Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Speedpass, Sep 23, 2011.

  1. Speedpass

    Speedpass
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,488
    Likes Received:
    0
    I sometimes read it, and its form is similar to the New American Standard Bible (NASB). Is it safe to assume that it is an updated version of the NASB?
     
  2. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    It isn't an update to the NASB(U) but is it's own, freestanding translation. Though it may read like other translations it isn't based on another English version. :)
     
  3. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    beieve that it is basically the baptist answer to the NIV !

    It adheres to "optimal translation" principles, which is a fancy way of saying they will try to steer a mediating position between literal and dynamic equilvalence...

    When bible needs to be literally transalted, they will do such, and when more free should be used, they do that!

    based upon latest manuscripts and info/technology, brand new translation..

    Like it, use it, seems to me to be a baptist NIV!
     
  4. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    101
    I prefer the Holman to the NIV (any flavor), although it has some idiosyncrasies -- such as the use of Messiah instead of Christ in the NT; frequent (but not necessarily consistent) use of Yahweh in the OT; This is the Lord's declaration instead of The Lord says in the Prophets -- and some one-of-a-kind renderings. On the whole, I think it's a good translation, probably closer to the NET than the NIV.

    I've been using it at church for a couple of years, partly because of its size and partly because the pastor was using the NKJV and I wanted a completely different translation. The new pastor uses the Holman, so I'll probably switch back to the ESV to follow along.
     
  5. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Well, I have read that members of the translation team are from 17 denominations.Therefore it would be inaccurate to call it a Baptist Bible.
     
  6. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Have you taken the time to read the 2011 NIV?

    Rick Mansfield and others say the NET translation is a bit more dynamic than the NIV. I consider the HCSB to be on the left side of that very small turf of mediating translations. A number of times the 2011 NIV and NET read about the same. I have never compared the HCSB with the Dallas project however.

    I like your thinking here. I always appreciate a sermon better using a version that differs from the preacher's translation. Not many here would agree with that line of reasoning though.
     
  7. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    You are correct that several different dominations were on the transaltion team, I was just referring to the fact that their seemed to be a situation where the SBC and other baptist groups seem to be "pushing" for it to be adopted as a main Bible version, ahead of the NIV!

    Same way that it seems like the ESV is making headway in 'reformed" circles !
     
  8. Jerome

    Jerome
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    5,615
    Likes Received:
    44
    Which non-SBC groups have been pushing the HCSB?
     
  9. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    that was my mistake!

    Did not read far enough into the article was reading!

    Appears that the SBC set up the HCSB to become their 'standard" bible version, replacing the NIV, in reaction to whn the TNIV and later on the NIV 2011 versions came out!

    translated in order to keep the Bible under what the SBC considered "sound" translation principles!
     
  10. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    101
    Only small bits. I read the TNIV for a while and found some changes I liked better than the NIV's renderings and some less. So far the same has been true with the 2011 v. TNIV. I will admit that the use of they as a singular is jarring. That doesn't bother many readers, but it bothers me.

    I wouldn't disagree. I was thinking not of translational philosophy but of tone; if you read the Holman and NET, they seem to be "new" in a way that other translations aren't, just as the original NIV represented a break from previous mainstream translation efforts.

    As a teenager I was using the NASB (the one with the ugly orange cover) when the pastor was using the KJV, and it's often been my experience since then that I was using a different version than the preacher. It never seemed to be a problem, so I guess I've slipped into the habit of preferring to be able to compare the texts.
     
  11. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    But do you use the singular they in conversational English? Wayne Grudem does, though he has been a vocal critic of all things NIV,especially the singular they phenomenon.
     
  12. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    101
    I'm sure I do, though I try not to. I also use ain't and y'all and regional colloquialisms and slang.

    But I do many things in informal conversation with family and friends that I wouldn't do in in formal settings or in writing standard English.
     
  13. 12strings

    12strings
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,743
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe that Lifeway (SBC publishers) purchased the rights to the Holman Bible so they could freely quote it without paying roylties, or fear of copyright issues. (anytime a publisher uses NIV or NASB, they are supposed to give credit to the copyright owners.)

    SBC using HOlman and KJV eliminates this issue, since they own Holman now, and KJV is not copyrighted.
     
  14. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,102
    Likes Received:
    218
    #14 Salty, Sep 27, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 27, 2011
  15. sag38

    sag38
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    1
    I don't think LifeWay purchased the rights to the Holman Bible. They didn't have to buy it because it was LifeWay's baby all the way from inception to completion. Now, they have a very good, modern English translation, that they can use in their literature without having to pay royalties.
     
