HCSB Questions

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Wilander, Aug 30, 2004.

  1. Wilander

    Wilander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've been reading the HCSB more and more, and I really like it. Sometimes, though, the translation seems a little wooden or predictable or even sacrificing precision for a smoother style.

    I was wondering what other folks' experiences are with it and their assessments. It flows real smoothly (particularly, the translation of Revelation), but at times it seems much less literal than the ESV or the NASB.

    Using the research and summary at the web site below, I figure that the HCSB lands somewhere between the ESV and the NIV when it comes to literalness. Does that correspond to others' experiences? Maybe, for Bible study the ESV is superior, but for general reading and devotional purposes, the HCSB might be preferred?

    http://www.propadeutic.com/

    I'd sure appreciate any thoughts from anyone. :confused:
     
  2. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    I to enjoy this version but it is not the most accurate. On the other hand it's more accurate than the NIV and many other versions. The versions I use the most are: ISV,NASB,HCSB,NKJV. Really enjoy all of them.
    The NASB and NKJV for study and ISV,HCSB for general reading.

    1cross+3nails=4given [​IMG]
     
  3. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    2 Thessalonians 2:3 (HCSB)
    Don't let anyone deceive you in any way. For that day
    will not come unless the apostasy comes first
    and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction.

    This say an "apostasy" comes before the man of lawlessness.
    I prefer the KJV which says "the falling away" which
    is the Rapture/resurrection. The apostasy is unmeasurable
    and impossible to know (save by God) when it happened.
    The falling away, the rapture/resurrection,
    will be known by all when it happens.

    The 7 English Bibles before the KJV used some form
    of "departure" here.

    What I like is that i live in the 21st
    Century (2001-2100). The HCSB is written
    in the English language of the marketplace
    of the 21st Century. I get tired of the
    upper crust language of
    the 17th Century (1601-1700).

    [​IMG] Praise Jesus! [​IMG]
     
  4. EaglewingIS4031

    EaglewingIS4031
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    0
    I Like it. I also like the ESV. I used to use the NASB and NIV alot in combination. Since getting the HCSB and an ESV earlier this year, the NASB and NIV have sat on the shelf.

    The HCSB uses "Messiah" alot in the NT. This may be right or it may be wrong but it is certainaly wierd. :rolleyes: :confused: The preface explains why they do this but it still seems like an arbitrary decision. Any way I now teach my SS class with it.
     
  5. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I teach my Sunday School class also
    using the HCSB.

    I hear there were signs at the Ovens
    of the 3rd Reich: "Brought to you by Christ".
    "Christ" is a stumbling block to the
    Jew. Every religious Jew looks for
    the coming of Messiah. I believe the
    Jewish Messiah is the Jew: Messiah Jesus,
    my Lord and Savior.

    [​IMG]
     
  6. EaglewingIS4031

    EaglewingIS4031
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK Ed but they still use Christ in the gentile parts. Do you really think Lifeway will market this to Jews.

    I do think you and I are probably in agreement on most issues with the HCSB.

    Amos 3:3
     
  7. Wilander

    Wilander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    It sounds like y'all have reached similar conclusions to my own: the HCSB is a smoother read because it's in a 21st Century style, but it's word-for-word correspondence is inferior to other versions such as the ESV or the NASB but superior to the NIV.

    Shucks. By paying a little more attention to literalness, the HCSB could have been really top notch, it seems.

    What is your SS experience like? Does the class respond well to it or not? How about KJV folks or NIV folks?
     
  8. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    I realize that this is not the Theology Forum, but you are mistaken on the interpretaion of this verse. The words "falling away" is the Greek word apostasia which literally means, "defection from truth" or "apostasy." It has no reference to the Rapture or resurrection.

    So, in this case the HCSB is accurate.
     
  9. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, I doubt if Lifeway will
    market this to Jews. However, it may market it
    to people who are Christian and non-Christian
    who need to refer to Jesus as "Messiah"
    and not as the curse word "Chr*st".
    BTW, in the 21st century it is common to
    place the title first and Say "Messiah Jesus"
    instead of "Jesus Messiah". "Jesus Christ"
    is now a curse word and there is no reason
    to use it, even if it does appear that way
    in the Greek and in the KJV.


    [​IMG] Praise Meffiah Iesus! [​IMG]
     
  10. Michael52

    Michael52
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    360
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have been reading the HCSB lately. I have read about half the NT and some of my favorite parts of the OT. As is my custom, when bible reading I typically read several other versions simulataneously (or at least have them handy for when a passage "strikes" me in a strange or different way).

    The HCSB is somewhat less literal than the NASB and ESV, but more literal than the NIV. Of course, the voluminous footnotes have the very literal translation where it deviates significantly. I have no doubt that between the text and the notes, it is very faithfully communicating the original a bit better than the NIV.

    Depending on ones taste I guess it reads better (more understandable?) than the NASB. As far as literary quality is conscerned, I am not sure I like it better than the NIV. I do not think it even comes close to ESV. Of course, this is just my biased opinion. It may "grow" on me. [​IMG]

    One "pet-peave" I have, maybe related to the literary quality issue, is the use of contractions when quoting dialogue. The contractions make it seem just a bit too "chatty" and informal.

