"I make major points out of small words." In my experience, dynamic equivalent translations tend to leave out the small words. I appreciate Dr. Lawson's perspective.
My understanding is that "meaning" is conveyed on several different levels. Language communicates meaning in its grammatical structure (no English translation picks this up), in its semantic relationships (CSB and NIV are good here), and in the individual words (NASB and ESV are good here). There are even a number of other ways in which language can communicate meaning where translations like the NLT can pick up on better. I read study from the CSB, NASB, and NIV. But I employ the ESV, NKJV, NET, CEB, and NLT extensively because you can get incredible insight from using different translations if you know what to look for when reading your Bible.
I've used NASB since college (1974) and have never experienced the "difficulties" with understanding often used to criticize it. Appreciate your matter-of-fact description that emphasizes the positive about reading the text.
❤️ Thankyou for explaining this. Sounds very respectable towards God using the capitals. I'm from Europe and never understood about the American translation.
I just Googled "What is the most accurate Bible Translation?" And the NASB (New American Standard Bible) popped up. So, I will check it out. Thank you Dr. Lawson. By the way, I listen to you on TH-cam every day, along with RC Sproul and John MacArthur. My favorite Videos are the Ligonier Panel.
I feel like there is a bit of a resurgence in popularity for the NASB which I am happy to see. I started in the NASB after I was born again, switched mainly to the ESV, but have now returned to the NASB with my new Preacher’s Bible and I have come to realize out of all the translations I have read and studied from, the NASB truly is my favorite as well.
Go for it , but what are your kids going to do when it's revised again, and again, and again until your great grandkids have a corrupt Bible. Most of these theologians do not believe God left a written word. It was like pulling teeth until I got a pastor to admit it.
tim prater That’s just false. Languages change, especially English, and it’s our duty to translate the Bible from its original languages into the common languages of the world.
Akihito007 Yeah, but it’s not just the translations that change; the Greek text is constantly being updated as well. So for people who hold to the Alexandrian text, the Bible is basically a work in progress. So we didn’t really have the word of God a few hundred years ago, and we don’t really have the word of God right now either. And in a hundred years, even if we’ve discovered an abundance of new manuscripts, we still might not have the word of God 100%, because there may be even more manuscripts out there left to discover. That’s why I stick with the KJV. I believe God has preserved his word 100% perfectly in one translation per language.
I really appreciate One Passion Ministries for this video. I've been using NIV since high school and I really love it. I now am inclined to get a copy of the NAS. I guess the challenge may be getting an original version of NAS that's not tampered with. Thanks Steve.
We aware truly blessed to have Gods word in many translations it was once illegal to own the bible and those who tried to translate it into English where put to death.
Good to hear because after 24 years of using the NASB (all the while comparing and purchasing many others) I still go back to the NASB. Call it a habit? I don't know, maybe. I used the ESV for a couple of years while going through it, Genesis through Revelation, and making copious margin notes as a gift to my youngest Granddaughter, as I did before for her older Sister (I did the same for her but gave her an NASB). Like Dr. Lawson, I have another six or eight translations, even a "Young's Literal Translation" which I do comparisons on certain passages, but always seem to go back to the NASB. Giving it some thought, I believe that Dr. MacArthur started me on the NASB as a new believer!
“in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.” Colossians 1:14 NASB “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:” Colossians 1:14 KJV Think again the nasb is Dull. Takes out through His Blood. Get a Bible with all the words in it. KJV super sharp sword.
@@LuisPerez-fy6up the NASB still includes it in Ephesians 1:7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace
“in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.” Colossians 1:14 NASB “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:” Colossians 1:14 KJV Think again the nasb is Dull. Takes out through His Blood. Get a Bible with all the words in it. KJV super sharp sword.
Randycadkins what? Did you even read what I wrote? Loose that putrid horrid Pride. “Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom.” Proverbs 13:10 KJV
@@LuisPerez-fy6up read what I responded to you first when you sent me, (and many others) the same message, that's why its disingenuous, it's not coming from pride, I just noticed that you have said the same thing, word for word, meaning you have copied and pasted the same response to many. I replied to you on my original post, I would like to see what you have to say about it.
I always thought I needed a modern translation but I have been reading the King James Version. I've had no problems understanding it, I do use a dictionary but I am learning the words quickly. The New King James helped me with this I will admit.
I'm not part of the English speaking world because my native language is Spanish, but in my opinion I think that I hasn't been able to stop reading and studying thoroughly my KJV bible, KJV or Geneva Bible were our ancestors primary Bible, Puritans and reformers primary Bible, KJV is the Word of God. If I need to figure out a text more deeply I simply consult a modern version, but KJV is really the Word of God. Greetings and blessings from Bogotá.
Stick to the King James Bible. Look up Isaiah 14:12 in the King James. Lucifer is replaced in the other versions by Day Star (2 Peter 1:19 a name of Jesus) or morning star (Revelation 22:16 a name of Jesus). Satan tries to steal God's Glory. Look up Acts 8:37 in other versions to see what is needed to be saved. In other versions, you go from wanting Baptism, to being dunked, apparently Baptism saves aks Catholicism, Armininism, Calvinism et al and other false doctrines. Pay attention to Ye and Thou. Pronouns in the King James were important. Modern versions they don't care about pronouns. That is affecting the US today. 1 Corinthians 12:21 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. thee - singular one hand you - plural two feet Thee, thou, thy, thine correctly translated as singular in the King James. Ye, you, your plural. Joshua 1 King James Bible 2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel. 3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses. Thou- Joshua is leading the people your- plural - the foot of any person of Israel could claim the promised land. Modern corrupted versions: NAS B1995 2 “Moses My servant is dead; now therefore arise, cross this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving to them, to the sons of Israel. 3 Every place on which the sole of your foot treads, I have given it to you, just as I spoke to Moses. Joshua has to run a marathon. We don't understand the pronouns. T words in the King Jams singular, Y words plural. No such thing in this version. You have to pick your pronouns. John 3:7 King James Bible “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.” Thee- as if pointing at Nicodemus Ye - everyone must be born again John 3:7 New American Standard B 1995 7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born [a]again.’ Does only Nicodemus need to be born again? According to this, that is probably the case. Good job sticking to the Bible, the King James Bible.
literal does not always mean accurate. in fact, in cases such as idioms, a literal translation would be a factually _bad_ translation. I personally do think there is a lot of value in using different translations, but I do not get why so many people equate literal to accurate.
I love the: NASB (my main Bible), KJV, AMP, NKJV and NLT! My top go to translations. And if I'm really struggling to understand something; I'll use: HCSB and the CEV, for more clarity and to see if I'm in the Holy Spirit's understanding and not my own!
I have the exact same feelings toward the NKJV, but I’ve been trying to use the NASB as my primary translation after having studied for two years in Greek and Hebrew as well as textual Criticism. Hopefully I’ll be able to fully convert 🤞
“in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.” Colossians 1:14 NASB “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:” Colossians 1:14 KJV Think again the nasb is Dull. Takes out through His Blood. Get a Bible with all the words in it. KJV super sharp sword.
The reason the KJV kept the “thee’s and thy’s” is because the pronouns that begin with T are singular, and the pronouns that begin with Y are plural. Don’t know why that’s such a problem.
I greatly prefer the 1977 edition and its archaic language. The '95 replaces pronouns with proper names or other identifiers much too frequently. I've heard many people repeat the claim that the NASB is the most literal translation, but I've not seen any data to back that up. Based on my own careful examination of 14 New Testament translations, in which I scored the liberties each translation took with the Greek (including variants) in 200 verses chosen at random, I'd say that the ASV is the most literal. It's clear the NASB isn't as literal as it could be -- just read the marginal notes that start with "Lit.".
King James Only. The ASV will agree with Strong's Concordance the most. Why? I am a King James Bible only believer. But, James Strong worked with Unitarians (people that don't believe the trinity) on the ASV, he also wrote Strong's concordance. They compiled the "unoriginal" manuscripts by writing the "supposed original" Greek texts etc by taking the King James Bible and back writing the Greek texts etc in the 1880s. People now go to these texts compiled poorly from the King James (not word for word) and say how amazing the ASV corresponds to the Strong's concordance. He wrote both, so well, duh. If the same person incorrectly translated two things, they probably agree a lot. Stick to the King James Bible. Look up Isaiah 14:12 in the King James. Lucifer is replaced in the other versions by Day Star (2 Peter 1:19 a name of Jesus) or morning star (Revelation 22:16 a name of Jesus). Satan tries to steal God's Glory. Look up Acts 8:37 in other versions to see what is needed to be saved. In other versions, you go from wanting Baptism, to being dunked, apparently Baptism saves aks Catholicism, Armininism, Calvinism et al and other false doctrines. Pay attention to Ye and Thou. Pronouns in the King James were important. Modern versions they don't care about pronouns. That is affecting the US today. 1 Corinthians 12:21 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. thee - singular one hand you - plural two feet Thee, thou, thy, thine correctly translated as singular in the King James. Ye, you, your plural. Joshua 1 King James Bible 2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel. 3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses. Thou- Joshua is leading the people your- plural - the foot of any person of Israel could claim the promised land. Modern corrupted versions: NAS B1995 2 “Moses My servant is dead; now therefore arise, cross this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving to them, to the sons of Israel. 3 Every place on which the sole of your foot treads, I have given it to you, just as I spoke to Moses. Joshua has to run a marathon. We don't understand the pronouns. T words in the King Jams singular, Y words plural. No such thing in this version. You have to pick your pronouns. John 3:7 King James Bible “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.” Thee- as if pointing at Nicodemus Ye - everyone must be born again John 3:7 New American Standard B 1995 7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born [a]again.’ Does only Nicodemus need to be born again? According to this, that is probably the case. Having Degrees won't save. The world was changed by ignorant fishermen, tax collectors and repentant Pharisees like Paul who forsook their knowledge and counted it as dung. IF you have lied, you are in danger of the lake of fire. Revelation 21:8 “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” Are you born again?
@@doylebecker4765 AMEN WELL SAID, KJV ONLY. The KJV is the only Bible I use and trust and no other. Those modern corrupted perversions all teach a works based salvation and makes salvation a process and difficult as it says in 1 Corinthians 1:18 of those MODERN PERVERSIONS-Being saved. MY KJV- 1 Corinthians 1:18 KJV says ARE SAVED and salvation is SIMPLE. God bless
“in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.” Colossians 1:14 NASB “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:” Colossians 1:14 KJV Think again the nasb is Dull. Takes out through His Blood. Get a Bible with all the words in it. KJV super sharp sword.
@@LuisPerez-fy6up what does this have to do with anything? Why would you compare two translations? You would first have to go to the original languages, then compare the translation with the original, then with English, then see which one is more accurate. The NASB is more accurate, even hear, try an interlinere Bible that has the Greek, and translates word for word to English as much as possible, it's not the Greek that is the problem but the English. Besides we 28,000 manuscripts, and the KJV used between 6-12 and even the Latin Vulgate in Revelation, but we have a more accurate of a translation with the NASB, have you done any study in the history of the translation?
