# Updated American Standard Version (UASV) 2021



## MWJ '90 (Dec 6, 2021)

Hi all! 

It's been quite some time since I've been on here. Hope everyone is doing well. As some of you may know, I'm a bit of a geek when it comes to Bible Translations and other Text related issues. Upon looking on the web a couple weeks ago, I came across a very shocking discovery. There is new 2021 revision of the old American Standard Version (*ASV*) from 1901! This was just released this month. This completely took me by surprise as I've figured the ASV was looooong gone and forgotten. I've always had a favorable opinion of the *ASV* as it was truly a highly literal English translation and I found it to be quite helpful in many regards despite the use of "Jehovah" in many places in the Old Testament or the Elizabethan English carried over from the *KJV*. 

This new revision seems to preserve a lot of what made the* original ASV* so great while updating the language and utilizing the latest OT and NT manuscripts. This new revision is officially abbreviated as the *UASV *

I would love to hear your thoughts regarding this new revision. I have provided a link for your view pleasure in case you haven't seen it. You can view it here. 

I look forward to some very insightful dialogue! 

Grace and Peace.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Claudiu (Dec 6, 2021)

And then there's the Refreshed: https://www.rasv.org/

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## MWJ '90 (Dec 6, 2021)

You know what's funny, I saw an earlier post on here regarding the Refreshed ASV just minutes after I posted this one  I was like "are you kidding me??" Lol this is my first time hearing about it. I will check it out. Thanks.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Taylor (Dec 6, 2021)

I frankly find these kinds of projects, while interesting, to be a largely wasted effort. Looking at the footnotes, it looks like a great deal of labor was put into this. But to what benefit? It will almost certainly never be widely distributed. I doubt more than a few thousand people worldwide will ever even know about it. I would even wager that in the end more people will use the original ASV than the UASV. Plus, as I just said in another thread, we already have a virtually endless supply of good English translations, to the point where yet another one, and especially another one done by a single individual, is, in my estimation, entirely pointless. Enough already.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Regi Addictissimus (Dec 6, 2021)

Don't forget the NTTASV.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## MWJ '90 (Dec 6, 2021)

Taylor, I actually agree with you on that. I do honestly wish there were only 3 good formal equivalence translations and 2 solid translations on the more dynamic equivalence spectrum, in English. My Dream Scenario:

*Formal Equivalence Translations*:

1. *King James Version*---Okay do I really need to say anything regarding this precious timeless gift to the English speaking world? No I don't....moving on.

2. *New King James Version*--- I would personally like to see a MINOR and I mean MINOR revision to help improve some of its renderings of certain words to better reflect the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek a bit more closely (examples: "power" to "authority" in certain contexts in the Gospels, etc.) This would be a great translation to have due to the NT Text having a different textual base than the CT text of most modern translations. To me the* NKJV* is a grossly underrated yet exceedingly useful translation for close detailed study. Its documentation of textual variants is almost unmatched by any translation readily available with perhaps the exception of the *Christian Standard Bible* (more on this gem later). One more thing that I really like about the *NKJV* (as well as the *NASB*) is how it capitalizes pronouns that is referring to deity. I understand that there are potential pitfalls to this approach in certain contexts, but I personally like that feature and think it is really useful in most places. But enough about this one, as you can see I have a soft spot for the* NKJV *but I digress.

3. *English Standard Version /New American Standard Bible '95*---to be honest both of these are excellent Formal Equivalent translations based on the best available manuscripts we have today. I honestly think if you were to take the best qualities of both of these translations and combine them into one translation (say the *New English Standard Bible *(*NESB*)?) this would arguably be the best of the Formal Equivalent translations available. I could definitely see many in the Reformed world happily endorsing the "*NESB"* as their translation of choice. Man, just think of the possibilities!

*Middle of the Road/ Dynamic Equivalence Translations*:

1. *Christian Standard Bible*--- this is an almost perfect translation for those looking for something less "wooden" than the *KJV*, *NKJV*, or *NASB* and more literal than the* NIV *or *NLT*. The *CSB *does a seriously great job with its manuscript documentation especially in the OT. The *CSB* is just an overall solid translation. The only thing I would like to see improved if possible is a more "poetic" reading in the Poetry and Wisdom books. However, I completely understand the current style the translators of the *CSB* decided to go with as it fits the purpose of the translation philosophy. Again, the *CSB *is an overall great translation that is a perfect compliment to the more "literal" translations mentioned above.

