• Hi Guest!

    Please share Talk Jesus community on every platform you have to give conservatives an outlet and safe community to be apart of.

    Support This Community

    Thank You

  • Welcome to Talk Jesus

    A true bible based, Jesus centered online community. Join over 11,000 members today

    Register Log In

NASB Preface Author Renounces His Involvement

Member

NASB Preface Author Renounces His Involvement


In the mid-1960s, the Moody organization hosted the kickoff conference for the NIV. However, there hasn't always been a consensus there regarding new versions. One of the past vice-presidents of Moody Bible Institute, Dr. Alfred Martin, said the theories and Greek text behind the new versions "collapse when subject to close scrutiny." He is not a fan of the NIV or NASB. One of the former pastors of Moody Church, Dr. S. Frank Logsdon, who "laid the groundwork" for the NASB said:

"I must under God renounce every attachment to the New American Standard Bible...The deletions are absolutely frightening...Some of the finest people in the world believe in that Greek text, the finest leaders that we have today. You'd be surprised; if I told you, you wouldn't believe it. They haven't gone into it, just as I hadn't gone into it; [they're] just taking it for granted. At any rate we went out and started on a feasibility report, and I encouraged him [Dewey Lockman] to go ahead with it. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord, because I encouraged him to go ahead with it. We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped to interview some of the translators; I sat with the translators; I wrote the preface. When you see the preface to the New American Standard, those are my words...I'm going to talk to him [referring to Dr. George Sweeting, president of Moody Bible Institute] about these things...Friends, you can say the Authorized Version is absolutely correct. How correct? One hundred percent correct."

Graciously, Logsdon announced his rejection of his own, about to be published, NASB, to the president of the Foundation (aka The Lockman Foundation), Dewey Lockman, and his friends, the Directors, as well as the publishing and translating committees. (He then lectured frequently on the problems in the NASB. His audio lecture is available from AV Publications.) Today, the NASB's publisher (The Lockman Foundation aka The Foundation) attempts to cover up Logsdon's initial involvement and final rejection of the NASB and Amplified Bible. Truth has a way of surfacing, however. "[F]or there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed;" (Matt. 10:26). A peek behind closed doors surfaces in a book, Dealing with the Devil. Its title states that it is:

by
C.S. Lovett
A Director
The Lockman Foundation,
Producers of the Amplified Translations
New American Standard


Its introduction begins:

"The occasion was a strategic meeting of a well known Foundation with people of the translating and publishing committees for a new translation of the Bible. It was a critical session for bringing a new work to the world. Momentous decisions were before the Foundation's directors. With remarkable timing, a person spoke words which stabbed the president of the Foundation with anguish. I saw the hurt of his soul rise to his face. The spirit of the meeting changed instantly. All decisions were deferred. Now the one making the comment was a friend of mine. He is as gracious and godly a Christian as you'd hope to meet. Those words from his lips didn't sound like him at all. When I regarded his wonderful spirit and beheld the great damage wrought in the president, I was perplexed -- 'How could such a thing happen?'"

NASB Director, Lovett reveals the rest, writing,

"...The palms of my hands became sweaty. A dreadful awareness swept over me. I experienced something about Satan I hadn't realized before. No one heard the gospel tune that rang within me, but a shout was echoing...

He lives, He lives
Satan lives today
He walks with me and
Talks with me, along
Life's narrow way!"


Lovett admitted, "I heard that. It began to haunt me." Was God warning this NASB Director through these words and through Logsdon's shocking announcement of his rejection of the NASB, which he had helped to hatch? Sadly, this NASB Director ascribed it to "SATAN," instead of to the wisdom of his "gracious and godly" friend and one time pastor of Moody Memorial Church, S. Franklin Logsdon. (C.S. Lovett, Dealing with the Devil, 1967, Baldwin Park Christianity: Personal Christianity, p. 10).

The Logsdon family has carried on his passion to warn Christians about the NASB and all new versions.

