NASB in Paragraph Format

I may have mentioned this earlier in this thread (or another?), but here goes anyway...

NASB95 has a method of marking pericopes or, if you will, paragraphs. The verse number is bolded for "new" thought streams. Occasionally (more so in the NT than the OT--Paul's extended ramblings, for instance), they will choose to mark a new thought stream in the midst of a verse, in which case the first letter of the first word in that new stream will be bolded. Which is all well and good, I suppose. But a couple of points...

First, this is all IMPOSED upon the text, not part of the text. While a few folks may realize this, many don't and won't. For me, the line-per-verse method of presentation is much more amenable to not clouding this point. I am often able to recognize transitions that aren't handled properly, either by the versification bosses of yesteryear or the present day translation committees. For instance, NASB95 uses topic subheads in various places, and these are occasionally misplaced, which can cause confusion and even doctrinal error if not recognized. Even so, the 95's line/verse presentation provides an experience more conducive to proper textual recognition.

Secondly, in my own writing I often quote extended passages from the NASB95, and for the sake of space, I format the 95's verse/lines into paragraphs. I frequently find myself setting paragraph breaks in different places than those identified by the bolded verse numbers. I sometimes even split a particular verse with a new paragraph. The take away is that these things are ultimately a matter of opinion and judgment. But many people will be robbed of the recognition that such a judgment is required of them if their Bible is preformatted for them. 

My point is...whether you, Dear Reader, prefer the look and so-called "readability" of paragraph presentation or not isn't the most germane consideration. You now have paragraphs in most all Bibles in Logos, but unless you are particularly critical in your study, even extraordinarily so, you are probably paying a price for your precious "readability". Enjoy.

LOL this getting 😝 

Bill Cook said:

But, I learned something... I never thought the format was a purchasing decision. In my case, I purchased the NASB not for the format, but for the translation - the more literal translation.

Bill when I first purchased the NASB library many years ago for Logos 2.0 I had never heard of the translation. I purchased it because it allowed me to engage with the text differently than my other bibles. I purchased it because it removed the artificial boundaries placed on the text by translators and allowed me to step back and think about the flow of thought in the text in a new way.  Personally I see this as a valuable step in the bible study process, particularly when I am studying it inductively. 

Since those days I now no a lot more about bible translation philosophlies and I appreciate the value of the NASB95 as one of the translations I use to study the scripture but having it in its original format is still very much an important part of the way I engage with the text. I only purchase translations to increase the scope of translation philosophies I have on hand for engaging with the text. 

At other times paragraph format is also valuable particularly when I just wanted to sit down a read a bible or am reading aloud in a group. But for getting into the text, engaging with it so I can start to ask questions of the text the one verse per line is the most helpful format for me.

Bill Cook said:

I am concerned about losing my notes in the reversion... But, I am sure I will make do again.

Bill you will not loose any notes. Corresponding Notes and Highlights feature will ensure these work seamlessly between the two resources. The feature has been around since the end of 2015, works well and I have provided links in a post above to tutorials on the feature if you are not familiar with it.

Bill Cook said:

I did not like the one verse per line format at all. But, I dealt with it. And, I certainly did not understand the uproar this issue has caused.

Bill i respect the fact that you did not understand why for some of us this is a big issue, we all have different ways of doing things, even how we read the bible for the purpose of studying it. And Bill I want to thank you for not laughing at us, calling us names ( at one point I was likened to Satan), or simply telling us we were wrong for wanting something different. Although you do not understand and have some concerns you choose to never respond in any of these ways.  Bill even though you did not like the one verse per line format you dealt with it because that was the way it always was formatted. Whether you thought about it or not you purchased the translation in that format.  For those of us who purcashed and used it because of its format we had something taken away from us we paid for, we had our bible study process disrupted and FL had no ready made solution - they were scrambling to build a solution after the fact but failed to understand their user - if they understood all of their users they would never had acted with haste and unprepared.

