I met my wife in 95 ! But still I’d rather have a translation that takes into consideration the changes in language over time . Let’s not fall into the same error of the KJB guys .
I think you hit on the crux of the change when you noted they were trying to "make it what people want." That, in my mind is a problem. I want a version that most closely matches what God actually inspired. The more troubling thing is the move to gender neutrality. When a specific pronoun was used, it should be carried forward in my view. It really isn't about what we want or what fits the cultural shifts today, it is about being as close to what was inspired as possible. I'll stick with my NASB 95. I'm familiar with it and feel it is as true as possible to the inspired word. Maybe if I grew up with the 77 version I'd feel the same way about it versus the 95 but I didn't. Maybe if the 2020 reaches someone who is offended by gender specific language, it will be worthwhile but for me, I prefer the 95.
I’m starting to understand the loyal NASB 77 crowd now. I’m a loyal 95er and I’ll stay a 95er I love the harder words it’s not a bad thing if you have to slow down and even look up a word here and there. If I read anything else it’s KJV ESV or NKJV if I want easy to read I love the CSB I’m all set on NASB Bibles and translations but for a new believer I see nothing wrong except it’s drastically different if there teachers using the 95 or 77 I’ve found little different in the 95 when my pastor used the 77 for a while only the pronouns in psalms and little words here and there
1977 or 1995 for me. I like the 1977 better. It’s still in print and can be found on eBay too. This is printed in Korea. www.amazon.com/gp/product/0899579442/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1. I’m 100% against buying a Bible made in China where they don’t have religious freedom. This is absolutely about making money and their Egos.
I really appreciate the NASB translation. I just got a new NASB by Schuyler in the 1995 update. Compared with the 2020 update, I think that it is not a huge departure from 1995, and for me that means I don't see a need to get the newer one. Personally, I don't see I need to have the more gender inclusive language, because I personally find that kind of fussiness unnecessary. But for those who prefer that clarification, it is good they have access to newer translations that include such edits.
Thanks for the comparison, Tim. My first bible text from the Lockman Foundation was the Amplified New Testament that I received from home while patrolling the coast of Vietnam in 1965. That was a significant update compared to the Cambridge Pitt Minion I had carried with me since 1963. I believe Lockman is committed to producing accurate translations. In addition, I have the Legacy Standard Bible which is another revision from the NASB 95 and enjoy it as well. I noticed in your comparison of the NASB 95 a change from the expression "hold fast." I must say that as a former sailor in the Navy, hold fast is an oft used term regarding the hauling in of lines or rope.
77 is the one I use because 77 is the one I have. I can't decide whether it is worth getting a 96 or 2020. If I decide on a 95, I better get one before they are completely gone. Decisions Decisions..... God bless y'all really good!
I think I’ll stick with the 1995. I will always have my KJV. I also use NKJV and NIV life application. I learn from each. Just my opinion, but the translation update is generational in that younger readers will be drawn more to their comfortable verbiage (2020). As long as any version is being read...to me that is what’s important. Thank God He didn’t make us all to like the same things.
@@njiomonansichristianfreder6374LMAO. 😂 The translations are STILL accurate in translating the messages. KJV is NOT the most accurate, reads horribly with Its outdated old English, and doesn't even use the oldest manuscripts. 😂
@JesusChrist_IsTruth-LoveForALL You are absolutely wrong, deceived and deceiving others. I've said enough on this crucial subject so, it's all on you moving forward.
I actually liked all the changes I saw in your comparison. I laid aside the NASB some time ago because I felt like it was artificially difficult to read (meaning that it seemed to me they went out of their way to pick tongue-twisting phrases). I also tend to favor the Byzantine text-type, but I respect the NASB's push for literalness. It knows what it's about. This 2020 version might have me taking another look at it. (When the NASB 77 came out, I snapped up a copy and it became my go-to Bible for years, finally prying my trusty King James from my hands.)
Thank you, this video helped a lot with making the decision between which one to get for myself. I only very recently started learning about God and wanted to buy a Bible too, and I believe the 2020 version of the NASB will be perfect.
Thanks Tim. Was hesitant at first but really like 2020. Don’t think it’s dumbing down but making more clear. And that it is gender specific all the better. Nothing changed theologically; extensive but integrity maintained...in my humble opinion.
It moved farther away from what the original actually says than closer. It switched to gender neutral. Not gender specific. Why would the Bible that is respected above others for its literal accuracy decide to go backwards away from that instead of closer? It appears they’re putting the feelings of a segment of society above God’s word.
I don't see myself changing to the 2020 from the 95. The 95 was a huge improvement over the 77, and I have grown so used to it that I don't think I would benefit from the textual changes. However, I think younger generations of serious students will enjoy having a literal translation that speaks their language.
I recently started in Matthew, Romans, and Revelation. So far I'm enjoying the 2020 in the NT a lot. I think most of the word changes have been great. I appreciate the use of italics for supplied words and how gender is handled. I teach a small group and share the faith with non-Christians from time to time so it's helpful for me to be comfortable and familiar with language that's accurate and understood. NASB 2020 looks to be a go! I need to read in the OT but I suspect that it'll be the formal translation that I read the most.
Nate McKnight I agree and have switched to NKJV from the ESV due to continual revisions, and the fact that verse-by-verse layouts of any quality are nearly non-existent for the ESV; I just got a new Thomas Nelson NKJV verse by verse Comfort Print and love it!
@@ronjones6555 I.have an esv topaz and a scr vbv lego and love them ...I've always been primarily an NAS guy but ill switch to NKJV and ESV for preaching
The change from semi-colons to commas is exactly what we are trying to get our students NOT to do! Shame on this revision for promoting improper punctuation in this regard. What this new version has done is introduced commas splices into the text. Students get marked down for having commas splices! "Look upon" and "look at" don't mean the same thing. "Chastening" and "punishment" are not the same thing. Using "punishment" caters to an error in theology. "Offenses" and "transgressions" aren't the same thing, either. Okay, I don't like this 2020 version.
Please correct me if I am wrong. A new work printed from an existing work has to be at least 10 - 20% different to get a copyright. Does change for the sake of change enable more sales? Just wondering how and why that works. Love this channel. Good job.
