am becoming increasingly aware of its drawbacks, but keep it for familiarity's sake, comparing it with the ASV most of the time. Thank you for the work you put into this. Your videos have greatly helped me in my search for "the one."
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thank you, Jay! The fault might be mine and not that of the translators, but I haven't found one I'd call perfect. I think the solution may be to get a wide-margin edition of a decent translation and work from there.
@jaynelsestuen9038
@jaynelsestuen9038 4 жыл бұрын
@@RGrantJones That sounds about right. The variety of English translations we currently possess ought to be considered a blessing more than a curse, though it would be convenient to once again have a common English version. In the mean time, we do what we can with what we've got.
@OrthodoxJourney359
@OrthodoxJourney359 4 жыл бұрын
For some reason the video would constantly buffer for no apparent cause. I had to download it to my IPad to watch it. What a wonderful and insightful video. Love your work and I really appreciate your extensive research to produce these reviews.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the encouraging comment, A Victorious Church! I learned a lesson with this one -- never post a video longer than an hour. I should have broken it into two parts.
@hstarcz
@hstarcz 4 жыл бұрын
Thank you for this very thorough and helpful comparison!
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thank you for that kind comment, hstarcz!
@richardgreene8171
@richardgreene8171 4 жыл бұрын
Excellent job with this video! One of your best videos yet. Appreciate your insight to the Greek; this was very encouraging for me, for I plan to revive my language studies. Over all, I will stick to NASB 1995 with ESV in second place. I really don't like what Lockman is doing with the 2020 revision. I also will read more of the NASB 1977(which made me switch from KJV to NASb), the ASV & KJV when studying. Thanks for your video. God bless.
@RyGuy8989
@RyGuy8989 4 жыл бұрын
Showed me exactly why I prefer the NASB over the ESV. And I'm thinking John MacArthur and The Master's Seminary is going to fix most what you mentioned with the NASB in the Legacy Standard Bible.
@theburlyburrito
@theburlyburrito 3 жыл бұрын
Well a year later when the LSB NT is out, a number of the places where the ESV includes text not in the NASB such as revelation 18:2 those text are found in the LSB. Your prediction was correct. Nice job.
@decluesviews2740
@decluesviews2740 3 жыл бұрын
Always appreciate your detailed analysis and comparisons. Due to the availability of the Deuterocanonical books, I don't have much of a choice between these two, but I appreciate being made aware of the deficiencies of the ESV. Currently, I most often use the RSV-2CE. I am, however, awaiting a better version of the Augustine Bible that I hear will be available soon!
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 3 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the kind comment, DeClue's Views! I'll be interested in seeing how the next edition of the Augustine Bible differs from the original. (Personally, I'd like to see the ESV return to "spat" as the past tense of "spit," but I realize that's a minor matter.) By the way, I subscribed to your channel recently, after watching your video with Chris Plance on Vatican II. Wishing you continued growth.
@decluesviews2740
@decluesviews2740 3 жыл бұрын
@@RGrantJones Oh wow! Thanks for watching and subscribing! (And I agree: "spat" is preferable as the past tense to spit.)
@daric_
@daric_ 3 жыл бұрын
I know it's hard to say which Bible is "best", because they all serve a purpose. I go between the ASV, ESV, and NASB for study and CSB for reading the text. Thank you for this video.
@MattBramer
@MattBramer Ай бұрын
THIS. IS. INCREDIBLE. Thank you, R. Grant Jones.
@katamarkon940
@katamarkon940 3 жыл бұрын
it was a great comparison.. and very detailed... great job!!! i love NASB and ESV...
@jddeklerk
@jddeklerk 3 жыл бұрын
The Bible reviews and Bible translation comparisons on this channel are extraordinarily.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 3 жыл бұрын
Thank you for saying so, JD! Most encouraging!