Randycadkins did you even read the verses how one has missing words that are the foundation of Christian Faith? Without Blood there is no forgiveness of sins do you not understand? I’ll give you another example. I always switch back from the NASB to the KJV they are both my favorite translations but the KJV is just the best as in it contains all the words in it. Here is another example. “And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.” Luke 4:4 KJV “ but by every word of God “ “And Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘M AN SHALL NOT LIVE ON BREAD ALONE.’ ”” Luke 4:4 NASB All new versions take out “but by every word of God”
@@LuisPerez-fy6up I did read what you said, but I still stand by what I said as well, if you compare translations you will always find things like this when one is "missing" or "adding" but we again, must go back to the original text or manuscripts, which an interlinere is very good, or a good Greek New Testament, I still stand by the accuracy of the NASB over the KJV, that's why I said, it's my favorite translation, notice also, this is where you have a textual variant, and wasn't in the original text, it is in another gospel though, that's why we have the synoptic gospels, so we can see all of what is going on in the 4 accounts of Jesus' earthly ministry, but we shouldn't be ok with bringing in to the text from another part, just like the John 8, or 1 John 5:7 or many other textual variants, we want to be accurate, I'm not saying I dont like the KJV, I'm saying my favorite is the NASB because of its accuracy
@@LuisPerez-fy6up you have replied w/this several times, It is in Eph 1:7....Did you know 1John 5:7 was added?? Also why is Easter in the KJV?? it isn't in ANY MSS....The KJV is a beautiful translation to read, But as far as accuracy and being a word for word no. If you looked in almost 80% of Ministers, Pastors, Preachers desks, I can guarantee you above all you find a NASB Bible right at the front. Again KJV is beautiful, and I'm sure they did the best they could at the time. Since then over 5,000+ mss have been discovered, the nestle Allan is a major source of information. The NASB is just a much more accurate, literal and reliable translation. No I'm definitely not saying all modern translations are, because there are certainly some bad ones, the KJV has it's flaws just as the NASB does, difference is when it comes to the NASB there is much more information and MSS to back it up.
I love that Dr. Lawson brings up that the NASB capitalizes the pronouns when God is speaking. He and John MacArthur put me on the NASB. Previously, I was an ESV guy, but once I read the NASB I had a greater preference over the ESV. (Also NASB is red-lettered.)😂😂😂
What grind? It's more the vocabulary than thee, thou and ye. If you read the word alot you learn the words and you have an accurate translation unlike the new translations which have an agenda to diminish the word of God. They keep putting new translations out to water down the word even further.
I am really interested in the spurgeon study Bible but it's in the CSB and KJV of course the KJV is what it is, anyone have any insight on the CSB translation I can't figure out why they went with the CSB and not the ESV or NASB
I use the KJV as that’s what was preached from the day I got saved and I’ve gotten used to the preaching from that version. I have however over the past year or so, started reading the ESV and I am really enjoying this translation.
I enjoy KJV because it makes you search, examine, compare, look into definitions of words, you break it down more, get into a deeper study of passages, it increases your hunger for reading because you get into it more, enhances your understanding because you wrestle with The Scriptures in a good way. Its not just about reading to check a box its about seeking the heart of God because He reveals Himself through His Word. Also i enjoy the "Ye" , "thee", "thou", and "you" because you know whos directly being spoken to. Take your time with the scriptures, I shouldnt have a microwave mentality with embracing God for Who He is.
The subject of which Bible translation to use has always been a struggle for me. I have grown up using the KJV, which is probably the main one used where I’m from in Northern Ireland. The church that I go to could be considered to be a ‘KJV only’ kind of church. I know that it is a reliable translation and one that I have memorised verses in throughout my life. However, I struggle to read and fully understand it. I recently started reading the NKJV, which was much easier to read and understand, and then more recently I have been using the ESV, which I have grown to love! My problem is that I want a Bible which I can really focus on reading and studying, but I just don’t know which one to use.
Timmy McIntyre hi. I’d stick with the KJ Holy Bible. Over 400 years of Gods blessings upon all those users and hearers. How do we trust versions that disagree with themselves and each other? Sorry Steve you’re wrong!
I have both, KJV and NASB, i like them both, but i do believe the translation is better in the NASB, both are good tho, and neither have been turned into a "motivational book", but the Word of God.
I read the KJV, I also have it on an app with a dictionary. Once you look up the words a few times they stick with you and you will understand it. I like the pronouns, thee is singular and ye is plural.
The NASB 1977 used thee and thou in the Psalms and a few other places in the bible. There are places in the KJV where it is unintelligible to the modern reader such as the word leasing for lying and some other clumsy expressions which impair the reading of the text for us moderns. This however is easily overcome even when reading portions of the KJV aloud. I simply make adjustments while reading. Interesting how the KJV was never an obstacle for the church even 30 or 40 years ago. No one I know spoke Elizabethian English and we got along fine. It becomes a matter of personal preference than anything else. I went from the KJV to the NASB 1995 as my primary bible. Not of necessity but out of personal preference. Although I must say that The King Jimmy carries a reverence, beauty and elegance modern translations do not possess.
King James Only. Look up Daniel 6 and read about the Satraps Daniel appointed. Wait, what is a Satrap? Modern versions have to change a certain percentage of the printing according to derivative copyright law. What is changed? Leasing? So, look it up. The King James uses Princes in Daniel 6. A little kid knows what a prince is. My point. The King James Bible was written in MODERN English (1500-present). We can still go to a Shakespearean play and understand it. People are so academically lazy and make baseless claims (not saying you did this) that the King James Bible is always more difficult. Actually modern versions are typically at a higher reading level and use more syllables than the King James. Stick to the King James Bible. Look up Isaiah 14:12 in the King James. Lucifer is replaced in the other versions by Day Star (2 Peter 1:19 a name of Jesus) or morning star (Revelation 22:16 a name of Jesus). Satan tries to steal God's Glory. Look up Acts 8:37 in other versions to see what is needed to be saved. In other versions, you go from wanting Baptism, to being dunked, apparently Baptism saves aks Catholicism, Armininism, Calvinism et al and other false doctrines. Pay attention to Ye and Thou. Pronouns in the King James were important. Modern versions they don't care about pronouns. That is affecting the US today. 1 Corinthians 12:21 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. thee - singular one hand you - plural two feet Thee, thou, thy, thine correctly translated as singular in the King James. Ye, you, your plural. Joshua 1 King James Bible 2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel. 3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses. Thou- Joshua is leading the people your- plural - the foot of any person of Israel could claim the promised land. Modern corrupted versions: NAS B1995 2 “Moses My servant is dead; now therefore arise, cross this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving to them, to the sons of Israel. 3 Every place on which the sole of your foot treads, I have given it to you, just as I spoke to Moses. Joshua has to run a marathon. We don't understand the pronouns. T words in the King Jams singular, Y words plural. No such thing in this version. You have to pick your pronouns. John 3:7 King James Bible “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.” Thee- as if pointing at Nicodemus Ye - everyone must be born again John 3:7 New American Standard B 1995 7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born [a]again.’ Does only Nicodemus need to be born again? According to this, that is probably the case. Having Degrees won't save. The world was changed by ignorant fishermen, tax collectors and repentant Pharisees like Paul who forsook their knowledge and counted it as dung. IF you have lied, you are in danger of the lake of fire. Revelation 21:8 “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” Are you born again?
@Doyle Becker Well, when we come to something obscure or unknown, we look it up. Problem solved. If Satrap is a problem, then what should we do with emerods? Or other words unfamiliar and unkown to the modern reader. Research, study, and learn. Problem solved. This is true for any particular translation. God has, in His infinite wisdom, provided His people with many helpful resources we can and ought to make profitable use of. No translation is without its flaws and weaknesses, which may require some improvement. If God did not raise up competent scholars and linguists, there would be no translations in any language known to man. Matthew 28:18-20; Revelation 5:9,10. For the English reader, even a concordance can be readily consulted to find the meaning of any word used in a translation. Is the reader of the authorized version confounded when he reads about emerods that plagued the enemies of God's people? Then get out your Englishmens Hebrew concordance or perhaps a Strongs concordance both meant to be used with the kjv. and look it up, and you will find the meaning and gain some knowledge of the original and what would be a more intelligible way of translating that particular word in today's vocabulary. The same principle holds true for any translation. If we want to be exact Hebrew, Aramaic, or Chaldean, and Greek only. Then you can be your own translator. The original texts alone are god-breathed, inerrant, and infallible, Brother. No single translation dare make that claim, however good and sound overall it may be. Even those who prefer and are the most stout defenders of the Kjv recognize the absolute supremacy and priority of the original languages over and above a venerated translation. Holy men of God spoke as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. 2 Peter 1:20,21. This can never be attributed to any body of translators. I am sure you will agree.
Being the most literal translation from the original language does not render it as the most “accurate”. Just spending a few minutes with an interlinear proves that point. Understanding the Bible in your own language shouldn’t require a professional geek dissecting each word with tweezers. Unless you’re skilled at those ancient languages you are going to have to trust someone. The NASB is fine, but so is the NLT SE. In fact, there are many places where the NLT does a superior job. The best insurance is to have two translations. My combo is the NKJV (TR with excellent notes) and CSB (modern English, Critical Text)
Been thinking about the CSB but all these new translations use “New Order” which are scary(p.s behind the one dollar bill) and the older bibles use the word “Reformation” hmm now I am thinking on trying out this version. NASB(non revised) version. “but only in matters of food and drink and various ritual washings: regulations concerning the flesh, imposed until the time of the new order. Sacrifice of Jesus.” Hebrews 9:10 NABRE(revised version) “since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation.” HEBREWS 9:10 NASB(Non revised edition)
You must realize the mss used for nasb are from 1st and 2nd century A.D. where as the mss used for the KJV only go back to the 10th and 11th century...I wonder what was changed in those Thousand+ years??? That is the reason why so many people turn to the NASB, the mss are much older, much more reliable and way less of a chance of anyone changing them.
I had rather have a Bible that is missing several words, but every word it does have is God-breathed, than a Bible that has all the original words, but with several words added that are not God-breathed. I had rather have half a cup of water than a full cup with a drop of urine. This is why I have less confidence in the KJV. Yes, it has more words and verses...but the manuscript tradition is unsound. I only want verses that are found among the majority of the earliest Greek manuscripts. God, in His wisdom, did not allow His Word to be corrupted by man. Rather than have only one copy of a copy of a copy, we have several. It's because of the sheer number of ancient manuscripts, rather than in spite of it, that the true Word of God can still be found, even 2000 years later.
@@iancampbell1494 Absolutely. When I do my deep dives I use Logos Bible Software. I typically have NET, ESV, NIV, NASB, KJV, NRSV, and NA28 Greek up at the same time as my default. I would never ONLY use one. However, for preaching, I now use the NET just to have consistency. But I will frequently tell people things like, "The NASB or KJV give this reading" etc
KJV for Me, if Puritans used it along with Geneva then that good enough for Me, also NKJV is OK, but No time for ESV, NASB, or any other of the Bible Translations. PS, Mr Lawson NKJV uses Capitals for Diety, I agree with You it does help.
They're both very literal. Most people who like one, like the other as well. I was making the decision between these 2 earlier this year and ended up going with the ESV because I think it reads smoother at several places. But both are on the far literal side of the spectrum, which is preferred, imo. An example: Romans 10:10 ESV: "For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved." NASB: "or with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation." So, you have "justified" vs "resulting in righteousness" and "saved" vs "resulting in salvation". For memorization, and also because I will be reading this to my children, I went with the slightly "smoother" version. You can go to Bible gateway, and put the 2 versions side by side and just check out several of your favorite verses, or chapters, to get a good comparison. I do like that the NASB has more notes for context, it capitalizes the "H" for "He" or "Him" when referring to God, which I wish the ESV did. And it also puts the passages where the NT quotes to OT in all caps, making it stand out a little more. So formatting wise, I kind of like the NASB better, but wording I like the ESV better. You can't go wrong either way, imo.
@@MansterBear I have an esv and a NASB95, the esv is a MacArthur study bible the NASB95 is a Zondervan Preacher's Bible (released this past Feb, got it for Christmas). In my recent opportunity to preach for youth Sunday at my local church (Psalm 51 with 1 Sam 11&12 as context), I was studying & comparing each (used the NASB95 to preach from). I found it was very similar and only difference mainly was the order of words. Esv was recommended by a reformed man at church and NASB95 by many reformed preachers I listen to. After reading and studying through much of the New Testament with the esv (I think I was up to 2 Thess) it was a little adjustment when I got the NASB95 bc the esv is smoother. I guess you could say I'm a young man (17) who desires the office of overseer.
