NIV vs. NASB Translations?

Question

Ok so I am in the process of trying to procure a new bible. I have already eliminated all translations other than these two for various reasons. I would like to know peoples opinions on these two translations like pros and cons of each and which one they prefer and why?

I am glad for all of the responses but I would really only like those pertaining to the NIV and NASB translations. As I mentioned I eliminated all other translations for one reason or another.

Answer 1

Which translates the meaning better. - a literal word for word translation, or a dynamic equivalent? The NASB is more of a literal and NIV more of a dynamic equivalent.

If you work with foreign language you may realize that word for word is not always the best translation of the author's meaning.

A dynamic equivalent attempts to translate the meaning.

I would say NIV is good for general use and NASB for more indept Bible study.

Actually for more serious Bible study you may want to use Greek tools - like strong's numbers. I use the Online Bible which has versions like NASB with strong's numbers, and greek parsing included in the Byzantine module. See http://www.onlinebible.net/ Most of the stuff is free.

Answer 2

Niv Vs Nasb

Answer 3

It might serve you well to get both; they take a totally different approach to translating. NIV is more of a sentence for sentence translation. It is called a 'dynamic equivalent' translation. It will give you a good idea of the ideas of the text and is easily readable. The NASB is a word for word translation and is *very* hard to beat for accuracy. Unfortunately, the NASB can be rather clunky and is quite unpoetic at times. A very good alternative, if you've never looked into it (it's new and you might not have heard of it) is the ESV. It has all of the accuracy of the NASB but is beautifully elegant and flow-y. I recommend it *highly*.

If I had these two choices --- NIV and NASB and could only choose one, I would go with NASB. I feel like the closer I can get to the literal translation of the text without it being difficult to read, the better. (And on that note, you might also want to own a copy of a literal translation; very challenging to read but worth it when you need the extra help on a particular passage).

God bless, sister!

Answer 4

Hi,
I am in full support of the NASB. I grew up reading the KJV and the NKJV versions. I tried NIV, but it sounded watered-down. Also, in doing Bible studies with other Christians, I have found that the NIV has words translated that don't reflect the true meaning of the words that most of the other versions have. There are some huge words changes that can change the meaning of the passage.

I've been using NASB for 5 years now and I find it to be very consistent with readability but reflecting the true meaning of the scriptures. NIV has continued to disappoint me.

Answer 5

This Site Might Help You.

RE:
NIV vs. NASB Translations?
Ok so I am in the process of trying to procure a new bible. I have already eliminated all translations other than these two for various reasons. I would like to know peoples opinions on these two translations like pros and cons of each and which one they prefer and why?

Answer 6

Here is some info on both, I personally prefer the NASB along with the Literal translation.

New American Standard Bible (NASB)---The Lockman Foundation had 58 outstanding conservative scholars work for more than a decade to produce this new translation, which was published in 1971. Their primary purpose was to make this translation true to the original Hebrew and Greek by producing a literal, word-by-word translation. Dr. Lewis Foster of Cincinnati Bible Seminary states, "Upon examination, this version shows less departure from the original languages than any of the other modern Bibles tested." The second purpose of the translators was to do the translation in a fluent and readable style according to current English usage. The result is an extremely accurate translation, which is also very readable. The NASB is an outstanding study Bible and is more accurate overall than the King James Bible or the New International Version. It is not as beautiful a translation as the King James or as easy to understand as the NIV.

The New International Version (NIV)---Like the NASB, the NIV was translated by men who held a high view of Biblical inspiration. Begun in 1967, the New Testament was completed in 1973 and the complete Bible in 1978. Five-man translation teams were assigned to each book. Their work was reviewed word by word and fine-tuned by three committees. Dr. Lewis Foster of Cincinnati Bible Seminary (Christian Churches and Churches of Christ) was one of more than 100 scholars from the U.S., Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand who participated. Their goal was to put the truths of Scripture into expressions used and understood today. But their leading principal was: "At every point the translation shall be faithful to the Word of God as represented by the most accurate text of the original languages of scripture.” The NIV is not a word for-word translation, but is instead a free translation which attempts to acknowledge each Hebrew or Greek word in some way. Its clarity and readability are excellent. Its accuracy is very good (though Less accurate than the New American Standard Bible), and its beauty of language is good (though not equal to the King James Bible.)

Answer 7

I think that to really get to the bottom of what what originally written, you will need, in addition to whatever Bible you seem to like, a KJV and a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.
If you want to do a side by side comparison of several translations at once for free check out the bluletter bible website.
I have been researching the Bible for years, and though most of you will disagree, the best and most consistent m odern English translation is the New World Translation byt the JW's.
Even thought many claim that it is twisted, I have tested all these claims using the Strong's and two Greek/English translations, and found that the claims were based on either outright lies, or on insufficient research.
I would at least get a copy of their Bible too, and use all of them to fine tune your understanding of the Holy Scriptures.

Answer 8

The KJV and all these other versions were NOT translated from the same text! The KJV was translated from text recognized and used by the early church. The NIV is good for saying "some manuscripts say"---I really don't care what some say--- I want the truth. You will only find that in the KJV.

Answer 9

I like the NIV Readers Version or Today's NIV or NKJ or on and on. I use 51 different versions to compare. I have them on disks in my computer.

Answer 10

Be very careful with these translations. They both omit various portions of essential scriptures and subtly change others. I would strongly suggest that you stick with the KJV and use the NIV to help you understand the KJV.