@AFrischPerspective
@AFrischPerspective 4 жыл бұрын
Thank you so much for all the work you put into these. I love your thoroughness and attention to detail. I noticed some blank screens at around 27:45 and 58:40 (in case you weren't aware). This was an excellent comparison of two well-known translations. I think the translations are moving away from the direction you would prefer, from the sound of it.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the kind comment! Yes, I noticed the black screens and traced them back to the mp4 file I loaded. I suspect that having so many files and transitions in the video project file caused my computer to hiccup. I think I'll take a few days to correct some of the more obvious typos in the charts, then attempt to make another mp4. If it's free of black screens, I may post a corrected version. Regarding translation philosophy, yes, I agree. But it's my job as an old man to be grumpy and contrary!
@AFrischPerspective
@AFrischPerspective 4 жыл бұрын
@@RGrantJones 😆 Thanks for fulfilling your role!
@FernandoSerna1654
@FernandoSerna1654 4 жыл бұрын
Many thanks for the time, energy and care that you invested in making this video. When all is said and done, I would choose the 1977 NAS over both of these. The ESV has become the darling of the Reformed churches of the Anglican Church in N. America. A pity.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
It's my pleasure, Fernando. I like both these translations, but I find that when I pick up the 95 NAS, I'm always tempted to put it down and read the '77 instead. (When I watch Steven Lawson's men's Bible studies on KZfaq, I follow along in my '77 NAS, even though he's teaching from the '95.) Something similar happens with the ESV and the RSV.
@FernandoSerna1654
@FernandoSerna1654 4 жыл бұрын
R. Grant Jones As you know Dr. Lawson eagerly promotes the 1995 NASB. Happy Passion Sunday: “Almighty God, you alone can bring into order the unruly wills and affections of sinners: Grant your people grace to love what you command and desire what you promise; that, among the swift and varied changes of the world, our hearts may surely there be fixed where true joys are to be found; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.”
@FernandoSerna1654
@FernandoSerna1654 4 жыл бұрын
@@RGrantJones Do you have a preference between NAS 1977 and the NKJV? On a different note, I have recently been reading the NEB and I really enjoy the more elevated language and grammar. Thank you.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
@@FernandoSerna1654 - I find myself using the 77 NAS more these days, perhaps because my position on the New Testament textual controversy has changed. I don't think it's because of the merits of the translations as translations. The NKJV is very good. Among other things, I like the way it includes Scriptural metaphors in the text rather than shoving them off into a footnote (e.g., 'seed' in Romans 1.3, 'fruit' in Romans 6.21). I just wish it weren't based on the TR. And when it comes to the Old Testament, I prefer Brenton and the NETS to either. The NEB is definitely a refreshing read. I've enjoyed it since the early 1970s.
@FernandoSerna1654
@FernandoSerna1654 4 жыл бұрын
R. Grant Jones Yes, i understand! For the OT do you mean Brenton ‘s translation of the LXII or the NETS of 2007, or either?
@mike21822
@mike21822 2 жыл бұрын
Awesome video, thank you
@einarengemoen2486
@einarengemoen2486 Жыл бұрын
You’re fabulous at this. Will you do one like this for NASB 95 vs 2020?
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
To clean up the typos and technical glitches in this video, I repaired it and broke it into two parts. Part I may be viewed here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Zppno7CJyZermqs.html and Part II, here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bcmPqtGVx7y0ZGg.html . The video by Dr. Mounce mentioned at the 03:34 point may be viewed here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ba-SZ7ipvp2raKs.html . By the way, please overlook the embarrassing typos on the title chart! And here I am pointing out typos in the NAS's footnotes! Conspiracy Cuber found another typo: the ESV and NAS texts are in the wrong columns in the Luke 10.1 entry at about the 18:25 point.
@jaynelsestuen9038
@jaynelsestuen9038 4 жыл бұрын
I didn't even notice until you pointed it out. The NAS has been around much longer than I thought! :)
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
@@jaynelsestuen9038 - I probably should have taken another week to build this video. I wonder how many other slips of the keyboard are yet to be discovered on the other charts!
