NASB onlyism

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#41
So, basically, God is not capable of assuring that His Word is not properly translated to suit Him? Now, there may be debate as to which we fell more comfortable reading, but passing Judgment on those who undertook the difficult task of translating ancient texts without even knowing their relationship with God is a bit of a risk in my opinion........

Way I see it is, the Holy Spirit is quite capable of "inspiring" whomever He wishes to do whatever He wishes........and I don't believe any of us are qualified to question Him........but, that may just be me.

LET US FIX OUR EYES ON JESUS, and obey His commandments to us.........LOVE, LOVE, LOVE!

(did I mention..........love?)
lol. The HS did not inspire the translators. Only the origional manuscripts. People who interpreted from latin to greek to english had to interpret from all the copies of manuscripts and from their own biases.. Each translation is biassed, you can see it in the way they are translated.
 

p_rehbein

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2013
30,213
6,548
113
#42
lol. The HS did not inspire the translators. Only the origional manuscripts. People who interpreted from latin to greek to english had to interpret from all the copies of manuscripts and from their own biases.. Each translation is biassed, you can see it in the way they are translated.
..........dunno........maybe they bowed down with a sincere and contrite heart, and asked the Holy Spirit to guide them in their labours........it's quite possible, dunno, I wasn't present.......just don't want to pass judgment on people I don't know.

Just a thought, but is it possible that we see one translation or another as "bias" because of our own "bias?" Just asking.....
 
Dec 21, 2012
2,982
40
0
#43
sorry to bust your bubble bro. But the thees and thous are old english translation of the modern day words you and yours.. No one speaks this way anymore..
"Thee" and "thou" are still used in the NASB-77 which is completely superior ("everybody knows") in every way to the "modern translation", the NASB-95.

Older bibles are better! :rolleyes: I will sell you the Apostle Paul's personal
NASB for only $500,000 US dollars.


NASB 1977 vs. 1995 edition

NASB 1977 vs. 1995 edition - BaptistBoard.com

the Lockman Foundation claims that "in perfecting the updated NASB, more than 20 translators spent nearly three years scrutinizing the NASB in order to modernize and maintain it in accordance with the most recent research on the oldest and best manuscripts. Thus, some passages have been updated for even greater fidelity to the original manuscripts."

It seems that in the 1995 version the passages with Old English "thee's" and "thou's" etc. have been updated to 'contemporary' English, and words and phrases that could be misunderstood due to changes in their meaning during those 20 years were revised to current English standards.
The NASB-77 is still in print as of 2008 (a bit overpriced though...)

Hebrew-Greek Key Word Study Bible (2008 AMG edition): NASB-77 Bible version, Hardbound (Key Word Study Bibles): Spiros Zodhiates, Dr. Warren Patrick Baker D.R.E.: 9780899577500: Amazon.com: Books
 

vic1980

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2013
1,653
199
63
44
#44
NASB onlyism <<< this is a joke thread right , only thee holyspirit teaches us what the scripture even mean.

God bless
 

KohenMatt

Senior Member
Jun 28, 2013
4,021
223
63
#45
No Praus, what I wrote is that the NIV is an abomination. Again, the NIV is not a Bible. It is a Satanic counterfeit. I gave you two of the reasons why it is in my previous post.


No Praus, I wrote that the burning of the NIVs are justifiable. The NIV is a wicked, Satanic counterfeit which attacks the Lord Jesus Christ and His deity.
Anyone ever wish there was an "I really, really, really, really, really, really dislike" button?
Or that there was a "This post is just downright silly and childish" button?

I find myself thinking that sometimes.

My favorite translation? The Holy Spirit. When it comes down to it, ALL translations are just man's interpretations of what God said. Some are more accurate than others, but they are all just 2nd hand from God Himself. So when I'm reading the word, whether it be NIV, NASB, KJV, CJB or any other Hebrew-focused translation, the Holy Spirit can overcome any faulty translation. And the Holy Spirit HAS to be the one teaching me as I read it. If I'm not trusting in the Holy Spirit to teach me, convict me and change me, it doesn't matter how accurate my translation is. That doesn't mean we all shouldn't strive for accuracy in our reading, but it should put things into perspective for us.

Question: What happens to all of the 3rd world Christians who have nothing to read BUT the NIV that was given to them? Should the only Bibles they own be burned and should those who read it and believe it be guilty of being a Satanic conterfeit?

