24 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
NASB Ultrathin -a Great Bible, October 16, 2001
This review is from: New American Standard Ultrathin Reference Bible; Black Genuine Leather (Leather Bound)
I have recently moved from using NIV as my main bible to the updated NASB. There's a huge amount of stuff on the web about which bible people 'should' use. From 'KJV only' on the one hand through to 'it doesn't matter'on the other hand. Lots of what's written is either bigoted nonsense or people riding hobbyhorses. Fact is that this translation is excellent and helps me (I'm a church pastor) get into the Greek & Hebrew more directly. It's well presented, the centre references are the best I've ever seen (and I've seen a lot!). The 'genuine leather' binding is worth the (little) extra cost. Once you start using this Bible I expect you'll want to A:Use it a lot and B: Use it for a long time. So invest. I would go so far as to say that to my mind this is probably the best translation for the serious student, and I've not seen a better presented edition-not at this or any price. Buy it. And in case you wondered, I don't work for the publisher (just the author.....)
Martin Bullivant
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
26 of 27 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Great buy!, December 15, 2005
This review is from: New American Standard Ultrathin Reference Bible; Black Genuine Leather (Leather Bound)
I recently bought the New American Standard Ultrathin Reference Bible; Black Genuine Leather. All in all, I'm pretty happy with my purchase. The Ultrathin is a nice size. The cover is genuine leather, and attractive. The print is a reasonable size for a fairly trim Bible. A modest concordance is included.
One thing that I noticed about this Bible is that the print is crisp, dark, and even. This makes it easy to read. I have some Bibles by Cambridge and Thompson Chains that cost much more, and yet, they have weak, uneven print.
There are a few things that I didn't like. There are no blank pages at either end for notes. I also didn't like the glossy pages for records in the front.
About translations: Translations can be literal, or dynamic. A literal translation gives you what the original text says, literally word for word. Care is even taken to preserve word count and order. Where ambiguity exists in the original text, it will exist in the translation, leaving the reader to determine what the text means. The NASB is a literal translation. A dynamic translation, on the other hand, gives you what the original text means. The translator invariably interprets the text for you. This leads to possible denominational influence in the translation. Word count and order will also vary from what was in the original text. A good example of a dynamic translation is the NIV. To sum up, the NASB will give you a really accurate reading of the original text, but may place conventional English grammar on its ear in places. It has been said that the NASB is so literal and accurate, that you could reverse translate it back into the original Greek! The NIV will make for smoother reading, but you are left with what the translators think the original text meant, not what it says. There is a big difference.
The NASB (like the NIV) relies on the latest manuscript evidence for the New Testament. There have been many manuscripts that have been found in the twentieth century that are incorporated into the NASB. These manuscripts are thought to be older, and therefore more accurate, than those used in the King James and other Textus Receptus based Bibles. However, text critical scholarship is not an exact science, so it would be a good idea to review the arguments for and against using a translation that included textual criticism in it's creation.
One of the major complaints about the NASB is the use of "wooden" English. Supposedly, this has been largely corrected in the updated 1995 version. Looking at the verses that I had previously memorized in the 1977 version, I do see some changes, but they tend to be modest and relatively infrequent.
This Bible has cross references and a concordance, but is not a "study Bible." If you want something less portable, but with more "helps" consider the Thompson Chain NASB, or perhaps an Open Bible NASB, or Scofield NASB.
Besides my minor quibble about the lack of blank endpapers for notes, this is a good value for someone who wants a portable NASB update version with a leather cover. Can't beat the price either.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
16 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Nice Bible, but ..., February 11, 2008
This review is from: New American Standard Ultrathin Reference Bible; Black Genuine Leather (Leather Bound)
I do not own this Bible, but I spent some time at the Christian book store comparing Bibles and unfortunately had to decline the purchase of this one. Nearly everything about it is top notch like the reviews say -- the cover, binding, layout, etc. However, I found the print to be difficult to read after several minutes and felt some eyestrain. It just seemed like a very light font, tightly packed, and slightly obscured by the print visible from the other side of the page. So before placing an order online I recommend you have a look at it in a bookstore first, especially if your near vision is not that great.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No