The Good and Bad of John MacArthur's New Translation, The LEGACY STANDARD BIBLE (LSB) 

Hey Frisch! Just wanted to say I recently stumbled across your videos while researching translations…I really value your channel! Your input is very genuine, honest, God-fueled, and unbiased. God has given you wisdom in what you do and your input is greatly appreciated. It’s help me grow in knowledge of translations.

As always, great viseo. I love your style. So kind. Fair. Gentle. God bless you.

316 announced that reference editions will hopefully release at the end of this year. Also they said some mass market editions are in the works. Great video as usual! I too was a bit concerned about the presentation of the translation by JMac and others but I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt because as you said, it’s exciting for them.

Affordability is important for some of us. Not only that, but exquisite quality isn't always appropriate. A few years ago, I had reason to replace a hardcover NIV which I'd had for a long time and got a paperback NASB 95. The only downside is that the cover is not going to last forever. This is very much a working Bible for me with highlighting, underlining in different colors and many handwritten notes and attached post-its.

Thank you Tim, appreciate your insight. I’m hoping they come out with a 2 column version in the future.

I’ve started reading this Bible for 2022. I’ve been using it in conjunction with the 95 NASB. Actually for the most part, you can follow along with the audio version of the 95 NASB if you are reading in the LSB. I respect and share the qualities and the concerns of this translation that you do. From a strictly quality standpoint. The Shamar goatskin copy and the layout are excellent. I’d highly recommend it to anyone from that standpoint. Thanks again for the channel. Greatly appreciated.

Thanks Tim. As always I really appreciate your insights. I'm looking forward to a LSB study Bible. Keep up the great work

I agree with you on the issue of too many translations. I have started reading the BSB and I love it, but it’s not something that everyone uses so I gotta rely on other translations when with church or small group.

Thank you for sharing your insights. I have thought about ALL of the things you have mentioned. I appreciate your insights as they confirmed my personal insights. Blessings.

Good analysis. Appreciate,please continue to review the teachings of different churches. 🙏

The plethora of translations sheds light on the lack of understanding on the part of the readers regarding the language we speak. The problem isn’t so often the translation, but the understanding of the translation. When the understanding is chased, everyone loses, in my opinion. I’m not opposed to this translation, but am not convinced of its necessity.

Hello Tim. I recently purchased a software copy of the Legacy Standard Bible from Steadfast Bibles and it has footnotes. In fact, the LSB has an abundance of footnotes. This as of late September 2022. I have since purchased two, hardbound copies. Print quality is exceptional.

I just recieved my copy and am planning on doing a video about it. So far I really like it! Probably more of a preching resource for me than my daily Bible but its really good still.

Very good points!

I read a different translation every year and the LSB Is the one I’m reading for 2022. Good translation! I agree that unless a lower-priced edition is released, I don’t see this translation becoming very popular. It’s a good translation but it may be a bit late for its release.

I love this translation. I'll be getting a reader's edition if/when it becomes available. I just got a full yapp goat skin (first time I've ever bought one like that) so I could have one to pass down to my kids. This has been my favorite Bible for daily use.

Super Giant Print edition? Is that in the works? This edition would be a blessing to my aging eyes; Is there an estimated release date for such an edition?

Excellent observations, Tim. The matter of low availability and not even any paperback or other hardback options with lesser quality paper is an issue. I appreciated you comments about elitism (And I bought the deep brown upper end Bible by choice). I get having a "reader's edition" but we know that during the translation/revision process, discussions were had and as such, translator notes (at minimum) should have been in the first edition as well. The NASB 2020 has all of that already. Yes, they built upon the 1995, but the LSB also started with a base text (NASB) and made changes along the way. That could be documented in the footnotes. I am fine waiting for later editions to have cross references (but even as I think about that, those are pretty standard and not likely to have anything added or deleted simply by updating the translation). Perhaps the cost of typesetting factored in to these earlier runs (if there is such a thing with everything being digital). Blessings.

Great points.

I'm good with NASB and NKJV. Both of these translations don't feel sectarian like most of the other translations do. But that's just my opinion. No disrespect intended.

