Irrelevant but mildly amusing anecdote; the NASB was the first modern translation I was given, after making my profession of faith. I loved it because I could actually understand the Scriptures, as opposed to having to decode the KJV. I read, re-read and memorized large portions of it. Much later on, when in seminary learning Greek, I used to have my quiet times in Greek, translating the passage - using the NASB to check my work (and the NASB worked really well here). Even more years later, I went back to seminary for another Master's degree and took an advanced Greek course, which required sight reading a passage in Greek, translating it on the fly. I was nervous about this, and prayed accordingly. On the day that I had to demonstrate my facility in Greek, the assigned passage was one I had memorized in the NASB. Seriously, I was able to recall the NASB, and work backwards to the Greek and passed the exam. Not one of my proudest academic moment; but nobody disses the NASB in my presence! 🙂
I took a year of Greek while in prison (Mounce, basic biblical Greek). It was actually very helpful that I was memorizing a lot of Scripture. The test often had us translating "Bible-ish" passages so that we couldn't just rely on our familiarity of the actual text.
@@ogmakefirefiregood They did the same kind of thing for me in school. Or they would give a random passage from Kings that nobody memorizes like the Gospels, since it was a Hebrew class. Anyway, kind of cool to see they were doing the same elsewhere.
Hey Mark! I have recently discovered your videos and love them. I've been binging on them for a few days now, and I also love your "word nerd" sense of humor. In that sense we are definitely fellow travelers 😊. Among the churches with which I am associated, I have for a number of years now been presenting much of the same kind of material you present, advocating the use of other translations, with good success. Thanks for you excellent, informative, and, yes, entertaining videos.
Thanks for adding more understanding to the literal side’s value. I’ll have to test myself on the you singular/plural interpretation, but I’m still waiting for that bible with “ya’ll” that resolves this argument 😆
I haven't tried the random "you/y'all" test, but when I began reading the NT in Greek, the only one that surprised me was Luke 22:31-32.. I looked at my husband's Bible and there was a footnote about the singulars and plurals there. The NASB that I had been reading for decades had no such footnote! Ha ha!
12:32 The guy who wrote that book taught my family KJV-onlyism. So glad I got out of that. I'm trying to budge the rest of my family out, too. They dont like KJVO, but they just need to make the jump to being able to read their Bibles.
Dr. Ward, this is really brilliant. I'm so glad to have found your channel. I saw Nathan Cravatt on the Dividing Line with James White and starting watching videos on the Recovering Fundamentalist channel. I eventually watched the video where you were the guest, which led me to your channel. I've really been enjoying your content. Thank you for your work. God bless.
I've taken the first part of Scott McQuinn's Greek class at Biblical Language Center, and it was excellent. I'm greatly looking forward to continuing with the program when life circumstances allow.
I enjoy reading the NLT and the NKJV; but I have recently been reading passages in the NASB and I have found the language used in the translation is growing on me (some of it is quite beautiful). I just ordered a compact NASB so that I can have one readily at hand (as you point out, having a 'more literal' translation available can be useful). Thanks for posting this video.
In short, more "literal" (or even more formally equivalent) doesn't necessarily imply more accurate. Often people falsely assume that more "literal" means more accurate but that is easily disproven. For instance, the literal translation of the French phrase "pomme de terre" would be "apple of earth" (and one can add an italicized "the" after "of" and before "earth" to conform with NASB style if preferred). But it'd be inaccurate in English to say I want an "apple of [the] earth" with cream and chives please when the real meaning of "pomme de terre" is "potato". 😊
Very good, Mark. You had me going with the LSV. I am reading the LSB which is totally different from LSV. Thanks for your work. Entertaining, informative, challenging,...
I feel like we are somehow related. (LOL) I've gone on this same "rant" and it seems to have only grown as a topic since ~2020. Thank you for the channel. (I've had your "Authorized Version" book for a while and just never got around to looking for more Mark Ward until this week.)
I love this video! I just discovered the AV translating historical presents as presents (but not always: Matt. 3:1, 15; 8:22; 9:14; etc.)! I finally know why it has that awkward English sometimes: "Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city" (Matt. 4:5) take in the present tense... does the devil still do this today?! Knowing that the AV is simply translating the historical present clears this up so beautifully. In Greek, the historical present tense is frequently used to describe past events as if they are happening in the present. This stylistic choice adds vividness and immediacy to the narrative, making the event feel more immediate to the reader or listener. The translators of the KJV often retained the original tense (Matt. 4:8; Mk. 15:27) when it contributed to the literary style or theological emphasis, even if it might seem awkward in contemporary English. So, while "they crucify" might sound unusual today, it reflects the original Greek's attempt to bring the event into the present moment, which was a common narrative technique in ancient texts. The choice to keep it as "they crucify" rather than "they crucified" preserves this effect, even though it may seem awkward to modern readers.
Right! The key here is to note that the KJV translators used their discretion to decide when a given historical present should be rendered as an English present and when it shouldn't. Today's translators should be allowed the same liberty.
This is the first video of yours I have seen, I love it, and now I am subscribed w/notification bell turned on :-) I arrived hoping for help in deciding whether or not to get a Legacy Standard Bible but I'll stay for more. Thanks.
I watched this video when it first came out, and now I'm watching it again in September. I have both the 77 and 95 update of the NASB, and it is a good translation. I've used them both for years, but I find myself loving and using the ESV more and more. So much more that now it's become my favorite translation, and I've come to believe that from everything I've read on the subject, that the ESV is more faithful to the original languages than the NASB, NKJV, or even the KJV. That's just my opinion of course.
Excellent! Yes, I loved working for BJU Press. I did a large freelance job for them in 2019-2020, writing a sixth grade biblical worldview book (with an excellent foundation laid by their team). I’m also doing some design work for them. Their mission is important to me.
In his New Testament translation, David Bentley Hart uses the historical present. It's quite an interesting feature in what is overall a very interesting translation. I'm not a Greek scholar, but having read up on his methodology and have read some of the translation, I get the sense that it provides a very close approximation to reading the Greek, but just using English words.
I've just been reading his book on beauty. He is quite the intellect. I've been wanting to look at his translation in greater detail. I can't say I was impressed with his descriptions of his work; he sounded kind of arrogant about what other translations were supposedly missing. But that doesn't mean the things he has seen aren't there.
@@markwardonwords Thanks for the response! I think he is a little bit arrogant, honestly. As you say, that doesn't mean he's necessarily wrong. The arguments between him and NT Wright regarding their dueling NT translations are quite interesting. I don't have the Greek knowledge to weigh in with my own opinion, but I can say that I have found his translation to be a worthwhile read. It at least provides a way to read a familiar text in a fresh and thought-provoking way.
@@markwardonwords You can’t trick me! I memorized that link! I never would have thought I’d see the day where a Bible linguist tried to rickroll someone...
LSB is number 1 for me by far. Also use the NASB, ESV and NIV for comparison. And if I want to refer to an older translation for further comparison I'll use the Geneva bible just, well just because.
Mark regarding time stamp 2:23 "In my Word Nerd video, I imagined the creation of an INCREDI-NASB, a superhero Bible that collected all the nerdy Bible conventions one could dream up. And oh, could I dream. Blue highlights for grammatically masculine words, pink for feminine ones, gray for neuter. Single underlines for singular words, double underlines for plural ones. Little dots and dashes connecting words that were alliterated in the originals." While said with some jest, there is a bible that seems to tick some of these boxes; The Discovery Bible by Gary Hill. I believe the New Testament was published in the 90s, and it uses red text in bold, and italics to communicate emphasis, as well as custom symbols to annotate original greek tenses. And you'll be happy to hear, it uses the NASB! :D Despite the many bible review channels on TH-cam, I've yet find one that scratches at this particular bible and it's (seemingly) unique system of conveying meaning to it's readers. While out of print, copies are available somewhat affordably on eBay, and if cost would be a barrier to a potential video of your opinion, I'd be happy to donate the funds for you to purchase a copy. Thank you for your wonderful videos.
Mark, enjoyed this video tremendously, thank you. However, you forgot to post the link to purchase the Incredi- NASB, along with acceptable payment sources: check, money order or drachmas
There is a translation that meets most of your most-literalest requirements - Alfred Marshall's translation used in Zondervan's older interlinears. I have occasionally met pastors who "survived" their solitary compulsory Greek paper at seminary by memorising 1 John in it and regurgitating it in exams.
Great presentation! How’s your Incredi-NASb project going? I can imagine (and would love to use) a big Custom Palette plus companion Visual Filters in Logos (user since mid 90’s) … are you working on something like that? Please let me know. Thanks!
