Featured Holman Christian Standard Bible

There is certainly an over-flooded market --that's for sure. But have you ever done side-by-side comparisons? Have you noted any contrasts between the ESV and HCSB?

 

No not at all.

 

I had asked you two questions.

#1 : Have you ever done side-by-side comparisons between the two versions?

#2 : Have you noticed any contrasts between the two translations?

 

I am sorry, apparently I needed to elaborate more.

No not at all.

No not at all.


Does that help?

 

No,not at all. ;-)

If you've never done side-by-side comparisons,how are you able to judge,as you have, that there are no contrasts between the ESV and HCSB?

 

I am trying to be patient here. Because of our history on this board I am trying to determine are you just unable to understand something fairly simple or are you trying to intentionally be difficult.


When I say no not at all I am saying I have never tried to make a judgement on that since I have never looked at it. I cannot explain it in any more simpler terms.

 

Likewise RM.

Then you should have just said you have never compared the two versions --period. Because,since you haven't done comparisons,you cannot make the determination that there are notable differences.

 

Since I only attend SBC infrequently, less than once per year, I was dis-invited to participate in this thread. However, I think a substantial number of SBC attenders have contributed, so my two cents should not derail the topic.

I am all for the HCSB over and against the NIV or ESV or NLT.

Sometimes the HCSB ventures off the beaten path, and misses the mark but more frequently, I believe, its "quirky" translations come closer to the mark or at least provide food for thought.

As someone else said, the go to bible of today is the NASB, but it should be compared with other translations, namely the HCSB, the NET, and the WEB.

Case in point, Luke 18:13-14. Most translations have the tax collector pleading for God to be "merciful" to me. But the HCSB has "turn your wrath from me." Now this is a parable told by Christ, the Lamb of God, who died to provide the propitiationary shelter for all mankind.

Note that the tax collector was justified, where the holier than thou, self righteous boob totally missed his condition before God. How are we "justified" under the New Covenant in His blood? By entering the propitiationary shelter of Christ.

So the quirky translation at least affords food for thought. The NASB has "merciful" footnoted as literally "propitious" but the HCSB brings the plea for Messianic deliverance more closely to the forefront.

 

I believe the "control" factor was more along the line of controlling who used it in their publications, as well as Lifeway and the SBC having absolute and unlimited access to it in their own publications. Content was surely a factor but not as big a factor as usage.

 

Perhaps, but remember the HCSB was coming out when the NIV was being updated and eventually came out as the TNIV and upset folks who thought Jesus was being disrespected in some way. I remember lots and lots of nonsense around this whole issue. SBC kinda jumped on the bandwagon and rode it to a new translation.

Also note the NIV was charging Lifeway for use of the NIV, which it does with everyone. Though not mentioned often, this control was undoubtably also about the cost associated in using the HCSB.

Plan and simple the HCSB would have died a quick and painless death had it not been printed in Lifeway curriculum.

 

Work on the HCSB began in 1984, 18 years before the TNIV was published. Not even close. LifeWay funded the translation project, which was the brainchild of former NKJV translation project manger Dr. Arthur Farstad, so it was natural that LifeWay would publish the Bible. The HCSB is not the "curriculum" Bible in LifeWay's Bible studies. Most of LifeWay's study materials still use the NASB as the reference work.

 

Almost. The HCSB bought (not sure exactly the right word) the Farstad work, which was close to being done without any SBC help. I believe Farstad passed before the work could be completed and when the SBC took over they made some changes which would be expected with different leadership.

Concerning the usage, I haven't seen every Lifeway work, but that which I have seen had the HCSB.

Also, the NIV is technically under continual revision though editions aren't published.

 

Got me to thinking, so I went and did a bit of looking. Pretty good summary of what happened with Farstad and the HCSB

http://www.bible-researcher.com/csb.html

 

We are SBC. Several of our students use the FCA Bible they get at school. Those Bibles are HCSB. The Bibles we got from Lifeway last year for VBS were HCSB.

 

This is true in terms of what started. However, as the bible-researcher.com link just above notes, when Lifeway and the SBC got tangled up with Zondervan in the late 90s they purchased the rights to Farstad's work and then sent it into various translation committees. The idea was to create a translation that accurately reflected core principles of the convention while also bringing in some of the most recent scholarship.

Ultimately what got the ball rolling in the SBC was the need to have their own translation the SBC didn't have to dole out money for on an ongoing basis. The HCSB provides this.

I know this information because one of my parents was a trustee in the SBC at the time.

This is not true. I just went into one of our curriculum closets and looked at 15 resources from the SBC/Lifeway including: The Gospel Project, Explore the Bible, Bible Studies for Life, and several children's materials and all of them state on the copyright page that the HCSB is the default text unless otherwise cited. None of the gave attribution to hte NASB/U.

 

Good article. I personally don't like the use of "Yahweh" in translations. Nobody called him that. Even Jews today do not use term....some oven write "G_d" in English so as nit to profane his name. In fact, when Jews read the Hebrew Scriptures today and encounter the word YHWH, do they not say "Hashem" when reading aloud.

Given that, I wonder why ppl use "Yahweh" in a translation? We DON'T know God's name since the vowel sounds were forgotten on purpose.

 

That's a scary thought, that they would attempt to do a translation that agrees with principles of the convention rather than one that agrees with the best manuscripts.

 

Thus the criticism of the HCSB being a SBC bible. They seemed, by most accounts, to do a fairly honest job in the translation, but perceptions are hard to shake.

 

The average church member knows nothing about any so called perceptions.