Everyone Relax,
Matt
 
T

Trax

Guest
#46
Name a translation that is inspired. None are. The original was inspired then came the copies then came translation. We have translations of copies of an inspired text.
If none are inspired, just what God do you have?? Understand, you are addressing
Him when you make comments about His word. The body of Christ just isn't taking God's
word serious at all. They think anyone for any reason can assemble words and books,
write "Bible" on the cover and presto, you got another Bible. Sorry, but God isn't anyone's
lackey to run after people to "inspire" their creation. Being inspired means, "God breathed in"
and God ONLY breaths into His creation. Jesus said to follow Him and He wants people
to be serious about it. And when the Body of Christ reads God's word, it better be something
God created. To make comments that there isn't an inspired word of God, in Bible form today,
you'll have to answer for that, when you stand before Him. God is the creator and He magnifies His
word above His own name, and when anyone speaks about His word, He hears it.

A word of warning to the body of Christ. The KJV Bible is God authorized and God inspired.
If you don't agree with that or don't like it, that is your opinion. But the moment anyone starts
attacking His word, it is directed right at God. That whole attitude throws question to the
individual's salvation. That is, why would anyone who claims to be saved, be bad mouthing God's
character and word? Its a contradiction in attitude. If the person is saved, he/she will be questioned
and that person will have to give an account for what they said and done.

Now, I read from the KJV only because I know its from God. These other modern translations,
I don't know. I go with the one I do know about. If, by chance, a more modern, God authorized
and God inspired translation, there will be ONLY one given. They all can't be. It will be a game
of chance trying to figure out which one, even if there is one. I know it is very easy for God
to bring about a Bible and inspire its translation. He gave the KJV Bible and I haven't seen
a legit reason for Him to give us another one.

Now, whatever Bible version you choose, is your choice. Choose for the correct reason.
 
Dec 21, 2012
2,982
40
0
#47
A word of warning to the body of Christ. The KJV Bible is God authorized and God inspired.
If you don't agree with that or don't like it, that is your opinion. But the moment anyone starts
attacking His word, it is directed right at God. That whole attitude throws question to the
individual's salvation. That is, why would anyone who claims to be saved, be bad mouthing God's
character and word? Its a contradiction in attitude. If the person is saved, he/she will be questioned
and that person will have to give an account for what they said and done.

Now, I read from the KJV only because I know its from God. These other modern translations,
I don't know. I go with the one I do know about. If, by chance, a more modern, God authorized
and God inspired translation, there will be ONLY one given. They all can't be. It will be a game
of chance trying to figure out which one, even if there is one. I know it is very easy for God
to bring about a Bible and inspire its translation. He gave the KJV Bible and I haven't seen
a legit reason for Him to give us another one.

Now, whatever Bible version you choose, is your choice. Choose for the correct reason.
The King James Bible and the Klingon Language Version Bible... :rolleyes:

The KLV Bible translation is an often over looked version. ... Some say it
is more accurate than The Messege by Eugene Peterson. If anyone hasn't heard of the
KLV Bible, well its the Klingon Language Version Bible. Yes, Klingon as in Star Trek. ...
Its a real translation, that can be bought with real money, and is
very accurate, so says the comments of it.
And God authorized the KJV Bible in 1611, but it still wasn't good enough for Him? :eek:

I never once said a God authorized and God inspired Bible couldn't be updated by God.
 
R

Reformedjason

Guest
#48
I never said the bible was not Gods word. I said we have a translation of a copy of an inspired text. I love the bible. It is Gods letter to us. I just like all versions not Kjv only.
 
J

jimmydiggs

Guest
#49
I never said the bible was not Gods word. I said we have a translation of a copy of an inspired text. I love the bible. It is Gods letter to us. I just like all versions not Kjv only.
You should read the ESV. Chosebyhim is following a jesuit bhuddist disc jockey drunk drummer full of demons trying to take people away from the Final Authority of the ESV.
 
Dec 21, 2012
2,982
40
0
#50
I never said the bible was not Gods word. I said we have a translation of a copy of an inspired text. I love the bible. It is Gods letter to us. I just like all versions not Kjv only.
That's what the KJV translators believed! :)

THE TRANSLATORS TO THE READER. (1769 spelling)

Now to the latter we answer that we do not deny--nay, we affirm and avow--that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God.
 
G

GraceBeUntoYou

Guest
#52
As much as I love, and use the NASB, I think that overall, it is a pretty darn accurate translation (not to be confused with text critical issues). However, that does not mean that every passage is accurately translated. I can point to versions that I don't particularly care for that actually do a better job rendering some of the passages. In addition, that also does not mean that the textual decisions behind the NASB are correct. For example, 1 Corinthians 10.9, the NASB utilizes the variant "Lord" over "Christ." Granted, there are reasons to accept this reading, there are far more reasons to oppose it, and opt for "Christ." NASB-Onlyism is equally as dangerous as KJV-Onlyism.