@@markwardonwords Ah ... versus full-testament for a given construct? Pity. It would be REALLY helpful to have VF's nicely laid out for various "non-simplistic" constructs, such as 1st-3rd class conditions, purpose clauses etc. It's straightforward to build a VF for second person singular personal pronouns, but the compound constructs are beyond my current skill level. Do you have a Group in Faithlife with templates for VF's etc we can download? Mine (in its infancy) is JimDean-StudyStuff ... currently, it has a couple dozen Palettes with organized groupings of various highlighting styles.
Hello, I’m Erik Wait in Half Moon Bay in California. I’ve been watching and enjoying a lot of your videos lately. In the morning I read an easier modern translation with my coffee before I head off to work. But if I’m studying I tend to use a more “literal” translation along with my Hebrew or Greek text and occasionally the LXX. The various English translations have different goals and intentions. Devotional reading is different than studying do when asked for a recommendation I ask, “what is your purpose?” FYI, I generally find that conservative Presbyterian and Reformed churches don’t have an official translation, especially those that are heavily populated by Dutch or Korean speakers.
@@markwardonwords the short version is. God separated the people's groups. Then Christ came to unify the different people groups ethnicities tribes languages into the new body of Christ creating one body United under one God one holy Union in Jesus so that we who were not a people are now a people, the people of God.
Thanks for the shoutout, Dr. Ward (though you spelled my named incorrectly [lol]). I enjoyed your analysis. If you ever were to produce a maximally literal translation, I think you should also address the issue of textual criticism because, as you know, there are serious concerns about which textual tradition is the best one to use. Having a "super-AV" or an "incredi-NASB" is one thing; having such a translation based on a particular Hebrew or Greek text is another thing.
@@JannahPursuit I really feel I have to put a ton of time into a translation before I can generalize about its quality. I've had to limit myself to the ones I've spent time with over the years!
Just bought it and started listening to it. I'm put off by the open attack on evangelical views of Scripture. If you feel you can filter those out, as I plan to do, I'm hopeful that the book will still hold some value. But I found it frustrating to have him emphasize the differences between the LXX and Masoretic Text and Dead Sea Scrolls rather than the overwhelming similarities.
@@markwardonwords Michael Law writes, "So in the most formative period of Christian theology, when the early church framed many of those beliefs now taken for granted by Christians worldwide, their thoughts were molded NOT by the Hebrew Bible that underlies our modern English Bibles, but by the Greek Septuagint. None of this would be terribly significant if the Septuagint were MERELY a translation of the Hebrew, as some have taken pains to assert; as we shall see, however, the Septuagint in many places contains a spectacularly different message. This is not only because the translators of the Septuagint books created new meanings in their translations but also for another more shocking reason altogether, And that's the fourth reason that the Septuagint is significant. The Septuagint often preserves a witness to an ALTERNATIVE, sometimes OLDER, form of the Hebrew text." Phew! Mark, I respect your research skills, what is your reaction to Law's ideas? I have heard often that 90% of Old Testament quotes by Jesus and Paul were from the LXX and the not the Hebrew Bible. I also am aware that the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox have always only used the LXX as their Old Testament. Have you done any videos on the LXX?
I think I would go for an interlinear Bible over a hyper literal. When I read a sentence in Greek, it makes sense. But the same word order translated into another language is gibberish. I should also add that I find transliteration of a word less friendly than the word written in Greek. My proficiency in Greek is not that advanced as I am self taught with the help of modern textbooks and TH-cam (can read John, but not more advanced). I am bilingual and do translations from Norwegian to English. The biggest challenge is translating idioms or phrases for which there are no equivalent. Do you keep the actual phrase or go for the intent? Something is lost either way!
@@markwardonwords this episode of "Minding Scripture" from Notre Dame features both translators mindingscripture.com/episode-4-translation-of-scripture/ On a related note, I find myself persuaded rather by Hart than by Wright on what makes for good translation afkimel.wordpress.com/2018/01/16/a-reply-to-n-t-wright/ In summary, I think Hart and Alter make scripture "come alive" in ways no other translations have ever done for me. I *feel* Paul in Romans etc. thanks for the response and have a blessed Lord's Day
ok i understand what your video's say and i may of asked this before but what about what the kjv onlys say about missing verses words taken out etc. i am really conflicted more now than ever about what version to use the kjv crowd make some very good points like you yourself have said the kjv has been the churches choice for over 400 years i just dont want to get anything wrong or miss something because i have the wrong version
Two things: that’s a problem you don’t have to solve, a question you don’t have to answer. The NKJV and MEV use the same Hebrew and Greek texts as the KJV, but they translate them into contemporary English.
I have enjoyed the NLT's "marketing" of the value of thought for thought translations. The "literal" translations can give readers a false sense of security that they are reading an exact word for word translation.
Yes, the lesson is be careful how negative you are about either idea because no translation is purely one or the other. "How dynamic is too dynamic" becomes like the question of "how much is too much to spend on a nice car" . . . . Anything more than what I spent.
If you are new to the Bible, have mid-to-low reading comprehension, or just want a translation that’s mostly focused on clarity, I recommend the NIV or NLT. If you’re looking for deeper study or prefer a more formal translation, I recommend the ESV or NASB (ESV is better than NASB from a clarity standpoint, IMO.)
More like which translation not to use. Off the top of my head: NWT, The message bible, the passion bible, tniv........ I'm sure there are more heretical translations
The NRSV and ESV are sister translations (both based on the RSV), so they're extremely similar. You would want to consider their three main differences when choosing between them: 1. The NRSV generally uses more contemporary English conventions. For instance, it consistently uses gender inclusive language, while the ESV will sometimes use "men" to refer to humans in general. The ESV also tends to retain more of the Jacobean English flourishes that come from their common ancestor, the KJV (e.g. "Judge not" instead of "Do not judge"), while the NRSV is more likely to update the diction. 2. The ESV translates the Old Testament from a Christian perspective, while the NRSV translates it from a Jewish perspective. Passages in the Tanakh that are traditionally used as Christian proof texts will be more obvious in the ESV. At the same time, the ESV stays closer to the Masoretic Hebrew tradition, while the NRSV is more willing to incorporate alternative readings from outside that text tradition. 3. While both translations strive for formal equivalence (word-for-word translation), the NRSV is a little more willing to smooth out the text a bit for ease of reading. That said, both translations rank at a high school reading level, and the NRSV often gets listed a grade level above the ESV in terms of readability. If you find them both a bit hard to read, you might consider using the CSB, which is just slightly less literal. Either translation is a superb choice. The ESV has a wider acceptance in Evangelical churches, while the NRSV is a staple of mainline Protestant churches, so your choice in translation may be tied to your choice in church affiliation. (Certain congregations can get really snobby if you bring in the ESV instead of the NRSV, and vice versa.)
I think those people need to learn Hebrew and Greek. ;) Go for it! If you’ve got such a firm desire in your heart for the details, they’re waiting for you in the Hebrew Bible and the Greek New Testament!
Funny. I was quite the NASB-snob for 40+ years (not an "onlyist", but definitely a snob), until about two or three years into studying Greek. All of a sudden I could see so many places where the NIV, or ESV or something else captured the sense of a phrase so much better than a literal rendering of the words could do. There is a lot more to translation than just "decoding" the words! @@markwardonwords
Mark, of all the "smooth readers", what's your preferred translation(s)? For me it was just NLT/NIV but I've read through GWttN recently and it's so direct. Both GWttN and NLT take some interpretive leisure and pick a fork in the road when ambiguity comes, most anything I research on NLT I agree with (I don't use filament I look it up myself), GWttN I can't see the forks and during parallel readings I find I don't always agree but the overall synopsis is much more coherent and convincing. This all based on 37 years NKJV, and another 2 ESV heavy (with NIV and NLT as cross reference). I'll read anything but I'm archiving stuff for my kid(s) to be ready JIC economic troubles and woke publishers ruin the pipeline producing them.
@@markwardonwords thanks. I've been defaulting to NIV for his homeschooling materials since it's the flagship option, just wondering if there was more out there. I also have (a lot of) Rose charts and Kingstone Comics, multiple children's bibles, he ought to be fine to pick his own adult stuff by 12 .... and I want it queued up in his closet with the rest of it. It's stocked like a loot drop in a RPG.
Very interesting. At least the Crossway says the the ESV is "essentially" literal. I don't know if we would understand an ultra literal Bible translation, like say the English part of an interlinear or reverse interlinear Bible.
In German there exist translations that make the NASB appear much less literal in comparison - they are not fun to read and often confusing. Its always helpful to remember that the NT was written in common Greek - I've been pleasantly surprised how accurate the NIV conveys the texts
I know this is an older video, but I couldn’t help myself. I only come to rewatch and comment that I propose (as unhinged as an idea this is, I am known for them) that we use “y’all” for all plurals in modern English translations. I emphasize it when I preach and always get a giggle. But it does help clarify who the phrase is addressing.
