HCSB to the CSB

All 3 of them have too much for my tastes....

 

How do you know the CSB has too much? What passages make you say that? Do you disagree with the Colorado Springs guidelines? Should we always make a pronoun masculine even though we know the word can refer to women and men at the same time and context leads the translator to believe women are indeed being addressed along with men?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

Common sense questions, but you will not get a straightforward reply from Y1. Evasion and irrelevancies is his stock-n'-trade.

Y1 runs to the hills when asked for specifics.

He considers the NET,CSB and NIV to have too much inclusive language. He does not feel the need to back up any wild claim he makes. He just asserts and that's enough for him.

 

Even though this thread is about the HCSB and CSB, I have decided to respond to the above. Y1 gets distracted much of the time. Hopefully he will focus on the following quotes from the very article he hoped would give a death blow to the NIV.

The paper quotes Kenneth Cherney :"For our target reader, in our target situation, we believe that decision was the right one, and the majority of similar decisions in NIV2011 are similarly defensible." (p.2)

TEC Report :"So far as the committee is concerned, we remain of the opinion that the respective callings of men and women are clearly and fully taught in the NIV in those Biblical passages that deal with the doctrine directly." (p.3)

Quoting Cherney:"...it is not necessary to conclude that NIV 2011's 'brothers and sisters,' even in these cases, is a capitulation to political correctness. An exegetical rationale is evident in each instance, even when the rationale is not one that we agree with." (p.9)

 

In this piece on BaylyBlog, by Tim Bayly, I discovered there are two different versions of the Colorado Springs Guidelines. (Relevant to this discussion because some have referenced them in regard to the CSB.) I wasn't aware of that. Most of you may have been.
Original Colorado Springs Guidelines, May of 1997
Revised Colorado Springs Guidelines, September of 1997

 

No i wasn't thanks. I guess i have never seen the orginal before. Still haven't, since I haven't read it yet ;)

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

And here is a hearty endorsement of the CSB at SBC Voices, by Scott Gordon:
Lost in Translation…To CSB or Not to CSB

 

I have been using the CSB for the last couple of weeks in Sunday School. I have no complaints. I will probably never quit reading the ESV for personal use, but I may perminatly use the CSB for my youth(S.S and the rest of the week) and the children's service(currently using NIV2011) I teach in Sunday Morning.

I am about 40% immigrant in my youth group on Wednesday night now. I am going to have to change from the ESV to somthing that reads smoother/ and at a lower reading level.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

There does seem to be a difference between the 2 versions though, as the Niv seems to want to get equal roles for male/female, while the Csb still keeps those differences!

 

I'm really liking the CSB a lot

 

You keep repeating that same old falsehood. If you are a believer you should lay aside those sinful habits of the unregenerate.

 

The Csb does not seem to be taking the side of the Niv, as in how we can set aside the role distinctions/differences between male and Female.

 

I have the CSB. You can read any particular verse you want to on Bible Gateway and compare it for yourselves.

The earth has not burned up because the CSB agrees that Christ died for men, women and children. It changes no doctrine.

Ephesians 5:22-31 Christian Standard Bible (CSB)

Wives and Husbands

22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord, 23 because the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church. He is the Savior of the body. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives are to submit to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her with the washing of water by the word. 27 He did this to present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or anything like that, but holy and blameless. 28 In the same way, husbands are to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hates his own flesh but provides and cares for it, just as Christ does for the church, 30 since we are members of his body. 31 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.

God Bless to all.

 

That is a big fat lie that you insist on propagating.

Why do you say untrue things so often? Honestly -- you are dishonest. It has to stop.

 

Ephesians 5:22-31 New International Version

Instructions for Christian Households

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Saviour. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church -- 30 for we are members of his body. 31 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.'

 

Completely untrue. Please show proof!

 

This is KJVO talk.

 

Here's a new one, seems they decided Belshazzar was so scared he crapped his pants. I looked around, ESV/HCSB/NIV/LEB, and they all say something about his his hips giving out and knees knocking.

At that moment the fingers of a man’s hand appeared and began writing on the plaster of the king’s palace wall next to the lampstand. As the king watched the hand that was writing, his face turned pale,and his thoughts so terrified him that he soiled himself and his knees knocked together. Daniel 5:5-6 CSB

 

Definitely a "new one"...and one seriously has to wonder why, since I find no other translation that says nor even hints to such. Perhaps those CSB revisers should have taken a look at the ESV Study Bible note:

"The king's response was abject terror: literally, 'the joints of his loins were loosened,' indicating that he lost strength in his hips and legs."

That CSB rendering, in my opinion, ranks right up there with the 1970 New English Bible translation at Joshua 15:18 "As she sat on the ass, she broke wind" (which even the later Revised English Bible committee had the good sense to eliminate and go back to "she dismounted from her donkey."

 

www.dennyburk.com/critiquing-gender-language-in-the-new-niv/

www.waynegrudem.com/.../An-Evaluation-of-Gender-Language-in-the-2011-NIV.pd.
Do you accept him as a credible authority?