@edwardgraham9443
@edwardgraham9443 4 жыл бұрын
Fantastic video, the wait was worth it. Having seen this, I'm very happy, actually extremely happy that I chose the New King James Version as my main bible translation, I believe it's more literal than both (although it's tough to compare them as it uses a different Greek text than both the NAS and the ESV). It does make you wonder why the translation team chose some of their renderings, whether it was just to stick with the tradition (ASV or RSV) or it was just their bias rather than to go with the Greek text. While I'm for readability, I'd rather have the literal reading in the text than in the foot notes. Put the "easier or clearer" rendering in the notes. Overall, whil both are good translations, I much prefer the NKJV, although I am fully aware that it too has its shortcomings, but I much rather it than the rest. I just hope Harper Collins (Thomas Nelson) don't decide to "update" the text, if they want to update something, just the translation notes and while their at it, make a wide margin nkjv reference Bible for crying out loud.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for that comment, Edward. In my opinion, you're correct -- the NKJV is more literal than either the NAS or the ESV, at least in the New Testament. I also agree that both are very good translations. By combining the best features of each, one could produce an excellent version. Concerning the NKJV, it may be that the executives at Harper Collins realize that NKJV sales rely on readers who want a stable text. If so, they may keep it that way -- at least during our lifetimes. It doesn't seem possible to me that Nelson *doesn't* have a wide margin Comfort Print NKJV on the drawing board. I'd like to see it soon.
@edwardgraham9443
@edwardgraham9443 4 жыл бұрын
@@RGrantJones It's incredible that it's not there already. I've seen so many people asking for it, yet I don't know what's keeping them from making one. Crossway has many options in the ESV, Holman has wide margins CSB in many versions and it is fastly becoming a favourite among many people, and even Kjv has wide margin options. How Thomas Nelson miss this one, I'm not sure. I've seen some bibles that they have coming up later this year, but none is a wide margin. They are good looking Bibles yes, but not what many people are asking for. I have very limited funds at a high exchange rate between the US dollar and that of my country, Jamaica and I'm saving for just that eventuality, that they do make a wide margin Bible, if not, I might have to use that funds and buy their journal the word bible. Most of us, just want a stable Bible translation and I'm not so sure we're going to get that with either the ESV or the Nas, seeing that there will be and updated Nas later this year or perhaps next year and Crossway have reverswd their decision concerning the 2016 ESV text being a permanent text. Someone from the US sent me a 2011 text ESV Study Bible, which I've not yet received, and don't know when either with this caronavirus situation, although our government said that shipments to our country will not not be hampered. It usually takes 2 to 6 weeks to get here and it was shipped March 9 anyways, so I still wait. Other than that, I use the free version of Logos Bible Software and the Youversion Bible app along with the internet to gourge on the scriptures 😁. I've learnt a tremendous amount of stuff from your channel and encourage you to keep it up, God bless you and thank you for posting these educational and informative videos.
@richardreinle7322
@richardreinle7322 4 жыл бұрын
That was great Thank You !
@einarengemoen2486
@einarengemoen2486 Жыл бұрын
Thank you! Very useful.
@thegothamite128
@thegothamite128 2 жыл бұрын
NASB95 and/or NASB77. You can’t go wrong with either one. I like the ESV, but the NASB is far superior in my humble opinion. I recently read the book of Romans in the NASB77 and I have to say that it reads like a literary masterpiece. Having said that, I’m looking forward to the eventual MacArthur LSB study Bible. I hope it comes sooner rather than later.
@Ambrose_op
@Ambrose_op 4 жыл бұрын
Excellent video, Dr. Jones. I enjoyed it thoroughly, and have found it very helpful. Thank you sincerely for taking the time to so painstakingly organize this and make it available. One question, rather unrelated to the content: you mentioned that you come from a tradition which encourage reading the deuterocanonical books. May I ask what tradition this is? Thank you again and may God bless you.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
I'm happy to be of help. Thanks for those kind words and for the question, Parker. I'm most comfortable in Anglicanism, from both a doctrinal and liturgical perspective -- though even there, as an introvert, I dislike the coffee hours and the socializing that goes on before the service. (The Catholics know best how to start and finish a worship service, in my opinion.)