Wonderful,so do I,all other translations to me are utter RUBBISH I preach the gospel all over the UK as a Evangelist,And may I add,I cannot stand folks like this guy,with all his rubbish books.
@@alexandermichael117 You may call it what you like, But he is 100% correct in what he says, The NASB/Critical Text always has and always will be much more accurate when it comes the English language. You don't have to like it, or agree with it. Never the less it is true and Fact.
@@Faith-Ministries Rubbish,years ago folks lived happily without your modern filth,and where more Holy,and Godly than today,with all the new perversions out there.
@@alexandermichael117 EXACTLY, and where do you think there Bible came from??? THE CRITICAL TEXT!!!.....you just proved yourself wrong better than I ever could..Have a blessed day.
King James bible the truth and genuine text of textus receptors is the inspired word of God. God is not the author of confusion. So many new translations take away important words or change them.
*CURSED IS THE MAN THAT TRUSTETH IN MAN.* God promised to preserve His word. (Psalm 12:6-7 KJV). If you're relying on men to preserve God's word, your faith in God's word is in truth rooted in "Hebrew and Greek scholars."
Even a Christian cannot brush aside the worship of Jehovah as God. In Revelation 1:5 the Son of God called himself "Jesus Christ, 'The faithful Witness.'" When on earth as a man he was a Jew, an Israelite, to whose nation the words of Isaiah 43:10 were written: "'You are my witnesses, ' is the utterance of Jehovah, even my servant whom I have chosen.," Jesus demonstrated that he was a faithful and true witness of Jehovah God. His genuine disciples today must be the same kind of witnesses, Jehovah's.
I will continue to use the older versions of the KJV, NASB, ESV, NIV, NLT and the only new update to the NASB the LSB . The whole bible is inspired by God for US so we might know Him, Honor Him, Obey Him, Worship Him and Proclaim Him. 2 Tim 3:16-17 All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be equipped, having been thoroughly equipped for every good work. I also had no idea the KJV had so many revisions. Does anyone know exactly how many KJV revisions ? I also really like the NASB 77, 95 but i am not happy with the nasb 2020 update and won't buy or use it. I was told by a pastor that John MacArthur began the LSB project to counteract the 2020 NASB translation , it worked, as Grace to You earned Lockman's attention . The Lockman foundation gave the Masters Seminary permission to do the translation. What an amazing work it has been and will definitely be buying one to follow along with Justin Peters yearly reading program that uses the LSB. With all that being said ... let's all read the bible and get a trusted translation that you can understand and always have the KJV when studying. I think we can all agree that we need to be very cautious with newer updates that have all the liberal, gender neutral inclusive language etc.... Peace be with you
The NAS? So sorry to hear that. It's just one of a whole range of 'modern version's, translated from a corrupted New Greek New Testament, based on corrupted codexe's/texts. What's wrong with you people...
Our not-bornagain-legalistic translators messed up big time and made the bible contradict itself on multiple points. The original text, lit up by Holy Spirit, on the other hand is crystal clear. Some examples: 1. Orge in context means "passion" in stead of "wrath". So now translators made a loving God (in Him is light no darkness, He is never tempted to do evil, God is love, it pleases the Father to give you the kingdom, the Father himself loves you, etc, etc) suddenly become a vengefull God, from wich we have to be saved....? Utter BS. Through Jesus, God saves us from the fall of man and restores us back to His divine nature. The divine nature Adam let go of in the fall. Jesus beaten to pulp on a cross? Gods extreme passion to restore what got lost in the Garden: His divine power and love image in human form. 2. Sozo means "made complete" in stead of "saved". So now we are stuck with a stupid totally unbiblical "Repent! Or go to hell!" doctrine. In stead it has always been about transformation of human life back in to His image again. Repent btw actually means "change the way you think completely". That would be: "Wow, God loves me and restores me from the fall into His Image. Thank you Jesus, have your way in me with your Holy Spirit. You are amazing!!" 3. "Seeing Jesus comming on the clouds" actually reads "perceiving Jesus from a heavenly perspective". So now we have millions of ignorant Christians waiting for a bus to get them to heaven in stead of understanding that heaven came inside of them to transform them in to their original created value again. Read Gen 1:27 vs 2 Cor 3:18. Etc, etc, Therefore. The letter kills but the Spirit brings forth Divine life in abundance......
Like most, I started with the KJV. Then, I moved to the NKJV. Once I went to Bible College & Seminary and obtained my degrees and became more of an Expository/Textual preacher; I moved over to the NASB (1995).
Literal and accurate are not the same. AT ALL. In fact the more literally you translate one language to another word for word, the less accurate it becomes. Obviously you can go too far and begin to start paraphrasing, but I'd say a happy medium would quite 'literally' be more accurate.
Christian BEWARE: Strongly suggest you search for FRANK LOGSDON He was a committee member for the NASB. After realizing the folly of the NASB project he renounced it And passionately repented of of his involvement.
Why do you NOT offer anything specific as to what Mr Logsdon says against the NASB? And James White, author of 'The KJV Only Controversy' also was on the NASB committee and he, along with a 'who's-who' of the many reformed theologians use & endorse the NASB. Facts and specifics are needed, without which, passion is pulp.
@@styner3001 you are quite free to reject the warning I gave..... All the relevant information is readily available to you via google search. Suggest you stop trusting men with vested interests......
@@stuartwest8836 Asserting those reformed theologians who are among the highest regarded in the world, to prostitute their expressed high regard for the NASB to $$, shows how shallow you think, and is even your own projection. Sounds like Steven Anderson is your kind of pastor.
@@styner3001 what a pity you have to resort to Ad hominem......facts are facts, if you choose to isolate yourself from facts, . Recognize.......big money is behind the bible babble......I am not impressed with 'Theologians', nor should you be......it is a fearful thing to play around with the word of God, the last words of the Bible place a Divine Curse on anyone wh mishandles it. Suggest you spend time researching who WESTCOTT& HORT were and the involvement of the JESUITS in this matter. Steven Anderson is a dangerous man who climbs his pulpit like a chimpanzee then leaps from it, he is a hireling and a fraud.... Hope that helps.......
@@stuartwest8836 When YOU refer to theologians like Steven Lawson as paid-for shills for the NASB, it is you with the "Ad hominem" attack problem of projection. You spew broad-brush accusations you have no proof of. The NASB is based upon thousands of older Bible manuscripts that are centuries older than the KJV. Although I see no connection Steven Anderson is anyones "hireling", he is an unrestrained angry fool,... there are thousands around like him, with just enough Koolaid drinkers to support his salary.
Most Christians don't read the Bible and Christians that do read the KJV. 76% read the KJV. The rest is those modern versions. I got multiple versions and I've studied them and the manscript families. I'll stick with the KJV because most manscripts agree with it and the Latin manscripts which are the oldest also agree with the KJV more than the Modern Versions. These manscripts also agree with Geneva Bible more than Modern Versions. So I'm for any Bible in The Syriac text family.
Total liar hahahaha you're mennonite cult.reads it most Christians in modern day not living by worx read niv overwhelmingly Anyone connected to reality knows that.
Yes Steven BUT what original are you comparing it against??? The Alexandrian texts? which all depart from the TR texts which underpin the Authorised version. So yes your NASB is a good translation of a CORRUPT original!
I'll stick with the KJV, I know the history of it and how it came to be translated and why. I was blinded by the NIV and have heard a lot of innacuracies from the pulpit when the NCSB and the confusion it causes. My studies indicate the purpose of the modern translations is confusion and boy do they provide confusion.
How does it cause confusion exactly? You'd get confused comparing the NASB and the KJV, you'll get confused comparing the NASB to the NIV. Just learn greek and try translate a passage yourself and see what the result is...
No reputable Greek or Hebrew scholar believes this , and the men who worked on it didn't know Greek or Hebrew , Google Frans Ferdinand trial on Greek Translation, if you are allowed too as the watchtower likes to control what you have access too not unlike the Roman Catholic false church that seals its materials with an Imprimatur or Nihil Obstat
TRANSLATION ERRORS IN MODERN BIBLES Gospel - correctly translated as "good news". Apostle - correctly translated as “sent one”, such as Paul and Peter the “sent ones”. Deacon - correctly translated as "servant". Bishop - correctly translated as "overseer” or “elder". Pastor - correctly translated as "shepherd". Word (in John 1:1) - correctly translated as “logos”. Logos means ultimate truth and wisdom; universal and beyond view or God's view, as opposed to human understanding. Logos did not mean “word” to the Greeks, as modern bibles mistranslate the entire idea and meaning. Epistle - correctly translated as "letter". Doctrine - correctly translated as "teaching". Homosexual - correctly translated as “homosexual sex”, referring to the act, not the person. God is not against people. Rather, God is against what people often do, including fornication, adultery and homosexual sex; all three listed together in I Corinthians 6:9. “For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the people, but that the people through him might be saved.” Disciple - correctly translated as "follower" or "student". Preach - correctly translated as "proclaim" - anyone can proclaim the good news of Jesus; no religious cemetery degree either needed, required or desired. However, one should be very careful regarding anything in the Bible, that they understand and teach others correctly. Church - correctly translated as the “assembly”; the people who believe in Jesus and have his spirit within them. An assembly of believers is not a building or a religious or other organization--it refers to the actual people who believe in Jesus. “Upon this rock I will build my assembly. . .” Saint - a saint is someone who has been made holy by being washed by the blood of Jesus. No pope or other human being can make anyone a saint. Only Jesus can make someone a saint. And we cannot make ourselves a saint by doing good works or refraining from certain things. Only through forgiveness from Jesus can someone become a saint. God's name is YHWH, not Jehovah. YHWH means "I AM, I SHALL BE to infinity". God did not tell Moses to tell the people Yahweh sent you or Jehovah sent you. God told Moses to tell the Hebrews that "I AM" sent you. This is according to my understanding. These mistranslations are used to turn Jesus into a religion, which is not the intention of the New Testament; Jesus is deliberately secular, eating, drinking and associating with sinners and the common people, while railing against the religionists of his time. The New Testament is written in secular Koine Greek, the language of the common people. True religion is defined in James I:27. Be not deceived, Jesus did not come to earth to establish a religion called Christianity. He came to earth to save us sinners, to set us free, to give us life abundantly and to establish his assembly, which consists of his people. “This is the work of God, that you believe in him who he sent.” The goal of God's free salvation, is that we will “have love, one for another” and that whatever we want people to do to us, we will likewise do unto them: “For this is the law and the prophets.” Without love, whatever we do is in vain.
