SBC and HCSB?

Simply replying to this thread implies no such thing, just for clarity's sake.

Personally, I have found many Southern Baptists who have a problem with the way the HCSB has been presented. Most of these people who have voiced concern are people who have come out of the IFB movement to the SBC. They do not like the way the HCSB has been presented, ie., in the same rhetoric that KJVO's present the KJV. It has been a cause for concern with my wife and myself, also. It has become such a divisive issue in our SS class that my wife and I no longer attend it. We attend the services, but not the SS class. Our pastor still uses the NIV, or at least has been to our knowledge. We have been unable to attend services for the last four weeks.

AVL1984

 

HCSB is a good translation. Slightly more literal than the NIV. More readable than the NASB and ESV in my humble opinion.

 

No doubt the evil one has been at work here. I like the HCSB, but if someone else like a different translation then all power to him. You could use the Message for all I care. It's a shame that some churches fall into the "onlyism" trap, whether it be KJV or others.

 

I agree, Cix. It is clear that the adversary is out to destroy anything that can be used. I personally haven't taken a side on the issue. We just didn't like the fighting about the version. I have read several passages from the version, though I don't own a copy. I've seen the lessons in the materials we get from Lifeway for SS, and it seems to be a good reliable version. I wouldn't expect anything less from the SBC. I believe they truly are trying to keep people "on the same page" and have some kind of uniformity. But, when it becomes so divisive that it's distracting from the working of the Holy Spirit in the SS class or the church, it's time to step back from it, as we have done.

 

Amen, Brother DeclarHim - Preach it!

The Holman Christian Standard
Bible (HCSB) is the very Word of God
preserved by His Divine Providence unto
this genernation of English Speakers in
the 21st Century. I found the presentation
HCSB presentation Bible in Mardel's
(Christian book store chain) for under $5
(before taxes). It doesn't have any study
aids but it does have the HCSB text
and the HCSB translator footnotes.
The HCSB does honestly show the variation
found between various sources for both
the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Strangely, in my Church you can't even get
a conversation going about it. My church does
use Lifeway (SBC) literature which does have
both the HCSB lesson text and the KJV1769
lesson text.

The NIVs in the pews are
not near worn out. They won't be replaced
until somebody supplies HCSBs for the
church. (our rug color has never been voted
upon, somebody always donates the rugs
of the color they wish -- voting with your $ )
Anyway, the NIVs in the pew have the
memorial and honor plates on the inside
front cover, so they may stay in the
back of the pews until they
need to be rebound (even if HCSBs are added).

The preacher, age 64, has memorized what
seems like 1/3 of the Bible -- you guessed
it, the KJV1769. So even if he reads from
a modern version, he will tell what the
KJV1769 says in the hard places (that he
has memorized).

The lady that teaches my Mother's old
class (Mom moved) is like 86. If she
has trouble with the reading from
the new HCSB she will
say something like "Read that again,
but from the Real Bible", in other words,
the KJV1769.

In summary, my Southern Baptist Church
is adapting to the HCSB. BTW, Like my
salvation, I say "my" because it pertaineth
to me, not because i own it. God owns
and is the author of my Salvation -- i
don't own my salvation, but it does pertain
to me. My church i don't own, but i am
a member of it. So I'm really not Southern
Baptist, but I am a member of a local church
which is a member of the Southern Baptist
Convention (SBC). For shorhand i say i'm
a SBC-ite.

 

As a former NASB and NIV user I like it. But I guess it is marketed to people like me because it is intended to strike a balance between the NASB and NIV. I the NIV is used by my current pastor my old pastor (at another SBC church) used the NASB. I now use the HCSB to teach my SS class because it is in the lesson material. Our pew Bibles are NIV, so I bring HCSB to service as well.

The ESV is also marketed to be between the NASB and NIV. But lean a little closer to the FE end of the spectrum. I like it to I bring it to church at night.

My copy of the HCSB has great footnotes and something called Bullet notes which are helpfull. but it has no maps or a concordance.
My ESV has great Maps and a concordance.
Both are hard cover and I use bible covers of the slip over non-zippered variety.

There are places and verses that I don't like in both versions, but I don't throw out babies with bath water.
Ps 23:1,4,6 in the HCSB reads very similar to the Catholic NAB
and Jn. 20:23 in the ESV is worded poorly also the footnotes for time referencs in John only leave one option. The HCSB and NASB offer 2 options.

I don't Like the way the HCSB is marketed. Statements from prominent SBC leaders such as: "Now we we have a version we can controll" and the HCSB slogan: "Nothing Could be Closer to the Truth" bother me.
Only 1/3 of the translatorsof the HCSB were Baptist.
I think there were alot of Presbeterians on the ESV team. It is developing a reputation as a reform Bible. But I'm reformed.

 

It's being accepted well, and I believe it will continue to gain acceptance. As much as people involve themselves in the technical matters of the debate, the truth is that "we're just not used to it." That will change, and people will realize it for what it is - the Word of God.

 

As long as it is published in all the SS material it will eventually become the default bible, just like the NIV did. I have resisted the marketing (read jammed down your throat) of the HCSB, but I resist most marketing of bible translations, so that is nothing new. I use the ESV, even in the pew bibles now. We don't use the Lifeway material for adults, only preschool and children...for now. Hope to end all Lifeway usage eventually.

 

Heresy!