You jest but I would buy your incredi-NASB version with the highlights and underlines to show tenses and whatnot (but keeping readability). It’s genius…readable but you still know details about the original language without having to pull out your GNT. PS wouldn’t get rid of all my other Bibles :)
Still resisting giving this opinion. =) But I'll give a hint: marketing for the LSB was the immediate (though certainly not the only) impetus to this video.
@@markwardonwords okay. With your permission I'd like to ask you one more question if that's okay. What do you think about the 2020 edition of the nasb?
@@austintucker394, I have not spent enough time with it to form a reliable opinion. I expect it to be good, because it was done by responsible individuals and is based on a good translation. That is all I know!
I think these hyper literal translations are so funny, mainly because when I do a translation for a study on a passage, I do rough translation like that and never bother to clean it up since no one else is ever going to read it and the Greek syntax makes sense when I read it.
MacArthur might as well go this way with his redundant new LSB. (I assume you were talking about him, but even if you weren't, I'm still all for criticizing the very existence of that translation.) Generally, I'm not sure if there's much practical everyday value for translations that are more formal than the NRSV and CSB (which tend to land on the center-left of translation continuum charts). I particularly like the slogan of the NRSV: "As literal as possible, as free as necessary." (The ESV lands a tad to the left of these translations on the charts, but as someone who uses all three translations in tandem, I would remark that the actual difference in "literalness" between the three is negligible.) That's not to say that there's no room for the NASB and NKJV with their italicized supplied words and abundance of awkward literalisms. I would simply say that they're more useful to a person learning Koine Greek than they are to everybody else.
@@markwardonwords By the way, I had to check out John 4.48 simply because it was used as an example of an ambiguous second person pronoun. Here's what I found among the major modern translations. Translations with footnote indicators: 1. NRSV: Footnote reads, "Both instances of the Greek word for you in this verse are plural." 2. ESV: Footnote reads, "The Greek for you is plural; twice in this verse." Translations with supplied words for clarity: 1. NASB: Text reads, "You people." 2. CSB: Text reads, "You people." 3. NKJV: Text reads, "You people." 4. NIV: Text reads, "You people." 5. NAB: Text reads, "You people." 6. NET: Text reads, "You people." 7. Amplified: Text reads, "You people." 8. NCV: Text reads, "You people." 9. Good News: Text reads, "None of you." 10. REB: Text reads, "None of you." Translations that fail to make a distinction: 1. CEB: Ambiguous "you." 2. MEV: Ambiguous "you." 3. New Jerusalem: Ambiguous "you." 4. NLT: Ambiguous "you." 5. RSV-CE: Ambiguous "you." 6. CEV: Ambiguous "you." My takeaway from this survey: if you're using more than one translation--whether you're a Roman Catholic, a mainline Protestant, a conservative Evangelical, or a TR-toting fundamentalist (or an Eastern Orthodox endorser of the "Majority Text" who has resigned to use TR translations for lack of a better option)--you're most likely going to be using at least one translation that addresses the issue.
Thanks Mark! I love this video, and your channel. It's evident you care about the Word, and work hard to provide helpful content for the Church. On another note, it would be wonderful (and a first?) if you/someone would review the readability of the NASB 95 vs. the NASB 2020, not simply (as some) focusing on the gender changes or the latest 'accuracy' claims, alone. I have been reading through the NASB 2020 this year as my personal daily devotion, (I use a different one every other year) and find it surprisingly more readable - not in the fashion of NIV/NLT, but I definitely stumble much less working through my daily reading plan. I wonder if they have achieved a slightly lower reading level (you have a great video on that topic with the false KJV claims - so I understand the need to not be impressed with any grade level claim that can be made) since most "experts" previously have assigned the NASB 95 to something like an 11th grade reading level. I find the English structure to be improved with the NASB 2020, much better than even the ESV (with my ADHD mind - even medicated - and I'm not sure why). I do, however, have a great respect and love for the ESV, but my question isn't about comparing the latest translation (as you so carefully demonstrate the pitfalls of that in this/other videos), but to truly improve my ability to retain and comprehend the Word, with the help of the Holy Spirit. I've struggled my whole life with chronic distractibility and reading retention. I often read, then have to re-read the same sentence 3-5 times over, before being able to grasp it or not get lost in thought. Yes...even reading the NIV/NLT. I appreciate any input or insight concerning better reading tips for those who struggle with focus; even your opinion on how a certain English approach (like ESV style English vs. an American style structure NASB/NIV?) can help those with bonafide reading challenges, schooled in the US of course. lol Finally...it would be interesting, if sometime you would consider touching on the subject of readability tips for English readers who struggle to read (adhd, dyslexia, etc); even those who read English as a second language. I'm familiar with the NIrV, but often see that relegated to children's bibles. God bless.
Wow-there are a ton of great questions here. I'm going to be honest: I just can't speak to all of these things. I don't have a right to an opinion on readability for those with learning disabilities, or people who aren't native English speakers. I can only make guesses and tell you what, given my low level of knowledge, I would do. I would try them out on the NLT. I'm thinking about this with someone I know. I'd suggest audio Bibles, too, perhaps (I myself do this nowadays). I have a NASB2020, but I just haven't looked into it in detail. It will take a while to do this! It's hard, hard work. I'm just not sure I'm up for it! But if a scholar I trust does the work, I will probably talk about it on this channel.
Frisch Perspective does take a look at the differences between 1995 and 2020. He also covers many other questions and reviews of Bible translations and new editions.
I did not know that "thee" was singular and "you" was plural. I wondered why they used both words. I don't read the KJV, but the Jewish Publication Society's 1917 "The Holy Scriptures", and they use those words too. That is a shocker to me.
I enjoy very much this video about INCREDI NASB and literal translation.You quoted John 3:16 in the Literal Standard Version.They're translation of everlasting life is continous life,but continuously life on earth or after life on earth?I was surprised that you didn't show a NASB with green cover if you know what I meant just kidding.
Ha! To be clear, just in case my friends at TMS stumble on this, I am truly not aiming this at the LSB. I'm aiming it at some of the thinking-and the marketing-that has developed around Bible translation more generally. The ethos that, yes, I do hear in promotional materials for the LSB is most certainly not unique to the LSB. And again, I'm not saying that churches should avoid using the LSB. I haven't read it yet, and I doubt I'll come to conclude that. I'm saying that they should humbly recognize that the literaler-than-thou arms race is not healthy, and that other pastors/congregations can have godly, careful, doctrinally sound reasons for choosing not to go that route.
@@markwardonwords Agree 💯. I have been enjoying the LSB but found a lot of value in your video- and the reminder that literal doesn’t always inherently mean better. As the saying goes: “The best Bible is the one you read.”
So where's the pre-order for Incredi-NASB? I need to feel elite by reading a literaller translation than the next person. So complete that not even I can understand its meaning.
Don't Greek and Hebrew have their word order flipped around from English? If that's the case, I guess we have to have a really awkward grammar, or I should say, a grammar awkward we should have.
Thanks again for another interesting video. I like to watch your and a good handful of other videos on TH-cam with insightful biblical thinking. I typically use a small “pile” of bible translations that I have here at my desk. I lean more toward literal translations (although I fully agree they can get “carried away”) it isn’t so much the need for literalism as much as the liberty that the less-literal translations take. Even the NIV veers way too much into straying away from accuracy. I see the NIV, and some other translations as well, more as a “paraphrase.” Its popularity requires that I’d best be familiar with it, and it isn’t so bad to see things in a different perspective. I was intrigued at your comment on the New World Translation Jehovah’s Witnesses use and the interpretation of John 1:1 “a god.” Within my collection of bible translations, I see the NWT certainly isn’t alone in saying “a god.” Plenty of other translations have it thusly too. Even in Young’s Commentary on his literal translation he notes John 1:1c as “literally a god." Scholars are all over the spectrum on this one. Some say “the word was divine,” "and he was the same as God" - The Good News Bible. "the Logos was divine" Moffatt, “and the Logos was god” [small “g”]. My sincere and kindly question; How is “a god” in violation of Greek to English translating? Why exactly is “a god” wrong or incorrect in a translating sense? Many scholars, in various ways, make the claim that “god” in John 1:1c is describing an “attribute” or “quality” of Jesus rather than what or who Jesus is. Thanks
The most common answer to this question is known as Colwell's Rule. (See, for instance, renowned New Testament scholar Bruce Metzger's 1953 article that criticizes the NWT: www.bible-researcher.com/metzger.jw.html .) However, that explanation (which has to do with whether a definite predicate noun comes before or after verb) is not universally accepted as being applicable to the verse. A good place to start on the topic is the footnote in the NET Bible, which discusses an alternative meaning that might be implied by the order of the predicate noun and the verb.
