Christian Standard Bible (CSB)

[RipponRedeaux]

This is a non sequitur if ever I heard one.

The Lord superintends His Holy Word in every language.

 

[alexander284]

Gender inclusive? Who?

I obviously use gender inclusive language in my everyday communication.

I simply don't care for it my (preferred) Bible translation.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

I obviously use gender inclusive language in my everyday communication.

I simply don't care for it my (preferred) Bible translation.

Well, this week (who knows what your preference will be next week) you like the ESV best. It has a whole lot more inclusive language in it than the 1984 NIV. So, in order to be consistent with your claim you should check out the Geneva, Bishop's Bible etc.

 

[alexander284]

Well, this week (who knows what your preference will be next week) you like the ESV best. It has a whole lot more inclusive language in it than the 1984 NIV. So, in order to be consistent with your claim you should check out the Geneva, Bishop's Bible etc.

Good point.

 

[alexander284]

Due to its lack of gender inclusive language, I'll be checking out the NKJV, next.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Due to its lack of gender inclusive language, I'll be checking out the NKJV, next.

Are you aware that you have said the same thing three times now? We get it. The NKJV will be your next flavor of choice.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

It's fascinating that the very one who started this thread hasn't quoted any verses from the CSB. After all, it is the supposed subject of the thread. At least I cited facts and stats. Maybe it will occur to him when we reach the 10th page. "Oh my! I haven't cited a single passage from the CSB although I was the guy who started the whole thing."

 

[alexander284]

Try the Nkjv also!

Yes, I think that's an excellent suggestion!

 

[alexander284]

I would like to make a simple statement, if I may.

When I express my opinion, I'm doing just that: expressing my opinion.

I do not feel the need to "prove" anything about my opinion.

I'm not trying to persuade anyone to believe what I believe, when I'm sharing my opinion with others.

I'm not trying to convince anyone that my opinion is the "correct" opinion to have.

I am merely making a simple statement in regard to what I like or prefer.

Again, I see no reason to "prove" anything about said opinion.

I just wanted to make that clear to everyone. Thank you.

 

[alexander284]

I'd like to hear your thoughts regarding the Christian Standard Bible (CSB). Thank you.

Notice the wording of my original post. I'm merely asking for "thoughts," not facts, proof, or evidence.

 

[Conan]

Are you aware that you have said the same thing three times now? We get it. The NKJV will be your next flavor of choice.

And why do you oppose that decision? Something tells me you would recommend the New English Bible or Jerusalem Bible instead. And they being the worst English Bibles ever printed.

 

[alexander284]

And why do you oppose that decision? Something tells me you would recommend the New English Bible or Jerusalem Bible instead. And they being the worst English Bibles ever printed.

Thank you for being the voice of reason, sir.

 

[alexander284]

Getting back to my thoughts regarding the Christian Standard Bible ...

I believe it to be a fine Bible translation, putting aside my disappointment in its efforts to use gender inclusive language.

 

[alexander284]

And I certainly prefer the CSB to "dynamic" translations (e.g. the NIV, NLT, etc).

 

[RipponRedeaux]

I believe it to be a fine Bible translation, putting aside my disappointment in its efforts to use gender inclusive language.

Did you just discover that it uses inclusive language? Even its predecessor used inclusive language.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

And I certainly prefer the CSB to "dynamic" translations (e.g. the NIV, NLT, etc).

You're confused. The NLT uses functional equivalence more than the those to the left of the charts, but it uses much less than those such as the CEV GNT etc. The NIV is in the same camp as the NABRE, CSB and NET. That's not news.

 

[alexander284]

I'd like to hear your thoughts regarding the Christian Standard Bible (CSB). Thank you.

In any case, here is the original post. Thank you.

 

[alexander284]

Did you just discover that it uses inclusive language? Even its predecessor used inclusive language.

No, I've known that for quite some time now.

 

[alexander284]

You're confused. The NLT uses functional equivalence more than the those to the left of the charts, but it uses much less than those such as the CEV GNT etc. The NIV is in the same camp as the NABRE, CSB and NET. That's not news.

I never claimed otherwise.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

I never claimed otherwise.

You grouped the NIV with the NLT in the dynamic category. So going by that invalid theory the NET and CSB would be in the very same category. That's sloppy thinking --making no distinctions.