# Is the Christian Standard Bible (CSB) a “novelty translation”?



## Georgiadis (May 4, 2020)

I put novelty translation in quotes because I’ve read it criticized as such though my personal experience has been quite the opposite. The CSB has been absolutely delightful to read and the differences I’ve noticed between other translations have been insightful and, for the most part, appear to be thoughtful, concise decisions made by the translation team and oversight committee.

I call the CSB my “Cheat Sheet Bible” because of how clearly it reads, but unfortunately now that the seed of doubt has been planted it has become a distraction, nay, OBSESSION, whenever I encounter a word that strays from the bulk of translations I trust. I do not mean high-profile verses like John 3:16, to which there is ample explanation provided. I am referring to individual word choices that at times, appear to lend credence to the accusation that the CSB arbitrarily changes words in order to meet the minimum requirement for obtaining a copyright. Again, not my words nor belief but a festering distraction.

I will share three examples I recently encountered. I would very much appreciate any insight you may have as to the decisions behind these word choices. I know that an entire translation does not hang upon three verses but for whatever reason, I feel like these get to the heart of my underling concern. It makes me angry to think that a sweeping accusation such as this would rob me of the joy of reading God’s word. But if it is grounded, then I would want to know.

To clarify, I’ve already been down the Critical Text vs Majority Text road many times. This is not a dynamic vs equivalence debate (at least I don’t think it is). I am just hoping to get an idea as to the decision behind the word choices in the following verses.



> 1 Thessalonians 5:6
> So then, let us not sleep, like the rest, but let us stay awake and be *self-controlled*.



Most translations I’ve checked use the word “sober” instead of “self-controlled”. Seems harmless enough but why change? They can mean the same thing but there is a drunkenness antonym in the next verse that becomes slightly disconnected without the word sober. Were the translators trying to avoid people making too strong a connection to alcoholism (which would clearly fall under the umbrella of the warning but not the main force of the command)?



> Ephesians 1:6-8
> to the praise of his glorious grace that he *lavished* on us in the Beloved One. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace that he richly *poured out* on us with all wisdom and understanding.



A lot of translations use lavished in verse 8 and then some variation of poured out, freely given/bestowed, etc… in verse 6. Why not use lavished in verse 8? Richly poured out seems an adequate substitution for lavished but why _move_ lavished to verse 6?



> Galatians 5:7
> You were running well. Who prevented you from being *persuaded* regarding the truth?



Many translations use some form of the word “obey” here instead of “persuaded”. To me, those are two very different words. What makes persuaded a better choice? When I see the NIV and KJV align with each other against the CSB it gives me pause!

I think it’s important to acknowledge that none of my doctrinal beliefs have been shaken by the variations I’ve encountered. Perhaps that makes this all moot. I just hate the thought of a translation that is produced for the primary, or even secondary, purpose of avoiding licensing fees for a publication house. No doubt it happens, and may even be the funding source behind the project - but that it would affect the translation to the extent of influencing word choices is of genuine concern.

The Puritan Board has been a real blessing in my life and this is the first time I’ve posted. Please go easy on me!


----------



## Polanus1561 (May 4, 2020)

Those differences are minor, and it seems you have come to the viewpoint that new translations must factor in what older translations have rendered. I don't think that should necessarily be the prerogative of newer translations. If a translator wants to use self controlled instead of sober to lead the reader not to think only alcholism is spoken of here, then so be it. Sorry, thinking you are making a mountain out of a mole-hill here, don't let this distract you from your bible-reading.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Hamalas (May 4, 2020)

Those all look like valid translation choices to me. I think you can safely ignore the nay-sayers on this one.  

And welcome to the PB! I sure hope this isn't your last post.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Georgiadis (May 4, 2020)

Thanks for the reassurance! I’m probably blowing it all out of proportion. I guess I’m just hoping that the motivation behind those examples was purely scholarly and not for the sake of “being different”. I’ll have to grow tougher skin if I’m going to watch bible reviews and not let the haters mess with my head!


----------



## Pilgrim (May 7, 2020)

No, although it may have a few novel features or renderings, such as the use of contractions.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (May 7, 2020)

I have been reading the CSB in Ezekiel and 1 Thessalonians and I have to say that it has grown on me a lot. The translation of Ezekiel seems particularly good.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Pilgrim (May 7, 2020)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> I have been reading the CSB in Ezekiel and 1 Thessalonians and I have to say that it has grown on me a lot. The translation of Ezekiel seems particularly good.



The HCSB was known for being rather vivid in the prophets, (in the words of one reviewer) so perhaps that has been continued in the CSB.

Perhaps the biggest problem I have with it is that I tend to skim "modern speech" translations the way I would a news article, which isn't conducive to reflecting on the text. So I tend to go back to the NKJV, KJV, or the NASB.


