I have seen Long debate about NKJV, but what about NASB and its companion(I mean AMP Bible). If Good why? If not good why?
with thanks,
God Bless you!!
Ev. Steve

[Paladin54]

Consider this quote:

"I must under God denounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord...We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface. When you see the preface to the New American Standard, those are my words...it's wrong, it's terribly wrong; it's frightfully wrong...I'm in trouble;...I can no longer ignore these criticisms I am hearing and I can't refute them. The deletions are absolutely frightening...there are so many. The finest leaders that we have today haven't gone into it [new versions of Hort and Wescott's corrupted Greek text] just as I hadn't gone into it...that's how easily one can be deceived...Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this?"

-Dr. Frank Logsdon, NASV Committee Member.

For starters

The NASV and the Amplified Bible are based on the Westcott and Hort texts. Here is a note from the Amplified Bible - Isaiah 14:12. Tell me that this is not evil and satanic:

"'Light-bringer' or 'Shining one' was originally translated Lucifer , but because of the association of that name with Satan it is not now used. Some students feel that the application of the name Lucifer to Satan, in spite of the long and confident teaching to that effect, is erroneous. Lucifer, the light-bringer is the Latin equivalent of the Greek word Phosphoros , which is used as a title of Christ in II Peter 1:19 and corresponds to the name 'bright Morning Star' in Revelation 22:16, which Jesus called Himself."

[Paladin54]

Wow, Brother Jerry, that is not only satanic but it is just scary!

Words cannot express this high perversion. They don't believe that Lucifer is Satan!?!

"And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light!"
-2 Corinthians 11:14

God save us.

hmm, i'd like to see a list of every error in the nas, and a seperate list for every bible translation. nkjv, niv, nlt, ncv, cev, kjv21, esv, and a partridge in a pear tree

For the most part, most of the changes in the mvs are in all of them - because they are based on the same corrupt manuscripts.

This lists some errors in the mvs (mostly NASV and NIV):

http://www.earnestlycontending.com/e...eversions.html

I'm sure there are many - this list shows some contradictions within the mvs themselves. No, I did not list a lot - I was just giving a basic intro to the issue.

It's interesting to note that in scripture there are only three places that record Christ's physical ascension: Acts 1:9, Luke 24:51, and Mark 16:19. The KJV and the nasb agree on Acts 1:9, but on Luke 24:51 the nasb removes the part that speaks of the physical ascension of the Lord. In Mark 16:19 the nasb contains the ascension but casts a footnote at the bottom saying that this verse is omitted in some other manuscripts, thus casting doubt on the authenticity of the verse. Therefore there is only one verse that contains a 100% true account of Christ's ascension. We all know that there has to be more than one verse found in scripture to prove a doctrine, so according to the nasb you cannot prove Christ's ascension. If Christ didn't rise then all our faith is in vain right?

Hello guys
Thanks a lot !
God bless you for your light
But more about them is needed to help
all who might visit this forum
Ev. Steve