  16. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    You hit the nail on the head. In fact, I have always thought the NIV to be overpriced when compared to other Bibles; maybe they were trying what we called the "Cadillac" approach of marketing during my MBA program, I can't really say whether or not NIV had higher expenses, but being the number one selling translation I would think that the price could be lowered somewhat. I know if you buy the rights on an software package for the NIV it is usually the highest. It was a simple fact that the SBC had a contract with NIV to print both the KJV and NIV side by side in their Sunday School (or whatever its called today) literature. My guess is that they got tired of the huge reprint fees and felt it would be worth hiring enough experts to do their own translation, which is NOT a copy or upgrade of another existing translation like the KJV just happens to be.

    This just happens to irritate the KJVO because they cannot point to a one hundred percent accurate English Bible before 1611 or actually 1769 as they do today. Yeah, maybe this was uncalled for, but it does fit the subject since the KJV is actually an upgrade of other Bibles including the Vulgate.
     
  17. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Could that be why the SBC has gone to making the HCSB the "NIV" for their churches, as NIV was "overprocing" them for use of thatversion for study purposes/sunday school literature etc?
     
  18. TC

    TC
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,225
    Likes Received:
    10
    I agree with you that buying the rights to use the NIV in software programs is the most expensive. However, in my area, physical copies of the NIV has been decently priced. For example, my last KJV study bible cost $40 and the NIV study bible cost $25. I got both a few years ago before the TNIV fiasco. Today, plain text editions are almost identically priced regardless of version.

    I really do not understand why they would not give anyone a break on the high use/reprint fee. In Lifeway's case, it was definitely better for them to finance their own translation.
     
  19. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    TC you are correct that the price of paper Bibles has dropped quite a bit. In fact, similar to what was said earlier, I went to Lifeway in Tulsa and they had less than six different KJV's while the shelves for Bibles were packed primarily with NIV's, HCSBs, NASBs, The Living Translation among others. It seems like the ESV may not be selling so well either. They only had about three ESV styles.

    Of course they had 500 "The Bible For Your 16 Year Old Cheerleader" type of Bibles. This seems to be the latest marketing trap and interestingly, they seem to have more in NIV versions than in HCSB versions.

    Ever since e-book readers have started becoming popular primarily with Amazon's low cost and reliable (now) Kindle readers--a lot of the old book companies are trying to keep the price of e-books the same as paper-backs or maybe a dollar cheaper. It is my understanding they are not selling because people know they are not buying, printing, paper, ink, storage, shipping and then returns of unsold books which was common in the trade. A lot of big authors even in the fiction realm are switching to private publishing and getting rid of their agents and using the web to market their books. They may not sell like Harry Potter, but then again, if a Kindle is priced somewhere between I believe its 99 cents and 9.95 or so the royalty is over or near 70% compared to 15% to 20% typical from a print publisher. With Amazon's power, I think we are going to see decreased prices in all books because now people who could not publish can put a book on Amazon and advertise it on the web at a low cost.

    I bought a Kindle and the NIV was still the highest, but I did buy the earlier version for a fairly reasonable price. Most other Bibles were very reasonable. I think I bought my ESV E-book for around 4 dollars or maybe less.

    ESV came out at the wrong time. Being a correction of the RSV it was competing with the NEW RSV and the HCSB along with the NIV who outsold every Bible. I don't think a lot of people realize the risk of a new translation since the market is flooded with them and it is hard to get a new Bible translation accepted by the general public that reads Bibles if they make one simple mistake in their first run and they all do, including the KJV and NKJV.

    Even the NKJV was a marketing ploy to try to get some of the big KJV market and I think it has worked in a lot of churches with the exception of churches that use the NIV for a pew Bible for its simplicity or they are hard-core fundamentalist with their KJV laying right next to Ripplinger's book about New Age Bibles. So, the NKJV has found a good nitch in churches especially like Southern Baptist where there are a lot of older people who don't want to lose their KJV, but will accept a NKJV. My nephew is a preacher in a church like this and he switched to the NKJV just to keep the older folks happy and they love it because they can still follow along and it is very close without the thee's and thou's. He would rather use a more modern Bible, but this was a safe compromise in a church with a lot of older adults.

    Bottom line, its all about marketing, quality of both text and the Bible itself (the first ESV's came apart easily and I think that hurt them even now) and who translated it and how many mistakes are found in the first editions off the press.

    Say what you want, but its about money even the die-hard printers making KJV Bibles. There you go, in the U.S. no copyright so they print in the public domain--just can't ship to England without paying a royalty. But, lets be clear. Everybody wants and needs to make a living, now whether you get rich or not from a Bible is between you and God, but you could also write another Harry Potter style series and pack your pockets without the complaints of all that money coming from your Bible's you print.
     

Share This Page

Loading...