Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | NASB Updated and ESV. | 1 Chr 20:3 | justme | 86063 | ||
Can anyone who has both the NASB updated and the ESV versions say which they like best and why? I have seen parts of the ESV and I have the NASB updated and I can't see very much difference. Any thoughts? justme |
||||||
2 | NASB Updated and ESV. | 1 Chr 20:3 | flinkywood | 86064 | ||
Justme, do a search for esv and nasb on this site. Make your query exclude dates before Nov 2001. Colin. 1Ch 20:3 And he brought out the people that were in it, and cut them with saws, and with harrows of iron, and with axes. Even so dealt David with all the cities of the children of Ammon. And David and all the people returned to Jerusalem. KJV |
||||||
3 | NASB Updated and ESV. | 1 Chr 20:3 | justme | 86181 | ||
flinkywood: Thanks for your response. However you did not answer my question. Do you have Both the NASN Updated and the ESV? If not please do not answer questions. I most certianly have done enough review, that's why I wanted someone who uses both. Better to say I don't know than answer, and leave it unanswered than to answer incompletly. Thanks anyway. justme |
||||||
4 | NASB Updated and ESV. | 1 Chr 20:3 | flinkywood | 86189 | ||
I use both. In the Psalms, ESV is close to the KJV, where the NASB is not. Esv also has a better handle on the distinction between "shall" and "will" than either the KJV or NASB, but in all versions, these future tenses are employed haphazardly (compare Psalm 63 in these translations). For musicality, style, concision. I vote ESV over NASB in the Psalms and in most poetical areas of the OT, Isaiah in particular. In the NT, it's the NASB all the way. The ESV's choice of "mind" over "heart" in 2 cor 9.7 may be acceptable, but it doesn't sound either right or memorable: "Each one must give as he has made up his mind..." (ESV) "Each one must do as he has purposed in his heart..." (NASB). The NASB is my preferred versus the ESV, which comes off as another language tweak among the many of today; for this reason, and some textual reasons as well, I prefer the NKJV by far over the ESV. I still urge you to consult the excellent exchange on this Forum when the ESV debuted, particularly Makarios' observations. It wasn't clear from your post whether you had done so. Colin |
||||||
5 | NASB Updated and ESV. | 1 Chr 20:3 | justme | 86339 | ||
Finkywood: Thanks so much for this response. You have in deed helped me. I did go the Lemstone and got some free textual and editors information. I then went to the ESV site and spent a long time looking over their information. Frankly I wonder why so many versions of the scripture are saying they are the most literal. I was required at one seminary to used the NRS and really did not care to much for it. When I read the RSV is in large part of the ESV I pretty well deternined to just stay with the Updated NASB. I suppose my age is showing but it is hard to change. I made the change of primary versions from NIV to the Updated NASB shortly after it came out. That and my pastor uses the NKJV which I don't see much to drastic difference, except the NASB flows easier and seems more natural to read and for me to comprehend. Any way thanks for your nice response. I wish you had a note in the Update User Info. as you sound very intellegent and worth knowing something about. Blessings to you. justme |
||||||
6 | NASB Updated and ESV. | 1 Chr 20:3 | flinkywood | 86342 | ||
Justme, I ain't all that intelligent, believe you me. If my dog Flinky could speak, he'd spout reams of all the dopiness he's seen me do. My wife even says, "This is my husband, I can't help it." Anyway, I go to the ESV for comparison and am not drawn to it in any deeper way. I actually like the lumpy grits style of NASB over the crystaline, studied brevity of the ESV. The NASB95 has punctuation errors (2 Chron 9.8 lacks a comma after "Israel"); is occasionally ungrammatical (James 3.4 desperately needs "they" after "winds" to make it a complete sentence); and can do violence to a good psalm (Psalm 1 is a prime example), but it has a studious, workmanlike earnestness; it tries hard to be what it is, and that appeals to me. Having said all that, I find the NKJV a better read in the OT. I also like its unique way of acknowledging CT texts variants in the margins of the NT, something no other translation does, or might dare to do. It is also "literal". I agree with you about the NRSV. Colin. |
||||||