# Is The NASB Dispie?



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

OK, I use the AV and the NASB for CT readings, I work out with an OPC friend who ALWAYS pokes fun at the NASB saying it has strong Dispie leanings. Sorry.....I cannot find that. I would like some other input on this "slander".


----------



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

WIND BLOWS..........CHIRP CHIRP CHIRP. A Tumbleweed rolls by lazily........anyone??????? Really in a weird way this has been bothering me. Help!


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Mar 5, 2007)

Why not just ask your OPC friend to actually guide you towards the truth instead of throwing unedifying darts?


----------



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

ChristopherPaul said:


> Why not just ask your OPC friend to actually guide you towards the truth instead of throwing unedifying darts?


Therein lies the rub.....he just points me to those denominations he does not agree with and avoids "guilty" passages and verses! That is why I appeal to the collective wisdom of my PB friends on this issue. HELP!


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Mar 5, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> Therein lies the rub.....he just points me to those denominations he does not agree with and avoids "guilty" passages and verses! That is why I appeal to the collective wisdom of my PB friends on this issue. HELP!




Well, I prefer NASB over any other translation and have never heard such a charge. So until this guy takes the effort to steer you away from error as a loving brother would or should, I say stick with what is known and recommended by those approved within our confessional churches over some hear say from a friend of a friend of a internet blogger etc..


----------



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

ChristopherPaul said:


> Well, I prefer NASB over any other translation and have never heard such a charge. So until this guy takes the effort to steer you away from error as a loving brother would or should, I say stick with what is known and recommended by those approved within our confessional churches over some hear say from a friend of a friend of a internet blogger etc..


Thank you Chris. I rather agree, my OPC friend is ga-ga over the ESV, so my discussions about the merits of the NASB have been fruitless.


----------



## larryjf (Mar 5, 2007)

One such example could be...

In Dan 9:27 the NASB adds "grain" to "offering" which dispensationalists point to for the restoration of the temple. The adding of "grain" could be an attempt to show this as a memorial sacrifice instead of an actual one.


----------



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

larryjf said:


> One such example could be...
> 
> In Dan 9:27 the NASB adds "grain" to "offering" which dispensationalists point to for the restoration of the temple. The adding of "grain" could be an attempt to show this as a memorial sacrifice instead of an actual one.


Bad reflection on me.......or perhaps not (depends whose side you are on! :John Lennon) Really if that is the best argument the Dispensationalists can come up with well.......it is weak at best. Pax Vobiscum


----------



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

What is the best Bible based on the CT with which to look into this issue?


----------



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

A shameless self "bump"........I just wanted the opinions of those now coming in.


----------



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

One more self serving bump.


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Mar 5, 2007)

I can't say as I can find the text of any English Bible to favor dispensationalism over any other scheme. There are of course many "study" bibles that are Dispensational in there marginal notations. Personally, since I can't read Greek or Hebrew I use several English Bibles when I'm studying to get as much out of a passage as I can. I use the 1599 Geneva, AV, NKJV, ESV, NIV and to a smaller extent the NASB (mainly because I do not own one and have to go online to view it). I suppose if I really dug I could find somthing in all of these English translations to support a Dispensational POV. Most of the "ultra-Dispensationalists" I know are also KJV only IFB types.


----------



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

MrMerlin777 said:


> I can't say as I can find the text of any English Bible to favor dispensationalism over any other scheme. There are of course many "study" bibles that are Dispensational in there marginal notations. Personally, since I can't read Greek or Hebrew I use several English Bibles when I'm studying to get as much out of a passage as I can. I use the 1599 Geneva, AV, NKJV, ESV, NIV and to a smaller extent the NASB (mainly because I do not own one and have to go online to view it). I suppose if I really dug I could find somthing in all of these English translations to support a Dispensational POV. Most of the "ultra-Dispensationalists" I know are also KJV only IFB types.


What is the IFB?


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Mar 5, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> What is the IFB?



I think it stands for some sort of Fundamental Baptist.


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Mar 5, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> What is the IFB?