The Love De-Emphasized Bible twisted by John Calvin no doubt! In Islam, Allah is virtually devoid of love. Caner and Caner list 99 names of Allah, and only one includes a reference to love (and this only to those who are “his own”). They write: When Allah is discussed within the Islamic community, the absence of intimacy, atonement, and omnibenevolence becomes apparent. In all the terms and titles of Allah, one does not encounter terms of intimacy. . . Even the most faithful and devout Muslim refers to Allah only as servant to master; Allah is a distant sovereign (Unveiling Islam, p. 117). But what do we find in Calvinism? God’s sovereignty-His power and holiness-are emphasized at the expense of His love. Dave Hunt observes: But where is God’s love? Not once in the nearly thirteen hundred pages of his Institutes does Calvin extol God’s love for mankind. This one sided emphasis reveals Calvinism’s primary defect: the unbiblical limitations it places upon God’s most glorious attribute. . . Something is radically amiss at the very foundation of this unbiblical doctrine (Debating Calvinism, p. 47) Jesus said: My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. 14 You are my friends if you do what I command. 15 I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you. John 15 12- 15 Truth in Love
I am a 0 point Calvinist, not an Arminian, both are ditches that take our eyes off Christ. I am a believer in what Christ did on the cross. The sovereign god of Calvinism is well described in your post. BTW sovereign or sovereignty is used 0 times in the King James Bible. King James Only. Stick to the King James Bible. Look up Isaiah 14:12 in the King James. Lucifer is replaced in the other versions by Day Star (2 Peter 1:19 a name of Jesus) or morning star (Revelation 22:16 a name of Jesus). Satan tries to steal God's Glory. Look up Acts 8:37 in other versions to see what is needed to be saved. In other versions, you go from wanting Baptism, to being dunked, apparently Baptism saves aks Catholicism, Armininism, Calvinism et al and other false doctrines. Pay attention to Ye and Thou. Pronouns in the King James were important. Modern versions they don't care about pronouns. That is affecting the US today. 1 Corinthians 12:21 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. thee - singular one hand you - plural two feet Thee, thou, thy, thine correctly translated as singular in the King James. Ye, you, your plural. Joshua 1 King James Bible 2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel. 3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses. Thou- Joshua is leading the people your- plural - the foot of any person of Israel could claim the promised land. Modern corrupted versions: NAS B1995 2 “Moses My servant is dead; now therefore arise, cross this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving to them, to the sons of Israel. 3 Every place on which the sole of your foot treads, I have given it to you, just as I spoke to Moses. Joshua has to run a marathon. We don't understand the pronouns. T words in the King Jams singular, Y words plural. No such thing in this version. You have to pick your pronouns. John 3:7 King James Bible “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.” Thee- as if pointing at Nicodemus Ye - everyone must be born again John 3:7 New American Standard B 1995 7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born [a]again.’ Does only Nicodemus need to be born again? According to this, that is probably the case. Having Degrees won't save. The world was changed by ignorant fishermen, tax collectors and repentant Pharisees like Paul who forsook their knowledge and counted it as dung. IF you have lied, you are in danger of the lake of fire. Revelation 21:8 “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” Are you born again? Good post on the false doctrine of Calvinism.
@@shirleygoss1988 lol your passive agreesive/underlying implication is so childish that your ignorance shows. Nothing wrong with the KJV. 1611 or whatever version. So sad you’re trying to indirectly claim others ignorance of which Bible they actually have/read. Simply because your obvious hatred for the KJV.
@@Texasguy316 You sir, are reading into what I asked, something that I did not ask, and I have no idea what you think you are getting at. There are various revisions of the King James version. The one most in use today is the 1769 revision. That is only with standardize spelling, and more modern punctuation. It is what many "1611 KJV Only" congregations refer to as the 1611 KJV! I know this because I have been in such congregations before, and still have friends who are. I have no hatred of the King James version!
Believing that there are multiple acceptable translations of the Bible in any given language is to believe that: 1. God has not perfectly preserved His words to mankind because: A. God did not want to preserve His words. B. God was unable to preserve His words. Or 2. Man has not accurately translated the Bible into a given language. But the perfect and pure English Bible says, Psalms 119:89 LAMED For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven. We have the perfect Bible in English. It’s the KJV.
NASB may be the most accurate word for word translation BUT the source text is flawed - the Westcott and Hort new testament text. Even Dr. Lockwood recanted his support for this version. The KJV is the only Bible in the English language based on the reliable Textus Receptus. It's all about the source text.
Jesus Saves It’s already been updated. The frequency of updates nowadays is ludicrous. I’ve put my foot down and decided to stick with the NASB ‘77 for life.
Yeah, I was sort of thinking the same thing. I don't believe that giving a capital letter to a pronoun referring to God is anything especially spiritual or honorific, etc. But when I think about it, it could be a useful tool when you're standing at the pulpit and you've wandered off your notes. It's just another tool.
I don't need a capital to understand this. This is my post. This post is Mine. That didn't make me a god or anything. I get who wrote the post. Don't you understand his question? "You NEED the translator to tell you who the pronoun is referring to? Interesting." More on pronouns coming. Stick to the King James Bible. Look up Isaiah 14:12 in the King James. Lucifer is replaced in the other versions by Day Star (2 Peter 1:19 a name of Jesus) or morning star (Revelation 22:16 a name of Jesus). Satan tries to steal God's Glory. Look up Acts 8:37 in other versions to see what is needed to be saved. In other versions, you go from wanting Baptism, to being dunked, apparently Baptism saves aks Catholicism, Armininism, Calvinism et al and other false doctrines. Pay attention to Ye and Thou. Pronouns in the King James were important. Modern versions they don't care about pronouns. That is affecting the US today. 1 Corinthians 12:21 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. thee - singular one hand you - plural two feet Thee, thou, thy, thine correctly translated as singular in the King James. Ye, you, your plural. Joshua 1 King James Bible 2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel. 3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses. Thou- Joshua is leading the people your- plural - the foot of any person of Israel could claim the promised land. Modern corrupted versions: NAS B1995 2 “Moses My servant is dead; now therefore arise, cross this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving to them, to the sons of Israel. 3 Every place on which the sole of your foot treads, I have given it to you, just as I spoke to Moses. Joshua has to run a marathon. We don't understand the pronouns. T words in the King Jams singular, Y words plural. No such thing in this version. You have to pick your pronouns. John 3:7 King James Bible “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.” Thee- as if pointing at Nicodemus Ye - everyone must be born again John 3:7 New American Standard B 1995 7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born [a]again.’ Does only Nicodemus need to be born again? According to this, that is probably the case. Having Degrees won't save. The world was changed by ignorant fishermen, tax collectors and repentant Pharisees like Paul who forsook their knowledge and counted it as dung. IF you have lied, you are in danger of the lake of fire. Revelation 21:8 “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” Are you born again?
@@ok5731 If I were to answer in kind I would say; Why mess with the gnostic text? But to answer in truth and spirit; The KJV (sans apocrypha which are Jewish fables and history) is the first translation into the English Proper language, and other than pronunciation has not, nor will need to be modernized. It also holds true to the greek in 99% of the readings....for example the NASB (which I use as a study tool) reads Abijah in Luke 1:5 with a footnote reading +or Abia in greek+ where the KJV simply reads Abia.
A Mormon doesn’t call himself a Christian! They study the Christian Bible! Their absolute authority to interpret the Bible is their Book of Mormon! Ask them any meaning of any verse in the Bible and they would go look in the Book of Mormon for the TRUE meaning." and twist it to Joseph Smiths heresy! A Jehovah Witness doesn’t call himself a Christian! They study the Christian Bible! Their absolute authority to interpret the Bible is The Watch Tower! Ask them any meaning of any verse in the Bible and they would go look in the Watch Tower for the TRUE meaning." and twist it to Russel's heresy! A Calvinist didn’t call himself a Christian! They study the Christian Bible! Their absolute authority to interpret the Bible is The John Calvin Institutes! Ask them any meaning of any verse in the Bible and they would go look in John Calvin’s Institutes for the TRUE meaning." and twist it to John Calvin’s heresy! A Christian call’s himself a Christian! They study the Christian Bible! Their absolute authority to interpret the Bible is The Bible! Ask them any meaning of any verse in the Bible and they would go look in the Bible and look for the TRUE meaning." and believe it for what it says! Christians rely on the leading and discernment The Holy Spirit promises to give Gods Children. "Not a Guru! That is assurance! When in history did the Calvinist start calling themselves Christians? Truth in Love
Thank you for JUST saying it instead of beating around the bush.
"I make major points out of small words." In my experience, dynamic equivalent translations tend to leave out the small words. I appreciate Dr. Lawson's perspective.
Thank you. I really love how NASB gives students more transparency to the process of translation.
My understanding is that "meaning" is conveyed on several different levels. Language communicates meaning in its grammatical structure (no English translation picks this up), in its semantic relationships (CSB and NIV are good here), and in the individual words (NASB and ESV are good here). There are even a number of other ways in which language can communicate meaning where translations like the NLT can pick up on better.
I read study from the CSB, NASB, and NIV. But I employ the ESV, NKJV, NET, CEB, and NLT extensively because you can get incredible insight from using different translations if you know what to look for when reading your Bible.
Thank you Dr Lawson 🙏
What a great teacher, I use the NAS also thanks for your explanation on this translation. I know it will help many out there
I've used NASB since college (1974) and have never experienced the "difficulties" with understanding often used to criticize it. Appreciate your matter-of-fact description that emphasizes the positive about reading the text.
Excellent.
❤️ Thankyou for explaining this. Sounds very respectable towards God using the capitals. I'm from Europe and never understood about the American translation.
5 years later, I'm more in love with the NASB95 now then when I started.
Thanks for this.
I just Googled "What is the most accurate Bible Translation?" And the NASB (New American Standard Bible) popped up. So, I will check it out. Thank you Dr. Lawson. By the way, I listen to you on TH-cam every day, along with RC Sproul and John MacArthur. My favorite Videos are the Ligonier Panel.
I believe Nasb is a readable translation. I appreciate your candor in this pod cast
I feel like there is a bit of a resurgence in popularity for the NASB which I am happy to see. I started in the NASB after I was born again, switched mainly to the ESV, but have now returned to the NASB with my new Preacher’s Bible and I have come to realize out of all the translations I have read and studied from, the NASB truly is my favorite as well.
Id say the ESV and the NASB are the 2 most accurate translations in english we have
Go for it , but what are your kids going to do when it's revised again, and again, and again until your great grandkids have a corrupt Bible. Most of these theologians do not believe God left a written word. It was like pulling teeth until I got a pastor to admit it.
tim prater That’s just false. Languages change, especially English, and it’s our duty to translate the Bible from its original languages into the common languages of the world.
Akihito007 Yeah, but it’s not just the translations that change; the Greek text is constantly being updated as well. So for people who hold to the Alexandrian text, the Bible is basically a work in progress. So we didn’t really have the word of God a few hundred years ago, and we don’t really have the word of God right now either. And in a hundred years, even if we’ve discovered an abundance of new manuscripts, we still might not have the word of God 100%, because there may be even more manuscripts out there left to discover. That’s why I stick with the KJV. I believe God has preserved his word 100% perfectly in one translation per language.
Steve Tucker good points Steve. I try to have grace with others but for the reasons you specified above, I read and study only the KJV
I use the NKJV for very similar reasons
I'm just getting started in ministry. I'm going with the LSB for all the reasons you've stated.
Love my nasb1995 and then when I speak to youth age students I use the ESV. Love both so much!
I agree to the level of since the beginning of time once Mankind put his hands on something changes will occur!
I really appreciate One Passion Ministries for this video. I've been using NIV since high school and I really love it. I now am inclined to get a copy of the NAS. I guess the challenge may be getting an original version of NAS that's not tampered with. Thanks Steve.
NAS is my favorite Bible translation ❤
I use the NASB for my study, but I've begun to look ay the NET Bible, the full not version. A lot of textual critical work went into this translation.
I like the notes of the NET, a lot. I'd say the text they chose is comparable to the NIV, but the notes is what makes it stand out.
I wonder if Dr. Lawson will consider switching to the LSB once it's fully published?
The Preacher's Bible is my first NASB (was using ESV before) and it has become my favorite.
We aware truly blessed to have Gods word in many translations it was once illegal to own the bible and those who tried to translate it into English where put to death.
Still that way in several countries, today.
I use the Holman Christian study Bible and the NASB as well.