I'm Australian, and I read the LSB online every day, and do have a Shamar goatskin bible on its way, so can tell you, Tim, that the LSB has Yahweh which replaces LORD. So it has Yahweh God, as well as God. It's not all Yahweh. I like that it is called LSB because I have never read an NASB and wouldn't have thought to either because it is called American. I read the KJV and NKJV, btw, and really love the LSB! Btw, the videos on the making of the LSB are great and they have a RU-vid channel with them all and they're extremely edifying. Interestingly, I agree with John MacArthur, that this is the best bible translation I have read, and this is said by someone who has always read the KJV. I am excited about getting my own LSB by mid January! The price of it was huge for me especially due to the exchange rate to Australia; shipping alone for me was $152 making this a $500 bible which I can only justify in my mind because I truly wanted the premium bible like all my others.

Thank you Sir. Great review and accurate observations. I have the new larger font leather LSB Bible that arrived last month. Like others I have carefully considered a number of factors including the new 2020 NASB edition vs the 1995 version, John MacArthur's over-the-top promotion of the LSB (I can say that and you likely can't), and the sense that I think he protesteth too much. The LSB has not yet earned the respect it craves in my opinion. We will see where all this goes between the newly created divisions of the people of God over time as more people becoming aware , envolved and differ their choices. Sad to see this sort of thing in His Church at this time.

Thanks for sharing your perspective. I was disappointed on the roll out but eventually will probably get it to add to my collection. I'm waiting for references and footnote and maybe a leathersoft cover. I don't think I'd spend the money to have it in leather. I wonder if it will eventually be produced with the JM study notes also.

Good review, I actually thought the use of YHWH was a good touch I like the point you made that the Church used the term Lord valid point. I want one copy but it is pricey indeed. Overall good video.

Dead on point, Tim! The lack of footnotes is just about a deal breaker for me. I have a copy of the LBS and I have a difficult time reading it due to the fact that footnotes are nonexistent. With that said, I also believe that the LBS was most likely rushed, again, footnotes are nonexistent. To release a new translation without footnotes just is not a good idea.

Thanks for this. I've been wondering about this "new" Bible. I've held off in getting one myself only because I'm waiting for the edition that will include footnotes. I understand that is supposed to be happening sometime in 2022. Also, as you mention, supply seems to be limited. In addition, I thought your point about the danger of language that may encourage a form of sectarianism within the church is an excellent one. I will likely end up getting a copy (although my version of choice is the ESV).

They use the word "Yahweh" in the Old Testament (not "The Lord") because the original text says "Yahweh" (YHWH). It hardly makes sense to fault a translation for being faithful, on grounds some dumb people will use it for sectarian purposes...

Really like your content - thank you. I was wondering if you have had a chance to check out the Berean Study Bible, and if so, what are your thought? Thank you and keep up the great work!!

Hi 👋 Tim I agree 👍 with everything you said, you can't get the LSB in a Christian Book Store which doesn't make sense to me at all. Great 👍 job Tim.

Having the LSB and ESV is really all you need. But I also like to reference the HCSB and NET.

i am really loving the Lsb its very readable and also the app has notes although its only the new testament.

I appreciate this brother’s comments on the LSB, they were well said. My concern is, if it’s the best translation ever, why isn’t it affordable for people who cannot afford the ‘best translation ever’? Doesn’t God want the ‘Best’ for all who seek His knowledge? Why are these Bibles getting so much press? Where are the reference columns? Are we looking for clarity from newer translations or are we not depending on God’s Holy Spirit to bring out the understanding and clarity from His word?

@Tim Frisch- if you could choose only one translation would it be the CSB or NKJV?

They made it accessible by a free app, and being able to read it for free online too

Thanks Tim for another irenic and informative video. I am with you on all three points, I would only add a caveat that I don't prefer the scholar's best guess, "Yahweh" in the text at all. I would prefer simply following the example of the Apostolic writings in using "Lord." However, if they are going to put it in there, consistancy seems better than what Holman did with the CSB. I have never understood that decision. If they want to be literal, they should just use YHWH, and perhaps also revert to the Greek rendering of Jesus' name.

Thanks for the video! Great, as always. Yahweh is His name, so I am thankful that John Macarthur acknowledges this, as it has been changed and ignored for far too long. Peace be with you!