The Lockman Foundation and Dewey Lockman sponsored and copyrighted the Amplified Gospel of John in 1954 and the Amplified New Testament in 1958. Zondervan then took it over and in 1962 came out with Job through Malachi. In 1964 they published Genesis through Esther. In 1965 the entire Amplified Bible was complete. Zondervan was taken over by Harper-Collins, a secular publishing house. It is the publisher of the Satanic Bible by Anton LaVey. It was in turn bought out by Rupert Murdoch, media's "prince of darkness." Therefore, Zondervan has been in secular hands for some time. One of the members of the Amplified Version committee, Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, has renounced the Amplified Version, as well as the New American Standard. He said:

"As a member of the editorial committee in the production of the Amplified New Testament, we honestly and conscientiously felt it was a mark of intelligence to follow Westcott and Hort. Now, what you have in these books strikes terror to my heart. It proves, alarmingly, that being conscientiously wrong is a most dangerous state of being. God help us to be more cautious, lest we fall into the snares of the arch deceiver."

The books that Logsdon referred to are Which Bible? and True or False? by D. O. Fuller (available from AV Publications). These books showed Dr. Logsdon, for the first time, the corrupt nature of the Westcott and Hort Greek text underlying new versions, which includes the Amplified, the NIV, NASB, ESV, HCSB, NAB, New Jerusalem Bible, The Message, and the New Living Translation.

The particular problem with the Amplified Bible is that it is guilty of adding to God's word. It is called an "expanded translation." It is in direct violation of Revelation 22:18 which says:

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:" Proverbs 30:6 adds: "Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."

We are forbidden to add anything to the word of God, and the Amplified Bible translation has done just that.

The Amplified Bible was actually written by a woman, Mrs. Siewert, and the Lockman Foundation essentially rubber stamped her work. Since it was written by a woman, is it any wonder it omits "holy" from 2 Peter 1:21 which says, "holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost"?

How can it 'amplify' the Bible, when it removes so many important words such as "Lord," "God" and "the Lord Jesus Christ"?

Amplifying 'rock music' does not make it better. Neither does amplifying the Bible with hot air from corrupt lexicons, such as Thayer's, then letting the air out by omitting God and the Lord Jesus Christ.
 
Last edited:
Member
I take it that you are a King James Only Advocate; I normally would not post on such a refuted topic but for the sake of the new believers who may read this and be confused, I must.

The Lockman Foundation's Official Response to KJVO claims about Frank Logsdon

The Board of Directors of The Lockman Foundation launched the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE translation work in the late 1950's following the completion of the AMPLIFIED NEW TESTAMENT. Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon was acquainted with Dewey Lockman, president of The Lockman Foundation, prior to Mr. Lockman's death in 1974. Mr. Logsdon was never a member of the Board of Directors, nor was he an employee of The Lockman Foundation. Mr. Logsdon had no authority to hire employees or translators for the Foundation, to set policy, to vote, to hold office, to incur expenses, etc. He cannot be considered "co-founder" of the NASB, nor part of The Lockman Foundation, nor part of the NASB translation team, nor did he write the forward of the NASB. According to our records, he was present at board meetings on two occasions -- once to hear a travel report; and once to deliver an "inspirational thought."

Mr. Logsdon last wrote to Mr. Lockman in fall of 1973 that he was moving to Florida. Mr. Lockman replied that he was surprised and saddened by his decision to leave the area. Mr. Lockman passed away in January of 1974, and no further correspondence was exchanged between Frank Logsdon and The Lockman Foundation. He resided in Florida until his passing some years ago.

The grass withers, the flower fades; but the word of our God stands forever. Isaiah 40:8 (NASB)

The Lockman Foundation
 
Member
Why do you think it is the Textus Receptus instead of another? What basis of comparison do you have?

There are multiple places where the KJV does not even properly convey the Greek in The Textus Receptus. Also, despite what some crazy people think, there were major errors in the 1611 version, which were corrected.

What of the writings of Erasmus and others, where we have known editions to the TR? Do you think God told them to put it in there?

Technically all of this is incorrect anyway. The KJV was NOT based on the Textus Receptus. It was based on the Stephanus text, which was largely Erasmian. The TR was not published until more than a decade after the KJV. The TR disagrees with this earlier Text in nearly 300 places, which is just about as many as it disagrees with modern versions, in some cases.

