Same (: I do like this small version though. Easy to carry. And I mostly study the NT so it is indeed convenient in more than one way but most definitely all of the LSB access is preferred. The most accurate Bible to date and I will argue till the return of Jesus Christ. The new KJV of the modern English era.
What a service and blessing to the church this work is. I’m thankful to be living during these days when this new translation will be released within my lifetime. Can’t wait to get the whole thing in my hands. I’ve resisted buying the NT version, but my patience is running thin…😁 please hurry and release the full bible LSB.
Thank you so much for discussing these things that we may be fully edified when reading the LSB. I really appreciate this study prgression that you are giving us.
Looking forward to getting the full translation in both print and hopefully Logos really soon! Great work and love these videos - brings so much meaning for what y'all have done.
Sounds like they've done a good job here. It'll be interesting how it's received once the full Bible is released. I've never used the NASB (as I'm not in America) but I might add an LSB to my shelf.
In what form does it come with translation notes? Cause I was thinking the same thing. Some version that has translation comments would be well received. These conversations are really edifying and insightful. I have a copy and it seems more like they labored to get rid of all footnotes, period.
Hope they add back the euphemism of 1 Kings 16:11 and other sections of Kings and 2 Samuel where in most modern translations it says "males" but in the Hebrew it actually says "he who urinates against the wall". It can even see they rendering on the side notes of the NASB, but like them to actually insert it into the text because it's more literal.
I wasn't sure there were Jewish (Messianic or otherwise) perspectives and translations considered. I'm looking for my first hard copy of the Bible since I have accepted salvation! I was excited to hear of this version a while back, just doing more research.
I appreciated the discussion about chesed ("lovingkindness"). As a former biblical languages student, I struggled yet agreed with your explanation that we are trying to have a connection to the tradition of translations from the past. This is because there may be a more understandable, yet accurate word(s) to capture the nuance of the Hebrew. Moreover, should our bibles sound like excellent modern English (i.e., the CSB)? I struggle with this. The LSB will be my go-to teaching Bible, but I'll definitely supplement with translations like the HCSB/CSB.
It seems to be the fact that the Legacy Standard Bible has definitely surpassed the accuracy and textual fidelity of the NASB (in any of its editions). LSB does maintain some of the inaccuracies of the NASB, nevertheless they may be corrected in future editions of the LSB.
@@briankuzmaguitar When you can do so, turn to Acts 19:1-5 in your Greek New Testament, read through the verses. After you do so read the following English versions (ASV-1901; NASB; LSB). Which of the 3 versions is more accurate and closest to the Greek text in Acts 19:1-5? There are several other passages the LSB reads as the NASB, and both have missed the mark in one way or another.
@@mikerichards1264 thank you for the texts. Diving in to word studies on those verses, it’s clear that both the versions fall short, but the LSB appears to rectify the author’s intent. For example, nasb and esv are implying that the Greek word “ei” (which means “if”) is the authors way of saying “if it exists”. The Greek clearly translates “we have not even heard if the Holy Spirit is. The is is clearly referring to the statement beforehand, which was Paul’s. If we are going to imply anything, it would have to be that, based on the author’s intended communication, to imply that Paul would want to say they weren’t aware it even existed, only by saying “if it even is”. That would be assuming the author was trying to say “is” was the word for existed, instead of assuming they were answering in relation to Paul’s question. It wouldn’t make sense that way, hence the LSB in italics put the correct implicated words “being received” referring to Paul’s question.
@@briankuzmaguitar another point of significant difference is Paul's question: "into what were you immersed?" The response was, "into John's immersion." Then they were "immersed into the name of the Lord Jesus.". (That's what the Greek says.) Of the translations named only the ASV-1901 translates consistently. The NASB, ESV, and LSB missed it.