Thanx, Pastor 🌹🌹

Great review, thanks! One point about the use of Yahweh is that any translation that seeks to use word for word translation methodology will have to use Hebrew transliteration for names and other words which have no corresponding English word. Using THE LORD is a fine option but tradition is substituted for translation and misses the actual word pretty dramatically. In reality, no translation is "THAT" word for word, otherwise you'd see considerably more transliterations like this because of how many words and grammatical ideas simply have no corresponding English equivalent, especially in the Old Testament. So I can see your point about potential challenges of the consistent use of Yahweh, but I also see the only alternative being to abandon the translation method which brings its own problems.

To me this seems to be almost a whole new translation and reads different from the NASB not for better or worse I personally like it so far

I like the HCSB

Why did the Master's people think another English translation was needed?

Thank for your review of the legacy standard bible. Is there a link where I can read it online and if so can you please tell me it?

You're right Tim, market saturation mega smack down. I've been using the NKJV/ESV & NLT. Maybe they wanted the LSB out (at least a version of it) before John Macarthur goes to glory? Who knows.

Happy New Year Tim. Thanks for another informative video. I am so happy that the translation YHWH is brought back, this is where I disagree with you, however, I do agree that FOOTNOTES should be included. If the Hebrew has YHWH, then that is what it should say. God bless.

I'm still not sure about the necessity of an updated NASB which is basically the way I see this one. We're never going to have the perfect translation. With that said, I do believe we should try to get as close as possible but was the NASB so corrupted by its use of terms that John and others decided something must be done with the translation we've used for decades in our ministries? I don't think he's ever stated that but a lot of effort was put into one more translation that I don't believe was really necessary. Maybe I'm wrong but that's just the way I discern this. I currently use several translations and each one gives its own unique perspective on how the word is translated. But even though I collect bibles and use different bibles, sometimes daily, I have not bought a copy of the LSB even though I have gotten a lot out of JM's ministry from what I've seen. And even though I still purchase different bibles (premier and unique study bibles) I just haven't felt a push to purchase the LSB. Just my own personal view and that's all I have to say about that.

I've been waiting to buy this Bible but it's already sold out.

BTW Royal Jongbloed printing is to last forever!!! Whereas other prints and paper are easy tearing and too ghosting …. So the expense IS worth it!!! I have one …. When people get birthday money of Christmas money it can be paid for in full and last a lifetime….it’s a lifetime investment….that’s the point

I Love how they have Yahweh, Yah in the OT the only thing I wish they did was in 1 Timothy 3 :16 . Saying God was manifested in the flesh instead of He. (NKJV) says God was manifested in the flesh. I really like that but I do like this Bible a lot

Not wearing a hat this time. Good man.

The biggest issue to me is the lack of paragraph formatted editions. I do not like verse-by-verse formatting. I would disagree regarding the use of "Yahweh." I think it is good to have some translations with the actual Name. I would prefer if they would just have printed "YHVH" or "YHWH", and let the reader deal with it as they see fit.

Got to love the amount of translations. Without them Mr Frisch would have half of the video library he has now. LSB is free online and has a free app. Same as ESV and others, so you have comparative access to a lot of great translations to compare too.

Do you think it’s the best translation based on the NASB?

If the original manuscripts had YHWH and Elohim it is important to *keep this distinction* to know, when the passage is about GOD and when it refers more generally to divine beings.

I simply agree with everything you stated... ✌️

Thanks for this video.I am you mentioned the absence of footnotes containing translation notes like why LORD/Lord was translated as Yahweh also with the use of slave instead of bondslave or servant in other changes with some explanation.I tried going to shop on line here in Philippines is quite expensive than say ESV study Bible,I appreciate that you mentioned the cost of getting a copy.

When LSB BECAME SO HARD TO GET AND TOO SMALL PRINT AND NO DOUBLE COLUMN. . I STOCKED UP ON NASB 95 IN 12 POINT FONT AND DOUBLE COLUMN. LOCKMAN AND ZONDERVAN HAVE BENEFITED FROM MY INTEEREST IN NASB.AND SCHUYLER.

If you find the Tetragrammaton 3628 times in the Hebrew text, why not reflect that accurately? That is not being sectarian, that is being transparent and showing what was in the original. Translating different Names and Titles as the same term (Lord) is NOT reflective of the original. Just saying. Haven't read the Bible itself, was still just looking into it. I am pleasantly surprised in their choice to reflect the Name carefully. If this was done in more Translations, it would be less cause for "sectarianism".