@Ambrose_op
@Ambrose_op 4 жыл бұрын
Well, I certainly understand those introverted tendencies! Anglicanism has always fascinated me greatly. I am a Reformed Baptist myself, but have a great appreciation for and interest in Anglican ideas - especially those of the older, more conservative bent. Of the more traditional denominations, I find that Anglicanism seems to be the most consistent. Thank you for not minding me asking this question and for your time, Dr. Jones.
@clauderichards6239
@clauderichards6239 3 жыл бұрын
Was surprised to see the NKJV to the left of the NASB on your translation continuum!
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 3 жыл бұрын
Thanks for commenting, Claude! I suppose I could come up with a way of scoring translations that would put the NASB left of the NKJV, but counting "liberties" the way I do, the NKJV is the more literal of the two. An observation that supports that ordering: In the spots where the NASB has a note giving the literal reading, I often find that the NKJV presents that literal reading in the text.
@elliottboyd-stringer
@elliottboyd-stringer 4 жыл бұрын
Thank-you for this extensive catalogue of in-depth reviews, you're really doing the faithful a good service. Would you be willing to review Dr. William von Peter's transliteration of the original Douay OT and Rheims NT/Gospel&Psalms? As far as I can tell, they're the only version of the 1582/1610 D-R available for general sale.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for that kind comment, Elliott. I reviewed a facsimile 1582 Rheims New Testament some time ago. As I recall, I was told that the transliteration contains numerous typos, so I didn't look into it any further.
@pmachapman
@pmachapman 4 жыл бұрын
Thank you for the informative video - many of your comments and conclusions are thought provoking, and hope that many are acted on by the respective translation committees! At first I thought your listing the NA28 as the text for the ESV was an error, and then lo and behold, in the 2016 edition that is just what is listed in the preface. This is something I find unusual as the 2001-2011 prefaces list the NA27 (which is of course the same text as NA26). I have an annotated ESV with all of the edition variants highlighted, and in the catholic epistles, there are no changes between the editions matching the NA27 to NA28 changes, as far as I can see. The 2001 ESV contains *some* of the readings new to the NA28, but by no means all of them, as of course the NA28 didn't exist then. My discussions with an ESV translator regarding these pointed to these being the prerogative of the book's translator, put up to the scrutiny of the committee. At a glance, the ESV seems to match the NA28 about as much as the NET2 does for the catholic epistles, which I find interesting, as off the top of my head, both translations shared some OT translators, but not NT translators. I am yet to see a translation really follow the NA28 (I use 2 Peter 3:10 as the litmus test, as it is the most controversial change).
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thank you, Peter! I hope so too, but I'm not very optimistic!
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
By the way, the CSB includes the NA28 reading for 2 Pt 3.10 in a footnote. It may be a while before that reading gains traction with translation committees. It will be interesting to see what the 2020 NAS does there. The recently announced Legacy Standard Bible will be based on NA27, so no chance that 'will not be found' will be found there. The next revision of the NRSV will likely be based on the SBL, so little chance there either.
@pmachapman
@pmachapman 4 жыл бұрын
@@RGrantJones Thanks for the info - the CSB has had little traction in New Zealand, so I am not too familiar with its variant selection, but I will look into it a bit deeper. You are right about the NRSV-UE using SBL, I remember reading a report from the SBL on it, maybe a year ago. I wonder if you, like I have, on first hearing of the Legacy Standard Bible thought, how much are they going to change? Is it going to be a 77 to 95 "sized" revision or maybe more of a Gideons ESV sized revision?
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
@@pmachapman - unless they've been working on it in secret for several years, I think it will be light. But 77 to 95 seems plausible. We know that Yahweh will be used in the OT, as in the Jerusalem Bible; and that bond-servant will become slave. I saw a note in a post at the Evangelical Textual Criticism group on Facebook, apparently from one of the translators, that indicated the NT text basis will be NA27 -- which (as I think you pointed out earlier) is NA26, apparatus excepted. They have time to polish a few rough spots.