You mentioned the gender-neutral changes in that they're very controversial, but you didn't weigh in on your view of those. Do the gender-neutral changes make the text more accurate or less?
Thank you so much - very interesting and somewhat saddening. I personally don’t like the gender language updated. I have now resolved to hold by NKJV Bibles closer than ever. The NKJV is so beautiful. How long will it be before they - the ubiquitous “they” - get their progressive hands on it and want to change it. 😥
The 2020 appears to be a widdling down of God's original Word rather than a modernizing. So many changed words that are inferior to the original in the 1995 and NKJV. For me the 2020 will never come into my home.
Thank you! I've been reading reviews but within two minutes you showed why I want the NASB 95. Obviously there's the gender-neutral, but scourging makes more sense, 'fell' as uncertain vs. "was laid" not in italics.
I think anytime a translation is more readable and understandable without sacrificing accuracy, its better because it can reach a greater amount of people.
Love NASB. I got saved in 96 and started using it along with KJV. Now adays I use multiple translations, each has it's purpose. But....I'm waiting for MacArthurs translation for my next purchase of NASB.
I got my NASB 2020 in the mail and its safe to say calling this translation "literal" is a lie an false advertising. There is no way you can honestly dumb-down a translation so much, make one CONSTANTLY look at the "literal" footnotes and call it literal. Such a huge disappointed and I will not be buying another, ever. Its terrible.
I'm so excited about the NASB 2020! I had compared some of the early releases and the changes in some places (for example in James 5 about the prayer of the righteous person) made a significant improvement to the clarity of meaning in the text. Does anyone know when it will be available?
Although the NASB is not my most preferred translation (the NKJV is), I do have an NASB77 and NASB95 in my collection, both of which I use with some frequency. As it stands right now, I see no need to add the NASB20 to my collection.
I had planned to steer clear of the 2020 update, but after watching your review, I’ve decided to give the 2020 version a chance. I do like that they continue capitalize pronouns for deity. I wish all the translations would do that.
I'm a bit late to comment, I've been led to read the NASB and started with the 2020 update, however I decided to compare the 2020 to the 1995 NASB while doing some Bible Study. I noticed the NASB 1995 has these verses in Luke 9 - 54When His disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” 55But He turned and rebuked them, [and said, “You do not know what kind of spirit you are of; 56for the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.”] And they went on to another village. Now compare the same Luke 9 verses in the NASB 2020 - 54When His disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” 55But He turned and rebuked them.9.55: 56And they went on to another village. Looks like language is not the only thing to be updated in the NASB 2020, how many other changes like the above are there.
The brackets in the first quote indicate the verse is not in the oldest manuscripts but they left it in out of tradition. The newer quote simply moves it to a footnote instead. I prefer the 95 but that example is simply a formatting choice.
i still use the NASB 1977.I'm one who goes to a KJV only church but would'nt really use the KJV and certainly not the NIV. The alternative in English churches is the NKJV which is my personal version or the ESV or NASB.I cant believe the English language has changed so much that the literal NASB needs updating in 1995 and 2020.God willing the NKJV will never "update"
NASB 95, 20, CSB, NET, KJV are my most used for study and my favorite will always be nasb. my first bible when I was saved was a NASB 95 and at church we used CSB.
I enjoy KJV because it makes you search, examine, compare, look into definitions of words, you break it down more, get into a deeper study of passages, it increases your hunger for reading because you get into it more, enhances your understanding because you wrestle with The Scriptures in a good way. Its not just about reading to check a box its about seeking the heart of God because He reveals Himself through His Word. Also i enjoy the "Ye" , "thee", "thou", and "you" because you know whos directly being spoken to. Take your time with the scriptures, you shouldnt have a microwave mentality with embracing God for Who He is.
Congratulations for the video👏👏👏👏👏 Brazil watching I'm looking for a Bible to read in English, to learn English with God involved. I think I found a good English version here. God bless your work👏👏🙏🙏
Curious to see your take on the BSB. They are coming out with multiple versions with different translations philosophys. Supposed to be similar to nasb
I do not like the linguistic gender changes! When in some older versions it reads Fisher's of men, I always assumed it meant women as well. We are after all the race of men, or mankind. I think that the education system is at fault here. Tragic. I certainly am glad I have enough non gender oriented Bibles to last for the rest of my life!
@@josueinhan8436 I thank you for your words. Would you mind if I ask a friend of mine who is also Portuguese. As English is the only language I speak, I would like to understand a bit more, if you wouldn't mind.
@@josueinhan8436 I thank you for your offer, please let me ask my friend first. I must also confess I have little aptitude for leaning other languages.
I have been a user of NASB95 for a while. I was curious about the differences in the 95 and 20 version were. I found your channel with the link to Scott’s account. One thing that troubles me the most is the removal of “begotten” when describing Jesus as the “only begotten Son”. For me, this cheapens the meaning because in saying “only Son” it makes Him comparable to us saying only son of our children. He is not the same. Another very troubling issue is the gender neutrality. It is not the original text and we need to read and study the Word in the context it was written because it has meaning.
The 95 is just my Bible. I'm not super big on the gender changes but I'm not up in arms because they used the NASB italics. The wording changes aren't my thing because I think in NASB, I don't think the language is archaic to warrant the translation. I'm sure it's excellent but the 95 is my Bible. I also just bought a premium NASB 95 that I plan on teaching out of and living in for the rest of my life. My reasoning for staying with the 95 is 40% philosophy of translation and 60% practical reasons
The CSB seems little changed from 2017 to 2020. But as you point out the CSB 2020 seems clearer better print in 2020 offering in some personal SIZE regular as well as large print. THAT IS worth waiting for but as of 2 days ago they ARE still sending out 2017. Maybe we should wait till they are ALL used up?
Hi Tim! Could you do a side-by-side comparison between the 2020 updates of the NASB and CSB? As for the 2020 NASB, I hate the unjustified and jagged right margins, it’s so unsightly!
Not a fan of the 2020. I am not sure publishers really think we need to update the language “for the people” every couple of decades or if it’s just a form of a money grab (or possibly just an excuse to get more culturally acceptable), but English speakers used the KJV for nearly 400 years with just 1 update so maybe we don’t need to constantly change the text every few years to fit the culture.