Independent Fundamental Baptist Churches.


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Mar 5, 2007)

ChristopherPaul said:


> I think it stands for some sort of Fundamental Baptist.
> 
> Irate maybe? Irritating? or perhaps Independent.



 

Well, they're Independent, often get Irate, and are definitely Irritating sometimes so all could apply I guess.

That said I've rarely seen people with as big a heart for the lost than the IFBs. Bad as there doctrine is at times they do have that.


----------



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

MrMerlin777 said:


> Well, they're Independent, often get Irate, and are definitely Irritating sometimes so all could apply I guess.
> 
> That said I've rarely seen people with as big a heart for the lost than the IFBs. Bad as there doctrine is at times they do have that.


Actually a lot of Fundamental Churches do have very much a heart for the lost. They are very big into missions. I once argued with a hyper-Calvinist over the need to witness in word and action. It got..........heated! Anyway! I am hijacking my own thread! NASB, Dispensational or not. I say no but there are a lot of my PB friends who have not weighed in here! I want to here from you! Pax.


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Mar 5, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> OK, I use the AV and the NASB for CT readings, I work out with an OPC friend who ALWAYS pokes fun at the NASB saying it has strong Dispie leanings. Sorry.....I cannot find that. I would like some other input on this "slander".



Lol, well, it is slander on the version, but not the christian. I use the NASB. 

I almost did turn to the ESV, but then I started to do reasearch and I like the fact that the NASB isn't strictly MT text, like the ESV, but uses the alexandrian texts. 

More info on texts would be :

http://www.bible-researcher.com/


----------



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

Andrew P.C. said:


> Lol, well, it is slander on the version, but not the christian. I use the NASB.
> 
> I almost did turn to the ESV, but then I started to do reasearch and I like the fact that the NASB isn't strictly MT text, like the ESV, but uses the alexandrian texts.
> 
> ...


Thank you Andrew! I did put "slander" in quotes so all would know it was one of my silly jokes!  Thank you for the link brother. Pax Vobiscum


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Mar 5, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> Thank you Andrew! I did put "slander" in quotes so all would know it was one of my silly jokes!  Thank you for the link brother. Pax Vobiscum




Brother, anytime.

By the way, I don't know latin "Pax Vobiscum".


----------



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

Andrew P.C. said:


> Brother, anytime.
> 
> By the way, I don't know latin "Pax Vobiscum".


Peace be with you.


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Mar 5, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> Peace be with you.




Sweet, I learned a latin phrase. 

Well,besides the one I do know, Vox Dei.


----------



## etexas (Mar 5, 2007)

Andrew P.C. said:


> Sweet, I learned a latin phrase.
> 
> Well,besides the one I do know, Vox Dei.


Chuckle..........I went to a classical prep-boarding school. Studied Latin there 4 years.


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Mar 6, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> Chuckle..........I went to a classical prep-boarding school. Studied Latin there 4 years.




Lucky


----------



## etexas (Mar 6, 2007)

Andrew P.C. said:


> Lucky


Did not think so at the time!


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Mar 6, 2007)

I follow Jesus said:


> Did not think so at the time!




Well, you could have also put the smackdown on the teachers.

 

(I like using this.)


----------



## etexas (Mar 6, 2007)

Andrew P.C. said:


> Well, you could have also put the smackdown on the teachers.
> 
> 
> 
> (I like using this.)


I tried that a few times.........me and my friends just wound up in detention. Eyes forward,both feet on the floor for a whole hour, Boarding Schools are like the Military, they KNOW how to break you down.


----------



## larryjf (Jun 8, 2007)

I just read something that i thought should be posted on this thread. It is from, "The Journey from Texts to Translations" - by: Paul D. Wegner.



