# Holman Christian Standard Bible



## 4ndr3w (Nov 23, 2004)

Has anyone any thoughts on the Holman Christian Standard Bible? I did a search and could only find this same question.

Here are some sample (HCSB) quotes:

(John 3:16)
"For God loved the world in this way: He gave His One and Only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life.

(John 6:44-45) 
"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the Prophets: And they will all be taught by God. Everyone who has listened to and learned from the Father comes to Me-- "

(Romans 9:10-16) 
"And not only that, but also when Rebekah became pregnant by Isaac our forefather (for though they had not been born yet or done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to election might stand, not from works but from the One who calls) she was told: The older will serve the younger. As it is written: Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated. What should we say then? Is there injustice with God? Absolutely not! For He tells Moses: I will show mercy to whom I show mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion. So then it does not depend on human will or effort, but on God who shows mercy."

(Ephesians 2:8-9)
"For by grace you are saved through faith, and this is not from yourselves; it is God's gift-- not from works, so that no one can boast."

(Galatians 5:19-23)
"Now the works of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, moral impurity, promiscuity, idolatry, sorcery, hatreds, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambitions, dissensions, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and anything similar, about which I tell you in advance--as I told you before--that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faith, gentleness, self-control. Against such things there is no law."

(Acts 11:17-18)
Therefore, if God gave them the same gift that He also gave to us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, how could I possibly hinder God?" When they heard this they became silent. Then they glorified God, saying, "So God has granted repentance resulting in life to even the Gentiles!"


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 23, 2004)

It is a conservative version of the NRSV. Consider it like the NIV with a different copyright.


----------



## 4ndr3w (Nov 23, 2004)

You got your name changed. Congrats.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Nov 24, 2004)

I don't know much about it, but in reading the quotes you posted I can tell you one thing: they come closest to translating John 3:16 as the Greek has it to any English translation.


----------



## sundoulos (Dec 28, 2004)

The HCSB is far -- very far -- superior to the NIV. Not even in the same class.


----------



## Ivan (Dec 28, 2004)

The HCSB is a translation paid for and translated by the SBC. It's okay. It's used in our SBC SS literature. I use the ESV.


----------



## sundoulos (Dec 28, 2004)

It is my understanding that the HCSB was a Holman project that came under the umbrella of the SBC when they bought out Holman. I use it in teaching the young adult SS class, Wednesday Bible study, and the Sunday evening service. I use the KJV for the Sunday AM service.


----------



## Ivan (Dec 28, 2004)

> _Originally posted by sundoulos I use the KJV for the Sunday AM service. _


_

I love the KJV. To me, it's the most beautiful of all the translations. I think it's much easier to memorize also, but it is old English. We have a tendency to be able to remember the odd (different) rather than the "normal". 

I have my KJV right there with my ESV._


----------



## ConfederateTheocrat (Dec 30, 2004)

I like my HCSB.


----------



## Bro.Jon (Jan 2, 2005)

I hope this article helps.
http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/Holman.html


----------



## Ranger (Jan 3, 2005)

Sorry BroJon, but that article didn't help much. It appeared to be from a group of KJV only guys who were trying to show the inadequacies of modern translations. Notice that many of the arguments made are lobbied against the ESV and NASB as well. The article is right though when it cleaims that the HCSB rejected the Masoretic text in light of LXX on some occasions, but most modern translations do at times. I like the sentence that says, "The Holman version also frequently rejects the Hebrew Masoretic text and instead follows the Greek Septuagint, the Syriac, Vulgate, or in some cases, just makes up its own text as it goes along. " Yeah I'm sure they just made stuff up as they went along. Lame.

From what I've read of the HCSB, it appears to be a slightly more conservative NIV. It ain't bad, but I'd rather read out of my wife's NKJV or my ESV.


----------



## Bro.Jon (Jan 4, 2005)

The HCSB is just a dupe of the NIV. The SBC just got tired of paying for the copyright.
Im sorry you reject anything King James. I am also sorry you reject people who have found apostasy in todays translations.
What ever itches the ears, I guess.


