Steven Avery
Administrator
NASB Confusion - The two sons and the Father's vineyard - Matthew 21:28-31
Matthew 21:28-31 - "A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go
work to day in MY vineyard. He answered and said, I will NOT: BUT AFTERWARD HE
REPENTED, AND WENT. And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and
said, I GO, sir.; and HE WENT NOT. Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say
unto him, The FIRST."
This is the reading of the King James Bible 1611, Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale
1535, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, the Revised Version of 1881, the
American Standard Version of 1901, the RSV 1952, NRSV 1989, ESV of 2001, the NKJV 1982,
Holman Standard 2003, the ISV 2010, the Catholic Douay 1950 and Jerusalem bibles 1969,
1985, the NIV of 1984 and even the NET version. These readings are found in the majority of
all manuscripts and in the Siniaticus copy, one of the so called oldest and best. However
Vaticanus or B, reverses the order of the two sons. Even the Catholic bibles rejected the
Vaticanus reading, and they have it in the Vatican library as one of their treasured possessions.
Yet they chose to follow the reading that matches that found in the King James Bible
them, "Because of your UNBELIEF: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of
mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall
remove." In this instance they had no faith at all and Jesus tells them that if they had just a little
bit of faith they could remove mountains.
However both Aleph and B read "little faith" instead of “unbelief”, and so the NASB, ESV and
NIV read, "Because you have SO LITTLE FAITH. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small
as a mustard seed. . .". If they had a little bit of faith to begin with, it doesn't make sense to tell
them they only need a mustard seed of faith to accomplish great things. But if they had no faith,
then Jesus's words make sense.
NASB Confusion - The two sons and the Father's vineyard - Matthew 21:28-31
Matthew 21:28-31 - "A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go
work to day in MY vineyard. He answered and said, I will NOT: BUT AFTERWARD HE
REPENTED, AND WENT. And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and
said, I GO, sir.; and HE WENT NOT. Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say
unto him, The FIRST."
This is the reading of the King James Bible 1611, Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale
1535, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, the Revised Version of 1881, the
American Standard Version of 1901, the RSV 1952, NRSV 1989, ESV of 2001, the NKJV 1982,
Holman Standard 2003, the ISV 2010, the Catholic Douay 1950 and Jerusalem bibles 1969,
1985, the NIV of 1984 and even the NET version. These readings are found in the majority of
all manuscripts and in the Siniaticus copy, one of the so called oldest and best. However
Vaticanus or B, reverses the order of the two sons. Even the Catholic bibles rejected the
Vaticanus reading, and they have it in the Vatican library as one of their treasured possessions.
Yet they chose to follow the reading that matches that found in the King James Bible.
When the Father came to the first son and told him to go work in his vineyard, instead of saying
"I will NOT:BUT AFTERWARD HE REPENTED, AND WENT." the NASBs from 1962, 63,
68, 71, 72, 75 and 1977 say "I WILL, AND HE DID NOT GO.” And when he comes to the
second son, in the NASBs from 1962 to 1977 , instead of him saying "I GO SIR, AND HE
WENT NOT” the NASBs have "I WILL NOT, YET AFTERWARD HE REGRETTED IT AND
WENT.” Then, when Jesus asks which of them did the father's will, instead of “the FIRST”, the
NASBs (1963 to 1977) say "the LATTER"!!!
Other bible versions that also follow the reading found in Vaticanus are the Jehovah Witness
New World Translation 1961, the New English Bible 1970, Goodspeed 1943, and the Revised
English Bible of 1989, put out as a recent joint effort between Protestants and Catholics. All
these versions follow the Vaticanus reading, in spite of the overwhelming evidence that it is
wrong.
Matthew 21:28-31 - "A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go
work to day in MY vineyard. He answered and said, I will NOT: BUT AFTERWARD HE
REPENTED, AND WENT. And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and
said, I GO, sir.; and HE WENT NOT. Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say
unto him, The FIRST."
This is the reading of the King James Bible 1611, Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale
1535, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, the Revised Version of 1881, the
American Standard Version of 1901, the RSV 1952, NRSV 1989, ESV of 2001, the NKJV 1982,
Holman Standard 2003, the ISV 2010, the Catholic Douay 1950 and Jerusalem bibles 1969,
1985, the NIV of 1984 and even the NET version. These readings are found in the majority of
all manuscripts and in the Siniaticus copy, one of the so called oldest and best. However
Vaticanus or B, reverses the order of the two sons. Even the Catholic bibles rejected the
Vaticanus reading, and they have it in the Vatican library as one of their treasured possessions.
Yet they chose to follow the reading that matches that found in the King James Bible
them, "Because of your UNBELIEF: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of
mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall
remove." In this instance they had no faith at all and Jesus tells them that if they had just a little
bit of faith they could remove mountains.
However both Aleph and B read "little faith" instead of “unbelief”, and so the NASB, ESV and
NIV read, "Because you have SO LITTLE FAITH. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small
as a mustard seed. . .". If they had a little bit of faith to begin with, it doesn't make sense to tell
them they only need a mustard seed of faith to accomplish great things. But if they had no faith,
then Jesus's words make sense.
NASB Confusion - The two sons and the Father's vineyard - Matthew 21:28-31
Matthew 21:28-31 - "A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go
work to day in MY vineyard. He answered and said, I will NOT: BUT AFTERWARD HE
REPENTED, AND WENT. And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and
said, I GO, sir.; and HE WENT NOT. Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say
unto him, The FIRST."
This is the reading of the King James Bible 1611, Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale
1535, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, the Revised Version of 1881, the
American Standard Version of 1901, the RSV 1952, NRSV 1989, ESV of 2001, the NKJV 1982,
Holman Standard 2003, the ISV 2010, the Catholic Douay 1950 and Jerusalem bibles 1969,
1985, the NIV of 1984 and even the NET version. These readings are found in the majority of
all manuscripts and in the Siniaticus copy, one of the so called oldest and best. However
Vaticanus or B, reverses the order of the two sons. Even the Catholic bibles rejected the
Vaticanus reading, and they have it in the Vatican library as one of their treasured possessions.
Yet they chose to follow the reading that matches that found in the King James Bible.
When the Father came to the first son and told him to go work in his vineyard, instead of saying
"I will NOT:BUT AFTERWARD HE REPENTED, AND WENT." the NASBs from 1962, 63,
68, 71, 72, 75 and 1977 say "I WILL, AND HE DID NOT GO.” And when he comes to the
second son, in the NASBs from 1962 to 1977 , instead of him saying "I GO SIR, AND HE
WENT NOT” the NASBs have "I WILL NOT, YET AFTERWARD HE REGRETTED IT AND
WENT.” Then, when Jesus asks which of them did the father's will, instead of “the FIRST”, the
NASBs (1963 to 1977) say "the LATTER"!!!
Other bible versions that also follow the reading found in Vaticanus are the Jehovah Witness
New World Translation 1961, the New English Bible 1970, Goodspeed 1943, and the Revised
English Bible of 1989, put out as a recent joint effort between Protestants and Catholics. All
these versions follow the Vaticanus reading, in spite of the overwhelming evidence that it is
wrong.