Good to hear because after 24 years of using the NASB (all the while comparing and purchasing many others) I still go back to the NASB. Call it a habit? I don't know, maybe. I used the ESV for a couple of years while going through it, Genesis through Revelation, and making copious margin notes as a gift to my youngest Granddaughter, as I did before for her older Sister (I did the same for her but gave her an NASB). Like Dr. Lawson, I have another six or eight translations, even a "Young's Literal Translation" which I do comparisons on certain passages, but always seem to go back to the NASB. Giving it some thought, I believe that Dr. MacArthur started me on the NASB as a new believer!
The NASB is my favorite, also for various reasons.
“in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.”
Colossians 1:14 NASB
“In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:”
Colossians 1:14 KJV
Think again the nasb is Dull. Takes out through His Blood. Get a Bible with all the words in it. KJV super sharp sword.
@@LuisPerez-fy6up the NASB still includes it in Ephesians 1:7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace
Luis Perez
Probably because “by his blood” was a later add on by commentators to clarify the passage.
@@LuisPerez-fy6up Based on bad manuscripts...
@@LuisPerez-fy6up the Greek text itself doesn’t have that in there. It was added later on...besides NASB Ephesians 1:7 includes “through his blood.”
What specific Bible does Dr. Lawson carry. (i.e. Zondervan Single Column, side column reference bible). ??
I use the NASB along with the NKJV
“in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.”
Colossians 1:14 NASB
“In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:”
Colossians 1:14 KJV
Think again the nasb is Dull. Takes out through His Blood. Get a Bible with all the words in it. KJV super sharp sword.
@@LuisPerez-fy6up I see your trolling on many people, its disingenuous what you are doing
Randycadkins what? Did you even read what I wrote?
Loose that putrid horrid Pride.
“Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom.”
Proverbs 13:10 KJV
@@LuisPerez-fy6up read what I responded to you first when you sent me, (and many others) the same message, that's why its disingenuous, it's not coming from pride, I just noticed that you have said the same thing, word for word, meaning you have copied and pasted the same response to many.
I replied to you on my original post, I would like to see what you have to say about it.
I always thought I needed a modern translation but I have been reading the King James Version. I've had no problems understanding it, I do use a dictionary but I am learning the words quickly. The New King James helped me with this I will admit.
I'm trying to find a dramatized version but can't find it on the 1995
I'm not part of the English speaking world because my native language is Spanish, but in my opinion I think that I hasn't been able to stop reading and studying thoroughly my KJV bible, KJV or Geneva Bible were our ancestors primary Bible, Puritans and reformers primary Bible, KJV is the Word of God. If I need to figure out a text more deeply I simply consult a modern version, but KJV is really the Word of God. Greetings and blessings from Bogotá.
Stick to the King James Bible. Look up Isaiah 14:12 in the King James. Lucifer is replaced in the other versions by Day Star (2 Peter 1:19 a name of Jesus) or morning star (Revelation 22:16 a name of Jesus). Satan tries to steal God's Glory.
Look up Acts 8:37 in other versions to see what is needed to be saved. In other versions, you go from wanting Baptism, to being dunked, apparently Baptism saves aks Catholicism, Armininism, Calvinism et al and other false doctrines.
Pay attention to Ye and Thou. Pronouns in the King James were important. Modern versions they don't care about pronouns. That is affecting the US today.
1 Corinthians 12:21 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
thee - singular one hand
you - plural two feet
Thee, thou, thy, thine correctly translated as singular in the King James. Ye, you, your plural.
Joshua 1 King James Bible
2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel.
3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses.
Thou- Joshua is leading the people
your- plural - the foot of any person of Israel could claim the promised land.
Modern corrupted versions:
NAS B1995
2 “Moses My servant is dead; now therefore arise, cross this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving to them, to the sons of Israel. 3 Every place on which the sole of your foot treads, I have given it to you, just as I spoke to Moses.
Joshua has to run a marathon. We don't understand the pronouns. T words in the King Jams singular, Y words plural. No such thing in this version. You have to pick your pronouns.
John 3:7 King James Bible
“Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.”
Thee- as if pointing at Nicodemus
Ye - everyone must be born again
John 3:7
New American Standard B 1995
7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born [a]again.’
Does only Nicodemus need to be born again? According to this, that is probably the case.
Good job sticking to the Bible, the King James Bible.
Yes, KJV is the perfectly preserved Bible in English.
In Spanish, it’s the RVG 2010.
KJV is to me trustworthy,I compared others they dont hold up.I dont trust most of these youtube preachers either.
Thanks for this. Feel free to share any other info like this. The pronouns, thats important.
literal does not always mean accurate. in fact, in cases such as idioms, a literal translation would be a factually _bad_ translation. I personally do think there is a lot of value in using different translations, but I do not get why so many people equate literal to accurate.
You are 100% correct. It’s crazy how many think literal word for word is more accurate
NKJV for me!
I love the: NASB (my main Bible), KJV, AMP, NKJV and NLT! My top go to translations. And if I'm really struggling to understand something; I'll use: HCSB and the CEV, for more clarity and to see if I'm in the Holy Spirit's understanding and not my own!
Nasb is my bible for all the same reasons.
Robert Pierre Olivétan was a good translator of the Bible in French. (1535)
I have the exact same feelings toward the NKJV, but I’ve been trying to use the NASB as my primary translation after having studied for two years in Greek and Hebrew as well as textual Criticism. Hopefully I’ll be able to fully convert 🤞
“in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.”
Colossians 1:14 NASB
“In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:”
Colossians 1:14 KJV
Think again the nasb is Dull. Takes out through His Blood. Get a Bible with all the words in it. KJV super sharp sword.
@Adam H yeah I use both now but have the KJV as my main bible.
The reason the KJV kept the “thee’s and thy’s” is because the pronouns that begin with T are singular, and the pronouns that begin with Y are plural. Don’t know why that’s such a problem.
Geneva #1 ......
Had no idea. Thanks!
I loved the jerusalem bible catholic edition!!! Very fresh translation & very useful for sharing the faith!!!
Salvation is by faith in Christ alone not by works or sacraments.
Jpep said it great the apochrophyia or how ever you spell it is false
I greatly prefer the 1977 edition and its archaic language. The '95 replaces pronouns with proper names or other identifiers much too frequently. I've heard many people repeat the claim that the NASB is the most literal translation, but I've not seen any data to back that up. Based on my own careful examination of 14 New Testament translations, in which I scored the liberties each translation took with the Greek (including variants) in 200 verses chosen at random, I'd say that the ASV is the most literal. It's clear the NASB isn't as literal as it could be -- just read the marginal notes that start with "Lit.".
Yes if they want to be a literal translation why not put the literal renderings in the text rather than the footnotes.
I just noticed that not once did you use thy, thou, keepeth, saith, nor abideth in any of your statement. Just an observation.
@@apostasiaelegcho5612 so true
King James Only.
The ASV will agree with Strong's Concordance the most. Why? I am a King James Bible only believer. But, James Strong worked with Unitarians (people that don't believe the trinity) on the ASV, he also wrote Strong's concordance. They compiled the "unoriginal" manuscripts by writing the "supposed original" Greek texts etc by taking the King James Bible and back writing the Greek texts etc in the 1880s. People now go to these texts compiled poorly from the King James (not word for word) and say how amazing the ASV corresponds to the Strong's concordance. He wrote both, so well, duh. If the same person incorrectly translated two things, they probably agree a lot.
Stick to the King James Bible. Look up Isaiah 14:12 in the King James. Lucifer is replaced in the other versions by Day Star (2 Peter 1:19 a name of Jesus) or morning star (Revelation 22:16 a name of Jesus). Satan tries to steal God's Glory.
Look up Acts 8:37 in other versions to see what is needed to be saved. In other versions, you go from wanting Baptism, to being dunked, apparently Baptism saves aks Catholicism, Armininism, Calvinism et al and other false doctrines.
Pay attention to Ye and Thou. Pronouns in the King James were important. Modern versions they don't care about pronouns. That is affecting the US today.
1 Corinthians 12:21 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
thee - singular one hand
you - plural two feet
Thee, thou, thy, thine correctly translated as singular in the King James. Ye, you, your plural.
Joshua 1 King James Bible
2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel.
3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses.
Thou- Joshua is leading the people
your- plural - the foot of any person of Israel could claim the promised land.
Modern corrupted versions:
NAS B1995
2 “Moses My servant is dead; now therefore arise, cross this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving to them, to the sons of Israel. 3 Every place on which the sole of your foot treads, I have given it to you, just as I spoke to Moses.
Joshua has to run a marathon. We don't understand the pronouns. T words in the King Jams singular, Y words plural. No such thing in this version. You have to pick your pronouns.
John 3:7 King James Bible
“Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.”
Thee- as if pointing at Nicodemus
Ye - everyone must be born again
John 3:7
New American Standard B 1995
7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born [a]again.’
Does only Nicodemus need to be born again? According to this, that is probably the case.
Having Degrees won't save. The world was changed by ignorant fishermen, tax collectors and repentant Pharisees like Paul who forsook their knowledge and counted it as dung. IF you have lied, you are in danger of the lake of fire.
Revelation 21:8
“But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.”
Are you born again?
@@doylebecker4765 AMEN WELL SAID, KJV ONLY. The KJV is the only Bible I use and trust and no other. Those modern corrupted perversions all teach a works based salvation and makes salvation a process and difficult as it says in 1 Corinthians 1:18 of those MODERN PERVERSIONS-Being saved. MY KJV- 1 Corinthians 1:18 KJV says ARE SAVED and salvation is SIMPLE. God bless
Yep, the NASB is my favorite translation 😁
“in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.”
Colossians 1:14 NASB
“In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:”
Colossians 1:14 KJV
Think again the nasb is Dull. Takes out through His Blood. Get a Bible with all the words in it. KJV super sharp sword.
@@LuisPerez-fy6up what does this have to do with anything? Why would you compare two translations? You would first have to go to the original languages, then compare the translation with the original, then with English, then see which one is more accurate.
The NASB is more accurate, even hear, try an interlinere Bible that has the Greek, and translates word for word to English as much as possible, it's not the Greek that is the problem but the English.
Besides we 28,000 manuscripts, and the KJV used between 6-12 and even the Latin Vulgate in Revelation, but we have a more accurate of a translation with the NASB,
have you done any study in the history of the translation?
Randycadkins did you even read the verses how one has missing words that are the foundation of Christian Faith? Without Blood there is no forgiveness of sins do you not understand? I’ll give you another example. I always switch back from the NASB to the KJV they are both my favorite translations but the KJV is just the best as in it contains all the words in it. Here is another example.
“And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.”
Luke 4:4 KJV
“ but by every word of God “
“And Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘M AN SHALL NOT LIVE ON BREAD ALONE.’ ””
Luke 4:4 NASB
All new versions take out “but by every word of God”
@@LuisPerez-fy6up I did read what you said, but I still stand by what I said as well, if you compare translations you will always find things like this when one is "missing" or "adding" but we again, must go back to the original text or manuscripts, which an interlinere is very good, or a good Greek New Testament, I still stand by the accuracy of the NASB over the KJV, that's why I said, it's my favorite translation, notice also, this is where you have a textual variant, and wasn't in the original text, it is in another gospel though, that's why we have the synoptic gospels, so we can see all of what is going on in the 4 accounts of Jesus' earthly ministry, but we shouldn't be ok with bringing in to the text from another part, just like the John 8, or 1 John 5:7 or many other textual variants, we want to be accurate, I'm not saying I dont like the KJV, I'm saying my favorite is the NASB because of its accuracy
@@LuisPerez-fy6up you have replied w/this several times, It is in Eph 1:7....Did you know 1John 5:7 was added?? Also why is Easter in the KJV?? it isn't in ANY MSS....The KJV is a beautiful translation to read, But as far as accuracy and being a word for word no. If you looked in almost 80% of Ministers, Pastors, Preachers desks, I can guarantee you above all you find a NASB Bible right at the front. Again KJV is beautiful, and I'm sure they did the best they could at the time. Since then over 5,000+ mss have been discovered, the nestle Allan is a major source of information. The NASB is just a much more accurate, literal and reliable translation. No I'm definitely not saying all modern translations are, because there are certainly some bad ones, the KJV has it's flaws just as the NASB does, difference is when it comes to the NASB there is much more information and MSS to back it up.