Overall, by favorite translations on the market are, ESV, NET, NASB, Lexham.
 
Last edited:
R

Reformedjason

Guest
#53
As much as I love, and use the NASB, I think that overall, it is a pretty darn accurate translation (not to be confused with text critical issues). However, that does not mean that every passage is accurately translated. I can point to versions that I don't particularly care for that actually do a better job rendering some of the passages. In addition, that also does not mean that the textual decisions behind the NASB are correct. For example, 1 Corinthians 10.9, the NASB utilizes the variant "Lord" over "Christ." Granted, there are reasons to accept this reading, there are far more reasons to oppose it, and opt for "Christ." NASB-Onlyism is equally as dangerous as KJV-Onlyism.

Overall, by favorite translations on the market are, ESV, NET, NASB, Lexham.
I understand. This tread is a joke
 

p_rehbein

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2013
30,213
6,548
113
#54
I understand. This tread is a joke
...the best laid "puns" of mice and men I suppose........ :)

I understood your intention from the beginning, but it has sure taken a sharp detour into the twilight zone......
 
G

GraceBeUntoYou

Guest
#55
You should read the ESV. Chosebyhim is following a jesuit bhuddist disc jockey drunk drummer full of demons trying to take people away from the Final Authority of the ESV.
Typically KJV-Onlyists make claims about the heretical nature of Alexandrian theology, while at the same time making glowing statements about the theology of Antioch.

But, I suppose for the sake of argument that we could argue just the opposite. After all, Alexandria was the home of Orthodoxies most ardent defenders: Alexander and his protege, Athanasius; Cyril; Peter I; Achillas. Whereas, Antioch was home of some of the most notorious heretics: Paul of Samosata; Apollinarius; Theodotus of Byzantium; Nestorius. And the early Church historian, Eusebius of Caesarea actually attributes Biblical corruption to some of these men, and to some of their followers (Church History, Book 5, Chapter 28).
 
Dec 21, 2012
2,982
40
0
#56
This is brilliant!

WalMart ESV:
under $2 new and none of it for Rupert Murdoch (not red-letter though) -> ESV, Crossway Bibles: Walmart.com

Matt 6:19
“Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal, 20 but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. (ESV)

gold.jpg
 
Jun 30, 2011
2,521
35
0
#57
Is the kingdom of God only about arguing which translation - especially if you discount the original languages the bible was written in, which made the translation we are arguing about - the argument is really illogical
 
Dec 21, 2012
2,982
40
0
#58
Peter Ruckman is really a Zen Bhuddist pretending to be a Christian, so he can deceive people to believe the KJV instead of the ESV.

Ruckman himself said he's full of demons. Like a barrel o' monkeys, he's got a barrel o' demons.
kool-aid-2.jpg

Chosebyhim is following a jesuit bhuddist disc jockey drunk drummer full of demons trying to take people away from the Final Authority of the ESV.
And you also may want to check out the book Peter Ruckman did on Bible Numerics:

View attachment 55944


Matt 7:15-20“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits. (ESV)

What About Ruckman?

What About Ruckman?

Peter Ruckman has been divorced two times and married three times yet he has been a pastor all along and he defends his unscriptural marital status in his book on divorce and remarriage and mocks those who challenge his qualification. His first marriage was before his conversion, and it ended in 1962 when his wife left him and filed for divorce. He began pastoring the Brent Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida, soon after that.

In 1972 Ruckman married the divorced wife of one of his former students. When a vote was taken in Brent Baptist as to whether the congregation supported his second marriage, 200 voted for it and 100 opposed it.

He subsequently resigned and started the Bible Baptist Church in Pensacola in 1974 with 17 people.

In 1988 Ruckman's second marriage ended when his wife walked out and sued for divorce.

Ruckman’s third marriage was to a member of his church, a mother of three.

Divorces do not take place in a vacuum. They take place in an environment filled with anger, carnality, hostility, bitterness, and sin. That is not judgmentalism; it is fact. Some of my divorced friends confess this as forcefully as I do. In fact, consider how Ruckman himself describes his family life in days gone by:

“I have had two wives desert me after fifteen years of marriage ... I have been in court custody cases, where seven children’s futures were held in the balance; in situations where Gospel articles were being torn out of typewriters, Biblical artwork torn off the easels, women trying to throw themselves out of cars at fifty m.p.h., mailing wedding rings back in the middle of revival services, cutting their wrists, threatening to leave if I did not give my church to their kinfolk; deacons threatening to burn down my house and beat me up; children in split custody between two domiciles two hundred miles apart, and knock-down, drag-out arguments in the home sometimes running as long as three days” (The Last Grenade, p. 339).