    Again, this may just be my own bias. I think every English teacher I ever had drilled it into me to avoid contractions in formal writting. I even "feel guilty" when I use a contraction here on the BB! :eek: ;)
     
  11. EaglewingIS4031

    EaglewingIS4031
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2004
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jesus Christ is the name of my Lord and Savior. It is the sweetest name I know. Anyone who uses it as a curse word is in violation of the third commandment. Those who wish to violate the commandment #3 will do so with any of the names of God. If the HCSB catches on people will soon use "Messiah Jesus" for swearing too. :(
     
  12. APuritanMindset

    APuritanMindset
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2004
    Messages:
    229
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have been using the HCSB for some time now, since I saw it on the shelves actually. I was waiting for it for a while too. I really like it. I agree with other people's posts that sometimes it seems to go with a flow of reading more than literalness, but the translations notes at the bottom of the page show this and do give you the option of an alternate reading.

    Taking Greek this year at school, I kinda wanted to comment on this contractions thing.

    The New Testament in particular was written in the common language of the people, it just was of a bit better quality. So I don't personally have an issue with the contractions. If it was in the vernacular in the original languages, than it should be the same today, in my opinion.
     
  13. Michael52

    Michael52
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    360
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree the Bible should be in the common language of common people, after all, that's who it is to reach (and teach). Though, now in English, as then in Greek, it should be of a bit better quality than is "common".

    I think the Bible should not necessarily be on the "cutting edge" in English. Our language changes so fast that what is "hip" and modern today quickly becomes "corny" (ie "trite") and decidedly "un-hip". A good bible translation should, though never quite modern, endure in timelessness beyond the generation in which it is produced.

    By the way, welcome to the BB, APuritanMindset. [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  14. Tangent

    Tangent
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2004
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    0
    Having just finished reading through the ESV I picked up my copy of the HSCB a few days ago and began looking it over. From what I've read so far, the ESV is certainly more literal, the HSCB more fluid. As for the use of "Messiah" instead of "Christ" in some NT passages, it was odd to read a familiar verse and see the former term replacing the latter. Also, in the OT "Yahweh" is used in several places (e.g., Exodus 3:15-16; 33:19; Psalm 68:4), whereas most versions use "LORD" exclusively. Neither of these changes is bad, just momentarily jarring. I'll reserve final judgment on the HSCB until I read more of it.
     
  15. APuritanMindset

    APuritanMindset
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2004
    Messages:
    229
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am deffinitely in agreement with you there. I have read some pretty ugly versions of the Bible done in the name of being "user-friendly" or whatever you call that. [​IMG]

    I do think the HCSB does a fine job of "feeling" (for lack of a better word) relevant while also holding a quality that makes it useful for word study as well.
     
  16. Wilander

    Wilander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    I do appreciate the footnotes which offer a more literal reading; it would have been perhaps better to have used the more literal reading in the translation (when it would not be too awkward to understand) and then the variation in the footnotes. The contractions aren't distracting, to me anyway, and suggest the informality of the original correspondence. I also like the use of "Messiah" and "Yahweh" as well as the brackets.

    I did use the HCSB with an older commentary which relied on the KJV for its Scripture, and I was pleasantly surprised by the correspondence between the two.

    Which raises an intriguing question: perhaps the KJV, not the ESV or NASB, is the translation against which to compare it as to style, etc. The HCSB does seem to preserve some of the eloquence of the KJV without falling victim to its archaisms, and because of its philosophy of "optimal equivalence" it appears to leave the reader with a clearer sense of the meaning of many passages instead of having to first overcome the syntax of a more word-for-word rendering of the Scriptures.

    I have varied using the HCSB and the ESV in a SS class I teach (not with Lifeway or SBC materials) in a class which uses mainly the NASB, KJV, or the NKJV. Overall, the response has been that folks appreciate the smoothness of the HCSB's prose along its correspondence to their own versions.
     
  17. APuritanMindset

    APuritanMindset
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2004
    Messages:
    229
    Likes Received:
    0
    If I am comparing it for literalness, I go to the NASB and compare that way. On my computer Bible program (e-sword) there is a NASB plug in with the Strong's Greek and Hebrew numbers and so I compare that way and then go to the original greek word and look for the definitions and such that way.

    When comparing for readibility, I always use the KJV in comparison because they are a lot alike in a lot of ways.
     
  18. Wilander

    Wilander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Any thoughts on portions of the translation--e.g. the use of "slaves" throughout Revelation and elsewhere. Or, better yet, "idolators" for Gentiles in Matthew 6:7, 32. Both struck me as powerful renderings, especially in light of the sealing in Rev. 7.

    I would add that the typeface and formatting of the HCSB is superb. Sections are headed in a helpful way for finding passages.

    I must be getting older; its ease on the eyes is much appreciated. :cool:
     
  19. Lizzy

    Lizzy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    I used the ESV till I got the HCSB about three months ago and now thats all I seem to use .I have the hardback that has the bullits notes in the back .
    I wish the Life Application Study Bible came out in the HCSB version .
     
  20. Wilander

    Wilander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lizzy,

    My experience is the same as yours. I initially started off with the ESV. With the publication of the full HCSB, I find myself using it more and more and getting more comfortable with it every time.
     

Share This Page

Loading...