Is there any inspired way to prepare for a sermon?
Yes, take a passage and explain whatever is written in it.
Holy Spirit.
I love all translations. But the NASB is my main go to.
From what year, May i ask? 😊
I love that Dr. Lawson brings up that the NASB capitalizes the pronouns when God is speaking. He and John MacArthur put me on the NASB. Previously, I was an ESV guy, but once I read the NASB I had a greater preference over the ESV. (Also NASB is red-lettered.)😂😂😂
I’m a dispensationalist believer do you have any videos on that
@@teresataylor1942it's a cult claiming God has changed your in the wrong religion hahahahaha
I own the NASB, NIV, KJV, ESV, and NKJV. I prefer the NKJV as I was used to the KJV but grew tired of the thees and thous.
The thee, thou and ye are important, thee is singular and ye is plural, that is more precise.
@@dwashington1333 it's archaic and was good for it's time. Nowadays it's just bothersome and tiresome to grind through all of that.
What grind? It's more the vocabulary than thee, thou and ye. If you read the word alot you learn the words and you have an accurate translation unlike the new translations which have an agenda to diminish the word of God. They keep putting new translations out to water down the word even further.
friends exactly! Although I understand the archaic words I wanted something more modern and understandable.
@@gerardocont03I know, words are hard, huh. SMH
NASB '77 - LBLA
I love the NASB1995! I am very excited for the Legacy Standard Bible to be released on March 5th. It will be an even better NASB 1995
I’ve got mine on order. Hoping to get it by Christmas 2020.
@Martin_Speaks What is so odd about it is in the New Testament, when they quote the Old Testament, they use LORD.
Love the Legacy standard Bible!
I enjoy the nkjv, has capitalised pronouns and additions in italics too. I'm waiting for the legacy Bible to come out, looks very good.
I am really interested in the spurgeon study Bible but it's in the CSB and KJV of course the KJV is what it is, anyone have any insight on the CSB translation I can't figure out why they went with the CSB and not the ESV or NASB
Because the CSB is a cross between the ESV and the NIV, For a lot of people the NASB is just "TOO" Literal and wooden.
I use the KJV as that’s what was preached from the day I got saved and I’ve gotten used to the preaching from that version. I have however over the past year or so, started reading the ESV and I am really enjoying this translation.
I enjoy KJV because it makes you search, examine, compare, look into definitions of words, you break it down more, get into a deeper study of passages, it increases your hunger for reading because you get into it more, enhances your understanding because you wrestle with The Scriptures in a good way. Its not just about reading to check a box its about seeking the heart of God because He reveals Himself through His Word. Also i enjoy the "Ye" , "thee", "thou", and "you" because you know whos directly being spoken to. Take your time with the scriptures, I shouldnt have a microwave mentality with embracing God for Who He is.
the esv is a vatican bible, hardly worth anyone's time
@@xceptamanbbornagainnokingd5836 ESV wasn't translated by Catholics. It's as though you speak without knowing, often.
The subject of which Bible translation to use has always been a struggle for me. I have grown up using the KJV, which is probably the main one used where I’m from in Northern Ireland. The church that I go to could be considered to be a ‘KJV only’ kind of church. I know that it is a reliable translation and one that I have memorised verses in throughout my life. However, I struggle to read and fully understand it.
I recently started reading the NKJV, which was much easier to read and understand, and then more recently I have been using the ESV, which I have grown to love!
My problem is that I want a Bible which I can really focus on reading and studying, but I just don’t know which one to use.
Timmy McIntyre hi. I’d stick with the KJ Holy Bible. Over 400 years of Gods blessings upon all those users and hearers. How do we trust versions that disagree with themselves and each other? Sorry Steve you’re wrong!
read the kjv and esv side by side
I have both, KJV and NASB, i like them both, but i do believe the translation is better in the NASB, both are good tho, and neither have been turned into a "motivational book", but the Word of God.
@InChrist that is a good idea, a good place to study, i love how you traded shifts to be able to study in a more consistant way! God bless
I read the KJV, I also have it on an app with a dictionary. Once you look up the words a few times they stick with you and you will understand it. I like the pronouns, thee is singular and ye is plural.
The NASB 1977 used thee and thou in the Psalms and a few other places in the bible. There are places in the KJV where it is unintelligible to the modern reader such as the word leasing for lying and some other clumsy expressions which impair the reading of the text for us moderns. This however is easily overcome even when reading portions of the KJV aloud. I simply make adjustments while reading. Interesting how the KJV was never an obstacle for the church even 30 or 40 years ago. No one I know spoke Elizabethian English and we got along fine. It becomes a matter of personal preference than anything else. I went from the KJV to the NASB 1995 as my primary bible. Not of necessity but out of personal preference. Although I must say that The King Jimmy carries a reverence, beauty and elegance modern translations do not possess.
King James Only.
Look up Daniel 6 and read about the Satraps Daniel appointed. Wait, what is a Satrap?
Modern versions have to change a certain percentage of the printing according to derivative copyright law. What is changed?
Leasing? So, look it up. The King James uses Princes in Daniel 6. A little kid knows what a prince is. My point. The King James Bible was written in MODERN English (1500-present). We can still go to a Shakespearean play and understand it. People are so academically lazy and make baseless claims (not saying you did this) that the King James Bible is always more difficult. Actually modern versions are typically at a higher reading level and use more syllables than the King James.
Stick to the King James Bible. Look up Isaiah 14:12 in the King James. Lucifer is replaced in the other versions by Day Star (2 Peter 1:19 a name of Jesus) or morning star (Revelation 22:16 a name of Jesus). Satan tries to steal God's Glory.
Look up Acts 8:37 in other versions to see what is needed to be saved. In other versions, you go from wanting Baptism, to being dunked, apparently Baptism saves aks Catholicism, Armininism, Calvinism et al and other false doctrines.
Pay attention to Ye and Thou. Pronouns in the King James were important. Modern versions they don't care about pronouns. That is affecting the US today.
1 Corinthians 12:21 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
thee - singular one hand
you - plural two feet
Thee, thou, thy, thine correctly translated as singular in the King James. Ye, you, your plural.
Joshua 1 King James Bible
2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel.
3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses.
Thou- Joshua is leading the people
your- plural - the foot of any person of Israel could claim the promised land.
Modern corrupted versions:
NAS B1995
2 “Moses My servant is dead; now therefore arise, cross this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving to them, to the sons of Israel. 3 Every place on which the sole of your foot treads, I have given it to you, just as I spoke to Moses.
Joshua has to run a marathon. We don't understand the pronouns. T words in the King Jams singular, Y words plural. No such thing in this version. You have to pick your pronouns.
John 3:7 King James Bible
“Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.”
Thee- as if pointing at Nicodemus
Ye - everyone must be born again
John 3:7
New American Standard B 1995
7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born [a]again.’
Does only Nicodemus need to be born again? According to this, that is probably the case.
Having Degrees won't save. The world was changed by ignorant fishermen, tax collectors and repentant Pharisees like Paul who forsook their knowledge and counted it as dung. IF you have lied, you are in danger of the lake of fire.
Revelation 21:8
“But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.”
Are you born again?
@Doyle Becker Well, when we come to something obscure or unknown, we look it up. Problem solved. If Satrap is a problem, then what should we do with emerods? Or other words unfamiliar and unkown to the modern reader. Research, study, and learn. Problem solved. This is true for any particular translation. God has, in His infinite wisdom, provided His people with many helpful resources we can and ought to make profitable use of. No translation is without its flaws and weaknesses, which may require some improvement. If God did not raise up competent scholars and linguists, there would be no translations in any language known to man. Matthew 28:18-20; Revelation 5:9,10. For the English reader, even a concordance can be readily consulted to find the meaning of any word used in a translation. Is the reader of the authorized version confounded when he reads about emerods that plagued the enemies of God's people? Then get out your Englishmens Hebrew concordance or perhaps a Strongs concordance both meant to be used with the kjv. and look it up, and you will find the meaning and gain some knowledge of the original and what would be a more intelligible way of translating that particular word in today's vocabulary. The same principle holds true for any translation. If we want to be exact Hebrew, Aramaic, or Chaldean, and Greek only. Then you can be your own translator. The original texts alone are god-breathed, inerrant, and infallible, Brother. No single translation dare make that claim, however good and sound overall it may be. Even those who prefer and are the most stout defenders of the Kjv recognize the absolute supremacy and priority of the original languages over and above a venerated translation.
Holy men of God spoke as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. 2 Peter 1:20,21. This can never be attributed to any body of translators. I am sure you will agree.
Being the most literal translation from the original language does not render it as the most “accurate”. Just spending a few minutes with an interlinear proves that point. Understanding the Bible in your own language shouldn’t require a professional geek dissecting each word with tweezers.
Unless you’re skilled at those ancient languages you are going to have to trust someone. The NASB is fine, but so is the NLT SE. In fact, there are many places where the NLT does a superior job. The best insurance is to have two translations. My combo is the NKJV (TR with excellent notes) and CSB (modern English, Critical Text)
Anyone know if NET Bible a good one?
NET reads very smoothly and has lots of notes if you interested in that.
Been thinking about the CSB but all these new translations use “New Order” which are scary(p.s behind the one dollar bill) and the older bibles use the word “Reformation” hmm now I am thinking on trying out this version. NASB(non revised) version.
“but only in matters of food and drink and various ritual washings: regulations concerning the flesh, imposed until the time of the new order. Sacrifice of Jesus.”
Hebrews 9:10 NABRE(revised version)
“since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation.”
HEBREWS 9:10 NASB(Non revised edition)
You must realize the mss used for nasb are from 1st and 2nd century A.D. where as the mss used for the KJV only go back to the 10th and 11th century...I wonder what was changed in those Thousand+ years???
That is the reason why so many people turn to the NASB, the mss are much older, much more reliable and way less of a chance of anyone changing them.
Have people forgotten about King James?
I had rather have a Bible that is missing several words, but every word it does have is God-breathed, than a Bible that has all the original words, but with several words added that are not God-breathed. I had rather have half a cup of water than a full cup with a drop of urine. This is why I have less confidence in the KJV. Yes, it has more words and verses...but the manuscript tradition is unsound. I only want verses that are found among the majority of the earliest Greek manuscripts. God, in His wisdom, did not allow His Word to be corrupted by man. Rather than have only one copy of a copy of a copy, we have several. It's because of the sheer number of ancient manuscripts, rather than in spite of it, that the true Word of God can still be found, even 2000 years later.
I see this triggered a few KJVonlyists
I recently moved from the ESV to the NET.
I like the net it’s nice to read but I usually cross reference several translations
@@iancampbell1494 Absolutely. When I do my deep dives I use Logos Bible Software. I typically have NET, ESV, NIV, NASB, KJV, NRSV, and NA28 Greek up at the same time as my default. I would never ONLY use one. However, for preaching, I now use the NET just to have consistency. But I will frequently tell people things like, "The NASB or KJV give this reading" etc
KJV for Me, if Puritans used it along with Geneva then that good enough for Me, also NKJV is OK, but No time for ESV, NASB, or any other of the Bible Translations. PS, Mr Lawson NKJV uses Capitals for Diety, I agree with You it does help.
Is the ESV. An equal to the NASB?
They're both very literal. Most people who like one, like the other as well.