@rachelkarslake7787
@rachelkarslake7787 4 жыл бұрын
First, I would like to thank you for another wonderful translation comparison. I also enjoy watching your Bible reviews. As a writing professor, I appreciate your academic approach (and love of semicolons). I was hoping you would address the 2016 ESV's translation of Genesis 3:16. The translators' choice of "contrary to" is not a good translation of the Hebrew in the Torah, and I was wondering how it could be justified. Thank you, again. I truly enjoy your channel.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the gracious comment! Yes, the ESV's translation of Genesis 3.16 is indeed controversial. Unfortunately, I'm not a Hebrew scholar, so I don't have an informed opinion on that topic. I will say that the 2016 text comports with the footnote in my 2011-text ESV Study Bible: 'Eve will have a sinful "desire" to oppose Adam.' The NET Bible translates the end of verse 16 as, 'You will want to control your husband, but he will dominate you.' It also provides a footnote that dismisses the view that Eve's desire is sexual and points to the use of the Hebrew word translated 'desire' in Genesis 4.7, 'where it refers to sin's desire to control and dominate Cain.' The editors add, 'This interpretation also fits the tone of the passage, which is a judgment oracle.' Apparently, they were persuaded by a 1975 article by Susan T. Foh entitled, 'What is the Woman's Desire?' She's the subject of a very brief article at Wikipedia.
@rachelkarslake7787
@rachelkarslake7787 4 жыл бұрын
@@RGrantJones Thank you for the reply. I find this very interesting, since it is the first time I have run into this interpretation. I converted from Judaism to Christianity three years ago, and I was very surprised when I was alerted to this particular translation of the verse. I am no Hebrew scholar, by any means. However, one of my adult daughters (a translation graduate) can read and understand Hebrew, and reported that the 2016 ESV translation of the word was misleading. She remains in the camp of sexual desire, as per the context of the passage and Jewish tradition. The ESV is not my Bible translation of choice, and I do not own an NLT. So, I do not have translation that agrees with this interpretation on hand. I find all of this fascinating. Thank you, again. I appreciate your time.
@Giancarlo_1997
@Giancarlo_1997 2 жыл бұрын
I would Highly Recommend the NASB95 to me it is the best English Bible translation. You can try the NASB1995 Single-Column Reference Bible it's a great one in goatskin and it's not so expensive as many others.
@peterbarber4294
@peterbarber4294 4 жыл бұрын
This was a very helpful video Mr. Jones; much appreciated! If you don’t mind my asking, given your study of these various translations, do you think it would be unwise for someone to rely primarily, or exclusively upon the King James for serious study, given the modern advancements in lexicography, text-criticism, &c? I find it difficult to pry myself away from the AV (I suppose because I’ve become used to it), but I often worry that I’m missing things that may be clearer in modern versions. Being somewhat new to all this I would appreciate your thoughts :)
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the question, Peter! The KJV handles some issues much better than the newer translations do -- plural pronouns, for instance, and ambiguous constructions (it leaves them ambiguous). But I think that if you rely *exclusively* on the KJV you may be missing out, unless you also tap into modern commentaries, or use a study Bible with good notes. Personally, I prefer to read from at least two versions -- one word-for-word translation, like the KJV, NKJV, ASV, RV, or NAS, and a second more interpretive translation.
@peterbarber4294
@peterbarber4294 4 жыл бұрын
@@RGrantJones I suppose I’m going to have to branch out a little: Thank you!
@gleasonparker1684
@gleasonparker1684 2 жыл бұрын
I did get a copy of 1977 NASB on Amazon. So now have all 3.
@larrycdalton
@larrycdalton 3 жыл бұрын
Excellent presentation. Interesting how the Legacy Standard Bible is closer to the ESV on most of the texts in the NT mentioned. I remain with the ESV though even though the LSB is growing on me. NASB is also a source of great joy with easy reading / rendering with the differences from the ESV not truly being significant. I prefer the rendering of both the ESV and NASB over the LSB on verses such as Eph 1:4 - 5 and 1 Cor 2:14 (LSB not being a great rendering and differs from EVERY PREVIOUS TRANSLATION)
@JeffBinkleyMartin
@JeffBinkleyMartin 3 жыл бұрын
Great work as always, dear brother. If you HAD to rank the following in order of your preferred English translation, what would it be? KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB, RSV
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 3 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the kind words, Jeff! You pose a very hard question! In my answer, I'll assume that personal devotional reading, detailed study, and corporate worship are all in view. With that in mind, I would rank them KJV, RSV, ESV. NKJV, and NASB. If I had ranked them for detailed study alone, I'd likely have reversed that order, assuming the NASB was a '77 edition with the full set of text and translation notes -- although I would have chosen an RV or an ASV over an NASB had one been available. That's the way I see it at the moment. Ask again in a month and the result may change!