Language evolves over time and changes, it's why we don't use the Greek, and Hebrew.🤷 KJV is outdated, doesn't even use the oldest manuscripts and rass horribly with its archaic old english. NASB 2020 changes nothing, it makes passages more CLEAR when speaking about MAN, and simply clarified it if it's make/female, it's literally a Non issue. People cry about anything.
I used to love the NASB but when even the 2020 version came out and 2Samuel 21:19-22 still was not corrected, think I've given up on this version. Then if the gender changes are reflected in the manuscripts as brothers and sister (most have the meaning of both) that is a good thing. Don't know why mostly men have an issue with that, especially with Galatians 3:28.
From what you've shown, it appears to just be a modernization of language. Which I'm very happy to hear, because while I love the NASB for its accuracy I sometimes struggle with its way of words. I think this is a good direction for the NASB, and I look forward to getting a copy.
Paragraph format is definitely the way to go. Verses weren't numbered till later, and verse-by-verse makes it harder to get the flow of thought, besides not being original. When I first encountered a paragraph-format Bible, I knew there was no going back.
Darrell Tan: I am at most 50/50 on your paragraph format statement. For straight out reading a paragraph format is alright. For a more in-depth study, or for just trying to quickly find a verse, I decidedly prefer a verse by verse format. I know there are folks who won't agree, but that is my two cents worth.✝️☦️🛐
There are so very many modern translations available to us and yet we need another one. Why? Profit pure and simple. With each new or revised translation that is produced there is profit to be made. There will always be those that run out and buy the latest and “best” new translation. I personally find it confusing when everyone has their own translation in a group study setting. Need I remind you, God is not the author of confusion. Hmmm 🤔 who is the author of confusion then?
but after comparing thid with the lsb.. the lsb has sometimes the same as nasb2020.. like by his wounds we are healed. thats 1 example. there are more. 2 of 3 from thid verses and in oversl text more .
1977 was the best version they had in my opinion except for the thees and thous when speaking to deity which defeated the purpose. I've given up on the NASB as a reliable translation. Many King James bible or the Authorized only people think that it is the best translation because it came from the Erasmus text. I just don't understand why these people just didn't make a Greek and Hebrew dictionary themselves and use it to create a more understandable text then the King James.
It appears to be a worthy update but I truly believe that it’s smart for them to publish both the 1995 and the 2020 side-by-side. I’ll be getting a copy to read through and then make my decision on whether I want to switch to it.
If you have Gods word now,,, what is the 20 for? one or the other is not Gods word bc they're not the same.Did God make a mistake in the 95 that He now has to "ammend" what He wrote in the 95?? NO!!! and NO!!! If God wrote the 95 there would be absolutely no reason for Him to write the 20 bc He is perfect in what He does. God only wrote one bible.
@@jicsayr5578 Okay, and why do you read an English translation like the KJV instead of the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek; the languages the Bible was originally written in? Would you say that the KJV is the perfect word of God even though it didn’t existed for about 1600 years of the life of the church? Do you believe that the church had the word of God before 1611? I genuinely just want to know how you wrestle with these questions?
@@pinkdiscomosh2766 #1,,,, I believe God has always preserved his word and I believe God gave us the english translation. I speak english therefore I use an english version. I don't speak or read greek or hebrew. But the reason of having more modern translations is harmful to the word of God as it deletes so many verses and waters down the word,such as "gender" neutral. God didn't write a bible to "please" those that don't know if they are male or female. In Is.14;12 they drop the word "lucifer" and call him the "morning star" etc,,,Jesus is the Morning Star,,Rev 22;16. In Rev 2;28,, And I will give him the morning star,,, who is being given here,Jesus or lucifer? Jesus, of course!! In Dan 3;25 Jesus is called "a son of the gods" (little "g") This is serious,changing things like this and its througout the "new" translations!! Lets take the NIV, with all the revisions it has,,,, Did God make a "mistake" in the first one that He had to "make" another one? and that was not correct so He made #3 and #4 and #5 and on. One might think,,, "can't God get it right the first time?" And now NASB20 comes out so God didn't get it right in edition #1? I have an 1848 KJV bible and it reads just like my 1985 version except for some name spelling changes,as Elias to Elijah,Noe to Noah etc. Lets say you took 10 "new" versions and compared them verse by verse,,, would they match?? No!! In Rev 22;18-19 it plainly tells us NOT to add or subtract from the word, so how can someone justify a bible that has SO many missing verses? What did Jesus come to do? To seek and save the lost! So why is Mat 18;11 missing in so many "new" translations? What would be a "good" reason" to omit that verse? I strongly believe that the "new version" issue is a plan of the devil to "condition " people to "accept" the new world order translation. When the one world bible translation comes out people will except it bc of all the translations we have now,, most likely something like a "chris-lam" (christian-islam)translation. Satan mimicks all that God has done and he is/will have his own version of the "bible". He will come and sit in the temple and show himself to be God while being nothing but the anti-christ! We have to be SO careful not to be deceived!! Would you please tell me what words you don't understand in the KJV? I've written a lot here and could go on for pages but I will stop here. I don't write this to "hammer" on anyone as each has the right to choose what they want, but not all choices are correct or good. All I want to say here is that you seek God with ALL your heart bc the storm is going to take many "christians" with it! And its coming soon!!! I want to see ya on the other side!!!
Just received my copy the other day and what I have read so far I would prefer the 2020 over the 95 hands down. If Lockman would have put this bible out 1971 would have locked the bible market. For the 2020 brought me back home to the NASB. Still love the ESV and the CSB but my main bible will be my main 2020 NASB
I don't like that 8 years old is in the 95 and 18 years old is in the 20. I feel whom ever wrote the nasb95 made a huge error if 2 chronicles 36:9 and why was it over looked? Did they use different sources material to justify the 18 years old in the nasb20? What changed from who wrote it originally?
i do like the nasb2020. i do not like the brothers and sister. i do not like the answarable instead of guilty too... thats basicly it what i dont like most i have the lsb 1 colum text only. and i like that text the most. its very good readable. not reall difficult. exept some words that are in english not used so anymore but besides that. its just very much the same but better
Honestly, I prefer the "answerable to the court." "Guilty before the court" implies that you'll always be found guilty if you're angry, while "answerable to the court" implies that you might not be found guilty. This is more consistent, because Jesus was angry sometimes and very obviously was not guilty.
