Two NASB Inductive Study Bibles

Подписаться 11 тыс.

Просмотров 7 тыс.

50% 1

Two Inductive Study Bibles. These are older editions that may not be readily available for purchase.
This video contrasts the International Inductive Study Bible of 1993 with the New Inductive Study Bible of 2000. Both are 66-book Protestant Bibles.
The ISBNs are 1565070917 for the 1993 (International) edition and 0736900160 for the 2000 (New) edition.
The International Inductive Study Bible is larger and includes the 1977 New American Standard Bible (NASB) text. The New Inductive Study Bible is based on the 1995 NASB text.
The font size in the International Inductive Study Bible is about 11.5 points.
That in the New Inductive Study Bible is about 10 points.
Both feature a single column of text divided into verses. References are in the inner margin, leaving the outer margin (relatively) free for taking notes. The outer margin in the International Inductive Study Bible is 44 to 46 mm wide, while that in the New Inductive Study Bible is 33 to 35 mm wide.
The paper weight in both editions is around 33 gsm. The paper is reasonably opaque and not particularly reflective.
The International Inductive Study Bible has a sewn text block. The New Inductive Study Bible has a glued text block.
Both are suitable for use as wide-margin Bibles.
Contents
00:00 Introduction
01:43 Page layout
04:34 The print (darkness, font size ...)
07:15 More on layout (references, headings ...)
09:13 Paper qualities
10:36 Book introductions
11:53 Bible study helps
17:19 The concordance and the color maps
18:35 The binding
19:28 Both lie open in Genesis
21:12 Introductory material
25:23 The fonts compared
25:50 The '77 vs the '95 NASB
29:15 Showthrough
30:38 Summary

Опубликовано:

26 июл 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 53

@dino575 2 года назад

Excellent and informative as always in your reviews! I am going to hunt down a 77 NASB - I do find the "olde English" text lovely to read even if it challenges at times. Thank you for uploading and sharing this review it is very much appreciated. ++

@RGrantJones 2 года назад

You're welcome, Dino. Thanks for the kind comment!

@djpodesta Год назад

Thanks Grant… I had completely forgotten that I had one of these NASB 77s. Must have bought it in the late 1990s. Found it… back on the bookshelf where it belongs.

@michaelshipman7104 2 года назад

You found one!!! So happy for you!!! Excellent review! It's one of my favorites! I have the 77' and an NIV 84'.

@elwalker9034 9 месяцев назад

Now that's an exhaustive review.

@ammeblancolopez7169 2 года назад

very helpful review. thank you. God bless you!

@daleclark3138 2 года назад

Got my $7.51 hardback 1993 printing in excellent condition in the mail today. Good review.

@decree72 Месяц назад

i paid 10,90€ for the 2000 inductive study bible, with free shipping from the US to germany, good on amazon. I pray its quality is really ok, i still have to wait for it, but the price was so tempting i never saw it this cheap.

@danivuk2036 2 года назад

Interesting concept. Never was a fan of study Bibles. Great review, as always.

@RGrantJones 2 года назад

Thanks, Dani! I agree, even though I've bought many of them. I intend to ignore the study concept and instructions in this one and use it as a wide-margin Bible.

@danivuk2036 2 года назад

@@RGrantJones I have one, in English. The NASB is the only English language version Bible ( of the major ones) I do not own. I am planning on getting a 95 soon.

@decree72 Месяц назад

i read study bibles different than pure bibles, i soak up background info in the study, sure it can be dangerous as you have to trust, some translations here in europe are propaganda, im believer in the word for word translations, nasb is something i can agree, elberfeld and zürcher in german.

@edhieeeee3 2 года назад

Yes they have new editions in NASB95 and the ESV

@clarkgrubb8495 2 года назад

The Lockman website used to have a statement of the translation principles of the NASB, and these are still on the the NASB Wikipedia article. The 4th principle is thus: "They shall give the Lord Jesus Christ His proper place, the place which the Word gives Him; therefore, no work will ever be personalized." I've found this difficult to interpret; I don't know what it means to personalize a work in this context. I was wondering if you knew what the translators were thinking or had a specific example of a translation that doesn't follow this principle.

@RGrantJones 2 года назад

Thanks for the question, Clark. In the foreword shown in this review, that's identified as the fourth aim of the Lockman Foundation. I think it means that Lockman wanted their publications to give honor to the Lord Jesus and not to individual contributors or translators. That may be the reason you don't see a list of contributors in NASBs. The other aims are to be true to the original languages, to be grammatically correct, and to be understandable to the masses.

@kylec8950 2 года назад

Are you sure this is sewn? I had this Bible years ago (hardback 77) and a year into its use, the binding came out and half the book of Genesis started to fall out!

@RGrantJones 2 года назад

Yes, it's definitely sewn.

@kylec8950 2 года назад

@@RGrantJones Still not convinced.

@RGrantJones 2 года назад

@@kylec8950 - maybe your copy was a different printing. Mine has stitching and well-defined signatures.

@kylec8950 2 года назад

@@RGrantJones Okay, thank you brother

@jimmu2008 2 года назад

You have a typo in the description, I believe - 1997 instead of 1977.

@RGrantJones 2 года назад

Thank you, James!

