Monday, November 13, 2017

NASB, will you have me back?

I can't exactly give any specific reason, but I have decided to return to my first love of biblical translations, the NASB. I think it is more related to the comments in the ESV than the translation--because, let's face it, I'm taking them both at their word (and the reviews) in regards to their accuracy.

This has no real effect other than if you ask me what is my preferred translation, I'll now say NASB rather than ESV.

If it is because of the comments--it's a very weird psychological effect. There is less tension in disagreeing than in "almost" agreeing. I disagree with enormous swaths of Scofield's comments, but I absolutely love my Scofield bible. You'd have to drag it from my cold, dead, millennial hands. As I've written before, Scofield was a (misguided) genius and it shows. Not to mention he was, as far as I know, the first to take the bold step of including the comments in the bible, giving them the appearance of being part of the bible. Genius.

But the ESV-- when I disagree with their comments it causes a lot of tension--like I must be wrong--I mean just look at the editorial board of the ESV! But more and more I'm thinking-- maybe they're sometimes wrong.

Anyway, who needs it! Who wants to spend time deciding if comments are right or wrong? Besides, I have the Calvin commentaries and he's always right. Like on Mary's perpetual virginity. And who cares about Revelation? Nobody understands Revelation!

UPDATE: I forgot to mention that my wife stuck with the NASB when I jumped on the ESV bandwagon. And she's always right.


  1. The ESV study notes are problematic esp. on the Trinity. Also the push to make a translation based on a bad interpretation of Gen. 3:16 permanent (ditched because of the outcry) caused me to switch back to NASB. Side benefit is now I can use my grandfather's giant print NASB. Much easier on older eyes.

    1. I need a print size where "tabernacle" necessarily crosses a page boundary.

    2. Shu-ling is always right.