I hope this NASV or NASB 2020 will not appear to be gender neutral,as what you said in another video with different topic combination of literal dynamic equivalence.I also hope in the update Mark 16:9-20 will still be retained,John 7:53-8:11,and I John 5:7-8 even though in the 1995 NASB it can be found in the footnote with the note some late manuscripts add...Personally im still attached to the 1977 and 1995 NASB.
I still think any translation that just copies the kjv for john 3:16 is showing an over commitment to tradition, and I was sad to see the 2020 update still reads For God so loved the world, when in modern english that indicates degree, when in 1611 and in the greek it means... means... I was glad to see that Romans 8:26 was updated in the 2020 from we do not know how to pray to what to pray
An update 'modernizing' words, that has no reference to gender and thus the potential of sin, is fine. Which is what the 1977 to 1995 did (e.g. thee to you). An update 'modernizing' words, that refer to gender, and thus change the meaning of the text, and thus pave the way for sin (in a generation where human beings are actively trying to blur the lines of a man and a woman), isn't fine. Which is what the 1995 to 2020 does (e.g. brethren, which is more accurately translated 'brothers', instead translates it to 'brothers and sisters' and thus not only have it be a non-accurate translation, but also provides confusion in the roles of a man and a woman, paving the way for people to continue to sin) So the update from 1977 to 1995, isn't the same as the update from 1995 to 2020, i.e. in 'modernizing' the language, which is what you said.
Just from what you showed us, I can see that the NASB 2020 has gone off the charts. It's like a bible for the corporate world. Message is more holy than report. Oh brother.
The LSB also by the Lockman Foundation is a far more literal translation based on the NASB 95. Those who prefer the 95 who are looking for an update will likely go that way rather than change to a translation based on a 15th century text that was produced as fast as possible to beat Spanish competitors to the press. Erasmus didn’t even transcribe the 12th century manuscripts he had (only 5 of them) he made notes on them directly and sent them to the printers so he could get then entire NT done by himself in six months. Modern translations have the benefit of using a text that references nearly 6000 original language manuscripts (not 5) and tens of thousands of other ancient translations that have since been discovered. I enjoy the KJV and NKJV and own several, but for those readers seeking absolute textual accuracy over anything else (like many NASB 95 fans) they are a poor choice.
Not to say there are not some really poor modern translations but that is more due to bias and attempts to cash-in on the Bible market than on any textual concerns.
The gender neutral language is worrisome and a departure from the NASB word for word tradition. Other than that looks like an improvement over the 1995 version that had some archaic language. I probably will not buy because of the gender neutral changes.
It appears that they changed the 1995 NASB for no reason good reason. They did not upgrade the translation to make it closer to the original, which is the reason the NASB is so universally loved and respected. They downgraded the translation to be further from the original. Why? People’s feelings? If people who love the NASB 1995 want an even NASB then get the LSB. The LSB should’ve been the NASB’s 2020 update..To many of us, it is.
Better to stick with the 95,the 20 version put mankind in were it shouldnt,changes 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 changed it to not include effenemete.20 version lean to premalinialism,ext.
🌷revelation 22:19 and if anyone takes from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away from his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.🌺
I’m always going to have a soft spot for the 1995 version because that was the year I was saved.
I just bought one...thec1995...and I really like it.
@@sandygrogg1203 yeah-it’s one of my most used along with the ESV
I met my wife in 95 ! But still I’d rather have a translation that takes into consideration the changes in language over time . Let’s not fall into the same error of the KJB guys .
@@michealferrell1677 I’m starting an NASB 95 only movement. Lol!
@@TomPlantagenet I’m CSB , ESV , NASB95/20 only :)
I think you hit on the crux of the change when you noted they were trying to "make it what people want." That, in my mind is a problem. I want a version that most closely matches what God actually inspired. The more troubling thing is the move to gender neutrality. When a specific pronoun was used, it should be carried forward in my view. It really isn't about what we want or what fits the cultural shifts today, it is about being as close to what was inspired as possible. I'll stick with my NASB 95. I'm familiar with it and feel it is as true as possible to the inspired word. Maybe if I grew up with the 77 version I'd feel the same way about it versus the 95 but I didn't. Maybe if the 2020 reaches someone who is offended by gender specific language, it will be worthwhile but for me, I prefer the 95.
Agreed 100%.
I’m starting to understand the loyal NASB 77 crowd now. I’m a loyal 95er and I’ll stay a 95er I love the harder words it’s not a bad thing if you have to slow down and even look up a word here and there. If I read anything else it’s KJV ESV or NKJV if I want easy to read I love the CSB I’m all set on NASB Bibles and translations but for a new believer I see nothing wrong except it’s drastically different if there teachers using the 95 or 77 I’ve found little different in the 95 when my pastor used the 77 for a while only the pronouns in psalms and little words here and there
Love Csb
1977 or 1995 for me. I like the 1977 better. It’s still in print and can be found on eBay too. This is printed in Korea.
www.amazon.com/gp/product/0899579442/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1. I’m 100% against buying a Bible made in China where they don’t have religious freedom. This is absolutely about making money and their Egos.
Yes. I like the 1977 NASB; learned to like the 1995. I stop there.
Thanks for this. I'll be looking for a 1995 version.
I really appreciate the NASB translation. I just got a new NASB by Schuyler in the 1995 update. Compared with the 2020 update, I think that it is not a huge departure from 1995, and for me that means I don't see a need to get the newer one. Personally, I don't see I need to have the more gender inclusive language, because I personally find that kind of fussiness unnecessary. But for those who prefer that clarification, it is good they have access to newer translations that include such edits.
Thanks for the comparison, Tim. My first bible text from the Lockman Foundation was the Amplified New Testament that I received from home while patrolling the coast of Vietnam in 1965. That was a significant update compared to the Cambridge Pitt Minion I had carried with me since 1963. I believe Lockman is committed to producing accurate translations.
In addition, I have the Legacy Standard Bible which is another revision from the NASB 95 and enjoy it as well.