My first Bible was an NASB, which I still have and is my preferred translation. So when I got my LSB it was not much different than what I was used to, which I liked. I agree with the use of Yahweh instead of Lord, in that there is too many changes of Lord to Yahweh.

It seems as though my initial post totally vanished. I have no idea why. But let me try again. As far as the pricing goes, it is a matter of when you purchase anything. If you’re looking for a lower price, then you need to check the site at different times to see when it will be on sale or with a discount code. That is what I did when I purchased both the NT, Psalms and Proverbs, as well as the whole Bible.

Sometimes i need the niv, nlt, to truly understand some verses. But i like digging into the kjv, nasb, lsb, initially.

Translator notes and references for the NT are available in Accordance. I do wish the LSB Handysize had the translator notes. My hope is they produce a SCR version.

Very Good, honest perspective. I think the LSB Bible is a translation that is an option over the NASB 2020. I feel that "if" the NASB 2020 was not happening, we probably would not have seen an LSB Bible either. That is only an opinion. I feel that Dr. MacArthur felt (and perhaps rightly so) that the NASB 2020 is beginning to show compromising cracks in the NASB text from the 77 & 95 versions. Personally, I like the text and I also have just about every major translation out there (but prefer the NASB, NKJV, ESV and now the LSB). Thanks

I wish they had given the 2020 a new name, also. I agree with you completely. Maybe have left the 95 as just the NASB. I’m glad Holman took their name out and made it just the csb.

I bought a LSB online recently and I think it is a good translation. My only disappointment is that they still have italics like as in the NASB and I would have preferred a reading like that of ESV where there are no italics. It makes smooth reading without the italics which in ESV are incorporated into a common font!

Thanks for that helpful review. My big question about translating the tetragrammaton as Yahweh in the Old Testament is that I doubt that this was the practice in the apostolic church in New Testament times. If there had been a move between New Testament times and the early church in say the 3rd century to go from saying "Yahweh" to saying "LORD", I am pretty sure we would know about it from the writings of the early church fathers. And if the apostolic church said "LORD", is there really a case for saying "Yahweh"?

I love the LSB. I have heard however the "first draft" has typos and a couple other bumps. Like you, I use a number of different translations.

I have the reference LSB & it does have the footnotes. The problem with my copy is that there is no presentation page. All my other Bibles have it and I like putting the dates I start using that particular Bible and be able to put family info in like my other Bibles. I believe when studying to use different translations to get better understanding. I love my NASB95 & so far I like the LSB; but not sure if it will be my number one choice. Some translations have a redundancy & repetitiveness of words within a sentence or paragraph that I find irritating. The most common problem is the overuse of “And” especially at the beginning of sentences. I realize that in ancient times sentences were many times connected this way, but today’s language usually does not do this.

I’ll stick with the Ryrie KJV Study Bible! Have had one since the 1980s! If you’ve done any memory work over the years……it’s best to stay with the same translation you’ve done your memory work with! You just continue to reinforce your years of memory work!😊

Yes, footnotes are important to me... I’ll wait. But using God’s name in the bible is certainly a more accurate translating than LORD. YHWH is a proper name and LORD is merely a title. Easy enough, if the original language (of any work) has a proper name, then the translation of it ought be a proper name too. Using LORD is from a tradition started in a religion (and its people) that God has rejected. There is no scriptural justification to incorporate that or any tradition into the Christians religion. Matthew 15:3, Mark 7:13

It looks like the Preacher's Bible(Handy Size) NASB that I have from 316. I also have the LSB in the NT w/Ps. It's too expensive for a complete bible. I'll wait until a less expensive version comes out. The use of Yahweh, especially when I'm reading a Psalm is too stark a difference and seems overdone.

Huh! A MacArthur approved Bible written by 5 graduates from MacArthur seminary. I wonder if they'll take a Calvinistic approach to the text? Wink, wink! We need another translation like we need another hole in the head! If someone is not able to understand the Gospel by reading the NASB, NIV, NKJV, LT, etc ect ect, than another one isn't going to help.