> ...the New American Standard Bible shows a clear premillennial preference, as Lewis points out:
> The translators chose \"as\" in the phrase \"the mountain of the house of the Lord will be established as the chief of the mountains\" (Isa 2:2; Mic 4:1), even though the margin acknowledges that \"on\" is literal. The rendering, \"And those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God\" (Gal 6:16) makes it more likely that the kai will be taken as coordinate rather than as explanatory. In the marginal notes, \"generation\" regularly carries the alternate \"race\" (Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32). \"He is near,\" though with a marginal note \"it\" (Mark 13:29), turns the thought of the passage to the second coming. In Revelation 5:10, the Greek present tense is rendered \"will reign\" where the ASV had \"they reign.\" Revelation 20:4 had \"they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years,\" which supports the contrast the premillennialist likes to make in the verse. The ASV had \"they lived,\" which is a more literal rendering for the Greek aorist, ezesan....As previously noticed, the NASB carries a page heading \"The millennium\" [sic] for the section.


----------



## VictorBravo (Jun 8, 2007)

There is one thing that suggests dispensationalism, or at least is peculiar. But it is not limited to just the NASB. The other modern translations do this too: In Revelation "kai" is often translated as "then" instead of "and" as in the older translations. It implies sequential rather than cummulative visions.

An example is Rev. 6:1, but it is found throughout Revelation.

A curious thing: I have an NASB from 1976 that translates Rev. 6:1 with the "and". We have a post 1977 version that translates it as "then".

I think it is a peculiar choice, but the NKJV does it too.


----------



## Herald (Jun 8, 2007)

Vic - the NASB was revised in the 90's.


----------



## larryjf (Jun 8, 2007)

victorbravo said:


> An example is Rev. 6:1, but it is found throughout Revelation.



The NKJV and ESV translate the first word of Rev. 6:1 as "Now"


----------



## VictorBravo (Jun 8, 2007)

larryjf said:


> The NKJV and ESV translate the first word of Rev. 6:1 as "Now"



Right, the NKJV doesn't follow the NASB, but it does the same thing elsewhere. For instance, in Rev. 5:11, it translates "kai" as "then", but, as you said, it translates it as "now" in 6:1. (Actually, looking at the Greek in Chapter 5, "kai" begins every verse except 12--the NKJV alternates among "then", "now", and "and").

Similar things occur in the ESV, but I don't have one anymore so can't look them up.



BaptistInCrisis said:


> Vic - the NASB was revised in the 90's.



Also right. I think I must have been unclear. What I found peculiar was the change that occured in the later revision from "and" to "then". 

I'm not saying that I think these are dispensational, just that suspicious types might think that. I suspect that it was an effort to make it even more readable. But still, the NASB claims to be pretty much a formal equivalent translation yet translates the word differently, often in the same chapter. It always struck me as odd.

My favorite translations are the AV, ASV, and, believe it or not, the Darby. But I encourage everyone to learn Greek. I never would have noticed these little things without doing so.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jul 17, 2007)

I read in one of Ken Gentry's books that the NASB had a premillennial bias; though he uses it to teach postmillennialism, so it can't make that much difference.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jul 17, 2007)

Andrew P.C. said:


> Lol, well, it is slander on the version, but not the christian. I use the NASB.
> 
> I almost did turn to the ESV, but then I started to do reasearch and I like the fact that the NASB isn't strictly MT text, like the ESV, but uses the alexandrian texts.
> 
> ...



MT meaning Majority Text? With the reference to the Alexandrian Text I assume that's what you mean. The ESV and NASB NT are both based on the Critical Text. 

There is no major translation based on the MT. It is often said that the NKJV is based on the MT because the editor was in favor of that position, but it is actually based on the Textus Receptus.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jul 17, 2007)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> I read in one of Ken Gentry's books that the NASB had a premillennial bias; though he uses it to teach postmillennialism, so it can't make that much difference.



I think most of the NASB translators were premillennial. I've also seen it alleged that the NIV has a premil slant. My guess is that there may be a questionable rendering here and there.


----------



## Calvibaptist (Jul 17, 2007)

victorbravo said:


> Right, the NKJV doesn't follow the NASB, but it does the same thing elsewhere. For instance, in Rev. 5:11, it translates "kai" as "then", but, as you said, it translates it as "now" in 6:1. (Actually, looking at the Greek in Chapter 5, "kai" begins every verse except 12--the NKJV alternates among "then", "now", and "and").
> 
> Similar things occur in the ESV, but I don't have one anymore so can't look them up.