Bill Cook said:

I was glad for the paragraph version. I did not like the one verse per line format at all.

 

Bill when the new paragraph formatted resource comes out, since this will be your preferred choice don't forget to prioritise it and if you have the NASB95 on your shortcut bar, update that too. 

I am glad we are now both being looked after with this decision.

Petah this was not a situation that could wait for a fix someday. FL created the pressure in the first place by taking away something that was not broken. The pressure they got in response was their own doing. FL's premature removal of the orginal NASB95 bible, which people paid for, impacted upon some users bible study workflow, it could not wait. The pressure was warranted because FL did the wrong thing. And they had no choice but to correct their mistake.

PetahChristian said:

Ben Amundgaard (Faithlife) said:

We went through every option we could think of (within reason) and determined that this was the only viable solution at this point. Rather than say "we'll get to a solution one day," we decided this was the best way forward.

In an ideal world, we wouldn't accrue technical debt. Sadly, we either have to live with the solutions we implement, or eventually spend much more time and money correcting our mistakes of the past.

I'm sorry that there was so much pressure to fix this now, Ben, as this may be something that can't easily be changed in the future.

Randall Cue said:

The original Hebrew of the Old Testament would have been written from right to left and without vowel points. The Masoretes added the vowel points much later for "readability." The original Greek texts of the New Testament would have been written without punctuation and without spaces between words. wouldyoufindsuchatextunderstandable. At times the Greek was written from left to right and then at the end of a line back the other direction from right to left on the next line. All of us need help in making the text readable. It is just a matter of how much help and who supplies it.

[;)] As I have followed the passionate opinions about verses and paragraphs in recent weeks, I have often recalled this anecdote - https://goodquestionblog.com/2013/02/26/0226/ 

David Paul said:

Some of what is offered by Logos is "teaching to fish" stuff, but some, frequently at the behest of customers, is silver platter stuff. In the big picture, paragraphs in Bibles probably aren't a huge problem, but they are the beginning of a problem if people prefer them because it makes everything "easier". Click!

This is a good analogy. Could I offer another one? Some prefer to obtain the fish for their recipes at the local market and some at a specialty seafood market. Some prefer to buy the fish already skinned and boned, others prefer the whole fish. Some would even claim to have caught their own fish. But did they catch a fish in a stocked pond or did they catch it in the wild? In the end hunger is satisfied by fish that God created as a good gift to sustain humans that bear His image.

Yes there is a problem when a child is asked "where do eggs come from?" and the reply is "aisle 6 of the market". And there is a problem when God's transformative revelation of Himself and His will in the written Word is reduced to "where did this truth originate?" and the reply comes back "The paragraph (or non-paragraph) edition in Logos software of the NASB English translation of the NA23 text compiled from X manuscript which is in the Y family which is thought to have originated in tradition..."

Your taxonomy may be different, but consider the "supply" chain

A - Divine Author

B - Human Author

C - Scribal tradition

D - Manuscript family

E - Biblical Language

F - English

F - Translation

G - Digital or Print

H - Faithlife or Competitors

I - Libronix or Logos 

J - Paragraph or Non-paragraph

K - Font, color, size, etc.

At what level does inspiration reside?

At what level does personal preference determine choice?

At what level does truth become error?

When are we tithing mint and dill or straining after gnats?

When does a fish cease to be a fish?

Whyndell Grizzard said:

Personally just preferance, don't over think or over spiritualize the paragraph over single verses disply.

Which is exactly why those who prefer the paragraph format need to stop carry out their attacks on the views of those who have a personal preference to using a verse format at times in their reading process, get over it. FL has recognised the need for two options to meet all of their customers needs. I have never once questioned anyones preference for paragraph format. I have simply stood firm on expressing my desire to be able to keep what I paid to put on my bookshelf because I found it helpful to my reading process.