2. *New International Version-*--I honestly think the *CSB* mentioned above is what the *NIV 2011* should have been more or less. Nevertheless the *NIV* remains a very solid translation despite the criticism (some of it justified, some just straight up ridiculous) it has received over the past almost half century. I will go so far to say that there are many places in which the *NIV *(yes even the *NIV 2011*) provides a much better and more accurate rendering than many of the translations above. Therefore I believe the *NIV* is worth keeping around. I also wouldn't mind seeing some of the renderings from the *New Living Translation* make its way into the *NIV*. This would make it an even more approachable translation for kids and/or English language learners.

So there you have it folks, these are the 5 English Translations that I would like to see stick around if every other English translations were to somehow disappear out of existence. A guy can only dream huh (Sigh) lol.

Reactions: Like 3 | Informative 1


----------



## Μαρτιν (Dec 7, 2021)

Indeed, i find it a bit crazy to see how much English Bibles there are when i open my library Logos.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Dec 7, 2021)

Μαρτιν said:


> Indeed, i find it a bit crazy to see how much English Bibles there are when i open my library Logos.


How many Bible translations do you have in the Netherlands?


----------



## Ben Zartman (Dec 7, 2021)

Why do you disapprove of the word "Jehovah?" Isn't it the English rendering of a Hebrew word, and isn't it less awkward that all-caps LORD to distinguish it form mostly-lowercase Lord used in the KJV? I think the KJV would have been much better for using Jehovah instead of LORD (words in all caps aren't exactly good grammar).


----------



## Μαρτιν (Dec 7, 2021)

in General the main Bibles that are in use are : 
Statenvertaling (1637), the Dutch equivalent of the KJV.
NBG vertaling (1951), a Dutch translation based on the CT. 
Willibrordbijbel (1978 and 2012). a catholic bible translation based on the CT. 
NBV (2004) and the updated version NBV21 (2021), replacment of the NBG bible and also based on the CT. 
Herziene Statenvertaling, (2011) a revision of the statenvertaling.

Reformed Christians mostley use the Statenvertaling or the Herziene Statenvertaling. Many other protestants uses the NBV. 

Besides these main translations there are two other:

Naardense Bijbel (2004) averry literal translation of the greek an hebrew. 
Bijbel in gewone taal (2014), a translation for people with minimal laungauge skills, the only used 4000 basic dutch to translate the whole bible. 

The chruches where i am invited to preach all use the Herziene statenveratling.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 4


----------



## PointyHaired Calvinist (Dec 7, 2021)

Refreshed RASV isn‘t bad. It’s one of the better individual revision projects.

Updated UASV has a distinct unitarian bias from what I’ve read. I don’t care for it at all.

Titus 2:13 note reads like a JW reason for ignoring the Greek and separating God and Savior.
John 8:58 says “I am” in one spot, but then gives a rambling note basically saying it should’t. He has an article saying it should be “I have been.“
Romans 9:5 removes the reference to the deity of Christ.
He also uses “CE” which is a pet peeve.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## retroGRAD3 (Dec 7, 2021)

MWJ '90 said:


> Taylor, I actually agree with you on that. I do honestly wish there were only 3 good formal equivalence translations and 2 solid translations on the more dynamic equivalence spectrum, in English. My Dream Scenario:
> 
> *Formal Equivalence Translations*:
> 
> ...


I like this selection

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## MWJ '90 (Dec 7, 2021)

retroGRAD3 said:


> I like this selection


Thank you. These have always been my personal top 5 translations.


----------



## MWJ '90 (Dec 7, 2021)

PointyHaired Calvinist said:


> Refreshed RASV isn‘t bad. It’s one of the better individual revision projects.
> 
> Updated UASV has a distinct unitarian bias from what I’ve read. I don’t care for it at all.
> 
> ...


Thank you so much for your insight. Truly appreciated.


----------



## PointyHaired Calvinist (Dec 7, 2021)

MWJ '90 said:


> *English Standard Version /New American Standard Bible '95*---to be honest both of these are excellent Formal Equivalent translations based on the best available manuscripts we have today. I honestly think if you were to take the best qualities of both of these translations and combine them into one translation (say the *New English Standard Bible *(*NESB*)?) this would arguably be the best of the Formal Equivalent translations available. I could definitely see many in the Reformed world happily endorsing the "*NESB"* as their translation of choice. Man, just think of the possibilities!



Let’s put Yahweh in this one and call it the NELB (New English Legacy Bible).

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## MWJ '90 (Dec 7, 2021)

PointyHaired Calvinist said:


> Let’s put Yahweh in this one and call it the NELB (New English Legacy Bible).


I like that idea. The HCSB included Yahweh but many people complained about its use, thus the CSB went back to the traditional LORD.


----------

