Is the New American Standard Bible the Better Bible?

First published in 2003

Have you ever found it amazing, that despite the praise of accuracy heaped upon the New American Standard Bible by Protestant/Evangelicals, it is largely ignored by the real Biblical experts. There is no reference to it in the BAGD, Aland's _Text of the New Testament_ or my edition of the UBS Greek text and it's companion piece, the Textual Commentary of the Greek NT. It is not mentioned in Eerdman's Dictionary of the Bible under "Bible Translations" and the same goes for Oxford's Companion to the Bible. F.F. Bruce does not reference it in his Commentary. James Dunn does not use it, Hurtado doesn't either. Metzger gives it a brief mention in his book _The Bible in Translation_ and even makes use of Laurence Vance's _Double Jeopardy_ in the review. This is an interesting move since Vance states in his Epilogue that "it would be double jeopardy to accept the NASBU [New American Standard Bible Update] as the word of God."

In his _Recent Translations: A Survey and Exploration_ in the 1992 Southerwestern Journal of Theology [34.2: 5-12] completely ignores the NASB. James Barr in his _Modern English Bibles as a Problem for the Church_ [Quarterly Review/Fall 1994] stated that "Bibles are being written in English which have as one of their aims the pleasing of the sort of Bible readers who will buy them and like them, and it is especially on the side of the more evangelical readership that this is at present happening."

Evangelical detractors of the New World Translation often accuse the NWT translators of producing a Bible that says what they want it to say, when actually the converse is true. The NASB, NIV and ESV are all reactions in response to the RSV, a Bible that does not say what they want it to say.

Yet none of the above scholars have no problem using the RSV, or the NEB which is contemporary to the NASB. The same goes for Glassman's _The Translation Debate_, while Barclay Newman calls the NASB a "tragedy" and a "nightmare" in _The Word of God-A Guide to English Versions of the Bible_.

The reason for all this is that the NASB is the "most literal" and the "most accurate" ONLY to the Conservative/Protestant/Evangelical mindset, as the NASB says what they want it to say.
No one else seems to be so easily fooled.

The NASB is not a progressive move in a better direction over and above the American Standard Version of 1901. The NASB will always be a pale imitation. It does not deserve to be the NEW ASV, it is just a wannabe. As for the NASB's critics move in the direction of the RSV, NEB, NAB etc., the supporters and translators of the NASB should be ashamed that the "Liberals" and Catholics are always making better Bibles. I personally use the RSV all the time. I have one always with me. Sure, the RSV does not use the Divine Name, but it is not claiming to be the "most literal" at the same time. The NASB is, but when they remove the Divine Name 7000 times from the OT and give it a Dynamic Equivalent replacement, it has essentially LIED to us again. The ASV, Concordant, Green's LITV and Young's Translation can compete for the claim to be the most literal, but when the NASB does so, it is relying on the ignorance of its readers.

In the world of Protestants and Evangelicals, it is quite obvious that the Bible has become a problem for them, and this problem has seeped over into the pews. They can blame themselves for the ever-increasing popularity of the KJVO movement.

Their people are confused, and the proliferation of newer Protestant Bibles are glutting the market. We are talking about a group of people that produce newer translations of the Bible on a rate more frequent than the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit edition. It is quite obvious that they are not very good at this, and perhaps they should step down and admit to their failure. Don't be fooled by their credentials, even Mormons produce their own scholars. I think the constant attacks by the Protestant/Evangelical mindset against the NWT is due to the fact that the JW's Bible is a constant source of embarrassment to this sector of the community.

metatron3@gmail.com