I was making the decision between these 2 earlier this year and ended up going with the ESV because I think it reads smoother at several places. But both are on the far literal side of the spectrum, which is preferred, imo.
An example: Romans 10:10
ESV:
"For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved."
NASB:
"or with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation."
So, you have "justified" vs "resulting in righteousness" and "saved" vs "resulting in salvation".
For memorization, and also because I will be reading this to my children, I went with the slightly "smoother" version.
You can go to Bible gateway, and put the 2 versions side by side and just check out several of your favorite verses, or chapters, to get a good comparison.
I do like that the NASB has more notes for context, it capitalizes the "H" for "He" or "Him" when referring to God, which I wish the ESV did. And it also puts the passages where the NT quotes to OT in all caps, making it stand out a little more.
So formatting wise, I kind of like the NASB better, but wording I like the ESV better. You can't go wrong either way, imo.
@@MansterBear
I have an esv and a NASB95, the esv is a MacArthur study bible the NASB95 is a Zondervan Preacher's Bible (released this past Feb, got it for Christmas). In my recent opportunity to preach for youth Sunday at my local church (Psalm 51 with 1 Sam 11&12 as context), I was studying & comparing each (used the NASB95 to preach from). I found it was very similar and only difference mainly was the order of words. Esv was recommended by a reformed man at church and NASB95 by many reformed preachers I listen to. After reading and studying through much of the New Testament with the esv (I think I was up to 2 Thess) it was a little adjustment when I got the NASB95 bc the esv is smoother.
I guess you could say I'm a young man (17) who desires the office of overseer.
I use an interlinear Bible, which is wonderful.
My devotional Bible is a KJV.
Wonderful,so do I,all other translations to me are utter RUBBISH I preach the gospel all over the UK as a Evangelist,And may I add,I cannot stand folks like this guy,with all his rubbish books.
@@alexandermichael117 You may call it what you like, But he is 100% correct in what he says, The NASB/Critical Text always has and always will be much more accurate when it comes the English language. You don't have to like it, or agree with it. Never the less it is true and Fact.
@@Faith-Ministries Rubbish,years ago folks lived happily without your modern filth,and where more Holy,and Godly than today,with all the new perversions out there.
@@alexandermichael117 EXACTLY, and where do you think there Bible came from??? THE CRITICAL TEXT!!!.....you just proved yourself wrong better than I ever could..Have a blessed day.
@@Faith-Ministries The Bible,the A.K.J.V. is Gods word all other versions are just that,perversions.
ESV NKJV as long it's not "the passion translation" or what I call "toilet paper translation"😭😢
Kjv
King James bible the truth and genuine text of textus receptors is the inspired word of God. God is not the author of confusion. So many new translations take away important words or change them.
I prefer the NKJV, its usually more literal than the NASB and has the better NT text.
Neither of those things are true.
@@denleemel Yes they are. Sorry you don't agree but facts are facts.
I am thankful for the NKJV as well, I've read it through twice and still read the KJV more but remain thankful for the NKJV.
KJV
NAS also has taken out verses as well, theres a reason fot that!!! KJV only!!!!
*CURSED IS THE MAN THAT TRUSTETH IN MAN.*
God promised to preserve His word. (Psalm 12:6-7 KJV). If you're relying on men to preserve God's word, your faith in God's word is in truth rooted in "Hebrew and Greek scholars."
Even a Christian cannot brush aside the worship of Jehovah as God. In Revelation 1:5 the Son of God called himself "Jesus Christ, 'The faithful Witness.'" When on earth as a man he was a Jew, an Israelite, to whose nation the words of Isaiah 43:10 were written: "'You are my witnesses, ' is the utterance of Jehovah, even my servant whom I have chosen.," Jesus demonstrated that he was a faithful and true witness of Jehovah God. His genuine disciples today must be the same kind of witnesses, Jehovah's.
All I heard from this pastor is I, Me, My.
I will continue to use the older versions of the KJV, NASB, ESV, NIV, NLT and the only new update to the NASB the LSB .
The whole bible is inspired by God for US so we might know Him, Honor Him, Obey Him, Worship Him and Proclaim Him.
2 Tim 3:16-17
All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be equipped, having been thoroughly equipped for every good work.
I also had no idea the KJV had so many revisions. Does anyone know exactly how many KJV revisions ?
I also really like the NASB 77, 95 but i am not happy with the nasb 2020 update and won't buy or use it.
I was told by a pastor that John MacArthur began the LSB project to counteract the 2020 NASB translation , it worked, as Grace to You earned Lockman's attention . The Lockman foundation gave the Masters Seminary permission to do the translation.
What an amazing work it has been and will definitely be buying one to follow along with Justin Peters yearly reading program that uses the LSB. With all that being said ... let's all read the bible and get a trusted translation that you can understand and always have the KJV when studying. I think we can all agree that we need to be very cautious with newer updates that have all the liberal, gender neutral inclusive language etc....
Peace be with you
The NAS? So sorry to hear that. It's just one of a whole range of 'modern version's, translated from a corrupted New Greek New Testament, based on corrupted codexe's/texts. What's wrong with you people...
The NASB is unnecessarily literal. The NIV11 is the most practical translation for most Christians.
NIV..... 🖓🖓🖓🖓🖓
STAY AWAY... 🖒🖒
Our not-bornagain-legalistic translators messed up big time and made the bible contradict itself on multiple points.
The original text, lit up by Holy Spirit, on the other hand is crystal clear.
Some examples:
1. Orge in context means "passion" in stead of "wrath".
So now translators made a loving God (in Him is light no darkness, He is never tempted to do evil, God is love, it pleases the Father to give you the kingdom, the Father himself loves you, etc, etc) suddenly become a vengefull God, from wich we have to be saved....? Utter BS. Through Jesus, God saves us from the fall of man and restores us back to His divine nature. The divine nature Adam let go of in the fall. Jesus beaten to pulp on a cross? Gods extreme passion to restore what got lost in the Garden: His divine power and love image in human form.
2. Sozo means "made complete" in stead of "saved".
So now we are stuck with a stupid totally unbiblical "Repent! Or go to hell!" doctrine. In stead it has always been about transformation of human life back in to His image again.
Repent btw actually means "change the way you think completely". That would be: "Wow, God loves me and restores me from the fall into His Image. Thank you Jesus, have your way in me with your Holy Spirit. You are amazing!!"
3. "Seeing Jesus comming on the clouds" actually reads "perceiving Jesus from a heavenly perspective".
So now we have millions of ignorant Christians waiting for a bus to get them to heaven in stead of understanding that heaven came inside of them to transform them in to their original created value again. Read Gen 1:27 vs 2 Cor 3:18.
Etc, etc,
Therefore. The letter kills but the Spirit brings forth Divine life in abundance......
So, the Passion Translation, the Massage, I mean, the Message, and, the Queen James Version are not making the cut?
Like most, I started with the KJV. Then, I moved to the NKJV. Once I went to Bible College & Seminary and obtained my degrees and became more of an Expository/Textual preacher; I moved over to the NASB (1995).
Literal and accurate are not the same. AT ALL. In fact the more literally you translate one language to another word for word, the less accurate it becomes.
Obviously you can go too far and begin to start paraphrasing, but I'd say a happy medium would quite 'literally' be more accurate.
What is the exact style of NASB? Goatskin or Calfskin? Reference or Preacher's Bible? Come on Dr. Lawson, the people want to know! Lol
Christian BEWARE:
Strongly suggest you search for
FRANK LOGSDON He was a committee member for the NASB.
After realizing the folly of the NASB project he renounced it
And passionately repented of of his involvement.
Why do you NOT offer anything specific as to what Mr Logsdon says against the NASB?
And James White, author of 'The KJV Only Controversy' also was on the NASB committee and he, along with a 'who's-who' of the many reformed theologians use & endorse the NASB.
Facts and specifics are needed, without which, passion is pulp.
@@styner3001 you are quite free to reject the warning I gave.....
All the relevant information is readily available to you via google search. Suggest you stop trusting men with vested interests......
@@stuartwest8836 Asserting those reformed theologians who are among the highest regarded in the world, to prostitute their expressed high regard for the NASB to $$, shows how shallow you think, and is even your own projection. Sounds like Steven Anderson is your kind of pastor.
@@styner3001 what a pity you have to resort to Ad hominem......facts are facts, if you choose to isolate yourself from facts, .
Recognize.......big money is behind the bible babble......I am not impressed with 'Theologians', nor should you be......it is a fearful thing to play around with the word of God, the last words of the Bible place a Divine Curse on anyone wh mishandles it.
Suggest you spend time researching who WESTCOTT& HORT were and the involvement of the JESUITS in this matter.
Steven Anderson is a dangerous man who climbs his pulpit like a chimpanzee then leaps from it, he is a hireling and a fraud....
Hope that helps.......
@@stuartwest8836 When YOU refer to theologians like Steven Lawson as paid-for shills for the NASB, it is you with the "Ad hominem" attack problem of projection. You spew broad-brush accusations you have no proof of. The NASB is based upon thousands of older Bible manuscripts that are centuries older than the KJV.
Although I see no connection Steven Anderson is anyones "hireling", he is an unrestrained angry fool,... there are thousands around like him, with just enough Koolaid drinkers to support his salary.
Most Christians don't read the Bible and Christians that do read the KJV. 76% read the KJV. The rest is those modern versions.
I got multiple versions and I've studied them and the manscript families.
I'll stick with the KJV because most manscripts agree with it and the Latin manscripts which are the oldest also agree with the KJV more than the Modern Versions.
These manscripts also agree with Geneva Bible more than Modern Versions. So I'm for any Bible in The Syriac text family.
Total liar hahahaha you're mennonite cult.reads it most Christians in modern day not living by worx read niv overwhelmingly
Anyone connected to reality knows that.
Does pastor Lawson know Greek?
Yes. He's fluent in Greek, as most calvinists are.
Yes Steven BUT what original are you comparing it against??? The Alexandrian texts? which all depart from the TR texts which underpin the Authorised version. So yes your NASB is a good translation of a CORRUPT original!
I'll stick with the KJV, I know the history of it and how it came to be translated and why. I was blinded by the NIV and have heard a lot of innacuracies from the pulpit when the NCSB and the confusion it causes. My studies indicate the purpose of the modern translations is confusion and boy do they provide confusion.
How does it cause confusion exactly?
You'd get confused comparing the NASB and the KJV, you'll get confused comparing the NASB to the NIV.
Just learn greek and try translate a passage yourself and see what the result is...
None..! as there are NO gods... Hahaha
NEW WORLD TRANSLATION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES is the most accurate Bible on this planet earth, and they are free.
No reputable Greek or Hebrew scholar believes this , and the men who worked on it didn't know Greek or Hebrew , Google Frans Ferdinand trial on Greek Translation, if you are allowed too as the watchtower likes to control what you have access too not unlike the Roman Catholic false church that seals its materials with an Imprimatur or Nihil Obstat
TRANSLATION ERRORS IN MODERN BIBLES
Gospel - correctly translated as "good news".
Apostle - correctly translated as “sent one”, such as Paul and Peter the “sent ones”.
Deacon - correctly translated as "servant".
Bishop - correctly translated as "overseer” or “elder".
Pastor - correctly translated as "shepherd".
Word (in John 1:1) - correctly translated as “logos”. Logos means ultimate truth and wisdom; universal and beyond view or God's view, as opposed to human understanding. Logos did not mean “word” to the Greeks, as modern bibles mistranslate the entire idea and meaning.
Epistle - correctly translated as "letter".
Doctrine - correctly translated as "teaching".
Homosexual - correctly translated as “homosexual sex”, referring to the act, not the person. God is not against people. Rather, God is against what people often do, including fornication, adultery and homosexual sex; all three listed together in I Corinthians 6:9. “For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the people, but that the people through him might be saved.”