@@MAMoreno Thanks for your reply... Hopefully I come across as equally respectable as well... Yes I have the NET bible and have studied those notes. Actually I'm glad that Colwell's Rule is finally being explained away for not being applicable. I wasn't totally convinced of it myself when I first read of it over 40 years ago... Even then, I knew at best it would only open a possibility and not "demand" it being a definite predicate noun. My intent isn't to criticize the NWT, there are scholars divided on both sides of the NWT issue. Actually, the most hard core folks will take primary issue against the NWT on only a handful of points, and yet will still agree with many other translating points that the NWT ends up endorsing. Even here, I checked the seven points of "plural" and "singular" "ye" "YOU" and "you" that Mark mentions, and the NWT is spot-on on all 7 as he presents! There are other videos and books explaining Greek and Hebrew translating and when I compare what they say and open the NWT on those scriptures they're discussing, they nearly always agree. There are typically the same few scriptures most scholars disagree with on the NWT. But that said, I still seek out specifically why translating John 1:1c as "a god" goes against translating dictates and standards, especially when I see so many other bible translations doing the very same thing. My focus isn't really on the NWT but, more pointedly, why "a god" goes against Greek grammar translating rules. Thanks
Just looking at the initial picture on the video, the ESV is not literal and very loosely on the formal side. Using the publishers own reverse interlinear, it's a translation not very close to the Greek below it. I mean this regarding vocabulary and grammar. The NKJV blows it away, and even the 1984NIV is considerably better.
Ive never met anyone who was NASB only or anyone who was ANYTHING only other than KJV only or TR only I’ve never even heard of anyone who was that was a Christian. But thats sad if they’re out there. I mostly use the NASB but without its footnotes the NKJV is more literal without the footnotes and so is the KJV, the NASB is about the same as the ESV.
Sir, while I have your (thine) ear, would you consider it wise or acceptable for me to use the NRSV ( in its current pre-update firm) as a dynamic translation "reading Bible" to pair with the RSV/NKJV I use for study? It helps me get out of the weeds in difficult verses but maintains the flow and feel of the KJV line.
Perhaps the Legacy Standard Bible is pretty close to being the Incredi-NASB? It's pretty incredible to me. I don't like a visual mess, though, so no highlighting, please. Yes, you love the Incredibles...I know :-)
@@markwardonwords Really?!! Cool! I hope you have been reading it online, as I have. My Shamar goatskin will be here any day...maybe today....it's only 7am for me so far. Does this mean that you approve of the LSB and even like it?!
@@artistchristos, that's a complicated question-because translations are complicated things. I wrote an article on the LSB before its release. It's up on the ETC blog. But I haven't looked at specific LSB renderings, because I don't have a copy.
Necro: is the steadfast bibles/316 publishing "steadfast limited, NASB large print compact" the best on the market currently? I just got one and it seems a half step better than a schuyler PSQ in quality, plus I like the single column better for a compact.... all that AND it's 80 dollars cheaper.
I’m not so smart, I didn’t know what ad hominem meant! But I actually like your ideas that you meant as satire because this isn’t Shakespeare and they should at least do that for people who still believe that this is literally the word of God jot for jot and title for title or whatever those things are. And who got angry about the gender issue, did God show up and pass it all Bible translators? And I just don’t get the sense that’s going to end up in a good place personally and again I’m not that smart.
Oh, don't remind me of the Ruckmanites! Horrors. They are prowling about all over the place. A week ago I had to tell a brother, whol thinks his KJV is the basis for all translation correction, that it cannot possibly be used that way. It's not the basis of any translation but its own.
I love and admire John MacArthur. Truly, I am not fit to shine his shoes. I do disagree with him a bit over Bible translation. But the result of his views would be something in which I still see genuine value and usefulness. We don’t have a sharp disagreement.
Irrelevant but mildly amusing anecdote; the NASB was the first modern translation I was given, after making my profession of faith. I loved it because I could actually understand the Scriptures, as opposed to having to decode the KJV. I read, re-read and memorized large portions of it. Much later on, when in seminary learning Greek, I used to have my quiet times in Greek, translating the passage - using the NASB to check my work (and the NASB worked really well here). Even more years later, I went back to seminary for another Master's degree and took an advanced Greek course, which required sight reading a passage in Greek, translating it on the fly. I was nervous about this, and prayed accordingly. On the day that I had to demonstrate my facility in Greek, the assigned passage was one I had memorized in the NASB. Seriously, I was able to recall the NASB, and work backwards to the Greek and passed the exam. Not one of my proudest academic moment; but nobody disses the NASB in my presence! 🙂
Ha! Nice!
I took a year of Greek while in prison (Mounce, basic biblical Greek). It was actually very helpful that I was memorizing a lot of Scripture. The test often had us translating "Bible-ish" passages so that we couldn't just rely on our familiarity of the actual text.
@@ogmakefirefiregood They did the same kind of thing for me in school. Or they would give a random passage from Kings that nobody memorizes like the Gospels, since it was a Hebrew class. Anyway, kind of cool to see they were doing the same elsewhere.
Wow, just wow! Thank you, Mark, for the informational humor and the convictional satire that helps us gain clarity on this important subject.
Thank you! That means a lot!
Hey Mark! I have recently discovered your videos and love them. I've been binging on them for a few days now, and I also love your "word nerd" sense of humor. In that sense we are definitely fellow travelers 😊. Among the churches with which I am associated, I have for a number of years now been presenting much of the same kind of material you present, advocating the use of other translations, with good success. Thanks for you excellent, informative, and, yes, entertaining videos.
Welcome aboard! Nice to meet you!
I feel quite proud of myself, I understood approximately 50% of this!
Kind regards from the UK.
Ha! Yeah, this one is pretty demanding. Maybe worth a second listen? What was difficult for you? Maybe I can explain further in another video!
Thanks for adding more understanding to the literal side’s value. I’ll have to test myself on the you singular/plural interpretation, but I’m still waiting for that bible with “ya’ll” that resolves this argument 😆
Yes!
Plus yinz and you’s
I'd pay good money to add that to my collection.
That’s “Y’all.
I haven't tried the random "you/y'all" test, but when I began reading the NT in Greek, the only one that surprised me was Luke 22:31-32.. I looked at my husband's Bible and there was a footnote about the singulars and plurals there. The NASB that I had been reading for decades had no such footnote! Ha ha!
12:32 The guy who wrote that book taught my family KJV-onlyism. So glad I got out of that. I'm trying to budge the rest of my family out, too. They dont like KJVO, but they just need to make the jump to being able to read their Bibles.
I pray that the Lord rescues your family from that error!
@@markwardonwords thanks, me too
Dr. Ward, this is really brilliant. I'm so glad to have found your channel. I saw Nathan Cravatt on the Dividing Line with James White and starting watching videos on the Recovering Fundamentalist channel. I eventually watched the video where you were the guest, which led me to your channel. I've really been enjoying your content. Thank you for your work. God bless.
Praise God-and thank you for the kind word.
I've taken the first part of Scott McQuinn's Greek class at Biblical Language Center, and it was excellent. I'm greatly looking forward to continuing with the program when life circumstances allow.
Awesome! Love that guy!
Both funny and informative. Literally.
;)
your superhero voice is so good, whateven🤣
My father was Incredi-RSV.
I enjoy reading the NLT and the NKJV; but I have recently been reading passages in the NASB and I have found the language used in the translation is growing on me (some of it is quite beautiful). I just ordered a compact NASB so that I can have one readily at hand (as you point out, having a 'more literal' translation available can be useful). Thanks for posting this video.
In short, more "literal" (or even more formally equivalent) doesn't necessarily imply more accurate. Often people falsely assume that more "literal" means more accurate but that is easily disproven. For instance, the literal translation of the French phrase "pomme de terre" would be "apple of earth" (and one can add an italicized "the" after "of" and before "earth" to conform with NASB style if preferred). But it'd be inaccurate in English to say I want an "apple of [the] earth" with cream and chives please when the real meaning of "pomme de terre" is "potato". 😊
Very good, Mark. You had me going with the LSV. I am reading the LSB which is totally different from LSV. Thanks for your work. Entertaining, informative, challenging,...
Great video! Really glad you're doing more TH-cam stuff now. God bless.
Thank you, sir. Looks like you're on TH-cam, too-but we can't see your face because it's just audio! =)
@@markwardonwords Haha, just getting my feet wet with podcasting and such. You've inspired me to start working on a video set-up though!
Canon M50 or M6 II, all the way!
whew... great video.. lots of information... thank you Pastor Mark... God bless you.
You are very welcome!
I feel like we are somehow related. (LOL) I've gone on this same "rant" and it seems to have only grown as a topic since ~2020. Thank you for the channel. (I've had your "Authorized Version" book for a while and just never got around to looking for more Mark Ward until this week.)