I noticed in your comparison of the NASB 95 a change from the expression "hold fast."
I must say that as a former sailor in the Navy, hold fast is an oft used term regarding the hauling in of lines or rope.
As a Navy vet (87-98), I can affirm we used the phrase “hold fast” as well.
77 is the one I use because 77 is the one I have. I can't decide whether it is worth getting a 96 or 2020. If I decide on a 95, I better get one before they are completely gone. Decisions Decisions..... God bless y'all really good!
They are going to keep the 95 in print along with the 2020 they said.
I now have a 1995 XL edition of the NASB, and I like it a lot. The font is a 12vpoint.. which I love.
I think it's less accurate now :(
If it ain't broke, why fix it right?
I think I'll stick with NASB 95 .... No plan to get the new one... 😊
I changed my mind... I had the NASB 2020.. I like both of them...😊
I think I’ll stick with the 1995. I will always have my KJV. I also use NKJV and NIV life application. I learn from each. Just my opinion, but the translation update is generational in that younger readers will be drawn more to their comfortable verbiage (2020). As long as any version is being read...to me that is what’s important. Thank God He didn’t make us all to like the same things.
You've got it all wrong.
It is not up to The Word of GOD to submit to generations, but down to the generations to submit to The Word of GOD.
@@njiomonansichristianfreder6374LMAO. 😂 The translations are STILL accurate in translating the messages. KJV is NOT the most accurate, reads horribly with Its outdated old English, and doesn't even use the oldest manuscripts. 😂
@JesusChrist_IsTruth-LoveForALL You are absolutely wrong, deceived and deceiving others. I've said enough on this crucial subject so, it's all on you moving forward.
@@njiomonansichristianfreder6374 😂 KJV only fans boys are DELUSIONAL.
@@njiomonansichristianfreder6374 😂 KJV only Fan boys are DELUSIONAL!
You are awesome! Thank you for this video! Not a fan of the 2020. Will stick to the 95
I actually liked all the changes I saw in your comparison. I laid aside the NASB some time ago because I felt like it was artificially difficult to read (meaning that it seemed to me they went out of their way to pick tongue-twisting phrases). I also tend to favor the Byzantine text-type, but I respect the NASB's push for literalness. It knows what it's about. This 2020 version might have me taking another look at it. (When the NASB 77 came out, I snapped up a copy and it became my go-to Bible for years, finally prying my trusty King James from my hands.)
Thank you, this video helped a lot with making the decision between which one to get for myself. I only very recently started learning about God and wanted to buy a Bible too, and I believe the 2020 version of the NASB will be perfect.
Thanks Tim. Was hesitant at first but really like 2020. Don’t think it’s dumbing down but making more clear. And that it is gender specific all the better. Nothing changed theologically; extensive but integrity maintained...in my humble opinion.
It moved farther away from what the original actually says than closer. It switched to gender neutral. Not gender specific. Why would the Bible that is respected above others for its literal accuracy decide to go backwards away from that instead of closer? It appears they’re putting the feelings of a segment of society above God’s word.
NASB don’t need new updates but rather more copy of different variants and formats
I don't see myself changing to the 2020 from the 95. The 95 was a huge improvement over the 77, and I have grown so used to it that I don't think I would benefit from the textual changes. However, I think younger generations of serious students will enjoy having a literal translation that speaks their language.
I recently started in Matthew, Romans, and Revelation. So far I'm enjoying the 2020 in the NT a lot. I think most of the word changes have been great. I appreciate the use of italics for supplied words and how gender is handled. I teach a small group and share the faith with non-Christians from time to time so it's helpful for me to be comfortable and familiar with language that's accurate and understood. NASB 2020 looks to be a go! I need to read in the OT but I suspect that it'll be the formal translation that I read the most.
I'm very grateful for Scott Shirley's site he made showing all the changes made. I'll definitely stick with my NASB95
Thank you, still trying to figure this one out.
It's official.... switching to the NKJV as my primary translation. Hope they don't monkey around with it.
I agree! The NKJV is my go to, but I love the NASB 95. Pray they leave it alone!
Nate McKnight I agree and have switched to NKJV from the ESV due to continual revisions, and the fact that verse-by-verse layouts of any quality are nearly non-existent for the ESV; I just got a new Thomas Nelson NKJV verse by verse Comfort Print and love it!
@@ronjones6555 I.have an esv topaz and a scr vbv lego and love them ...I've always been primarily an NAS guy but ill switch to NKJV and ESV for preaching
Lol... U really need to read up on KJV translations.
Sorry Nate,,, the NKJV has been "monkeyed" around with! Check out how many times "hell" is left out of your NKJV !!!
The change from semi-colons to commas is exactly what we are trying to get our students NOT to do! Shame on this revision for promoting improper punctuation in this regard. What this new version has done is introduced commas splices into the text. Students get marked down for having commas splices!
"Look upon" and "look at" don't mean the same thing.
"Chastening" and "punishment" are not the same thing. Using "punishment" caters to an error in theology.
"Offenses" and "transgressions" aren't the same thing, either.
Okay, I don't like this 2020 version.
I agree, Kathy. I feel the changes they made to the 2020 version are not helpful. I wish they would leave things alone!
The newer generation is a bunch of men pleasers. Sad.
Thanks for your insight!
As an esv and nkjv reader, the nasb 95 feels richer in language
I have a 1977 NASB and a 1995 NASB and I’m planning on getting the 2020 NASB.
I love NASB20. Thanks and God bless.
Thanks for the review. I am getting BOTH. 95 and 2020.
On a positive note the cost 95 NASB bibles might be cheaper when this version comes out.
Ha2 🤣👍 right
Please correct me if I am wrong. A new work printed from an existing work has to be at least 10 - 20% different to get a copyright. Does change for the sake of change enable more sales? Just wondering how and why that works. Love this channel. Good job.
Great stuff Bro! I love the 2020 and will read and study it.
I’ll stick to the 95and avoid the 2020
You mentioned the gender-neutral changes in that they're very controversial, but you didn't weigh in on your view of those. Do the gender-neutral changes make the text more accurate or less?