Disciple - correctly translated as "follower" or "student".
Preach - correctly translated as "proclaim" - anyone can proclaim the good news of Jesus; no religious cemetery degree either needed, required or desired. However, one should be very careful regarding anything in the Bible, that they understand and teach others correctly.
Church - correctly translated as the “assembly”; the people who believe in Jesus and have his spirit within them. An assembly of believers is not a building or a religious or other organization--it refers to the actual people who believe in Jesus. “Upon this rock I will build my assembly. . .”
Saint - a saint is someone who has been made holy by being washed by the blood of Jesus. No pope or other human being can make anyone a saint. Only Jesus can make someone a saint. And we cannot make ourselves a saint by doing good works or refraining from certain things. Only through forgiveness from Jesus can someone become a saint.
God's name is YHWH, not Jehovah. YHWH means "I AM, I SHALL BE to infinity". God did not tell Moses to tell the people Yahweh sent you or Jehovah sent you. God told Moses to tell the Hebrews that "I AM" sent you. This is according to my understanding.
These mistranslations are used to turn Jesus into a religion, which is not the intention of the New Testament; Jesus is deliberately secular, eating, drinking and associating with sinners and the common people, while railing against the religionists of his time. The New Testament is written in secular Koine Greek, the language of the common people. True religion is defined in James I:27.
Be not deceived, Jesus did not come to earth to establish a religion called Christianity. He came to earth to save us sinners, to set us free, to give us life abundantly and to establish his assembly, which consists of his people. “This is the work of God, that you believe in him who he sent.”
The goal of God's free salvation, is that we will “have love, one for another” and that whatever we want people to do to us, we will likewise do unto them: “For this is the law and the prophets.” Without love, whatever we do is in vain.
Watch 'The Great Bible Hoax Of 1881: Is The Text Mistranslated?'
Cult spam lol
The Love De-Emphasized Bible twisted by John Calvin no doubt!
In Islam, Allah is virtually devoid of love. Caner and Caner list 99 names of Allah, and only one includes a reference to love (and this only to those who are “his own”). They write:
When Allah is discussed within the Islamic community, the absence of intimacy, atonement, and omnibenevolence becomes apparent. In all the terms and titles of Allah, one does not encounter terms of intimacy. . . Even the most faithful and devout Muslim refers to Allah only as servant to master; Allah is a distant sovereign (Unveiling Islam, p. 117).
But what do we find in Calvinism? God’s sovereignty-His power and holiness-are emphasized at the expense of His love. Dave Hunt observes:
But where is God’s love?
Not once in the nearly thirteen hundred pages of his Institutes does Calvin extol God’s love for mankind. This one sided emphasis reveals Calvinism’s primary defect: the unbiblical limitations it places upon God’s most glorious attribute. . . Something is radically amiss at the very foundation of this unbiblical doctrine (Debating Calvinism, p. 47)
Jesus said:
My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. 14 You are my friends if you do what I command. 15 I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you. John 15 12- 15
Truth in Love
I am a 0 point Calvinist, not an Arminian, both are ditches that take our eyes off Christ. I am a believer in what Christ did on the cross.
The sovereign god of Calvinism is well described in your post. BTW sovereign or sovereignty is used 0 times in the King James Bible.
King James Only.
Stick to the King James Bible. Look up Isaiah 14:12 in the King James. Lucifer is replaced in the other versions by Day Star (2 Peter 1:19 a name of Jesus) or morning star (Revelation 22:16 a name of Jesus). Satan tries to steal God's Glory.
Look up Acts 8:37 in other versions to see what is needed to be saved. In other versions, you go from wanting Baptism, to being dunked, apparently Baptism saves aks Catholicism, Armininism, Calvinism et al and other false doctrines.
Pay attention to Ye and Thou. Pronouns in the King James were important. Modern versions they don't care about pronouns. That is affecting the US today.
1 Corinthians 12:21 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
thee - singular one hand
you - plural two feet
Thee, thou, thy, thine correctly translated as singular in the King James. Ye, you, your plural.
Joshua 1 King James Bible
2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel.
3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses.
Thou- Joshua is leading the people
your- plural - the foot of any person of Israel could claim the promised land.
Modern corrupted versions:
NAS B1995
2 “Moses My servant is dead; now therefore arise, cross this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving to them, to the sons of Israel. 3 Every place on which the sole of your foot treads, I have given it to you, just as I spoke to Moses.
Joshua has to run a marathon. We don't understand the pronouns. T words in the King Jams singular, Y words plural. No such thing in this version. You have to pick your pronouns.
John 3:7 King James Bible
“Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.”
Thee- as if pointing at Nicodemus
Ye - everyone must be born again
John 3:7
New American Standard B 1995
7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born [a]again.’
Does only Nicodemus need to be born again? According to this, that is probably the case.
Having Degrees won't save. The world was changed by ignorant fishermen, tax collectors and repentant Pharisees like Paul who forsook their knowledge and counted it as dung. IF you have lied, you are in danger of the lake of fire.
Revelation 21:8
“But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.”
Are you born again?
Good post on the false doctrine of Calvinism.
I like the 1611 KJV
Ron grimes
Do you mean the 1611 KJV, or do you mean the 1769 revision of the 1611 KJV?
@@shirleygoss1988 Well, he did say 1611 KJV not 1769 revision of 1611 KJV.
@@benedictalmarines3856 Do you actually own a 1611 edition of the KJV? Although I believe it would be a facsimile.
@@shirleygoss1988 lol your passive agreesive/underlying implication is so childish that your ignorance shows. Nothing wrong with the KJV. 1611 or whatever version. So sad you’re trying to indirectly claim others ignorance of which Bible they actually have/read. Simply because your obvious hatred for the KJV.
@@Texasguy316 You sir, are reading into what I asked, something that I did not ask, and I have no idea what you think you are getting at.
There are various revisions of the King James version. The one most in use today is the 1769 revision. That is only with standardize spelling, and more modern punctuation. It is what many "1611 KJV Only" congregations refer to as the 1611 KJV! I know this because I have been in such congregations before, and still have friends who are.
I have no hatred of the King James version!
But what on earth does a Japanese person do re translations of the Bible? God works despite evangelists' imperfections?
Believing that there are multiple acceptable translations of the Bible in any given language is to believe that:
1. God has not perfectly preserved His words to mankind because:
A. God did not want to preserve His words.
B. God was unable to preserve His words.
Or
2. Man has not accurately translated the Bible into a given language.
But the perfect and pure English Bible says,
Psalms 119:89
LAMED
For ever, O LORD,
thy word is settled in heaven.
We have the perfect Bible in English. It’s the KJV.
NASB may be the most accurate word for word translation BUT the source text is flawed - the Westcott and Hort new testament text. Even Dr. Lockwood recanted his support for this version. The KJV is the only Bible in the English language based on the reliable Textus Receptus. It's all about the source text.
Nope
CSB is the overall best translation in English.
In your opinion.
Til they update it next year like they did last year
LOL
Jesus Saves It’s already been updated. The frequency of updates nowadays is ludicrous. I’ve put my foot down and decided to stick with the NASB ‘77 for life.
@@jsong8282 The NASB has had updates... the ESV isnt even a translation but a major update of the NRSV in reality. So what exactly is the point here?
You NEED the translator to tell you who the pronoun is referring to? Interesting.
Charles Doyle you don’t understand his context?
Yeah, I was sort of thinking the same thing. I don't believe that giving a capital letter to a pronoun referring to God is anything especially spiritual or honorific, etc. But when I think about it, it could be a useful tool when you're standing at the pulpit and you've wandered off your notes. It's just another tool.
I don't need a capital to understand this. This is my post. This post is Mine. That didn't make me a god or anything. I get who wrote the post. Don't you understand his question?
"You NEED the translator to tell you who the pronoun is referring to? Interesting."
More on pronouns coming.
Stick to the King James Bible. Look up Isaiah 14:12 in the King James. Lucifer is replaced in the other versions by Day Star (2 Peter 1:19 a name of Jesus) or morning star (Revelation 22:16 a name of Jesus). Satan tries to steal God's Glory.
Look up Acts 8:37 in other versions to see what is needed to be saved. In other versions, you go from wanting Baptism, to being dunked, apparently Baptism saves aks Catholicism, Armininism, Calvinism et al and other false doctrines.
Pay attention to Ye and Thou. Pronouns in the King James were important. Modern versions they don't care about pronouns. That is affecting the US today.
1 Corinthians 12:21 21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
thee - singular one hand
you - plural two feet
Thee, thou, thy, thine correctly translated as singular in the King James. Ye, you, your plural.
Joshua 1 King James Bible
2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel.
3 Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses.
Thou- Joshua is leading the people
your- plural - the foot of any person of Israel could claim the promised land.
Modern corrupted versions:
NAS B1995
2 “Moses My servant is dead; now therefore arise, cross this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving to them, to the sons of Israel. 3 Every place on which the sole of your foot treads, I have given it to you, just as I spoke to Moses.
Joshua has to run a marathon. We don't understand the pronouns. T words in the King Jams singular, Y words plural. No such thing in this version. You have to pick your pronouns.
John 3:7 King James Bible
“Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.”
Thee- as if pointing at Nicodemus
Ye - everyone must be born again
John 3:7
New American Standard B 1995
7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born [a]again.’
Does only Nicodemus need to be born again? According to this, that is probably the case.
Having Degrees won't save. The world was changed by ignorant fishermen, tax collectors and repentant Pharisees like Paul who forsook their knowledge and counted it as dung. IF you have lied, you are in danger of the lake of fire.
Revelation 21:8
“But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.”
Are you born again?
You are wrong, Pastor . Kjv is God's word.
Learn Greek and read Sacred Scripture untranslated.
Best Byzantine text formal equivalent : KJV
Best Alexandrian text formal equivalent : NASB
Best dynamic equivalent text : no good dynamic translation.
Why mess with the Catholic text ?
@@ok5731 If I were to answer in kind I would say; Why mess with the gnostic text?
But to answer in truth and spirit; The KJV (sans apocrypha which are Jewish fables and history) is the first translation into the English Proper language, and other than pronunciation has not, nor will need to be modernized. It also holds true to the greek in 99% of the readings....for example the NASB (which I use as a study tool) reads Abijah in Luke 1:5 with a footnote reading
+or Abia in greek+
where the KJV simply reads Abia.
A Mormon doesn’t call himself a Christian!
They study the Christian Bible!
Their absolute authority to interpret the Bible is their Book of Mormon!
Ask them any meaning of any verse in the Bible and they would go look in the Book of Mormon for the TRUE meaning." and twist it to Joseph Smiths heresy!
A Jehovah Witness doesn’t call himself a Christian!
They study the Christian Bible!
Their absolute authority to interpret the Bible is The Watch Tower!
Ask them any meaning of any verse in the Bible and they would go look in the Watch Tower for the TRUE meaning." and twist it to Russel's heresy!
A Calvinist didn’t call himself a Christian!
They study the Christian Bible!
Their absolute authority to interpret the Bible is The John Calvin Institutes!
Ask them any meaning of any verse in the Bible and they would go look in John Calvin’s Institutes for the TRUE meaning." and twist it to John Calvin’s heresy!
A Christian call’s himself a Christian!
They study the Christian Bible!
Their absolute authority to interpret the Bible is The Bible!
Ask them any meaning of any verse in the Bible and they would go look in the Bible and look for the TRUE meaning." and believe it for what it says!
Christians rely on the leading and discernment The Holy Spirit promises to give Gods Children. "Not a Guru! That is assurance!
When in history did the Calvinist start calling themselves Christians?
Truth in Love
What a psycho you just made up all that you have no.idea what Christianity is wackjob