It is no wonder Christianity struggles to make in-roads into the society today when I look at the dogmatic self-righteous attitude of some of you towards people who are different to you over non-essential things like this topic. If you can't be accepting of your fellow Christians who find it helpful to read their bibles line by line at times, the may God forgive us all because we are not going to reach a World that despately needs Jesus Christ.

Disciple of Christ (doc) said:

Your post is just another smug attempt at a put down of those who appreciate something different to you. When will you people lay off and start respecting different needs exist when it comes to the way we like to read - it is that simple,

My post was neither smug nor lacking in respect. It is simply pointing out that the verse markers themselves were a human addition to the Biblical text and this addition did not happen until MANY years after the text originated. 

As one user posted

David Paul said:

First, this is all IMPOSED upon the text, not part of the text. While a few folks may realize this, many don't and won't.

I was just pointing out that not only are paragraph markers imposed, but versification is also.

I've already said that I liked the original verse by verse format

David Thomas said:

I really liked the verse by verse layout when creating my own Hebrew/English Interlinear for study. So I get why some REALLY preferred the old  verse by verse layout. 

Disciple of Christ (doc) said:

if you can't respect our differences then please stop the snide attacks. This post is totally inappropriate and irrelevant.

I did not realize you had been ordained as the Forum police. (now THAT was snide!)

I did not attack any user, but am frustrated when the newer format is implied that it is "dumbed down" for the sake of readability, inferring that the older "less readable" format is superior.

Disciple of Christ (doc) said:

a put down of those who appreciate something different to you

When I agree with other users that this is nothing more than a matter of preference, you seem to be the one who takes offense where none is intended. Disagreement with a position is not a "put down.". 

David Thomas said:

I was just pointing out that not only are paragraph markers imposed, but versification is also.

David, this was the point of my post as well. But to go even further, punctuation is also imposed on the next. Generally, rules of English grammar are used in the translation of any Biblical text into English. David, I appreciate your posts on the forum. I, for one, have never noted any form of sarcasm or snarkiness from you.

I guess I came to the "discussion" late. Thanks for that reminder.

David Thomas said:

Disciple of Christ (doc) said:

need to stop carry out their attacks on the views of those who have a personal preference to using a verse format at times in their reading process, get over it

This cuts both ways!

David I have never said anybody liking the paragraph format is wrong. I have never said anyone liking the paragraph format should have their paragraph format bibles which they have paid for removed from their library unlike a number of people one this thread who keep on harping about how inconvenient for them it will be to have one bible translation in two formats. Please check your facts in future.  I am simply standing my ground.  I have experienced and bullies like you in churches and pastors who have use their position to try and manipulate me into being their pawn in their mind games with other people and I will not let people like you walk over me on these forums. All I want is to simply be able to keep and use what I purchased in my library. 

Alan FL caused this by removing something from peoples libraries that they had purchased and did it without their permission.  FL have agreed to correct their error and put that resource back.

If someone continues to tell me I have they have a right to ask for something to be removed from my library because it is not their preference they are acting outside of the forum guidelines.

Alan Palmer (Faithlife) said:

Please stay on topic and follow the forum guidelines.

I would ask that interested parties take discussions related to preferences of translation and style to ChristianDiscourse.com.

Can we please have this thread locked. I believe everyone has had a chance to share their thoughts on the subject. And as far as I can tell everyone is in extremely violent agreement on the subject. We all want both versions. Everyone wants the line-by-line version, formatted perfectly. Everyone wants the paragraph version, formatted perfectly. Everyone agrees the current resource should not have been released in the manner it was. There has been some debate on the manner of the solution, but everyone wants exactly the same solution: both formats, perfectly formatted. The solution has been decided on and is on the way. There is nothing else that needs to be said here.

With all respect to everyone. If you find this post (or any other post of mine) is offensive or anything less than respectful then I'm sorry. It's my failure to communicate and not ever my intention at all.