@@mikerichards1264 not exactly. Here’s why. Immersion in the English language does not imply religious rite. In the context of again, the correct implication and intention of the writer, we are talking of literal baptism by immersion for the purpose of public declaration. ASV is wrong to simply say it was a bath or getting wet without any mention of the purpose of it. Sorry friend. I’m rolling with LSV. Do a word study on it. See #3. Below baptized G0907 βαπτίζω ----- [Analytics] baptized (51x) G0907 (78x) [Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament] 907 βαπτίζω 77 βαπτίζω (< βάπτω), [in LXX: IV Ki 5:14 (טבל [2881]), Is 21:4, Jth 12:7, Si 31 (34):30*;] to dip, immerse, sink; 1. generally (in Polyb., iii, 72, of soldiers wading breast-deep; in i, 51, of the sinking of ships); metaph., to overwhelm (Is 21:4; cf. MM, Exp., x); c. cogn. acc., βάπτισμα β., Mk 10:38, 39, Lk 12:50. Mid., 2. to perform ablutions, wash oneself, bathe (IV Ki 5:14, Jth 12:7, Si 31 (34):30): Mk 7:4; aor. pass, in same sense, Lk 11:38. 3. Of ablution, immersion, as a religious rite, to baptize; (a) absol.; Mk 1:4, Jo 1:25, 26, 28, 3:22, 23, 26, 4:2, 10:40, I Co 1:17; ὁ βαπτίζων (= ὁ βαπτιστής, M, Pr., 127), Mk 6:14, 24; c. acc., Jo 4:1, Ac 8:38, I Co [p. 75] 1:14, 16; c. cogn. acc., τὸ βάπτισμα, Ac 19:4 (cf. Mk 10:38, supr.); pass., to be baptized, receive baptism: Mt 3:13, 14, 16, Mk 16:16, Lk 3:7, 12, 21, 7:29 (τ. βάπτισμα) Luke 7:30, Ac 2:41, 8:12, 13, 36, 9:18, 10:47, 16:15, 33, 18:8; mid., 22:16 (M, Pr., 163); (b) with prepositions: ἐν, of the element, Mt 3:6, 11, Mk 1:4, 5, 8, Lk 3:16, Jo 1:26, 31, 33, 3:23, Ac 1:5, 2:38, 10:48, 11:16, I Co 10:2; εἰς, of the element, purpose or result (Lft., Notes, 155), Mt 3:11, 28:19, Mk 1:9, Ac 8:16, 19:3, 5, Ro 6:3, I Co 1:13, 15, 10:2, 12:13, Ga 3:27; c. dat., ὕδατι, Lk 3:16, Ac 1:5, 11:16; ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν, perh. to fulfil the wish of a dead friend, I Co 15:29 (v. ICC, in l.; cf. DB, i, 238 ff.; DCG, i, 169a; ii, 605b; Cremer, 126).†
Use the dss way more, like in psalm 145:13. It is very weird that the masoretic text is still considered superior. It’s basically treated like the Textus Receptus
The whole conversation on חֶסֶד (hesed) is a huge fail 🙄 "If we translate it idiomatically, people will think they understand it." Yeah, duh. It's a translation. That's the whole goal. "If we translate it in a sensible way, people won't dig deeper." By that logic, should we translate terms as obscurely as possible, to motivate ppl to study deeper? "HALOT doesn't emphasize 'love' but rather loyalty and fidelity." So let me get this straight. It doesn't mean love, so you keep the gloss "loving-kindness???" Translate it as loyalty! Or fidelity! Tradition has become more important than truth here, plain and simple.
I’m with you. Why not loyalty or fidelity? Better yet, why not covenantal love? As much as I look forward to this version, I am disappointed in this one thing.
Can’t wait to get the full translation in my hands!!
Same (:
I do like this small version though. Easy to carry. And I mostly study the NT so it is indeed convenient in more than one way but most definitely all of the LSB access is preferred. The most accurate Bible to date and I will argue till the return of Jesus Christ. The new KJV of the modern English era.
Me too! I preordered the hard cover handy size today and can’t wait.
@@theburlyburrito I pre-ordered the Handy Size patina brown Italian cowhide with paste down liner, aka the $99 one.
@@RyGuy8989 Very nice, I’m sure that you’ll love it!
Wonderful to hear the LSB Translation OT and NT will be available soon!
Will it come as one Bible? And when will it be released ?
What a service and blessing to the church this work is. I’m thankful to be living during these days when this new translation will be released within my lifetime. Can’t wait to get the whole thing in my hands. I’ve resisted buying the NT version, but my patience is running thin…😁 please hurry and release the full bible LSB.