That is what the man admits took place. That is only a small glimpse into the sin and confusion surrounding those years. Friends, you can label me a judge if you want, but a man with that type of family life has no business in the pastorate. Let him preach on the streets. Let him preach in the jails. Let him preach in the nursing homes. Let him preach in other ways, but we must obey the Bible and reserve the pastorate formen who have godly homes.

Ruckman mocks those who call for high standards for the pastorate and who don’t believe a divorced man fits God’s requirements for the office. He calls them hypocrites and Pharisees. Consider how he describes his third marriage:

“... we got married in a regular Sunday night service after the offering was taken up: bridesmaids, wedding cake, rice, shaving cream on the car, the whole works. Standing room only. I WAS FLAUNTING MY FAITH IN THE FACE OF THE APOSTATE FUNDAMENTALISTS WHO WERE GOING TO ‘CASH IN’ ON MY MARRIAGE” (Ruckman, The Full Cup, p. 280).

On page 211 of his biography, Dr. Ruckman says that those who ask the question, “Do you think a divorced preacher is qualified for the ministry,” are “SELF-RIGHTEOUS PHARISEES.”

This mocking, ungodly attitude has encouraged other men that it’s O.K. to be divorced and remain in the pastorate and even to flaunt the same before anyone who disagrees. Yes, sadly, many have followed Ruckman’s lead.

kool-aid-man.jpg
 
T

Trax

Guest
#59
I never said the bible was not Gods word. I said we have a translation of a copy of an inspired text. I love the bible. It is Gods letter to us. I just like all versions not Kjv only.
Read Numbers chapter 11. It paints a vivid picture of what the body of Christ is doing now.
Here are some highlites:

1. The people are being fed with manna, which God gave. They all ate the same thing, manna.
2. They all traveled in the same direction
3. They began to complain and wanted meat to eat. They got tired of manna.
4. This made God angry.
5. Num 11:19-20 Ye shall not eat one day, nor two days, nor five days, neither ten days, nor
twenty days; (20) But even a whole month, until it come out at your nostrils, and it be loathsome
unto you: because that ye have despised the LORD which is among you, and have wept before
him, saying, Why came we forth out of Egypt?
Ever puked and it came out your nose? That is what God said. He said they despised Him and they
would eat this stuff till they puked it out of their nose and became sick of it.
6. Num 11:33 And while the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed, the wrath of
the LORD was kindled against the people, and the LORD smote the people with a very great plague.


Manna is a picture of God's word. The flesh (or the meat) was what the people wanted.
Today, you got manna and a whole lot of flesh. The body of Christ wanted spiritual
food that pleased them and so you got all these translations. Because the body
rejected the manna, you are covered up with the flesh and they will eat it till they
puke it out their nose now. If you got issues with the KJV, then you got issues with the manna
and with God. And every reason for reading another modern translation is "self-centered"
and "self-pleasing" reasons. The body is desiring the flesh and it will have to come
out the nose now.
 
R

Reformedjason

Guest
#60
Read Numbers chapter 11. It paints a vivid picture of what the body of Christ is doing now.
Here are some highlites:

1. The people are being fed with manna, which God gave. They all ate the same thing, manna.
2. They all traveled in the same direction
3. They began to complain and wanted meat to eat. They got tired of manna.
4. This made God angry.
5. Num 11:19-20 Ye shall not eat one day, nor two days, nor five days, neither ten days, nor
twenty days; (20) But even a whole month, until it come out at your nostrils, and it be loathsome
unto you: because that ye have despised the LORD which is among you, and have wept before
him, saying, Why came we forth out of Egypt?
Ever puked and it came out your nose? That is what God said. He said they despised Him and they
would eat this stuff till they puked it out of their nose and became sick of it.
6. Num 11:33 And while the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed, the wrath of
the LORD was kindled against the people, and the LORD smote the people with a very great plague.


Manna is a picture of God's word. The flesh (or the meat) was what the people wanted.
Today, you got manna and a whole lot of flesh. The body of Christ wanted spiritual
food that pleased them and so you got all these translations. Because the body
rejected the manna, you are covered up with the flesh and they will eat it till they
puke it out their nose now. If you got issues with the KJV, then you got issues with the manna
and with God. And every reason for reading another modern translation is "self-centered"
and "self-pleasing" reasons. The body is desiring the flesh and it will have to come
out the nose now.
I don't even know what to say to that. That is so ridiculous , I have no response.