I love this video! I just discovered the AV translating historical presents as presents (but not always: Matt. 3:1, 15; 8:22; 9:14; etc.)! I finally know why it has that awkward English sometimes: "Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city" (Matt. 4:5) take in the present tense... does the devil still do this today?! Knowing that the AV is simply translating the historical present clears this up so beautifully.
In Greek, the historical present tense is frequently used to describe past events as if they are happening in the present. This stylistic choice adds vividness and immediacy to the narrative, making the event feel more immediate to the reader or listener. The translators of the KJV often retained the original tense (Matt. 4:8; Mk. 15:27) when it contributed to the literary style or theological emphasis, even if it might seem awkward in contemporary English.
So, while "they crucify" might sound unusual today, it reflects the original Greek's attempt to bring the event into the present moment, which was a common narrative technique in ancient texts. The choice to keep it as "they crucify" rather than "they crucified" preserves this effect, even though it may seem awkward to modern readers.
Right! The key here is to note that the KJV translators used their discretion to decide when a given historical present should be rendered as an English present and when it shouldn't. Today's translators should be allowed the same liberty.
This is the first video of yours I have seen, I love it, and now I am subscribed w/notification bell turned on :-)
I arrived hoping for help in deciding whether or not to get a Legacy Standard Bible but I'll stay for more. Thanks.
Awesome! Welcome. This video is one of my very favorites. The rest may not live up to the promise or this one!
I watched this video when it first came out, and now I'm watching it again in September. I have both the 77 and 95 update of the NASB, and it is a good translation. I've used them both for years, but I find myself loving and using the ESV more and more. So much more that now it's become my favorite translation, and I've come to believe that from everything I've read on the subject, that the ESV is more faithful to the original languages than the NASB, NKJV, or even the KJV. That's just my opinion of course.
I think they’re all good and useful!
@@markwardonwords Agreed.
This is my new favorite video of yours! Incredi-NASB is going to be my screensaver now! :p Btw, what are the posters in the background?
Thanks! Ha!
The posters are from Biblical Worldview: Creation, Fall, Redemption, my last big project while I was at BJU Press.
@@markwardonwords We homeschool our kids and we have been looking at bju for next year!
Excellent! Yes, I loved working for BJU Press. I did a large freelance job for them in 2019-2020, writing a sixth grade biblical worldview book (with an excellent foundation laid by their team). I’m also doing some design work for them. Their mission is important to me.
Don't forget to give name and web info of your Church, want to check it out!
In his New Testament translation, David Bentley Hart uses the historical present. It's quite an interesting feature in what is overall a very interesting translation. I'm not a Greek scholar, but having read up on his methodology and have read some of the translation, I get the sense that it provides a very close approximation to reading the Greek, but just using English words.
I've just been reading his book on beauty. He is quite the intellect. I've been wanting to look at his translation in greater detail. I can't say I was impressed with his descriptions of his work; he sounded kind of arrogant about what other translations were supposedly missing. But that doesn't mean the things he has seen aren't there.
@@markwardonwords Thanks for the response! I think he is a little bit arrogant, honestly. As you say, that doesn't mean he's necessarily wrong. The arguments between him and NT Wright regarding their dueling NT translations are quite interesting.
I don't have the Greek knowledge to weigh in with my own opinion, but I can say that I have found his translation to be a worthwhile read. It at least provides a way to read a familiar text in a fresh and thought-provoking way.
@@sorenpx And that's a lot to be thankful for with such a well-studied document as the NT!
Soooo, are you going to post a link to preorder the Incredi-NASB version. I am kinda excited now. 😉
Yes! th-cam.com/video/dQw4w9WgXcQ/w-d-xo.html
@@markwardonwords You can’t trick me! I memorized that link! I never would have thought I’d see the day where a Bible linguist tried to rickroll someone...
;)
Haha!
@@markwardonwords is this you lip-syncing?? 😂
Great stuff Mark! Love the "Incredi-NASB" motif!
Thanks, Dwayne!
LSB is number 1 for me by far. Also use the NASB, ESV and NIV for comparison. And if I want to refer to an older translation for further comparison I'll use the Geneva bible just, well just because.
This actually sounds like it would be an interesting study tool
Ha!
Mark regarding time stamp 2:23 "In my Word Nerd video, I imagined the creation of an INCREDI-NASB, a superhero Bible that collected all the nerdy Bible conventions one could dream up. And oh, could I dream. Blue highlights for grammatically masculine words, pink for feminine ones, gray for neuter. Single underlines for singular words, double underlines for plural ones. Little dots and dashes connecting words that were alliterated in the originals." While said with some jest, there is a bible that seems to tick some of these boxes; The Discovery Bible by Gary Hill. I believe the New Testament was published in the 90s, and it uses red text in bold, and italics to communicate emphasis, as well as custom symbols to annotate original greek tenses. And you'll be happy to hear, it uses the NASB! :D Despite the many bible review channels on TH-cam, I've yet find one that scratches at this particular bible and it's (seemingly) unique system of conveying meaning to it's readers. While out of print, copies are available somewhat affordably on eBay, and if cost would be a barrier to a potential video of your opinion, I'd be happy to donate the funds for you to purchase a copy. Thank you for your wonderful videos.
Several lines in this made me and my wife laugh out loud.
I love hearing that! Thank you for watching!
Mark, enjoyed this video tremendously, thank you. However, you forgot to post the link to purchase the Incredi- NASB, along with acceptable payment sources: check, money order or drachmas
I accept only denarii! ;)
Loved this! I too embrace multiple translations…
LSB / NASB95
ESV
HCSB
NET
Excellent!
Now I want an incredi-nasb
I'm currently working to make it even MORE literal-soon there will be almost no English left! ;)
There is a translation that meets most of your most-literalest requirements - Alfred Marshall's translation used in Zondervan's older interlinears. I have occasionally met pastors who "survived" their solitary compulsory Greek paper at seminary by memorising 1 John in it and regurgitating it in exams.
Wow! Interesting! Good tip.
Great presentation! How’s your Incredi-NASb project going? I can imagine (and would love to use) a big Custom Palette plus companion Visual Filters in Logos (user since mid 90’s) … are you working on something like that? Please let me know. Thanks!
I’m afraid my custom palettes are much more targeted. :(
@@markwardonwords Ah ... versus full-testament for a given construct? Pity. It would be REALLY helpful to have VF's nicely laid out for various "non-simplistic" constructs, such as 1st-3rd class conditions, purpose clauses etc. It's straightforward to build a VF for second person singular personal pronouns, but the compound constructs are beyond my current skill level. Do you have a Group in Faithlife with templates for VF's etc we can download? Mine (in its infancy) is JimDean-StudyStuff ... currently, it has a couple dozen Palettes with organized groupings of various highlighting styles.
I love this! This is a must-watch video!!!
Thank you!
I love this so much. :)
A high honor coming from you! To be fair, I ought to do one going the other direction. A MEGA-NLT or something. I’ve been cogitating on this.
You should! I'd suggest that Romans 14:5 in the NLT would be a good starting point.
I’m on it!
I unironically want the incredi-NASB.
the ASV is basically just the incredi NASB
Thank you for all your hard work Mark.Very well done.You are a Blessing!
You are very welcome!
Hello, I’m Erik Wait in Half Moon Bay in California. I’ve been watching and enjoying a lot of your videos lately. In the morning I read an easier modern translation with my coffee before I head off to work. But if I’m studying I tend to use a more “literal” translation along with my Hebrew or Greek text and occasionally the LXX. The various English translations have different goals and intentions. Devotional reading is different than studying do when asked for a recommendation I ask, “what is your purpose?” FYI, I generally find that conservative Presbyterian and Reformed churches don’t have an official translation, especially those that are heavily populated by Dutch or Korean speakers.
I totally agree!
Do we have an English translation that was not translated by Evangelicals? Reason I'm asking is because not all Christians are Evangelicals.
Many! Catholic, mainline, orthodox.
“Historians recently discovered that this story was invented by a pre-incarnate appearance of Peter Ruckman.” 😂
Yup. It's all true! ;)
Zonderfans announces the NIYV (New International Y’all Version.). The Texas Receptus.
Yes!!!
First time I preached I use the Tower of Babel as an example. The title of the sermon was; God gives birth to Unity through diversity.
Interesting! That’s kind of the opposite of what you would expect! What unit did you have in mind?
@@markwardonwords the short version is. God separated the people's groups. Then Christ came to unify the different people groups ethnicities tribes languages into the new body of Christ creating one body United under one God one holy Union in Jesus so that we who were not a people are now a people, the people of God.
Ah, got it!
Thanks for the shoutout, Dr. Ward (though you spelled my named incorrectly [lol]). I enjoyed your analysis. If you ever were to produce a maximally literal translation, I think you should also address the issue of textual criticism because, as you know, there are serious concerns about which textual tradition is the best one to use. Having a "super-AV" or an "incredi-NASB" is one thing; having such a translation based on a particular Hebrew or Greek text is another thing.