Thank you both very much for such a helpful discussion. I am really looking forward to obtaining the LSB in the UK.
Thank you so much for discussing these things that we may be fully edified when reading the LSB. I really appreciate this study prgression that you are giving us.
Looking forward to getting the full translation in both print and hopefully Logos really soon! Great work and love these videos - brings so much meaning for what y'all have done.
I'm so excited!
Sounds like they've done a good job here. It'll be interesting how it's received once the full Bible is released.
I've never used the NASB (as I'm not in America) but I might add an LSB to my shelf.
It would be cool if the legacy Bible came with translation notes like the Net Bible
It comes with translation notes
@@southernberean8166 that is great! Thank you
In what form does it come with translation notes? Cause I was thinking the same thing. Some version that has translation comments would be well received. These conversations are really edifying and insightful. I have a copy and it seems more like they labored to get rid of all footnotes, period.
You did an excellent jobs on fools, it helps so that one may not always say "the Hebrew says". I love your translation philosophy 👏👏👏👏
Thank you, Abner and Joe.
Appreciate you brothers more than I can say!🙌🏻
Hope they add back the euphemism of 1 Kings 16:11 and other sections of Kings and 2 Samuel where in most modern translations it says "males" but in the Hebrew it actually says "he who urinates against the wall". It can even see they rendering on the side notes of the NASB, but like them to actually insert it into the text because it's more literal.
Good point. Also puts the kibosh on “gender neutral” “translations”.
Will the print edition include references? I miss that the most in the LSB New Testament and Psalms.
Will you ad all the things you have been talking about in the margins or as a study bible and include these things like MacArthurs study Bible?
Please please please publish a super giant print sized edition.
I wasn't sure there were Jewish (Messianic or otherwise) perspectives and translations considered. I'm looking for my first hard copy of the Bible since I have accepted salvation! I was excited to hear of this version a while back, just doing more research.
Please put my name on the list when John MacArthur LSB Study Bible arrives.
I appreciated the discussion about chesed ("lovingkindness"). As a former biblical languages student, I struggled yet agreed with your explanation that we are trying to have a connection to the tradition of translations from the past. This is because there may be a more understandable, yet accurate word(s) to capture the nuance of the Hebrew. Moreover, should our bibles sound like excellent modern English (i.e., the CSB)? I struggle with this. The LSB will be my go-to teaching Bible, but I'll definitely supplement with translations like the HCSB/CSB.
Please... don't forget the large and giant print editions.
Large and giant with WIIIIIDE MARGINS please 🙏 I'll take care of the cart to move it around at home 😋
Please make the whole Bible in India. when would the full release be out
Is there a release date yet?
I just ordered this Bible is this is going to come study Bible to ?
It seems to be the fact that the Legacy Standard Bible has definitely surpassed the accuracy and textual fidelity of the NASB (in any of its editions). LSB does maintain some of the inaccuracies of the NASB, nevertheless they may be corrected in future editions of the LSB.
What are some inaccuracies? Just curious so I can be aware.
@@briankuzmaguitar When you can do so, turn to Acts 19:1-5 in your Greek New Testament, read through the verses. After you do so read the following English versions (ASV-1901; NASB; LSB). Which of the 3 versions is more accurate and closest to the Greek text in Acts 19:1-5? There are several other passages the LSB reads as the NASB, and both have missed the mark in one way or another.
@@mikerichards1264 thank you for the texts. Diving in to word studies on those verses, it’s clear that both the versions fall short, but the LSB appears to rectify the author’s intent. For example, nasb and esv are implying that the Greek word “ei” (which means “if”) is the authors way of saying “if it exists”. The Greek clearly translates “we have not even heard if the Holy Spirit is. The is is clearly referring to the statement beforehand, which was Paul’s. If we are going to imply anything, it would have to be that, based on the author’s intended communication, to imply that Paul would want to say they weren’t aware it even existed, only by saying “if it even is”. That would be assuming the author was trying to say “is” was the word for existed, instead of assuming they were answering in relation to Paul’s question. It wouldn’t make sense that way, hence the LSB in italics put the correct implicated words “being received” referring to Paul’s question.