Thank you so much - very interesting and somewhat saddening. I personally don’t like the gender language updated. I have now resolved to hold by NKJV Bibles closer than ever. The NKJV is so beautiful. How long will it be before they - the ubiquitous “they” - get their progressive hands on it and want to change it. 😥
Why would people be upset that a new version is coming out? They can simply keep their Bibles.
I just bought the NASB 2020 and I love it. To think the Bible is speaking to women, too, is a good feeling.
The 2020 appears to be a widdling down of God's original Word rather than a modernizing. So many changed words that are inferior to the original in the 1995 and NKJV. For me the 2020 will never come into my home.
Good morning Tim 🌞
Thank you! I've been reading reviews but within two minutes you showed why I want the NASB 95. Obviously there's the gender-neutral, but scourging makes more sense, 'fell' as uncertain vs. "was laid" not in italics.
I think anytime a translation is more readable and understandable without sacrificing accuracy, its better because it can reach a greater amount of people.
Am waiting for LSB.
Love NASB. I got saved in 96 and started using it along with KJV. Now adays I use multiple translations, each has it's purpose. But....I'm waiting for MacArthurs translation for my next purchase of NASB.
I got my NASB 2020 in the mail and its safe to say calling this translation "literal" is a lie an false advertising. There is no way you can honestly dumb-down a translation so much, make one CONSTANTLY look at the "literal" footnotes and call it literal. Such a huge disappointed and I will not be buying another, ever. Its terrible.
I'm so excited about the NASB 2020! I had compared some of the early releases and the changes in some places (for example in James 5 about the prayer of the righteous person) made a significant improvement to the clarity of meaning in the text.
Does anyone know when it will be available?
From what I have seen, it will be released for sale in April 2021 :-)
Although the NASB is not my most preferred translation (the NKJV is), I do have an NASB77 and NASB95 in my collection, both of which I use with some frequency. As it stands right now, I see no need to add the NASB20 to my collection.
I had planned to steer clear of the 2020 update, but after watching your review, I’ve decided to give the 2020 version a chance. I do like that they continue capitalize pronouns for deity. I wish all the translations would do that.
I'm a bit late to comment, I've been led to read the NASB and started with the 2020 update, however I decided to compare the 2020 to the 1995 NASB while doing some Bible Study.
I noticed the NASB 1995 has these verses in Luke 9 - 54When His disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” 55But He turned and rebuked them, [and said, “You do not know what kind of spirit you are of; 56for the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.”] And they went on to another village.
Now compare the same Luke 9 verses in the NASB 2020 - 54When His disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” 55But He turned and rebuked them.9.55: 56And they went on to another village.
Looks like language is not the only thing to be updated in the NASB 2020, how many other changes like the above are there.
The brackets in the first quote indicate the verse is not in the oldest manuscripts but they left it in out of tradition. The newer quote simply moves it to a footnote instead. I prefer the 95 but that example is simply a formatting choice.
Thanks for this review. I am very interested in this translation.
I've got a 1995 NASB leather bond rather expensive bible on the way! Will be getting it Monday according to the tracking!
Looks like I'll be sticking with the ESV.
NASB 2020 is great
i still use the NASB 1977.I'm one who goes to a KJV only church but would'nt really use the KJV and certainly not the NIV. The alternative in English churches is the NKJV which is my personal version or the ESV or NASB.I cant believe the English language has changed so much that the literal NASB needs updating in 1995 and 2020.God willing the NKJV will never "update"
NASB2020 also capitalized some pronounce that the NASB1995 had missed.
Ex: Gen 3:15; 2Thes 2:7
I won't be switching. I use nasb 95 and the 2005? Esv. Sometimes I'll use nkjv or even niv
NASB 95, 20, CSB, NET, KJV are my most used for study and my favorite will always be nasb. my first bible when I was saved was a NASB 95 and at church we used CSB.
I think I can remember how an old famous preacher I used to listen to said that afflicted can also be translated humiliated...
I enjoy KJV because it makes you search, examine, compare, look into definitions of words, you break it down more, get into a deeper study of passages, it increases your hunger for reading because you get into it more, enhances your understanding because you wrestle with The Scriptures in a good way. Its not just about reading to check a box its about seeking the heart of God because He reveals Himself through His Word. Also i enjoy the "Ye" , "thee", "thou", and "you" because you know whos directly being spoken to. Take your time with the scriptures, you shouldnt have a microwave mentality with embracing God for Who He is.
Congratulations for the video👏👏👏👏👏
Brazil watching
I'm looking for a Bible to read in English, to learn English with God involved.
I think I found a good English version here.
God bless your work👏👏🙏🙏
Curious to see your take on the BSB. They are coming out with multiple versions with different translations philosophys. Supposed to be similar to nasb
Here you go! ruclips.net/video/m_1Wo4NP5bg/видео.html
Brethern in context is brothers and sisters.
Yeah but they took out the word begotten when refering to Jesus' connection to the father
I do not like the linguistic gender changes! When in some older versions it reads Fisher's of men, I always assumed it meant women as well. We are after all the race of men, or mankind.
I think that the education system is at fault here. Tragic.
I certainly am glad I have enough non gender oriented Bibles to last for the rest of my life!
I make your word mine, and also I do the same in my native language versions(portuguese). I hate what they did with New Almeida's translation
@@josueinhan8436 I thank you for your words.
Would you mind if I ask a friend of mine who is also Portuguese. As English is the only language I speak, I would like to understand a bit more, if you wouldn't mind.
@@shirleygoss1988 no, it's ok. I dont mind at all. 👍
@@shirleygoss1988 would you like me to help you with any translation or something else?
@@josueinhan8436 I thank you for your offer, please let me ask my friend first.
I must also confess I have little aptitude for leaning other languages.
I have been a user of NASB95 for a while. I was curious about the differences in the 95 and 20 version were. I found your channel with the link to Scott’s account. One thing that troubles me the most is the removal of “begotten” when describing Jesus as the “only begotten Son”. For me, this cheapens the meaning because in saying “only Son” it makes Him comparable to us saying only son of our children. He is not the same. Another very troubling issue is the gender neutrality. It is not the original text and we need to read and study the Word in the context it was written because it has meaning.
I like in 2020 version they still # the verses in the paragraph. So I think easier to read.