@JeffBinkleyMartin
@JeffBinkleyMartin 3 жыл бұрын
@@RGrantJones Absolutely! Generally speaking, my order would look much the same. A complex thing, indeed. I am very excited about the RSV that Schuyler is planning to release in summer of next year. If they were to ever go with an ASV, I'd probably have a level of excitement that would scare the children.
@dustinburdin9620
@dustinburdin9620 4 жыл бұрын
Question: your slide at 26:29 I love your comparison of 200 samples. But does this indicate that the NKJV is technically even more literal than the NASB? It was second on your chart
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thank you for the question. Yes, the way I measure "literalness," the NKJV is more literal than the NASB.
@chriswilson6597
@chriswilson6597 4 жыл бұрын
I just got a nasb 77. My everyday is nasb 95. Id be interested to get your thoughts on the 77 vs 95. I'm going to watch your asv review since its the predecessor of my bible. Enjoy your video's
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for commenting! Since I don't mind the archaic language, I prefer the '77 over the '95. I believe in one of my early videos -- perhaps in the one covering the 2003 edition of the NAS SCR (aka the Judge) -- I show some of the changes made in '95 that I disfavor.
@chriswilson6597
@chriswilson6597 4 жыл бұрын
@@RGrantJones thanks ill look it up. I'm really enjoying the 77 so far. I might start teaching out of it.
@TomPlantagenet
@TomPlantagenet 4 жыл бұрын
For some reason this video, and only this video keeps freezing every few seconds. Anyone else having this problem?
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Tom - I've watched it on two browsers on my computer and on one other device. No freezing. But I have noticed the screen goes black in a couple of locations. The fault isn't with KZfaq; it's with the mp4 file I uploaded. Apparently I've reached my computer's limit for processing video project files. But I may fix a few typos on the charts and give it another shot.
@TomPlantagenet
@TomPlantagenet 4 жыл бұрын
R. Grant Jones cool thanks.when I get the chance I’ll try it on another device. I’m using an iPhone so maybe I need another platform
@TomPlantagenet
@TomPlantagenet 4 жыл бұрын
Watched the video on another platform with no problem. Great video, thanks. I’m wrestling with which to use as my primary translation. I suppose you can’t go wrong with either one.
@EdgeOfLight
@EdgeOfLight 4 жыл бұрын
As an outsider (who just ran into your channel because of your excellent oxford kjv review and who stays because of your strangely horse tranquilising voice) I think there are too many different bibles. How do you even manage? I read the kjv because of the beautiful language and the influence it bears. The others look too modernised, paraphrased and seem to lack poetry or singularity. They should release one that corrects translation problems while retaining the archaic/traditional beauty of the kjv
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the comment! Regarding the beauty of the KJV, I agree completely. I believe what you describe is what the Church of England had in mind in the nineteenth century -- a mild revision of the KJV to correct a few translation errors and to clarify a few obscure passages. But the result was the Revised Version, which changed the KJV far more than was originally intended.
@ShiroiNihonjin
@ShiroiNihonjin 4 жыл бұрын
If you graph your literalness rating over time (of translation), do you find a general downward trend? That would be a good counterargument to those who talk about old translations being archaic and in need of modernizing.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
I think it's true that the older translations are generally more literal than the newer ones. But I've noticed that revisions are sometimes more literal than originals. The Jerusalem Bible is more free than the New Jerusalem Bible, which is more free than the Revised New Jerusalem Bible. The New English Bible is more free than the Revised English Bible. The NASB, unfortunately, like the NIV, is moving in the opposite direction.
@gleasonparker1684
@gleasonparker1684 2 жыл бұрын
I think the NASB 95 and ESV 2016..latest version?..are my 2 favourite BIBLES at this point.