Aaaahhh!!! I hate misspelling! Can’t believe I did that. Sigh.
Have you done any videos on the CEB?
No videos, no.
@@markwardonwords Do you ever plan on making one? I'd love to hear your thoughts
@@JannahPursuit I really feel I have to put a ton of time into a translation before I can generalize about its quality. I've had to limit myself to the ones I've spent time with over the years!
Mark, your thoughts please, on Timothy Michael Law's book, "WHEN GOD SPOKE GREEK, The Septuagint and the Making of the Christian Bible."
It looks very promising. Not evangelical. But promising. I want it! I can't decide in what format, though…
Just bought it and started listening to it. I'm put off by the open attack on evangelical views of Scripture. If you feel you can filter those out, as I plan to do, I'm hopeful that the book will still hold some value. But I found it frustrating to have him emphasize the differences between the LXX and Masoretic Text and Dead Sea Scrolls rather than the overwhelming similarities.
@@markwardonwords Michael Law writes, "So in the most formative period of Christian theology, when the early church framed many of those beliefs now taken for granted by Christians worldwide, their thoughts were molded NOT by the Hebrew Bible that underlies our modern English Bibles, but by the Greek Septuagint. None of this would be terribly significant if the Septuagint were MERELY a translation of the Hebrew, as some have taken pains to assert; as we shall see, however, the Septuagint in many places contains a spectacularly different message. This is not only because the translators of the Septuagint books created new meanings in their translations but also for another more shocking reason altogether, And that's the fourth reason that the Septuagint is significant. The Septuagint often preserves a witness to an ALTERNATIVE, sometimes OLDER, form of the Hebrew text." Phew! Mark, I respect your research skills, what is your reaction to Law's ideas? I have heard often that 90% of Old Testament quotes by Jesus and Paul were from the LXX and the not the Hebrew Bible. I also am aware that the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox have always only used the LXX as their Old Testament. Have you done any videos on the LXX?
@@MikesBibleNotes, my response is to go read William Ross' book. =) This quotation is precisely the one that made me write that follow-up comment.
@@markwardonwords Thank you for the book recommendation. Any other thoughts on the LXX would be appreciated.
I think I would go for an interlinear Bible over a hyper literal. When I read a sentence in Greek, it makes sense. But the same word order translated into another language is gibberish. I should also add that I find transliteration of a word less friendly than the word written in Greek. My proficiency in Greek is not that advanced as I am self taught with the help of modern textbooks and TH-cam (can read John, but not more advanced). I am bilingual and do translations from Norwegian to English. The biggest challenge is translating idioms or phrases for which there are no equivalent. Do you keep the actual phrase or go for the intent? Something is lost either way!
“Elasti-NIV”, a.k.a. “The Message” who is the arch villain of Incredi-NASB
Ha! Yes, we could take this metaphor so far!
Hey Mark, have you read David Bentley Hart's NT? Would be interested in your take on his and Alter's work in particular. Take care!
Good ideas. I wrote a review of the latter’s book on translation. I may make a video of that.
@@markwardonwords this episode of "Minding Scripture" from Notre Dame features both translators
mindingscripture.com/episode-4-translation-of-scripture/
On a related note, I find myself persuaded rather by Hart than by Wright on what makes for good translation afkimel.wordpress.com/2018/01/16/a-reply-to-n-t-wright/
In summary, I think Hart and Alter make scripture "come alive" in ways no other translations have ever done for me. I *feel* Paul in Romans etc.
thanks for the response and have a blessed Lord's Day
When is this Incredi-NASB coming out? I'd buy a copy
I think it just did. =)
ok i understand what your video's say and i may of asked this before but what about what the kjv onlys say about missing verses words taken out etc. i am really conflicted more now than ever about what version to use the kjv crowd make some very good points like you yourself have said the kjv has been the churches choice for over 400 years i just dont want to get anything wrong or miss something because i have the wrong version
Two things: that’s a problem you don’t have to solve, a question you don’t have to answer. The NKJV and MEV use the same Hebrew and Greek texts as the KJV, but they translate them into contemporary English.
But if you want to dive into this subject-and this is my second point-then watch this video: th-cam.com/video/NAqeYqp0-7o/w-d-xo.html.
"A pre-incarnate version of Peter Ruckman." Lol 😅
;)
I have enjoyed the NLT's "marketing" of the value of thought for thought translations. The "literal" translations can give readers a false sense of security that they are reading an exact word for word translation.
I know that marketers gotta market, but I wish sometimes they would tone it down…
Yes, the lesson is be careful how negative you are about either idea because no translation is purely one or the other. "How dynamic is too dynamic" becomes like the question of "how much is too much to spend on a nice car" . . . . Anything more than what I spent.
Right!
Love it . I love every translation.
I want to buy a bible in this month
Help me bro to choose one
NRSV?
KJV?
ESV?
If you are new to the Bible, have mid-to-low reading comprehension, or just want a translation that’s mostly focused on clarity, I recommend the NIV or NLT.
If you’re looking for deeper study or prefer a more formal translation, I recommend the ESV or NASB (ESV is better than NASB from a clarity standpoint, IMO.)
@@k80.01 thanks great help. God bless you
More like which translation not to use. Off the top of my head: NWT, The message bible, the passion bible, tniv........ I'm sure there are more heretical translations
The NRSV and ESV are sister translations (both based on the RSV), so they're extremely similar. You would want to consider their three main differences when choosing between them:
1. The NRSV generally uses more contemporary English conventions. For instance, it consistently uses gender inclusive language, while the ESV will sometimes use "men" to refer to humans in general. The ESV also tends to retain more of the Jacobean English flourishes that come from their common ancestor, the KJV (e.g. "Judge not" instead of "Do not judge"), while the NRSV is more likely to update the diction.
2. The ESV translates the Old Testament from a Christian perspective, while the NRSV translates it from a Jewish perspective. Passages in the Tanakh that are traditionally used as Christian proof texts will be more obvious in the ESV. At the same time, the ESV stays closer to the Masoretic Hebrew tradition, while the NRSV is more willing to incorporate alternative readings from outside that text tradition.
3. While both translations strive for formal equivalence (word-for-word translation), the NRSV is a little more willing to smooth out the text a bit for ease of reading. That said, both translations rank at a high school reading level, and the NRSV often gets listed a grade level above the ESV in terms of readability. If you find them both a bit hard to read, you might consider using the CSB, which is just slightly less literal.
Either translation is a superb choice. The ESV has a wider acceptance in Evangelical churches, while the NRSV is a staple of mainline Protestant churches, so your choice in translation may be tied to your choice in church affiliation. (Certain congregations can get really snobby if you bring in the ESV instead of the NRSV, and vice versa.)
@@MAMoreno thanks 😊.
You'd be surprised (or not) that there are actually people out there, including me, who'd love to have an Incredi-NASB! 🤤
I think those people need to learn Hebrew and Greek. ;) Go for it! If you’ve got such a firm desire in your heart for the details, they’re waiting for you in the Hebrew Bible and the Greek New Testament!
Funny. I was quite the NASB-snob for 40+ years (not an "onlyist", but definitely a snob), until about two or three years into studying Greek. All of a sudden I could see so many places where the NIV, or ESV or something else captured the sense of a phrase so much better than a literal rendering of the words could do. There is a lot more to translation than just "decoding" the words! @@markwardonwords
@@annagaiser5186 RIGHT! I'm so sad that this insight is so hard-won. But it's reality. It' just hard to understand without experiencing it.
Fun one! Can I get it in R. L. Allan or Schuyler green goatskin?
Comes only in titanium.
@@markwardonwords I assumed it would be in unobtainium. At least for now.
YES!!!
Can’t believe I’m subbing here.
It’s not worth it. There’s still time to unsubscribe!!
What do you think about the Passion Translation? Thank you
Likely to come out with a video on that at some point. But I'd point you to Mike Winger's TH-cam series on TPT.
Mark, of all the "smooth readers", what's your preferred translation(s)?
For me it was just NLT/NIV but I've read through GWttN recently and it's so direct. Both GWttN and NLT take some interpretive leisure and pick a fork in the road when ambiguity comes, most anything I research on NLT I agree with (I don't use filament I look it up myself), GWttN I can't see the forks and during parallel readings I find I don't always agree but the overall synopsis is much more coherent and convincing. This all based on 37 years NKJV, and another 2 ESV heavy (with NIV and NLT as cross reference). I'll read anything but I'm archiving stuff for my kid(s) to be ready JIC economic troubles and woke publishers ruin the pipeline producing them.
I do tend to like the NIV and NLT.
