Holman Christian Standard Bible

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by alexander284, Apr 18, 2005.

  1. alexander284

    alexander284
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'd like to hear everyone's opinion in regard to the Holman Christian Standard Bible.

    Thank You. [​IMG]
     
  2. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    How to get saved in the HCSB:

    Romans 10:9 (HCSB = The Holman Christian Standard Bible):
    if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
     
  3. alexander284

    alexander284
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are you endorsing the HCSB? :confused:
     
  4. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe that all English versions are
    the inerrant Written Word of God. The
    HCSB contains the inerrant Written Word
    of God. Yes, i endorce it.

    I also have been using it to teach my Sunday
    School lesson for over a year. HCSB is
    a good Bible.
     
  5. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    We recently had a thread on the HCSB.

    HCSB dynamic or literal

    Here is the introduction to the HCSB that shares its motivations and translation philosophy.

    Here is an article where Michael Marlowe gives his opinion on the HCSB.

    Here is the historical context of the translation from bible.org

     
  6. mcgyver

    mcgyver
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    0
    I personally prefer the NKJV/NASB, but I have found nothing wrong with the HCSB, and in fact would recommend it over the NIV...A matter of personal opinion. [​IMG]
     
  7. alexander284

    alexander284
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you think the HCSB will ever be as widely accepted by the public as the NIV?

    Or will be regarded [​IMG] as a "Southern Baptist" translation?
     
  8. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,429
    Likes Received:
    72
    I think it's a good version. I personally don't like the tone of the text, which lends itself to colloquialisms at times, but this is not a serious flaw--it's a matter of preference.

    My problems with the HCSB:
    1. It was possibly written to derail the TNIV and/or to replace the NIV in Lifeway material.
    2. The translation team was HEAVILY baptist when compared to other translation teams.
    3. "Optimal" equivalence

    I really see no need for the "optimal" equivalence translation philosophy. All it really is "dynamic with a little bit of formal equivalence every now and then." I have no problem with the dynamic equivalence philosophy as employed in the NIV, so I'm sticking with it.


    But, if these issues do not bother you, then by all means use the text. As for me, I did not find the HCSB literal enough to replace my NASB, nor did I find it constructed better than my NIV.

    As an interesting aside, if you have an early text edition HCSB, one of the titles of Jesus listed on page 1070 is "Source of LifeWay Network User" according to Acts 3:15, apparently. :D
     
  9. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,429
    Likes Received:
    72
    I think it is as likely for SBC churches to adopt the Roman Catholic New American Bible as it is for mainstream Christianity to accept the HCSB.
     
  10. alexander284

    alexander284
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with everything you said to this point.
    However,I prefer the more "literal" translations.

    I have mixed feelings about the HCSB. I am glad it's more literal than the NIV but I find the colloquialisms a bit off-putting. ;)
     
  11. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I used the NIV to teach Sunday
    School for 10-11 years. I prefer the HCSB.

    It will be a significant Bible if only
    a 'Southern Baptist Bible'.
     
  12. alexander284

    alexander284
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    [/QUOTE]I used the NIV to teach Sunday
    School for 10-11 years. I prefer the HCSB.

    It will be a significant Bible if only
    a 'Southern Baptist Bible'. [/QB][/QUOTE]

    I would be interested in knowing why you prefer the HCSB to the NIV. (Just curious.) [​IMG]
     
  13. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ed, how can you say that "all English versions are the inerrant Written Word of God"? Are you saying that all the English versions are perfect, and without fault, as the word "Inerrant" means? urelt you have to limit this to the original autographs. Further, by your statement, that the HCSB "contains the inerrant Written Word of God", you can be accused of saying that you only believe in a partial "Inspiration of Scripture", which I am sure you don't believe.

    Regards
    Icthus
     
  14. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please ignore "urelt"
     
  15. Ed Edwards

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

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Icthus: " Further, by your statement, that the HCSB "contains the inerrant Written Word of God", you can be accused of saying that you only believe in a partial "Inspiration of Scripture", which I am sure you don't believe."

    I don't understand your charges.
    What is partial "Insdpiration of Scripture"?
    I believe in whole inspiration of scripture.
    The whole of the HCSB is inspired, inerrant scripture
    and additionaly contains inerrant, inspired scripture.

    Icthus: "Ed, how can you say that "all English versions are the inerrant Written Word of God"?"

    I didn't say that, i said (cut and paste):
    "I believe that all English versions are
    the inerrant Written Word of God."

    MOst people want me to say:
    "I believe that all faithful English versions are
    the inerrant Written Word of God."
    (yes, The Reader's Digest Bible (RDB) is weak.
    Yes, the New World Translation (NWT) is weak.
    They still contain the inerrant Written Word of God.
    But people get upset when i say that.

    I'm not a missionary
    "I believe that all English versions are
    the inerrant Written Word of God".
    Feel free to say only the unavailable original
    authographs are inspired and inerrant. I'm going
    for the avialable Bibles are inspired and inerrant.

    BTW, that includes the KJV1611, KJV1769, and KJV1873
    that i have on my shelf.
     
  16. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for clearing it up :D
     
  17. alexander284

    alexander284
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow! An excellent analogy. :cool:
     
  18. west

    west
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2004
    Messages:
    197
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like it !
     
  19. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Originally posted by StefanM:
    I think it is as likely for SBC churches to adopt the Roman Catholic New American Bible as it is for mainstream Christianity to accept the HCSB. [/QB]
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Do you think someone can be saved reading the RC New American?
     
  20. JohnB

    JohnB
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2002
    Messages:
    281
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think the HCSB is ok as yet another unasked for version (like the NCV, the CEV, etc.)

    However, I think Holman's underlying motive was clear: save money on royalties. Almost all the Christian publishers I can think of have their own version for this purpose.

    The HCSB allows them to save millions annually on NIV/NKJV (etc.) royalties in the tons of Sunday School material and other materials published by the SBC.

    Like I said, it's ok as far as translation. But it was totally unneeded except for econmoic reasons. The NIV, NKJV, NASB and ESV all were perfectly sufficient. In act, I don't think any English version since the NKJV has really been needed.
     

Share This Page

Loading...