The 95 is just my Bible. I'm not super big on the gender changes but I'm not up in arms because they used the NASB italics.
The wording changes aren't my thing because I think in NASB, I don't think the language is archaic to warrant the translation. I'm sure it's excellent but the 95 is my Bible. I also just bought a premium NASB 95 that I plan on teaching out of and living in for the rest of my life.
My reasoning for staying with the 95 is 40% philosophy of translation and 60% practical reasons
Good information…. I’ll stick with the 95….
The CSB seems little changed from 2017 to 2020.
But as you point out the CSB 2020 seems clearer better print in 2020 offering in some personal SIZE regular as well as large print. THAT IS worth waiting for but as of 2 days ago they ARE still sending out 2017. Maybe we should wait till they are ALL used up?
Hi Tim! Could you do a side-by-side comparison between the 2020 updates of the NASB and CSB? As for the 2020 NASB, I hate the unjustified and jagged right margins, it’s so unsightly!
I love my NASB 95. I won't get the 2020. What I do want to get is Macarthur's LSV.
Tim I love the twenty twenty n s s b bible is fantastic period
Thanks!
What is the most accurate NASB? NASB1977? NASB1995? NASB2020? The NASB is considered the most accurate Bible, but what version of it?
The 95 generally gets the nod for most accurate, but with the LSB out now it is probably word-for-word the most accurate translation.
LSB and NASB are both Lockman Foundation products.
Not a fan of the 2020. I am not sure publishers really think we need to update the language “for the people” every couple of decades or if it’s just a form of a money grab (or possibly just an excuse to get more culturally acceptable), but English speakers used the KJV for nearly 400 years with just 1 update so maybe we don’t need to constantly change the text every few years to fit the culture.
Language evolves over time and changes, it's why we don't use the Greek, and Hebrew.🤷 KJV is outdated, doesn't even use the oldest manuscripts and rass horribly with its archaic old english. NASB 2020 changes nothing, it makes passages more CLEAR when speaking about MAN, and simply clarified it if it's make/female, it's literally a Non issue. People cry about anything.
I used to love the NASB but when even the 2020 version came out and 2Samuel 21:19-22 still was not corrected, think I've given up on this version. Then if the gender changes are reflected in the manuscripts as brothers and sister (most have the meaning of both) that is a good thing. Don't know why mostly men have an issue with that, especially with Galatians 3:28.
From what you've shown, it appears to just be a modernization of language. Which I'm very happy to hear, because while I love the NASB for its accuracy I sometimes struggle with its way of words. I think this is a good direction for the NASB, and I look forward to getting a copy.
The 95 was clunky in places and I wondered many times why certain words and phrases were translated as they were. This is a positive thing.
I hope this will put an end to people referring to the NASB as being "wooden!"
Paragraph format is definitely the way to go. Verses weren't numbered till later, and verse-by-verse makes it harder to get the flow of thought, besides not being original. When I first encountered a paragraph-format Bible, I knew there was no going back.
Darrell Tan:
I am at most 50/50 on your paragraph format statement.
For straight out reading a paragraph format is alright.
For a more in-depth study, or for just trying to quickly find a verse, I decidedly prefer a verse by verse format.
I know there are folks who won't agree, but that is my two cents worth.✝️☦️🛐
Just the opposite for me, I would never even consider paragraph form.
Very good video!
I think the changes are good. 😊 But I do love the ‘95. 😬
Excellent video breakdown, thank you.
There are so very many modern translations available to us and yet we need another one. Why? Profit pure and simple. With each new or revised translation that is produced there is profit to be made. There will always be those that run out and buy the latest and “best” new translation. I personally find it confusing when everyone has their own translation in a group study setting. Need I remind you, God is not the author of confusion. Hmmm 🤔 who is the author of confusion then?
Very good; very interesting.
The one change I don't like with the nasb 2020 is how they changed psalm 139:14 on how they replaced "fearfully " with "awesomely"
I like updates to translations because I like having a modern language Bible
but after comparing thid with the lsb..
the lsb has sometimes the same as nasb2020..
like by his wounds we are healed.
thats 1 example. there are more.
2 of 3 from thid verses and in oversl text more .
'95 for me.
1977 was the best version they had in my opinion except for the thees and thous when speaking to deity which defeated the purpose. I've given up on the NASB as a reliable translation. Many King James bible or the Authorized only people think that it is the best translation because it came from the Erasmus text. I just don't understand why these people just didn't make a Greek and Hebrew dictionary themselves and use it to create a more understandable text then the King James.
It appears to be a worthy update but I truly believe that it’s smart for them to publish both the 1995 and the 2020 side-by-side. I’ll be getting a copy to read through and then make my decision on whether I want to switch to it.
If you have Gods word now,,, what is the 20 for? one or the other is not Gods word bc they're not the same.Did God make a mistake in the 95 that He now has to "ammend" what He wrote in the 95?? NO!!! and NO!!! If God wrote the 95 there would be absolutely no reason for Him to write the 20 bc He is perfect in what He does. God only wrote one bible.
@@jicsayr5578 what Bible translation do you read?
@@pinkdiscomosh2766 KJV
@@jicsayr5578 Okay, and why do you read an English translation like the KJV instead of the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek; the languages the Bible was originally written in? Would you say that the KJV is the perfect word of God even though it didn’t existed for about 1600 years of the life of the church? Do you believe that the church had the word of God before 1611? I genuinely just want to know how you wrestle with these questions?
@@pinkdiscomosh2766 #1,,,, I believe God has always preserved his word and I believe God gave us the english translation. I speak english therefore I use an english version. I don't speak or read greek or hebrew. But the reason of having more modern translations is harmful to the word of God as it deletes so many verses and waters down the word,such as "gender" neutral. God didn't write a bible to "please" those that don't know if they are male or female. In Is.14;12 they drop the word "lucifer" and call him the "morning star" etc,,,Jesus is the Morning Star,,Rev 22;16. In Rev 2;28,, And I will give him the morning star,,, who is being given here,Jesus or lucifer? Jesus, of course!!
In Dan 3;25 Jesus is called "a son of the gods" (little "g") This is serious,changing things like this and its througout the "new" translations!!
