Updated American Standard Version
Giving Bible readers what God said not what translators think God meant
This article delves into the historical and phonetic evidence supporting the existence of the 'J' sound in ancient Hebrew, challenging widespread misconceptions and highlighting the Sephardic pronunciation tradition.
In "Unveiling the Shift," we critically explore the significant changes between the 2020 New American Standard Bible (NASB) and its 1995 predecessor. Our in-depth analysis reveals that the 2020 edition leans towards readability and dynamic equivalence at the cost of strict literalness and faithfulness to the original texts. There is no other article this extensive on this subject on the internet, period!
This comprehensive article delves into the profound theological implications of Exodus 3:14. Through a conservative Bible scholar's lens, it critically examines and offers fresh insights into Jehovah's self-revelation, dissecting the popular interpretations and presenting a compelling argument about God's character and purpose for Israel.
Exactly why are we making other translations beyond the King James Version of 1611? The King James Version has been the primary translation of the Christian community for 400+ years (1611-2021). There is no doubt that this Bible alone has affected the lives of hundreds of millions and has influenced the principles of Bible translation for the past four centuries. Should the KJV still be considered a trustworthy translation? What makes up a trustworthy translation? What translations are the most trustworthy?
The KJV and ASV translations of Gk (μονογενής monogenēs) in six NT passages (Jn. 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; He. 11:17; 1 Jn. 4:9), usually in the phrase “only begotten Son” (all the references except that in He. 11:17 are to Jesus’ relationship to God). Most scholars are against the legitimacy of the KJV rendering “only begotten” in the six passages mentioned above. It should be noted that John uses monogenēs nine times, while Luke uses it three times and Paul once.
For some time now terms ending in the word “equivalent” or one of its variations have been preferred in describing translation philosophies. I have a problem with this word, and all translators really should have the same problem with it: it begs the very question we are debating.
Does harpazo or any of its derivatives have the sense of ‘holding in possession,’ ‘retaining,’ or does it mean ‘seize,’ ‘snatch violently’?
John 1:1 is all about capitalization and the tiny word “a,” which in grammar is called the indefinite article. And yet, this clause has been the most debated verse for centuries. So, was the Word “God” or “a god”?
There is a single article (the) preceding two nouns of the same case (God, Savior) that are joined by the conjunction “and.” More than 140 years ago, Granville Sharp developed what became known as “the Granville Sharp rule,” applying it in such constructions. It claims that, since the article (the) is not duplicated before the second noun (Savior), the two nouns have to refer to the same person or subject.
The divine name יהוה (JHVH) is used some six thousand eight hundred and twenty-three times in the Masoretic Text. Six thousand five hundred and eighteen times the name is marked to be pronounced יְהֹוָה (Hebrew) J'hõh-vãh' 3068). Three hundred and five times the name is marked to be pronounced יֱהֹוִה (Hebrew Jehõh-vih' 3069). Not once is the divine...