I know this isn't a languages thread, per se, but does the Greek do the equivalent of the Hebrew's _waw_ consecutive? This would be what you see in the Hebrew in Genesis 1, where just about every verse begins with the Hebrew word _waw_ (translated "and"), but the form denotes a sequential list. Therefore, most English Bibles translate it, "and then..."

Does the Greek have this type of function as well? Is this just an interpretation of the translators in Rev. 6?


----------



## Pilgrim (Jul 17, 2007)

Fingolfin said:


> Thank you Chris. I rather agree, my OPC friend is ga-ga over the ESV, so my discussions about the merits of the NASB have been fruitless.



Of course you could "slander" the ESV by saying it is merely a warmed over version of the National Council of Church's RSV, and that the payment that Crossway had to make to the NCC for the rights to the RSV text bailed the NCC out from the brink of financial ruin....


----------



## Pilgrim (Jul 17, 2007)

victorbravo said:


> Right, the NKJV doesn't follow the NASB, but it does the same thing elsewhere. For instance, in Rev. 5:11, it translates "kai" as "then", but, as you said, it translates it as "now" in 6:1. (Actually, looking at the Greek in Chapter 5, "kai" begins every verse except 12--the NKJV alternates among "then", "now", and "and").
> 
> Similar things occur in the ESV, but I don't have one anymore so can't look them up.
> 
> ...



I don't know Greek, but I too have sometimes been puzzled why the NASB translators will substitute a word when the literal rendering in the margin would not be unclear. Apparently it is most often done for the sake of readability even though the version is sold as being the "most literal", and whether the substitution is more clear is at least sometimes debatable. Often that word in the NASB margin is what the NKJV has in the text. I haven't researched the differences in the 1977 and 1995 NASB's in this regard, since the main difference with the 1995 revision was to make it "more readable" and also getting rid of the thee's and thy's in the Psalms. Of course, it could also be argued that with all of the marginal notes, the NASB at least alerts the reader more often than the ESV and other versions when they are not giving a literal rendering.


----------



## tcalbrecht (Jul 17, 2007)

Fingolfin said:


> OK, I use the AV and the NASB for CT readings, I work out with an OPC friend who ALWAYS pokes fun at the NASB saying it has strong Dispie leanings. Sorry.....I cannot find that. I would like some other input on this "slander".



I don't know about overt dispie, but I always found it curious that the translators of the NASB found it expedient to convert several key symbolic numbers in the book of Revelation to English units. E.g.,



> The one who spoke with me had a gold measuring rod to measure the city, and its gates and its wall. The city is laid out as a square, and its length is as great as the width; and he measured the city with the rod, *fifteen hundred miles* (aka "twelve thousand furlongs"); its length and width and height are equal. And he measured its wall, *seventy-two yards* (aka "a hundred and forty and four cubits"), according to human measurements, which are also angelic measurements. (Rev. 21:15-17)



That reading certainly gives it a more dispensational flavor.


----------



## jsup (Jul 17, 2007)

I started off on KJV, then to NKJV, CEV, ESV, and now I'm sticking with the NASB. I haven't noticed any leanings. Perhaps your OPC friend was judging the translation by the notes and leanings of the commentators.


----------



## etexas (Jul 17, 2007)

jsup said:


> I started off on KJV, then to NKJV, CEV, ESV, and now I'm sticking with the NASB. I haven't noticed any leanings. Perhaps your OPC friend was judging the translation by the notes and leanings of the commentators.


Actually, he said......."Look how many Baptist pastors use it, and most of them are Disp"..........I know it was a lame argument on his part and to my Baptist friends here on the PB a workout bud said it not me! Another "shot" he took was A lot of Church of Christ people use it........he gave me this factoid over post workout smoothies............I truly had nothing to say...........rare for me!


----------