@@briankuzmaguitar another point of significant difference is Paul's question: "into what were you immersed?" The response was, "into John's immersion." Then they were "immersed into the name of the Lord Jesus.". (That's what the Greek says.) Of the translations named only the ASV-1901 translates consistently. The NASB, ESV, and LSB missed it.
@@mikerichards1264 not exactly. Here’s why. Immersion in the English language does not imply religious rite. In the context of again, the correct implication and intention of the writer, we are talking of literal baptism by immersion for the purpose of public declaration. ASV is wrong to simply say it was a bath or getting wet without any mention of the purpose of it. Sorry friend. I’m rolling with LSV. Do a word study on it. See #3. Below
baptized G0907 βαπτίζω
-----
[Analytics]
baptized (51x) G0907 (78x)
[Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament]
907 βαπτίζω 77 βαπτίζω (< βάπτω), [in LXX: IV Ki 5:14 (טבל [2881]), Is 21:4, Jth 12:7, Si 31 (34):30*;]
to dip, immerse, sink;
1. generally (in Polyb., iii, 72, of soldiers wading breast-deep; in i, 51, of the sinking of ships); metaph., to overwhelm (Is 21:4; cf. MM, Exp., x); c. cogn. acc., βάπτισμα β., Mk 10:38, 39, Lk 12:50. Mid.,
2. to perform ablutions, wash oneself, bathe (IV Ki 5:14, Jth 12:7, Si 31 (34):30): Mk 7:4; aor. pass, in same sense, Lk 11:38.
3. Of ablution, immersion, as a religious rite, to baptize;
(a) absol.; Mk 1:4, Jo 1:25, 26, 28, 3:22, 23, 26, 4:2, 10:40, I Co 1:17; ὁ βαπτίζων (= ὁ βαπτιστής, M, Pr., 127), Mk 6:14, 24; c. acc., Jo 4:1, Ac 8:38, I Co [p. 75] 1:14, 16; c. cogn. acc., τὸ βάπτισμα, Ac 19:4 (cf. Mk 10:38, supr.); pass., to be baptized, receive baptism: Mt 3:13, 14, 16, Mk 16:16, Lk 3:7, 12, 21, 7:29 (τ. βάπτισμα) Luke 7:30, Ac 2:41, 8:12, 13, 36, 9:18, 10:47, 16:15, 33, 18:8; mid., 22:16 (M, Pr., 163);
(b) with prepositions: ἐν, of the element, Mt 3:6, 11, Mk 1:4, 5, 8, Lk 3:16, Jo 1:26, 31, 33, 3:23, Ac 1:5, 2:38, 10:48, 11:16, I Co 10:2; εἰς, of the element, purpose or result (Lft., Notes, 155), Mt 3:11, 28:19, Mk 1:9, Ac 8:16, 19:3, 5, Ro 6:3, I Co 1:13, 15, 10:2, 12:13, Ga 3:27; c. dat., ὕδατι, Lk 3:16, Ac 1:5, 11:16; ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν, perh. to fulfil the wish of a dead friend, I Co 15:29 (v. ICC, in l.; cf. DB, i, 238 ff.; DCG, i, 169a; ii, 605b; Cremer, 126).†
Question - the masters press will be releasing the “Psalms of Grace” this year, which translation will it be?
Where can I get this?
Use the dss way more, like in psalm 145:13. It is very weird that the masoretic text is still considered superior. It’s basically treated like the Textus Receptus
So, its "Chesed", and not "Cheesed!" *Facepalm*
lliiiiiittttt
The whole conversation on חֶסֶד (hesed) is a huge fail 🙄
"If we translate it idiomatically, people will think they understand it." Yeah, duh. It's a translation. That's the whole goal.
"If we translate it in a sensible way, people won't dig deeper." By that logic, should we translate terms as obscurely as possible, to motivate ppl to study deeper?
"HALOT doesn't emphasize 'love' but rather loyalty and fidelity." So let me get this straight. It doesn't mean love, so you keep the gloss "loving-kindness???" Translate it as loyalty! Or fidelity!
Tradition has become more important than truth here, plain and simple.
Same with John 3:16
I’m with you. Why not loyalty or fidelity? Better yet, why not covenantal love? As much as I look forward to this version, I am disappointed in this one thing.