Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Isaiah 9:6 For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Isaiah 9:6 For to us a Child shall be born, to us a Son shall be given; And the government shall be upon His shoulder, And His name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. [Is 25:1; 40:9-11; Matt 28:18; Luke 2:11] |
Subject: Is Jesus the 'Eternal Father'? |
Bible Note: Greetings, Ray! You stated, "In the NASB the child and son are in lower case as is "his kingdom" in Isa 9:7. "His shoulders" is capitalized in verse six along with child and son. I believe we can capitalize all these pronouns and have a better interpretation. Do you agree?" In Isaiah 9:6 and 7, we see the NASB not capitalizing 'child' and 'son' in verse 6, and 'his kingdom' in verse 7.. However, the NKJV capitalizes every single pronoun and noun in these verses that directly or indirectly refer to Christ, which is consistent with their line of thinking: to capitalize all nouns or pronouns that refer to Christ regardless of sentence structure, etc. The Amplified is interesting here- it capitalizes 'Child' and 'Son' in verse 6, but it does not capitalize 'his kingdom' in verse 7.. Why the discrepancy in capitalization? I see the NASB translators not capitalizing 'child' and 'son' here for the very same reasons that they felt capitalization was not needed in Luke 2:7- that the words 'child' and 'son' are referring to what exactly was 'born to' or given to 'us'; 'us' being the subject of the sentence in verse 6, not the 'child' or 'son'. However, the NASB further explains this 'child' and 'son' in the very next part of this verse by saying that "the government will rest on His shoulders" and "His name"; which clearly ascribe Deity to Jesus Christ! The NKJV capitalizes both 'Child' and 'Son', which is consistent with their reasoning of capitalizing any and all references to Deity. The Amplified gives capitalization here to both 'Child and Son' which further explains who this Child actually is. In verse 7, 'his kingdom' is not capitalized in the NASB (both editions) nor in the Amplified, but it is in the NKJV. Why the discrepancy? When you read the phrase of verse 7 that mentions 'his kingdom', you see the subject of this phrase as being 'the throne of David'. Christ would rule on David's throne, thus fulfilling the prophecy that the kingdom of David shall be established forever.. Isaiah was writing prophecy, and he did not have the 'completeness' of understanding that we now have today. Therefore, the NASB and Amplified translators clearly saw the phrase 'his kingdom' as describing the 'throne of David' and not directly pertaining to Christ, although this verse in every way 'indirectly' pertains to Jesus Christ! The NKJV continues upon its methodical path by capitalizing even 'His kingdom' here, regardless if the word 'His' might be directly describing David here, but ultimately being fulfilled by Christ. "Do you agree?" Even though the NASB has proven to be 'selective' in capitalization in the verses that we have studied here, I still approve of and prefer its rendering of these verses over the renderings of the other two Bibles. However, you may feel differently and feel that the NKJV is taking the best 'road' here by being entirely 'consistent' in all issues of capitalization. Either way, we can rest assured that each translation is giving us the appropriate message and a vivid picture of Jesus being God in every way while also being a 'Babe', 'Son', and 'Man'.. :) Please tell me if you have any other questions! Nolan |