----------



## pastorway (Jan 4, 2005)

An article from the same misguided KJV only website seems to heap praise upon our dear friend and defender of the faith Dr. James White. The article states:



> James White has committed another blunder in his vain attempts to overthrow the authority of God's pure words as found in the King James Bible. He has no Final Authority but his own mind and would like very much for you to join him and his merry Bible of the Month Club Band to find out what God REALLY said.



How charitable. That means _loving_ for all you non KJVers out there.



Phillip


----------



## Bro.Jon (Jan 4, 2005)

You must be a White fan. Like White, I see you like to attack the intelligence and scholarhip of KJB defenders. 
Do you also base your translation beliefs on the fact that ALL modern translators must be sincere, and wouldn't possibly make a mistake?
Do you also ignore the fact that KJB defenders have also reject Ruckman?
Do you also think that translations are man-centered and not God-centered, as Mr .White does?
Im not sure how Mr. White is a "defender" of anything, when all he tries to do is make up some stuff to pitch another snake oil modern version.


----------



## Ivan (Jan 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by brother.Jon_ Im sorry you reject anything King James.



I doubt that anyone here "rejects" the King James. I don't.


----------



## Bro.Jon (Jan 4, 2005)

In all honesty Ivan, if the KJB isn't your Bible of choice, then you reject it. 
If you purchase a car, you have to reject some until you come to the one you feel is reliable.
Not only do the anti-KJO folks reject the KJB, they reject those who are. As pastorway so politely put it, "misguided". 
Oh poor us.


----------



## fredtgreco (Jan 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by brother.Jon_
> In all honesty Ivan, if the KJB isn't your Bible of choice, then you reject it.
> If you purchase a car, you have to reject some until you come to the one you feel is reliable.
> Not only do the anti-KJO folks reject the KJB, they reject those who are. As pastorway so politely put it, "misguided".
> Oh poor us.



Then I guess you have rejected the Greek and Hebrew Bible, since you don't use it. Poor God, to have been so benighted as to use those languages.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jan 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by brother.Jon_
> In all honesty Ivan, if the KJB isn't your Bible of choice, then you reject it.
> If you purchase a car, you have to reject some until you come to the one you feel is reliable.
> Not only do the anti-KJO folks reject the KJB, they reject those who are. As pastorway so politely put it, "misguided".
> Oh poor us.



That is true, if the KJV isn't your bible of choice, then one by logical consequence, one does reject it. But what do you mean by "it"? Am I rejecting the Bible or the KJV?


----------



## 4ndr3w (Jan 4, 2005)

brother.Jon,

It is my observation that most everyone you have challenged in this and other threads have been using due diligence as mentioned in 2 Tim. 2:15 which states:



> Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Tim. 2:15 (KJV)



Anything less would be disobedience. 

Also, you have made several negative statements against James White without stating direct quotes from him. I ask that you prove your statements concerning James White.


----------



## Bro.Jon (Jan 4, 2005)

Fred, again you are hung on this "we must speak Hebrew or Greek to know what God is saying".

"Am I rejecting the Bible or the KJV?" 
If you don't use the KJB then you reject it. I don't use the NIV, I reject, I don't use the NASB, I reject it. I don't know where you take reject meaning the Bible. Unless you are agreeing that the KJB is the Bible God gave us.

Ah, Mr. White... Someone earlier stated that I neededto read his book. Well, before I read anyones book, I have a habit of checking up on the author. Here are some quotes as to why the White fans are against the KJB only folks.

"As long as we allow the defender of the AV to determine the grounds of the argument by assuming the KJV to be the standard of all others, we will get absolutely nowhere." (J. White, The King James Only Controversy, pg. 129
"The King James Only controversy, by its very nature, brings disruption and contention right into the pews of the local Christian church. KJV Only advocates due to the nature of their beliefs, are often disruptive of the fellowship in churches feeling that their message of God's one true Bible needs to be heard by all" (White, TLJOC, pg. iv). 
KJO advocates disruptive? Division happens when people change from the Bible that was used by most people since the 18th century.
What does he write?
"Responsibility must be laid at the door of the KJV Only camp for the destruction of many Christian churches" (p. iv).
The church has been under attack ever since the new snake oil translations came along. I think the responsibilty is on Mr. White, and his followers, for supporting them.