----------



## Georgiadis (May 11, 2020)

After a lot of digging, I'm happy to say that I really appreciate these differences now. They are far from novel or obscure and seem as accurate, consistent, and well thought out as any. I should have known better than to let the CSB haters get to me... but at least I can put this one to bed and go on joying in the Word.

Thanks for bearing with me!

For those that may be curious, I did my best to summarize an explanations for each verse in question. I am NOT a scholar but read nearly every commentary I could find to hopefully gain some insight into the original Greek. I’m not even sure I got it 100% right but I think it’s close enough for me to be able to let it go. I'll post my answer to each verse in the next three comments. I'd update the post but I'm a new member and can't make edits beyond three days after publishing.


----------



## Georgiadis (May 11, 2020)

Georgiadis said:


> Most translations I’ve checked use the word “sober” instead of “self-controlled”. Seems harmless enough but why change? They can mean the same thing but there is a drunkenness antonym in the next verse that becomes slightly disconnected without the word sober. Were the translators trying to avoid people making too strong a connection to alcoholism (which would clearly fall under the umbrella of the warning but not the main force of the command)?


The CSB consistently translates words derived from néphó (sober) as self-control and uses “sensible” and “good sense” for other Greek words that could also mean self-control (sōphrona, sōphrosynēs, etc...). sōphrona gets its roots from sozo and phren (safe in mind). The CSB seems to be captureing the mental aspect of sōphrona and the physicality of nēphōmen in nearly every occurance. The only exception is in 1 Peter when nēphontes and nēpsate are specifically mentioned in the context of preparing your mind and being alert. Then the mental aspect is favored over the physical and translated as “sober-minded”.


> 1 Peter 1:13
> Therefore, with your minds ready for action, be sober-minded _(nēphontes / sober)_ and set your hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ.





> 1 Peter 5:8
> Be sober-minded _(nēpsate / sober)_, be alert. Your adversary the devil is prowling around like a roaring lion, looking for anyone he can devour.


Similarly sōphronas and sōphronein are only ever translated “self-control”, as opposed to “sensible” or "good sense", in Titus when used in context of encouraging women and young men to live pure lives.


> Titus 2:5-6
> to be self-controlled _(sōphronas / safe in mind)_, pure, workers at home, kind, and in submission to their husbands, so that God's word will not be slandered. In the same way, encourage the young men to be self-controlled _(sōphronein / sound mind)_


Interestingly, older men are also encouraged to be self-controlled but their exhortation follows the typical CSB pattern of using the more sobering word nēphalious as well as the sensible sōphronas.


> Titus 2:2
> Older men are to be self-controlled _(nēphalious / sober)_, worthy of respect, sensible _(sōphronas / safe in mind)_, and sound in faith, love, and endurance.


So I guess older men get a double dose... sober up old man!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Georgiadis (May 11, 2020)

Georgiadis said:


> A lot of translations use lavished in verse 8 and then some variation of poured out, freely given/bestowed, etc… in verse 6. Why not use lavished in verse 8? Richly poured out seems an adequate substitution for lavished but why _move_ lavished to verse 6?


There seems to be two different approaches to translating verse 6. One highlights the fact that God’s grace is freely given in Christ and the other is that we have found favor with God through Christ. Lavished seems a good word choice for highlighting both, A) how undeserving we are and B) our shocking transformation from beggar to co-heir.

Besides the fact that it would be unnecessarily confusing to use “lavished” for two different words in such close proximity to each other - the Greek word in verse 8 seems to carry a notion of overflowing from the riches of God’s grace which is represented well with “richly poured out”. This is what Ellicott’s Commentary had to say about using the word "overflow" to provide the missing emphasis in previous translations that had rendered it “abound”.


> ...the word "overflow" having an emphasis which our word "abound" has lost, and signifying here that the richness of God's grace not only fills the soul with the blessing of salvation, but overflows into the additional gifts...


----------



## Georgiadis (May 11, 2020)

Georgiadis said:


> Many translations use some form of the word “obey” here instead of “persuaded”. To me, those are two very different words. What makes persuaded a better choice? When I see the NIV and KJV align with each other against the CSB it gives me pause!


There is a little wordplay in the original Greek that is preserved in the CSB. Persuaded (peithesthai) has the same root as “persuasion” in verse 8. It is a derivative of “peitho” and another form is used yet again in verse 10.


> Galatians 5:7-10
> You were running well. Who prevented you from being persuaded _(peithesthai / to convince)_ regarding the truth? This persuasion _(peismonē / a yielding to persuasion)_ does not come from the one who calls you. A little leaven leavens the whole batch of dough. I myself am persuaded _(pepoitha / to convince)_ in the Lord you will not accept any other view. But whoever it is that is confusing you will pay the penalty.


Translating peithesthai as “persuaded” instead of “obeying” keeps the wordplay intact without obscuring the meaning.


----------