 

Heresy! </font>[/QUOTE]LOL! Not really heresy. I have been glad to be away from much of Lifeways materials for a while. I'm not saying that they aren't any good, I'm just saying I don't like the marketing ploy of many things. I noticed that many IFB churches started doing this kind of thing with Way of Life literature, and other IFB writers, and many started putting in small bookstores in their churches to push their "onlyism" works. Guess churches are just becoming too commercial for some reason. Could it be the $$$$$ or is it to push their own agendas???

AVL1984

 

DeclareHim, many of the churches in our area are already pushing it like the IFB does the KJV. Now, as a whole, I cannot speak for the convention, but I know many others from other parts of the country are saying that their churches (SBC) are doing the same. It would be a shame to see this thing get so blown out of proportion that the SBC splits again.

AVL1984

 

We're not pushing it here, but I feel it will gain wide acceptance as time goes by. And in the end, it will be worth the monitary expense for the SBC, not having to pay NIV royalties anymore.

 

So do you think there will be a study version soon?

 

How about a HCSB with maps! A study bible is getting a little ahead of ourseves isn't it.

 

Eaglewing: “I don't Like the way the HCSB is marketed.”

Good point. The HCSB promoters in their exaggerated marketing hype actually state the following:

"Holman Christian Standard bible(tm)
the most accurate
the most readable
the most faithful
translation ever published."

Besides being arrogant in the extreme (and I suppose it has a further
implication that we should all become HCSBO due to its unparalleled
accuracy, readability, and faithfulness), this statement is nonsense.
Why? Because it can easily be falsified.

Allow me to present just three examples of HCSB translational problems
from the perhaps hundreds that could be alleged:

======================================

(1) The three-word phrase TAUTA LELALHKA hUMIN ("I have spoken these
things to you") in Jn 14:25; 15:11; 16:1, 4, 6, 33; also Jn 16:25 TAUTA
EN PAROIMIAIS LELALHKA hUMIN, "I have spoken these things in similitudes
to you").

These seven cases are the *only* NT occurrences of this particular
phrase. The phrase therefore is "characteristically Johannine". Since
all occurrences appear in relatively close context, any proper theory
of translation should result in consistency of rendering, regardless of
the particular rendering.

Yet in the HCSB, one ends up with:

Jn 14:25 - I have spoken these things to you
Jn 15:11 - I have spoken these things to you
Jn 16:1 - I have told you these things
Jn 16:4 - I have told you these things
Jn 16:6 - I have spoken these things to you
Jn 16:25 - I have spoken these things to you
Jn 16:33 - I have told you these things

While they all "mean the same thing" in a dynamic equivalent sense,
there are still unresolved problems regarding consistency of rendering.

(a) In each case Jesus is speaking;

(b) All these occurrences appear within a relatively close context,
within the single-unit upper room discourse.

It thus would seem that consistency of rendering should have been
*mandatory* -- yet the HCSB (as well as most other translations,
including the KJV!) drops the ball at this point.

======================================

(2) Similarly, in Php 2:2 (this came up in a Sunday School lesson) the
verb FRONEIN occurs twice and the HCSB renders each occurrence quite
differently, with the latter meaning reflecting creative eisegesis at
its best: the first occurrence in the verse, TO AUTO FRONHTE, is
rendered "thinking the same way"; the second occurrence, TO hEN
FRONOUNTES, is rendered "focusing on one goal". Whatever this is, it is
not "translation" if by such we are to understand "accurate" and
"faithful" as possessing any meaning. (I would note that the NKJV at
this point retains translational consistency by reading "like-minded"
and "of one mind").

======================================

(3) One also should consider how the word IDOU (properly translated as
"Behold!", "Look!" or "See!") is rendered in the HCSB. The interjection
clearly derives from a verb of seeing (EIDON), and is in fact the
imperative of such. But HCSB loses the sight concept by rendering it
in some very different ways; a non-exhaustive list of examples follows:

(a) "Listen!" (Mt 20:18; Mk 10:33; Lk 1:20; 1:31; 18:31; 1Co 15:51; Re
3:20), even when the verb carries no connotation of hearing. The
_proper_ command to listen (AKOUETE or AKOUSATE) is correctly
translated when it occurs (e.g., Mt 13:18; 15:10; 17:5; 21:33;, Mk 4:3;
7:14; 9:7; Lk 9:35; 18:6), but if Jesus at one point says AKOUETE and
at another point says IDOU, does not Jesus himself make a distinction
on this point that should have been respected and retained?

(b) "Consider" (Mt 13:3; Mk 4:3; Lk 1:36,38), when contemplation is not
a part of the connotation (the actual Greek verb for "consider"
(KATANOHSATE) appears in Lk 12:24,27, and is correctly translated by
the HCSB there);

(c) "See" (a reasonably correct rendering): Mt 1:23; 23:38; Lk 13:35;

(d) "there it was" (Mt 2:9), no comment needed.

(e) totally omitted from translation and not reflected at all in the
resultant translation (Mt 1:20; 2:1,13,19; 3:16,17, etc.)

The level of "accuracy" for the HCSB seems to drop dramatically in
light of these data. Basically, the HCSB crosses over much too far into
dynamic equivalency, and thereby totally belies its advertising claims.

Is the HCSB therefore "the most accurate" or "the most faithful"
translation "ever published"?

Give me a break.....