@tonyb408
@tonyb408 3 жыл бұрын
Good information. How many of the translation choices are based on copyright ($$$) considerations? And do you plan on doing a video like this comparing the kjv and nkjv?
@gleasonparker1684
@gleasonparker1684 2 жыл бұрын
Audio is better here. THANKS.
@gleasonparker1684
@gleasonparker1684 2 жыл бұрын
I do like The New American Standard Bible uses italics to indicate where words are supplied and I don't like the ESV where they just ignore the supplied words and don't put anything there.
@Luke-qs1lv
@Luke-qs1lv 4 жыл бұрын
My 2011 ESV has 72 in Luke 10:1, did that change in 2016?
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
No. The ESV has 72. The NAS has 70. It appears I put the NAS text in the ESV column and vice versa. Perhaps I should delete this video and repair some of these typos. Thanks very much for pointing that out!
@daric_
@daric_ 3 жыл бұрын
Thank you for this comparison. Both the NASB and ESV are solid Bibles, but they are admittedly not the most literal. However, "literal" does not always mean "best". I've kind of given up on finding a perfect Bible. I like the 1901 ASV's literalness, but I don't like the antiquated and incorrect use of "Jehovah" ("Yahweh", "YHWH", or "YHVH" would be preferable), for example. I've translated stuff from English to French, and vice versa, and translation is a difficult ordeal. I can translate, "Qu'est-ce que c'est que ca, ce machin?" And a literal word-for-word translation to English would be, "What is it that it is but/what that, this machine [contraption]?" But it's horribly unreadable. In English, we would just say, "What's this thingy?" or, "What is that?" So I like that the NASB and ESV generally stick as literally to the text as is viable and when the literal translation would make it difficult to read or would significantly change the meaning, they translate what is being expressed by the author in its meaning while retaining the literal translation in the footnotes. To me, this is the best compromise. For a simple example where a literal translation would make it poorly understood is when we often talk about the "heart" (wills, desires, emotions, wisdom, etc.). For an equivalent in Hebrew, they would say "kidneys" (keyalot), and this is mentioned over 30 times in the Old Testament. Almost no Bible outside of interlinear versions translates it as "kidney" every time. And I'm fine with that. Leaving a "Lit" footnote is preferable to me. We also know how such hyper literal translations can be used far outside what was intended. A famous example is 1 Kings 14:10 (cf 1 Samuel 25:22, 34), where most Bibles translate a phrase, "mastin beqir" as simply "every male", the literal Hebrew phrase is, "him who pisses/urinates against the wall" from the Hebrew ". The King James Bible has in the text, "pisseth against the wall" was used by a IFB preacher named Steven Anderson in the now infamous sermon about how real men need to urinate standing up (despite the fact that this wasn't the point of the text whatsoever). So hyper "literalness" need not be the best translation. Anyways, I'm rambling. Thank you again for the video! Great work.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 3 жыл бұрын
Thanks for that interesting and informative comment! In these videos I sometimes remember to emphasize that 'literalness' and 'accuracy' aren't the same thing. I agree that the most literal translation isn't necessarily the best.
@basedcataphract5852
@basedcataphract5852 3 жыл бұрын
One of my favorite commens of all time, Yes, i agree, i translated stuff from Indonesian to english, the grammar is similar but see this : TETAPI ini itu sebenarnya enggak kayak itu, tapi beda Word for word : But this it actually not like it , but different We would say : But this one is different than that one!
@thomasjefferson6
@thomasjefferson6 3 жыл бұрын
Superb analysis of two very common versions. The ESV overall seems more liberal than the NASB, and I Cor. 11:28 is just one example (36:16 in the video). The Greek word for the generic English "man" is the generic masculine (not neuter) Greek word anthropos. To eliminate the masculinity of this word and turn it into an impersonal neuter ("person") as the ESV does is to translate falsely. The only reason for doing this is due to the influence of feminism in modern culture, something that should have no role whatever in honest Bible translating.