@@markwardonwords thanks. I've been defaulting to NIV for his homeschooling materials since it's the flagship option, just wondering if there was more out there. I also have (a lot of) Rose charts and Kingstone Comics, multiple children's bibles, he ought to be fine to pick his own adult stuff by 12 .... and I want it queued up in his closet with the rest of it. It's stocked like a loot drop in a RPG.
I busted out laughing at your Amen following John 3:34 😆
I never stop delighting to find that someone out there gets my sometimes obscure humor. Lots of people in real life just stare at me.
You are One Precious Brother. You bring much joy to all, except KJV Only people. Smiles.
You made my wife laugh out loud!
Very interesting. At least the Crossway says the the ESV is "essentially" literal. I don't know if we would understand an ultra literal Bible translation, like say the English part of an interlinear or reverse interlinear Bible.
Right-essentially.
In German there exist translations that make the NASB appear much less literal in comparison - they are not fun to read and often confusing.
Its always helpful to remember that the NT was written in common Greek - I've been pleasantly surprised how accurate the NIV conveys the texts
Im assuming this is regarding the 1995 NASB, not the 2020 NASB?
Neither! This is the INCREDI-NASB!!!
(But the NASB I use in the video a few times is the 1995.)
I know this is an older video, but I couldn’t help myself. I only come to rewatch and comment that I propose (as unhinged as an idea this is, I am known for them) that we use “y’all” for all plurals in modern English translations. I emphasize it when I preach and always get a giggle. But it does help clarify who the phrase is addressing.
Let's do it!
"A pre-incarnate appearance of Peter Ruckman" LOL loosing it!
;)
You jest but I would buy your incredi-NASB version with the highlights and underlines to show tenses and whatnot (but keeping readability). It’s genius…readable but you still know details about the original language without having to pull out your GNT. PS wouldn’t get rid of all my other Bibles :)
Ha! That kind of info is readily available in Logos Bible Software! Get that until the INCREDI-NASB comes out!! =)
What do you think of the LSB?
Still resisting giving this opinion. =) But I'll give a hint: marketing for the LSB was the immediate (though certainly not the only) impetus to this video.
@@markwardonwords Are you saying in the video that literal is not always better ? I asked cause I wanna make sure I understand the message.
@@austintucker394, yes! And it isn't always better because it isn't always possible.
@@markwardonwords okay. With your permission I'd like to ask you one more question if that's okay. What do you think about the 2020 edition of the nasb?
@@austintucker394, I have not spent enough time with it to form a reliable opinion. I expect it to be good, because it was done by responsible individuals and is based on a good translation. That is all I know!
Fantastic video!
Means a lot coming from you!
I think these hyper literal translations are so funny, mainly because when I do a translation for a study on a passage, I do rough translation like that and never bother to clean it up since no one else is ever going to read it and the Greek syntax makes sense when I read it.
Right!
MacArthur might as well go this way with his redundant new LSB. (I assume you were talking about him, but even if you weren't, I'm still all for criticizing the very existence of that translation.)
Generally, I'm not sure if there's much practical everyday value for translations that are more formal than the NRSV and CSB (which tend to land on the center-left of translation continuum charts). I particularly like the slogan of the NRSV: "As literal as possible, as free as necessary." (The ESV lands a tad to the left of these translations on the charts, but as someone who uses all three translations in tandem, I would remark that the actual difference in "literalness" between the three is negligible.)
That's not to say that there's no room for the NASB and NKJV with their italicized supplied words and abundance of awkward literalisms. I would simply say that they're more useful to a person learning Koine Greek than they are to everybody else.
Been there. Done that. ;)
evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2020/05/more-on-translation-draft.html
@@markwardonwords By the way, I had to check out John 4.48 simply because it was used as an example of an ambiguous second person pronoun. Here's what I found among the major modern translations.
Translations with footnote indicators:
1. NRSV: Footnote reads, "Both instances of the Greek word for you in this verse are plural."
2. ESV: Footnote reads, "The Greek for you is plural; twice in this verse."
Translations with supplied words for clarity:
1. NASB: Text reads, "You people."
2. CSB: Text reads, "You people."
3. NKJV: Text reads, "You people."
4. NIV: Text reads, "You people."
5. NAB: Text reads, "You people."
6. NET: Text reads, "You people."
7. Amplified: Text reads, "You people."
8. NCV: Text reads, "You people."
9. Good News: Text reads, "None of you."
10. REB: Text reads, "None of you."
Translations that fail to make a distinction:
1. CEB: Ambiguous "you."
2. MEV: Ambiguous "you."
3. New Jerusalem: Ambiguous "you."
4. NLT: Ambiguous "you."
5. RSV-CE: Ambiguous "you."
6. CEV: Ambiguous "you."
My takeaway from this survey: if you're using more than one translation--whether you're a Roman Catholic, a mainline Protestant, a conservative Evangelical, or a TR-toting fundamentalist (or an Eastern Orthodox endorser of the "Majority Text" who has resigned to use TR translations for lack of a better option)--you're most likely going to be using at least one translation that addresses the issue.
YES!!! Excellent!
Good work here, Moreno!
"Pre-incarnate appearance of Peter Ruckman" !! 😆😆😂😂
It gives me a lot of delight to know that other people enjoy these moments of nerdy humor.
Thanks Mark! I love this video, and your channel. It's evident you care about the Word, and work hard to provide helpful content for the Church. On another note, it would be wonderful (and a first?) if you/someone would review the readability of the NASB 95 vs. the NASB 2020, not simply (as some) focusing on the gender changes or the latest 'accuracy' claims, alone. I have been reading through the NASB 2020 this year as my personal daily devotion, (I use a different one every other year) and find it surprisingly more readable - not in the fashion of NIV/NLT, but I definitely stumble much less working through my daily reading plan. I wonder if they have achieved a slightly lower reading level (you have a great video on that topic with the false KJV claims - so I understand the need to not be impressed with any grade level claim that can be made) since most "experts" previously have assigned the NASB 95 to something like an 11th grade reading level. I find the English structure to be improved with the NASB 2020, much better than even the ESV (with my ADHD mind - even medicated - and I'm not sure why). I do, however, have a great respect and love for the ESV, but my question isn't about comparing the latest translation (as you so carefully demonstrate the pitfalls of that in this/other videos), but to truly improve my ability to retain and comprehend the Word, with the help of the Holy Spirit. I've struggled my whole life with chronic distractibility and reading retention. I often read, then have to re-read the same sentence 3-5 times over, before being able to grasp it or not get lost in thought. Yes...even reading the NIV/NLT. I appreciate any input or insight concerning better reading tips for those who struggle with focus; even your opinion on how a certain English approach (like ESV style English vs. an American style structure NASB/NIV?) can help those with bonafide reading challenges, schooled in the US of course. lol Finally...it would be interesting, if sometime you would consider touching on the subject of readability tips for English readers who struggle to read (adhd, dyslexia, etc); even those who read English as a second language. I'm familiar with the NIrV, but often see that relegated to children's bibles. God bless.
Wow-there are a ton of great questions here. I'm going to be honest: I just can't speak to all of these things. I don't have a right to an opinion on readability for those with learning disabilities, or people who aren't native English speakers. I can only make guesses and tell you what, given my low level of knowledge, I would do. I would try them out on the NLT. I'm thinking about this with someone I know. I'd suggest audio Bibles, too, perhaps (I myself do this nowadays).
I have a NASB2020, but I just haven't looked into it in detail. It will take a while to do this! It's hard, hard work. I'm just not sure I'm up for it! But if a scholar I trust does the work, I will probably talk about it on this channel.
Frisch Perspective does take a look at the differences between 1995 and 2020. He also covers many other questions and reviews of Bible translations and new editions.
6:27 - Wow
Thanks for mentioning the Eastern Orthodox and the Septuagint.
I did not know that "thee" was singular and "you" was plural. I wondered why they used both words. I don't read the KJV, but the Jewish Publication Society's 1917 "The Holy Scriptures", and they use those words too. That is a shocker to me.
I enjoy very much this video about INCREDI NASB and literal translation.You quoted John 3:16 in the Literal Standard Version.They're translation of everlasting life is continous life,but continuously life on earth or after life on earth?I was surprised that you didn't show a NASB with green cover if you know what I meant just kidding.
=)
INCREDI-NASB!!! In other words, the Legacy Standard Bible!
Ha! To be clear, just in case my friends at TMS stumble on this, I am truly not aiming this at the LSB. I'm aiming it at some of the thinking-and the marketing-that has developed around Bible translation more generally. The ethos that, yes, I do hear in promotional materials for the LSB is most certainly not unique to the LSB. And again, I'm not saying that churches should avoid using the LSB. I haven't read it yet, and I doubt I'll come to conclude that. I'm saying that they should humbly recognize that the literaler-than-thou arms race is not healthy, and that other pastors/congregations can have godly, careful, doctrinally sound reasons for choosing not to go that route.