Since Erasmus compiled HIS translation from several different manuscripts, and actually had variant readings included in his work, in several hundred places, the ONLY way you can say the KJV is the authoritative version, is to say that it is "Re-inspired".

This Erasmian text, which almost exclusively is what the Stephanus text is based on, was actually dedicated to "His Holiness" Pope Leo X!!

Early writers/Church fathers who quote scripture, RARELY (none to my knowledge, but my knowledge is not sufficient enough to state this categorically) agree with the Stephanus/Erasmian text over the earlier manuscripts upon which most modern versions are based on. In most cases, they would agree with the modern version.


Many of the words in the KJV have completely different meanings, or in some case, the opposite meaning of today. For instance the word "Let" in olde english, means to hinder, or to stop. In modern english it means the opposite, to permit or allow. There are dozens of words such as these, that give the wrong idea to modern readers.


Just a few
 
Member
You've provided no primary research documentation -- merely 'plausible denial' via the usual rhetoric and invectives.
 
Last edited:
Member
If I remember right the Lochman Foundation which did the NASB has on their site info about Dr. Logsdon. But is sounds to me like this is more of a bate and switch for KJV Onlyism.
 
Member
To those of you who read this post and have never heard of this material before; this is malicious to say the least. The so called facts presented here, are twisted half truths and some outright lies. For anyone to publish such material, as a Christian it is unhonorable, and distorts truth, and brings into question a faithful translation of the Holy Scripture. The NASB is a very accurate translation.

You must ask yourself why would anyone attack and discredit a translation of the Bible, what is their motive? Has God blessed the NASB, is there anything that differs in context from the Greek ? Few of us have the knowledge to understand Greek. But we can ask our pastors, and our Seminary denominational professors. The best way we can determine truth is to ask those who have the knowledge of Greek and see what they say. I did and I am very sure the NASB is trustworthy, true and faithful to the Greek text as possible from Greek into English. No translation is perfect, as long as human's do the translating.
 
Member
This is the conditioned presumption:

The NASB is a very accurate translation.
...which is utilized to validate the ad hominum attack:

... this is malicious to say the least. The so called facts presented here, are twisted half truths and some outright lies. For anyone to publish such material, as a Christian it is unhonorable, and distorts truth, and brings into question a faithful translation of the Holy Scripture.
He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him. Proverbs 18:13 KJV

Ignorance may be bliss, but only for a season...
 
Member
lawrenceb: "Ignorance may be bliss, but only for a seasom" I take you meant this for me? I personally have no problem if you believe the only God blessed Bible is the KJV. In my ministry I have made it my policy that once I have stated the facts, the response that comes back determines if it's worth diaologuing any further.

I wish you well, and I think it's wonderful you are reading the Bible and seeking to share the Good News of Jesus Christ. God Bless you.
 
Member
[TABLE]
<tbody>[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2"][TABLE]
<tbody>[TR]
[TD]
[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]
New International Version (©1984)
That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

New Living Translation
(©2007)
If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

English Standard Version (©2001)
because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God
hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.


Well, after checking the Gospel in a number of different translations
of Romans 10:9 there does not appear to be a shred of difference.

That is, if your eye did not immediately detect the important error
in the modern translations!

How dare these modern translations use "you" instead of "thou".


Who were the devils that translated the Bible into English?

Latin was the language of the educated, you are all grieviously deceived.

Hence the Vulgate would be the Bible of choice.

Two can play this ridiculous game.



[/TD]
[/TR]
</tbody>[/TABLE]
 
Last edited:
Member
David, thank you for taking the time to put these examples up. The only translation that should NEVER be used is the New World translation. I have a very dear friend that founf jesus and surrendered to Him and became a follower. He used a Bible that was really very hard for him to read. When The Holy Spirit seeks to draw us to Jesus He uses so many ways.

I was raised on the KJV and put to memory so many verses that to rethink and put to memory again is sometimes rather hard as I get the verses mixed up.

You have said without error the only way to read exactally what the Bible says is to read it in Greek. There is no room for discrediting anything that way. But few that have even have the basiic tools to understand how to use Vines or a Concordance. These need to be in every growing Christians tools.

The only thing rediculous is someone hears the Gospel and rejects the Lords Salvation. Blessings.
 

Similar threads

Top