@deeemm8350
@deeemm8350 4 жыл бұрын
I'll stick with the RSV (mainly the RSV2CE). For me, no level of marketing or amount of premium bindings can make up for the ESV's grammar and punctuation; I can't read it without being thoroughly annoyed. I shelved the NASB when I read the way in which certain sentences are structured, i.e. Matthew 12:23: "This man cannot be the Son of David, *can he*?" I much prefer "Can this be the Son of David?” I recall many renderings like this in the NAS.
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for commenting, Dee Emm. I have the same problem with the ESV.
@gabrielangelo9937
@gabrielangelo9937 4 жыл бұрын
Between the two, which do you prefer to use?
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the question! I would prefer not to say, because I'm likely to change my mind tomorrow. Each has good and bad characteristics.
@ThecrosseyedTexan
@ThecrosseyedTexan 2 жыл бұрын
Informal speech Mafia what an interesting choice of words. Wasn't biblical Greek, Koine Greek, informal? Trust me I'm not trying to be snarky I promise it's a legitimate question.
@gbantock
@gbantock 4 жыл бұрын
I am a bit disappointed that the Augustine Bible emends the E.S.V. than the second Catholic Edition of the R.S.V. does so. I keep both at hand, but I shall be using the R.S.V.-C.E.2 more than the E.S.V.-C.E.
@gbantock
@gbantock 4 жыл бұрын
Excuse hat, I mean "emends ... less often".
@WgB5
@WgB5 8 ай бұрын
What surprises me in the practice of claiming the Dead Sea scrolls as a reliable source when the experts had not even had the time to translate anything with accuracy, let alone understand the motivations of the group who buried these things. Typically, burying scriptures means that they were not good enough for public review.
@gbantock
@gbantock 4 жыл бұрын
In the chart, didn't you really mean "2d person pronouns"?
@RGrantJones
@RGrantJones 4 жыл бұрын
Yes, I did. I'll add that to the list of typos to correct. Thank you, Gerald.
@Charles-jj2su
@Charles-jj2su 3 жыл бұрын
I vastly prefer the NASB. The ESV has way too many verses that change words to suit a Calvinist view.
@SharonBalloch
@SharonBalloch 3 жыл бұрын
Neither for me.. they both say that you are not a child of God.. but Jesus says you are and God says you are...but these bibles both say Jesus is Gods one and only Son.. when he is really Gods only begotten Son.. and in the same books say that Adam is Gods son..so no thanks.. that is just not the truth.. and I love the truth..
Why I Chose The ESV over the NASB
16:53
Tear Up Your Bible
Рет қаралды 81 М.
A Four-Dimensional Perspective on Bible Translations
30:41
R. Grant Jones
Рет қаралды 8 М.
Became invisible for one day!  #funny #wednesday #memes
00:25
Watch Me
Рет қаралды 55 МЛН
Does size matter? BEACH EDITION
00:32
Mini Katana
Рет қаралды 11 МЛН
Scary Teacher 3D Nick Troll Squid Game in Brush Teeth White or Black Challenge #shorts
00:47
Incredible magic 🤯✨
00:53
America's Got Talent
Рет қаралды 68 МЛН
ESV or LSB? // Comparing the ESV and LSB Translations
42:57
Back2theWord
Рет қаралды 57 М.
Missing Verses in the ESV??? Why Aren't These Verses in My Bible?
11:29
Matthew Everhard
Рет қаралды 72 М.
ESV vs RSV: a Translation Review (with improved audio)
32:02
R. Grant Jones
Рет қаралды 14 М.
KJV vs ESV, Part I -- the Old Testament
25:20
R. Grant Jones
Рет қаралды 17 М.
NRSV vs ESV -- a Translation Review
49:15
R. Grant Jones
Рет қаралды 24 М.
English Bible Translations Family Tree
19:15
UsefulCharts
Рет қаралды 630 М.
Dan Wallace's TOP 5 BIBLE TRANSLATIONS
35:36
Mike Licona
Рет қаралды 162 М.
3 Problems with the ESV
11:20
Bible Geek
Рет қаралды 68 М.
Became invisible for one day!  #funny #wednesday #memes
00:25
Watch Me
Рет қаралды 55 МЛН