For further reading:

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/examining01.htm
http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/examining02.htm
http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/examining03.htm
http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/examining04.htm
http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/Acts10-11.html
http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/Jude4.html
http://www.av1611.org/KJV/ripwhit1.html
http://www.av1611.org/KJV/ripwhit2.html
http://www.av1611.org/KJV/ripwhit3.html
http://www.av1611.org/KJV/ripwhit4.html
http://www.av1611.org/KJV/ripwhit5.html
http://www.av1611.org/KJV/ripwhit6.html
http://www.av1611.org/KJV/ripwhit7.html


----------



## fredtgreco (Jan 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by brother.Jon_
> Fred, again you are hung on this "we must speak Hebrew or Greek to know what God is saying".
> 
> "Am I rejecting the Bible or the KJV?"
> If you don't use the KJB then you reject it. I don't use the NIV, I reject, I don't use the NASB, I reject it. I don't know where you take reject meaning the Bible. Unless you are agreeing that the KJB is the Bible God gave us.



No, you are the one that said if don't use a version, we "reject it." I never said that we must speak Hebrew or Greek to know what God is saying. 

But then again, I don't expect to get a logical responsive answer from you.

This is your last post on this Board until you provide the signature information. But then again, I don't expect that you will be showing that you abide by a Biblical ecclesiology.


----------



## 4ndr3w (Jan 4, 2005)

brother.Jon

You quote James White as saying:


> "As long as we allow the defender of the AV to determine the grounds of the argument by assuming the KJV to be the standard of all others, we will get absolutely nowhere." (J. White, The King James Only Controversy, pg. 129



You prove this point in the same message by writing:



> "Am I rejecting the Bible or the KJV?"
> If you don't use the KJB then you reject it. I don't use the NIV, I reject, I don't use the NASB, I reject it. I don't know where you take reject meaning the Bible. Unless you are agreeing that the KJB is the Bible God gave us.



Are you not setting for yourself the standard that the KJV is the only translation that qualifies as inspired scripture... even to the extent of rejecting any need for the original languages? So should we go around teaching everyone to speak in Old English? 

Most everyone on this board works diligently to "rightly divide" the Word, thus the very purpose of this board in the first place. You have violated the board rules and have made no attempt to correct yourself. I believe the administrators and moderators have been very fair with you and yet you have clearly proven James White's other statement about being disruptive.

Please take the time to re-read your statements and reflect upon the spirit in which they were given. Clearly you have a deep rooted zeal for the Word of God (at least the KJV translation of it). Nobody here rejects the KJV, they are simply not rooted in KJ Onlyism because they find the concept incorrect and perhaps heretical.


----------



## Ivan (Jan 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by brother.Jon_ In all honesty Ivan, if the KJB isn't your Bible of choice, then you reject it. If you purchase a car, you have to reject some until you come to the one you feel is reliable.



I work overnight, so I've been sleeping. Lots going on here. Interesting and kinda sad. The KJV is one of my translations of choice. I have found a number of makes and models of vechiles to be reliable.

It's going to snow here tonight!


----------



## 4ndr3w (Jan 4, 2005)

Ivan,

I hope you don't get too cold.


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Jan 4, 2005)

brother. John, which revision of the KJV do you hold to ? 1611 ? 1613 ? 1789, 1869 ?


----------



## Ivan (Jan 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by 4ndr3w_
> Ivan,
> 
> I hope you don't get too cold.



HA! I will, but only for a while. No way staying warm unless one stays inside all the time in Wisconsin. Apparently that's not as much of a problem in Mississippi, a State, by the way, that I have heard good things about lately. For instance, although being one of the poorest States, it's one of the highest in charitable giving. God bless Mississippi!


