KJV versus NASB versus ESV

First let me say that I have cut my teeth, so to speak, on the KJV.  I still do love that translation and regard it highly but the need for a more modern language Bible is a real issue that needs to addressed. Words, meaning and phrases have changed so much that unless you take much care and explaining of the KJV text you will get the wrong impression in what is being said. And let’s face it, me and every other average American will struggle with this. Despite this the KJV still has much value and the literary prose is beautiful. Part of the KJV value comes from the fact that it does use a different base manuscript than all the modern texts use. So I would still use the KJV as a way to check what is written.

We would do well to remember that a translation is -simply as it says- a translation. Each one does it’s best to convert the original Hebrew/Greek wording into our language, but there is no perfect rendering. And I certainly don’t want to to tout that any one particular English translation, KJV included, is to be regarded as THE ONLY REAL BIBLE to read. This would relegate us to doing what has been done in the past, that is locking the word of God in a language that other people can’t read. This happened years ago when the Bible was locked in  the Latin Vulgate language and the common man couldn’t read it. Also this reasoning makes a statement to other non-English speaking people that their Bible isn’t really good enough and if you want to read the “real” word of God then you need to learn English. Isn’t that silly? I mean come on, we aren’t even reading the exact  wording anyway, because it was written in Greek and Hebrew. It’s grammatically impossible to translate each word exactly as it was written because there are some Greek/Hebrew words that the English doesn’t have, so translators have to do their best in finding an equivalent match. The same goes for each language in the world. So we shouldn’t get hung up if we hear a translation that says it a little differently than what we are used to. My conclusion is this, if you have to support your belief system solely on the exact wording of one particular translation because other versions contradict your doctrinal view, then I would question as to whether or not your particular doctrinal view is accurate. I have found that the main important beliefs of the bible don’t hing on any one particular wording.

Now having said all this, there are translations that more closely relay the original writer’s intent. There are basically three camps of translations 1. word-for-word 2. thought-for-thought 3. paraphrasing.  Paraphrasing would be like THE MESSAGE or THE LIVING Bible, thought-for-thought would be like the NIV or NLT and word-for-word would be like the KJV, NASB or ESV. The idea behind thought-for-thought translations ( also called dynamic equivalent) is that they look at whole sentences and paragraphs and translate what they think the whole thought is trying to be relayed. This can be valuable and every translation does this to an extent but it also opens the reader up to a more subjective interpretation, that is you are more likely to hear the translator’s view point being read into a particular verse.   The word-for-word translations try to convey the original text in our language with minimal interpretation. They want the readers to make up their own mind on what is being said and not do that for them. Like I said all translations have to make judgement calls on how to render a verse in order to make it readable. If not a strictly word-for-word English rendering of the Greek/Hebrew would be nonsensical. Find an interlinear concordance to see what I mean. So I recommend staying with the word-for-word camp, though I certainly feel that the power of the gospel shines through in the other camps as well.

So this brings us to the English Standard Version (ESV) and the New Amercan Standard Bible (NASB). I’m not wanting to give an exhaustive detail behind each translation, do a short google search or wikipedia and you will find that. The NASB is said to be a response to the liberal translation call the Revised Standard Version (RSV) written in the 1950′s. The NASB uses the American Standard Version (ASV), written around 1900 and is itself an attempt to transfer the good qualities of the KJV into a more modern language, as it’s “base” text and then uses the most recent archaeological manuscript findings to compare what is being said.  There has been great improvements in the understanding of the original language since the time that the KJV was written. More manuscripts  have been found to help fill in the gaps of understanding and give the translators a better sense behind the meaning of Greek and Hebrew words. Now the ESV is said to be a response to the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV).  The ESV uses the RSV as it’s base text. Just to note the RSV does have some connection to the ASV in that it was an attempt to make the text read in modern English. I read one comment that says the ESV is the RSV with the theology fixed.

I own both translations and they both have good qualities about them and different strengths.  The ESV is accurate, has a very smooth easy to read flow about it and a some what “classic” English feel but with great readability. Someone commented that it is like having the readability of the NIV but the literary accuracy of the NASB.  I do find that the ESV at times does stray more into the area of interpretation for the sake of readability. But overall it is a very good translation. Now the NASB is known as being the “most literal” translation. I say this tongue-in-cheek as do many others. If you do an exhaustive research you will see why. It does live up to its reputation of attempting to be very accurate. I find it to be very readable and the 95 update has taken out a lot of the “wooden reading” that the original contained. Because of an effort to stay close to the manuscripts the NASB will sometimes read with awkwardness, some have called it Yoda language. It’s really not that bad, in fact in comparing the NASB to the ESV there are several times when the ESV had the Yoda language when the NASB didn’t and the NASB had a better read to it. When you approach this type of reading it lets you know that there is something going on with the Greek text that it’s trying hard to follow and not interpret for you. Often times I’ve encountered that the NASB gives you a better understanding of what is being spoken by taking this route. But overall the ESV does have an easier read to it. I think one way to explain this is described by this. The ESV has a classic English feel to it and the NASB is more of just a modern English. The ESV captures and saves some of the literary prowess of the KJV, but this also comes with the use of some words or the shortening of verses that don’t clearly convey what is being said for the sake of beauty. The NASB loses the poetic feel of the KJV but at the same time it helps you understand what is being said.

The choice between which one to choose is a difficult one to make. At times they reverse roles on the issues I pointed out. Currently I carry a cambridge wide margin NASB and have been using it for my main bible and note taking for the last year. The Zondervan NASB study bible is a very valuable resource. I regularly consult other translations including the ESV and KJV. I have three other KJV wide margin bibles than I have used for many years and filled with notes. The last KJV wide margin I bought was a limited edition that Oxford put out a few years ago. I call it the “fat boy” because it is about 3″ thick by 9.5″ by 10″ . It’s so thick because the quality of paper is very good.  Here’s a link to what the current cambridge ESV and NASB wide margin looks like  Click here .  Also here is another link to help you compare translations and gives some very useful info on them.

My conclusion is that the KJV is still a good faithful representation of God’s word but the archaic language and sentence structure makes it so difficult to read that many readers don’t get the impact of what’s being said or miss interpret what was said. It’s still valuable to compare with in Bible study to get a different perspective. By reading a modern English translation it will breathe a fresh perceptive and understanding to your Bible study life. There is just something about reading the Bible in an English language that you can readily understand. The ESV is said to be 8th grade level and the NASB is said to be 11th grade, so they certainly aren’t a dumbing down of God’s word for readability sake (there are some that have a reputation for this). There is no perfect translation. The ESV and the NASB are both fine modern English word-for-word translation choices for Bible study and devotion. It is not my intent to make anyone feel bad for whatever translation they may prefer to use. If you have a translation that you like best and God uses it to bless, instruct and encourage you, then you should keep using it. The light of the gospel is able to shine through many different versions and receiving the gospel is the most important part anyway.

Advertisement