@@markwardonwords Agree 💯. I have been enjoying the LSB but found a lot of value in your video- and the reminder that literal doesn’t always inherently mean better. As the saying goes: “The best Bible is the one you read.”
So where's the pre-order for Incredi-NASB?
I need to feel elite by reading a literaller translation than the next person. So complete that not even I can understand its meaning.
Yeah, the more impossible to understand it is, the more likely it is to be accurate. ;0
Don’t forget can leap a NIV in a single bound. 😂
Blessings
Yes!!!
Hahaha
Don't Greek and Hebrew have their word order flipped around from English? If that's the case, I guess we have to have a really awkward grammar, or I should say, a grammar awkward we should have.
Not exactly-but there are definitely places that, translated literally according to word order, sound like Yoda!
@@markwardonwords That was what I was trying to say.
Hypothetically speaking... when will this "incredi-nasb" be for sale?
In the New Jerusalem, where only perfect translations will be available in the Bride of Christ bookstore.
Thanks again for another interesting video. I like to watch your and a good handful of other videos on TH-cam with insightful biblical thinking. I typically use a small “pile” of bible translations that I have here at my desk. I lean more toward literal translations (although I fully agree they can get “carried away”) it isn’t so much the need for literalism as much as the liberty that the less-literal translations take. Even the NIV veers way too much into straying away from accuracy. I see the NIV, and some other translations as well, more as a “paraphrase.” Its popularity requires that I’d best be familiar with it, and it isn’t so bad to see things in a different perspective.
I was intrigued at your comment on the New World Translation Jehovah’s Witnesses use and the interpretation of John 1:1 “a god.” Within my collection of bible translations, I see the NWT certainly isn’t alone in saying “a god.” Plenty of other translations have it thusly too. Even in Young’s Commentary on his literal translation he notes John 1:1c as “literally a god." Scholars are all over the spectrum on this one. Some say “the word was divine,” "and he was the same as God" - The Good News Bible. "the Logos was divine" Moffatt, “and the Logos was god” [small “g”].
My sincere and kindly question; How is “a god” in violation of Greek to English translating? Why exactly is “a god” wrong or incorrect in a translating sense? Many scholars, in various ways, make the claim that “god” in John 1:1c is describing an “attribute” or “quality” of Jesus rather than what or who Jesus is. Thanks
The most common answer to this question is known as Colwell's Rule. (See, for instance, renowned New Testament scholar Bruce Metzger's 1953 article that criticizes the NWT: www.bible-researcher.com/metzger.jw.html .) However, that explanation (which has to do with whether a definite predicate noun comes before or after verb) is not universally accepted as being applicable to the verse. A good place to start on the topic is the footnote in the NET Bible, which discusses an alternative meaning that might be implied by the order of the predicate noun and the verb.
@@MAMoreno Thanks for your reply... Hopefully I come across as equally respectable as well... Yes I have the NET bible and have studied those notes. Actually I'm glad that Colwell's Rule is finally being explained away for not being applicable. I wasn't totally convinced of it myself when I first read of it over 40 years ago... Even then, I knew at best it would only open a possibility and not "demand" it being a definite predicate noun. My intent isn't to criticize the NWT, there are scholars divided on both sides of the NWT issue. Actually, the most hard core folks will take primary issue against the NWT on only a handful of points, and yet will still agree with many other translating points that the NWT ends up endorsing. Even here, I checked the seven points of "plural" and "singular" "ye" "YOU" and "you" that Mark mentions, and the NWT is spot-on on all 7 as he presents! There are other videos and books explaining Greek and Hebrew translating and when I compare what they say and open the NWT on those scriptures they're discussing, they nearly always agree. There are typically the same few scriptures most scholars disagree with on the NWT. But that said, I still seek out specifically why translating John 1:1c as "a god" goes against translating dictates and standards, especially when I see so many other bible translations doing the very same thing. My focus isn't really on the NWT but, more pointedly, why "a god" goes against Greek grammar translating rules. Thanks
I appreciate the gracious back-and-forth.
i stand corrected
✔
the reina valera says el pinaculo not un pinaculo so i guess it does it right lol
Just looking at the initial picture on the video, the ESV is not literal and very loosely on the formal side. Using the publishers own reverse interlinear, it's a translation not very close to the Greek below it. I mean this regarding vocabulary and grammar. The NKJV blows it away, and even the 1984NIV is considerably better.
You should write your on bible translation.
I started while in seminary. It’s a good exercise.
Thanks Mark, the more I continue on my journey exploring different translations (in part, with you and Logos's© 😉 help) I'm finding NASBO similar in many ways to KJVO ... they haven't made it to that level yet, but comments from some in the literaler is betteraler crowd usually comes along with backhanded comments about anything other than the MOST literal NASB is inferior.
Yes, that spirit of uncharity is not unique to the KJV-Only position. It really is sad. :(
Ive never met anyone who was NASB only or anyone who was ANYTHING only other than KJV only or TR only I’ve never even heard of anyone who was that was a Christian. But thats sad if they’re out there. I mostly use the NASB but without its footnotes the NKJV is more literal without the footnotes and so is the KJV, the NASB is about the same as the ESV.
It will be a sad day if/when the NASB 95 is withdrawn.
And yet I predict that it will be. =|
Spell it! JOHN MACARTHUR!
I shall neither confirm nor deny! ;)
@@markwardonwords says, "I shall neither confirm nor deny!"
Paraphrase: "Yes! It's Johnny Mac!".
🤣🤣🤣
Take my money already and sell me that incredi-NASB!
I can do the first part, but not yet the second. ;)
Done! It ain't much, but it's something. Thank you for your content. Truly, truly.
@@thoughtsandblogs Wow! I was kidding, but I'm still very grateful!
I'm only a third way through the video but incridiNASB sounds like Young's Literal translation to me 😆
Yup. ;)
Sir, while I have your (thine) ear, would you consider it wise or acceptable for me to use the NRSV ( in its current pre-update firm) as a dynamic translation "reading Bible" to pair with the RSV/NKJV I use for study? It helps me get out of the weeds in difficult verses but maintains the flow and feel of the KJV line.
Perhaps the Legacy Standard Bible is pretty close to being the Incredi-NASB? It's pretty incredible to me. I don't like a visual mess, though, so no highlighting, please. Yes, you love the Incredibles...I know :-)
Yes, some marketing copy for the LSB was one of the major impetuses for this video… You caught me!
@@markwardonwords Really?!! Cool! I hope you have been reading it online, as I have. My Shamar goatskin will be here any day...maybe today....it's only 7am for me so far. Does this mean that you approve of the LSB and even like it?!
@@artistchristos, that's a complicated question-because translations are complicated things. I wrote an article on the LSB before its release. It's up on the ETC blog. But I haven't looked at specific LSB renderings, because I don't have a copy.
Necro: is the steadfast bibles/316 publishing "steadfast limited, NASB large print compact" the best on the market currently? I just got one and it seems a half step better than a schuyler PSQ in quality, plus I like the single column better for a compact.... all that AND it's 80 dollars cheaper.
Honestly for 35 years I've been telling my wife I don't speak her language😉
;)
The LSB will be the Incredi-NASB
I shall neither confirm nor deny…
Learn Hebrew and Greek? Sorry, I am still struggling with my birth language....English. I like the ESV, the NKJV, and the NIV.
Good calls!
Could make for an entertaining FB page
The Message FTW :) just kidding...
I’m not so smart, I didn’t know what ad hominem meant! But I actually like your ideas that you meant as satire because this isn’t Shakespeare and they should at least do that for people who still believe that this is literally the word of God jot for jot and title for title or whatever those things are. And who got angry about the gender issue, did God show up and pass it all Bible translators? And I just don’t get the sense that’s going to end up in a good place personally and again I’m not that smart.
Oh, don't remind me of the Ruckmanites! Horrors. They are prowling about all over the place.
A week ago I had to tell a brother, whol thinks his KJV is the basis for all translation correction, that it cannot possibly be used that way. It's not the basis of any translation but its own.
Thankfully, this is an extremist view, even among KJV-Onlyists.
Leave Johnny Mac alone!
I love and admire John MacArthur. Truly, I am not fit to shine his shoes. I do disagree with him a bit over Bible translation. But the result of his views would be something in which I still see genuine value and usefulness. We don’t have a sharp disagreement.
My top 3 favorite examples of the immediate benefit of Early Modern English inflected pronouns are below; otherwise, as your testing indicated, it's rare to be confused by the singular/plural "you" in the modern English Bibles.
KJV© And the Lord said , Simon, Simon, behold , Satan hath desired [to have] you, that he may sift [you] as wheat: (NET2, NRSV, and MSG add "all" for clarity).
KJV© Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. (NET2 adds "all" for clarity)
KJV© And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? (NLT renders "these people" for clarity).
Excellent. There is a finite number of these instances.