| |||||||||
| History of the English Bible |
| Overview |
| Old English translations |
| Lindisfarne Gospels |
| Middle English translations |
| Wyclif's Bible |
| Early Modern English translations |
| Tyndale's Bible |
| Coverdale's Bible |
| Matthew's Bible |
| Taverner's Bible |
| Great Bible |
| Geneva Bible |
| Bishops' Bible |
| Douay-Rheims Bible |
| King James Version |
| Modern English translations |
| 18th and 19th century |
| Quaker Bible |
| Thomson's Translation |
| Webster's Revision |
| Young's Literal Translation |
| Joseph Smith Translation |
| Julia E. Smith Parker Translation |
| English Revised Version |
| 20th and 21st century |
| American Standard Version |
| Revised Standard Version |
| New World Translation |
| New American Standard Bible |
| Jerusalem Bible |
| New American Bible |
| New English Bible |
| New International Version |
| English Standard Version |
| Ongoing translation projects |
| Anchor Bible Series |
| New English Translation |
The New American Standard Bible (NASB) is a translation of the Bible. It is a literal translation of the Bible from the original Aramaic, Greek and Hebrew text. There was no attempt by the translators to interpret the Bible. The NASB version of the New Testament was published in 1963. The first version of the NASB was published in 1971. A revision of the NASB was published in 1995.
The strength of the NASB is that it is an attempt at a literal translation without interpretation, and thus is closer to the words used in the original text. The weakness of the NASB is that the wording and sentence structure can be confusing. The NASB also sometimes fails to convey the intent of the author as clearly to a modern reader of average education.
For example, a comparison of Psalm 66:1
NASB version: "Shout joyfully to God, all the earth."
King James Version: "Make a joyful noise unto God, all ye lands."
In this example, while the NASB version is more literally accurate, it can be argued that the King James Version is much more poetic and perhaps closer to the intention of the author. In fact, the general criticism of this translation has not been that the original languages have been rendered in a prejudicial, biased, or literally inaccurate fashion but rather that they have been rendered in a flat and pedestrian manner.