@jimmu2008 2 года назад

@@RGrantJones All these dates with Bibles and prayer books get confusing. Did you know there was a 1975 NASB? I didn't have a copy of the 1977 NASB, so I tried buying one from EBay. What I got was copyrighted 1975! I have no idea what changes were made between then and 1977.

@RGrantJones 2 года назад

@@jimmu2008 - yes, I was aware of the '75 NASB. I put a Background chart near the beginning of the 1995 NAS vs 2016 ESV video that lists all the editions I know of. I believe my high school friend (who later joined the Yellow Deli cult and is a still a member as far as I know) used the '73 NASB. I have a copy of the '73, but I don't have a '75.

@jimmu2008 2 года назад

@@RGrantJones I have never heard of the Yellow Deli cult. I have a paperback copy of the 1973 NASB, but I have never used it. I also have "the four translation New Testament" published for Decision Magazine in 1966. It has the 1963 NASB NT, along with the KJV, Beck, and Williams. Judging by the underlining, I'd say I preferred the NASB at the time; however I have not used the NASB since then.

@dino575 2 года назад

@@jimmu2008 Think this is the 12 Tribes - there is a community of them here in Southern UK. They do also have a deli and its yellow )

@elizabethdaniel646 2 года назад

I’m looking for an niv one

@edwardgraham9443 2 года назад

I'm not sure how to look at the NASB now or which one to use. There's the 73, 75, 77, 95, 2020 and now the LSB. So many editions of the same translation. It seems like quite a few many people are not happy with the 2020 update. It also seems, from what I've gathered thus far, that the LSB has been a hit with many people. Quite a few people seems to be making it their main translation. My issue witht the NASB has never been with the translation itself, like the NKJV, I can't stand the capitalized pronouns for diety. Every time I see them, it irks me so badly that I cannot continue to read and lose my chain of thought. I hate it that much, as much as I hate red letter Bibles. This however, was a very good comparison video. I'm now wandering what the next new translation is going to called and when it's going to be released.

@jimmu2008 2 года назад

The NRSVue - New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition - is due out in August. The digital version is already available for purchase.

@jimmu2008 2 года назад

Do you dislike the capitalization of pronouns for the same reasons I do? I think it violates conventional rules of capitalization, and I think their may be times when the antecedent is ambiguous, and so the translators should allow the reader to determine the antecedent.

@edwardgraham9443 2 года назад

@@jimmu2008 Thank you, I want to see what this will be like. I made a typo error that I've now edited in my first response, I meant to say, quite a few many people are NOT happy with the NASB 2020 even though some are as opposed to the LSB which I'm yet to see anyone saying any negative things about it. At least not yet anyways. There may be, but I've not seen it myself.

@edwardgraham9443 2 года назад

@@jimmu2008 Yes, for the very same reasons. I can think of a few instances off the top of my head where I believe the translation team capitalized the pronoun when it should not have been. One such example is in the book of Revelation 14:14, where the NKJV capitalized the word "one" while NASB does not, although the NASB translators put "or One" in the footnote and they also capitalized "Son of Man". The context to me is simply saying that the heavenly being looked like a human being and was definitely not speaking to the one on the cloud being Jesus Christ. Also Daniel 3:25, I'm very sure Nebuchadnezzar, is not referring to the pre incarnation of Jesus, but just a heavenly being, an angel, and think the better translation should have been a son of the gods, in commons g.

@jimmu2008 2 года назад

@@edwardgraham9443 Thanks, for the helpful reply and the specific examples. I don't use either of these translations regularly, but I suspected that the capitalization of pronouns would be an issue. Now I know it is. BTW, it's nice to hear from you again. Seems like it's been a while.

@anthonyeusebius5834 2 года назад

So wonderful to see the constant changes to Gods unchanging word! As one Minister said We can no longer say with any confidence: "Thus saith the Lord" unless of course you add "in the 1977 edition" or 2004 edition etc. Makes it so much easier to teach whatever you want and turn peoples hearts away from faith in Gods word just as the Jesuits planned when they had Sinaiticus forged so they could turn people away from the recieved majority text found in all Bibles ending in the KJV. Which makes perfect sense because why on earth would people believe 5700+ greek manuscripts more than 30,000 old Latin Syriac and old German and italic manuscripts that all basically agree. When we can go to two obvious recent forgeries that do not agree on any page or any one verse and have tens of thousands of erasures deletions changes and omissions! As long as we have the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus to destroy peoples fath and Westcot n Hortss changes to the greek which he purposefully did to destroy faith in the KJV upon which ALL NEW NESTLE ALAND AND UBS based translations are based. But we can further mock God and make a fool of Bible believers by constantly changing the text with "updates" and we can MAKE A HELLUVA LOT OF MONEY SELLING THEM!!! Good job! Ichabod!

@marcc325 2 года назад

Amen!! :)

@truth2217 2 года назад

KJV God’s perfect word in English

@biblethumper6284 2 года назад

That's right! NASB is filled with errors.

@truth2217 2 года назад

@@biblethumper6284 The Bible corrects man man does not correct the Bible KJV

@biblethumper6284 2 года назад

@@truth2217 you have a good Bible believing church you are a part of?

@truth2217 2 года назад

@@biblethumper6284 Yes I’m just about to leave to go there it’s not a perfect Church but they preach the truth

@biblethumper6284 2 года назад

@@truth2217 well that's good, as long as they don't correct the Bible, if I didn't have one that I was satisfied with, I would literally move, being fed in church is important.