Never seen you without the hat. Did you finally complete your collection or something? 😂

Your only strictly theological concern seems to be the use of Yahweh vs LORD throughout the Old Testament. (Your concern about footnotes is not theological. I don't know what to call it -- literary perhaps? But it's not theological.) The notion that replacing LORD with Yahweh will, by itself, create a proud sect of Christians who look down their noses at their fellow believers who use translations that retain LORD in the text is shear fantasy. No disrespect intended. I say this because we have precedents for using the Divine Name instead of a divine title in the text. The American Standard Version and the Jerusalem Bible both used the Divine Name instead of LORD -- Jehovah in the case of the ASV and Yahweh in the case of the JB. Did the ASV produce an ASV sect among evangelicals or main stream Protestants? Did the JB produce a JB sect among Roman Catholics? No, in both cases. All kinds of Protestants have used the ASV as their main or ancillary Bible. All kinds of Roman Catholics and Protestants have used the JB as their main or ancillary Bible. In fact, Ken Taylor used the ASV as the basis for his own paraphrase of the Scriptures, The Living Bible. I do admit that the use of Yahweh (or Jehovah) makes our God sound like a tribal deity instead of "the Lord of all the earth" Micah 4:13 et al. Its use will also contribute heavily to the LSB joining the ASV and JB on the shelves of Good Will and used book stores where they will together accumulate a fine layer of dust. Don't get me wrong. I intend to buy the LSB in the next year or two when they've gotten the typos out and the footnotes in and the price point comes down. As for the LSB or any Bible that has Yahweh in it becoming a sect maker -- that's a psycho-social impossibility. In other words, nothing to worry about.

Is it really from John MacArthur or produced by him?

The lack of certainty regarding the vowels inserted in YHWH has always bothered me, so I wasn't that thrilled with the unreserved use of the name.

COULD YOU DO A REVIEW OF 1977 NASB BIBLE. GIANT PRINT. I HEARD LAST NITE IT IS ONE MACARTHUR USES NOW. 11 POINT FONT. END OF VERSE REFERENCES. RED LETTER. HANDY SIZE SAME AS LSB HANDY SIZE, THICKER. SOME EXPLANATION OF ALTERNATE READINGS AT BOTTOM. APPARENTLY 9.5 IS TOO SMALL FOR MACARTHUR OR ME OR ANYONE WHO WEARS GLASS3S.

The LSB looks interesting, but I'll wait for more affordable versions with footnotes before I consider buying it. Honestly though, I'm happy with the NASB 2020. It may be more contemporary English, but I think that's a plus so it can be more readable and still be very literal. Also, if you want more literal renderings in the NASB, Lockman does a great job of footnoting them to compare so you get the best of both worlds. I've recently been surprised to see how close the CSB is to the NASB 2020. I've always thought of the CSB as more middle of road like the NIV, but it's more literal than I thought. I'm curious what your opinion is, Tim. The CSB is always shown in charts as significantly less literal than the NASB, but I've compared the two and they are very close. Is the NASB 2020 more dynamic than the earlier NASB's or is the CSB more literal than advertised?

Thank you for your comments, especially stating that using both word-for-word and thought-for-thought translations havw advantages. I prefer thought-for-thought, but definitely believe, and myself use, both types of bibles. I disagree with your "recommendation" in limiting the use of Yahweh in the Old Testament due to the possibility of it contributing to more sectarian divisiveness (Protestants are already so divided up!), although I appreciate you concern over the possibility of divisiveness is real. "Yahweh" is already familiar enough to the general Christian public that it shouldn't cause much divisiveness (we already seem to be over the "gender-neutral" controversy spurred by the TNIV), plus it is a more faithful representation of the Hebrew OT. So I think it was a mistake for the CSB to remove its use of Yahweh that was present in the HCSB. I think that decision was made because 1) it was "different" than most other bibles, and 2) it was perceived to be like the JWs use of "Jehovah" in their New World Translation. Both those reactions in the customer base would produce fewer purchases of the HCSB, and let's face it, bible manufacturers need to sell their product. It may seem crass to suggest money was a big motive, but I think that my suggestion is plausible, if not probable. I do think the Legacy Standard Bible is not necessary, which you seem to suggest as well. It seems like it's John MacArthur's propensity to theological independence, and confidence (arrogance?) in his Reformed Calvinistic cessationist inerrant outlook that have inspired him to believe he must improve the Bible……according to his viewpoints. He has a well-earned reputation as a self-designated critic of anything in evangelicalism he doesn't agree with. Your quote of MacArthur stating his belief that his LSB is "the best" Bible translation possible really showcases the self-importance he places in his own opinions. Again, thank you for your perspective, humility and objectivity in your reviews. May I suggest learning New Testament Greek yourself (Bill Mounce has an online course, as does www.biblicalmastery.academy)? It will greatly enrich your understanding of the bible and made your views even more valuable! Taking Greek was one of the best things I ever did for myself.