Lets take the NIV, with all the revisions it has,,,, Did God make a "mistake" in the first one that He had to "make" another one? and that was not correct so He made #3 and #4 and #5 and on. One might think,,, "can't God get it right the first time?" And now NASB20 comes out so God didn't get it right in edition #1? I have an 1848 KJV bible and it reads just like my 1985 version except for some name spelling changes,as Elias to Elijah,Noe to Noah etc.
Lets say you took 10 "new" versions and compared them verse by verse,,, would they match?? No!! In Rev 22;18-19 it plainly tells us NOT to add or subtract from the word, so how can someone justify a bible that has SO many missing verses? What did Jesus come to do? To seek and save the lost! So why is Mat 18;11 missing in so many "new" translations? What would be a "good" reason" to omit that verse? I strongly believe that the "new version" issue is a plan of the devil to "condition " people to "accept" the new world order translation. When the one world bible translation comes out people will except it bc of all the translations we have now,, most likely something like a "chris-lam" (christian-islam)translation. Satan mimicks all that God has done and he is/will have his own version of the "bible". He will come and sit in the temple and show himself to be God while being nothing but the anti-christ! We have to be SO careful not to be deceived!! Would you please tell me what words you don't understand in the KJV? I've written a lot here and could go on for pages but I will stop here. I don't write this to "hammer" on anyone as each has the right to choose what they want, but not all choices are correct or good. All I want to say here is that you seek God with ALL your heart bc the storm is going to take many "christians" with it! And its coming soon!!!
I want to see ya on the other side!!!
Just received my copy the other day and what I have read so far I would prefer the 2020 over the 95 hands down. If Lockman would have put this bible out 1971 would have locked the bible market. For the 2020 brought me back home to the NASB. Still love the ESV and the CSB but my main bible will be my main 2020 NASB
That's interesting. What are some examples of what you like about the 2020?
@@AFrischPerspective not wooden in the translation much smoother and still accurate.
I don't like that 8 years old is in the 95 and 18 years old is in the 20. I feel whom ever wrote the nasb95 made a huge error if 2 chronicles 36:9 and why was it over looked? Did they use different sources material to justify the 18 years old in the nasb20? What changed from who wrote it originally?
i do like the nasb2020.
i do not like the brothers and sister.
i do not like the answarable instead of guilty too...
thats basicly it what i dont like most
i have the lsb 1 colum text only. and i like that text the most.
its very good readable. not reall difficult. exept some words that are in english not used so anymore but besides that. its just very much the same but better
Honestly, I prefer the "answerable to the court." "Guilty before the court" implies that you'll always be found guilty if you're angry, while "answerable to the court" implies that you might not be found guilty. This is more consistent, because Jesus was angry sometimes and very obviously was not guilty.
@@curtthegamer934 good thougt..! true
I hope this NASV or NASB 2020 will not appear to be gender neutral,as what you said in another video with different topic combination of literal dynamic equivalence.I also hope in the update Mark 16:9-20 will still be retained,John 7:53-8:11,and I John 5:7-8 even though in the 1995 NASB it can be found in the footnote with the note some late manuscripts add...Personally im still attached to the 1977 and 1995 NASB.
It's too bad they won't ever translate traditionally Anglicized words.
I still think any translation that just copies the kjv for john 3:16 is showing an over commitment to tradition, and I was sad to see the 2020 update still reads For God so loved the world, when in modern english that indicates degree, when in 1611 and in the greek it means... means... I was glad to see that Romans 8:26 was updated in the 2020 from we do not know how to pray to what to pray
NASB95 and LSB for me. Why not use the best 2 in English?
An update 'modernizing' words, that has no reference to gender and thus the potential of sin, is fine. Which is what the 1977 to 1995 did (e.g. thee to you).
An update 'modernizing' words, that refer to gender, and thus change the meaning of the text, and thus pave the way for sin (in a generation where human beings are actively trying to blur the lines of a man and a woman), isn't fine. Which is what the 1995 to 2020 does (e.g. brethren, which is more accurately translated 'brothers', instead translates it to 'brothers and sisters' and thus not only have it be a non-accurate translation, but also provides confusion in the roles of a man and a woman, paving the way for people to continue to sin)
So the update from 1977 to 1995, isn't the same as the update from 1995 to 2020, i.e. in 'modernizing' the language, which is what you said.
From what I see, the 2020 is not for me.
Just from what you showed us, I can see that the NASB 2020 has gone off the charts. It's like a bible for the corporate world. Message is more holy than report. Oh brother.
I think the NKJV will be able to steal the NASB's thunder.
I hope so. It's much more literal and follows a better NT text.
The LSB also by the Lockman Foundation is a far more literal translation based on the NASB 95. Those who prefer the 95 who are looking for an update will likely go that way rather than change to a translation based on a 15th century text that was produced as fast as possible to beat Spanish competitors to the press. Erasmus didn’t even transcribe the 12th century manuscripts he had (only 5 of them) he made notes on them directly and sent them to the printers so he could get then entire NT done by himself in six months.
Modern translations have the benefit of using a text that references nearly 6000 original language manuscripts (not 5) and tens of thousands of other ancient translations that have since been discovered. I enjoy the KJV and NKJV and own several, but for those readers seeking absolute textual accuracy over anything else (like many NASB 95 fans) they are a poor choice.
Not to say there are not some really poor modern translations but that is more due to bias and attempts to cash-in on the Bible market than on any textual concerns.
The gender neutral language is worrisome and a departure from the NASB word for word tradition. Other than that looks like an improvement over the 1995 version that had some archaic language. I probably will not buy because of the gender neutral changes.
It appears that they changed the 1995 NASB for no reason good reason. They did not upgrade the translation to make it closer to the original, which is the reason the NASB is so universally loved and respected. They downgraded the translation to be further from the original. Why? People’s feelings? If people who love the NASB 1995 want an even NASB then get the LSB. The LSB should’ve been the NASB’s 2020 update..To many of us, it is.
Better to stick with the 95,the 20 version put mankind in were it shouldnt,changes 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 changed it to not include effenemete.20 version lean to premalinialism,ext.
🌷revelation 22:19 and if anyone takes from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away from his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.🌺