I know how some people feel about Ecumenism and how it wilfully downplays/overlooks important aspects of different denominations and even religions. Still, on the Yahweh question, it might be wise to take a page out of the Catholic Church's playbook: the Jerusalem Bible and New Jerusalem Bibles both used the name Yahweh, and were widely used in Europe (and America, although not liturgically), but in 2008 the chief rabbi of Rome raised concerns over it to Pope Benedict, and the pope then, in turn, put out a proclamation for the Catholics to switch back to "LORD" in future translations. Even if you feel that the pope caved in to pressure from another religion or that Protestants shouldn't follow Catholics in what they do, it may be another aspect of the "sectarian" issue where using something so sacred that Jews use euphemisms for their euphemisms in a mass market translation might come off as tacky at best. I can understand the reasonings of both sides of the debate, but doing something like this when the vast majority of Christians are moving AWAY from it (I think the CSB changed all the places where Yahweh was in the HCSB back to LORD) goes to show the insular "MacArthur-ism" in this translation that may make it only popular with his crowd and the "sacred name" movement.

Great point with regards to the possibility of sectarianism due to the 'YHWH'

I would like a bible with the original Hebrew and Greek alongside the English definitions for each word, but wouldn't know what version gives that kind of detail. It would be helpful to have though.

I recommend the book 'the ecclesiastical text' by Theodore Letis to understand some of the history to what has become a glut of translations. Sure, he holds to the KJV but, he's not a KJV onlyist.

I ask a simple question with no agenda behind it: is the Church better or weaker with the multitude of translations available? Are they creating unity among bible believing Christians or confusion? Are the multitude of translations a result of a vibrant, strong, growing body of Christ or a symptom of apostasy and unbelief? Again, no agenda but an observation.

How would Johnny Mac interpret Matthew 19:28? "And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." Denominations, and Johnny Mac says that our church started in Acts Chapter 2. How can that be? In Acts 1:6-7 we see the gospel of the kingdom discussed by Peter, and Jesus. Acts 1:6-7 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? 7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

the lack of footnotes is a bummer

I’m not sure a man who would choose those classes can be trusted.

I find it disturbing that translating the divine name, as it is found in the original manuscripts, is considered “sectarian.” Translators will be called to account for changing God’s word and removing His name from the Bible.

LSB is available and free onlne.

7 people translating the bible all from the same school is worrisome

I appreciate your review, but I'm surprised you didn't do a little more research first. The translators use Yahweh only where the tetragrammaton YHWH appears, but they use Lord in other instances, for example where Adonai is used.

Where’s your cap?

Your “Bad” has no weight to it. From a theologian point of view.

I do like the LSB. I'll use it alongside my ESV and NLT. I agree on the footnotes. They are necessary.

How does the LSB render 1John 2: 2.

I really wanted to like the LSB. So much so that I invested in a calfskin version as well as a NT. I read it for several months. But the more I read the more I found that I didn't like. Finally I gave them away.

I will keep my NASB. I do not need a Bible dedicated to the " legacy" of John MacArthur.

Are you also bothered by whether one of the translators might be left handed, after all that was a deciding factor for priests. I curiously turned this video on thinking I might discover some legitimate concerns and taking into account these concerns. Instead such things as printing in a foreign country and having a higher quality printing at first is something you are critical about. I have previously thought your comments were pertinent- I am aghast at your criticisms.

I didn’t like how the HCSB was not consistent in translating God’s name. I didn’t like how we stay away from the word slave either. So far the only thing I frown on is keeping the John 3:16 wording. I think CSB had the right idea. I hear sermon clips of “God SOOOOO loved….”. But we are keeping this wording for the sake of tradition. No footnotes is interesting. I know they said that when there is a questions about if “He” should be “he”, there would be a footnotes. I’d like to know when there app is going to include the Old Testament.

The LSB wears the Roman laurel wreath, meaning that it is approved by the Jesuits as a counter reformation interpitation bible.

What is your #1 choice?