----------



## 4ndr3w (Jan 4, 2005)

I think he is having a little trouble posting right now. I believe in the KJV Only thread he refers to himself as a



> I am a AV1611 KJB-only Baptist.



http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=2909&page=2


----------



## Ivan (Jan 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by 4ndr3w_
> I think he is having a little trouble posting right now. I believe in the KJV Only thread he refers to himself as a
> 
> 
> ...



Well, I think that shows some consistency on his part.


----------



## 4ndr3w (Jan 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Ivan_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by 4ndr3w_
> ...



I like it, but it does have it's down sides. Ex: It doesn't really snow here, it just ices over.


----------



## Ivan (Jan 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by 4ndr3w_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Ivan_
> ...



Much like Southern Illinois, where I grew up. I've lived in the St. Louis area most of my life. I lived in Ft. Worth, Texas of over three years. I'm now residing in Wisconsin (for fourteen years), about a hour from Milwaukee and an hour an a half from Chicago. It's okay, but I'd be ready to move on, if the Lord so willed.

So how do you feel about that Holman Standard Bible! 

Sorry for the diversion, folks.


----------



## 4ndr3w (Jan 4, 2005)

So far I find it a little better than the NIV. 


*brother.Jon,*

Hopefully, you will have a chance to respond soon as I now see a signature. I would also like to point out that it is good that you check out the author but your statements do not reflect that you have even read his book. In all fairness, don't you think people should read a persons work before trying to tear it apart?


----------



## pastorway (Jan 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by brother.Jon_
> If you purchase a car, you have to reject some until you come to the one you feel is reliable.



So since we own two Toyotas we accept Toyotas and reject all other cars. But then again, one is a car and the other a truck. So if I drive the truck to work and my wife drives the car then have I rejected the car and she the truck, or are we just using the TOOL we prefer to get the job done for the day?

I have more than one version I use daily. The KJ is one of them, but not the only one. So I don't reject it. I use it along with the others. 

The problem with KJV Onlism is as simple as having only one tool in ones toolbox because of the belief that there are no other tools available for use.


----------



## Shane (Jan 7, 2005)

Forgive me if this appears arrogant, and I would not presume to be the most learned in this debate.

But it seems to me the KJ only guys (and I have a friend who is one) seem to be limiting God. Can not an all powerfull God work through other Good translations? I agree we do have some bad ones but the ESV NKJV NASB all seem to be good and they certainly dont seem to be changing sny doctrines etc.


----------



## 4ndr3w (Jan 7, 2005)

Welcome Shane!

It is unfortunate that KJ only guys tend to do that. I am amazed at how they tend to push the original languages aside. I must admit, I was disturbed at how brother.Jon showed little respect for people like Fred Greco. Many of the people on this board can translate the orignal languages on the fly.


----------



## Shane (Jan 7, 2005)

Thanks Brandon

Very true, It just strikes me as narrow minded and to add to that what about the poor guys who are not so fluent in English, now they have to deal with the good old Elizabethan text. They would grow much more spiritualy with an easier text like the ESV where they could get a better understanding of Gods Word.
I use a NKJV and NASB myself and still want to get the ESV. I aslo agree that there is nothing wrong with the KJ and if its your preference great but dont limit Gods ability to teach to one Bible that is not even the original Hebrew and Greek


----------



## 4ndr3w (Jan 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Shane_
> I use a NKJV and NASB myself and still want to get the ESV. I aslo agree that there is nothing wrong with the KJ and if its your preference great but dont limit Gods ability to teach to one Bible that is not even the original Hebrew and Greek





FYI - You can get the ESV free from http://www.e-sword.net


----------



## Shane (Jan 7, 2005)

Thanks 

I do actually have it on Esword. But I am one of those nutty book collectors so I simply gotta get the book. 
Not only that I want it to be the new ESV Reformed Study Bible, and my wife keeps telling me I have got enough!


----------



## 4ndr3w (Jan 7, 2005)




----------



## Ianterrell (Jan 8, 2005)

"Im sorry you reject anything King James. I am also sorry you reject people who have found apostasy in todays translations."

Apostasy? Do you know what apostasy means?


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Jan 22, 2005)

Scary scary scary. We've made an Enligsh translation of God's Word the centerpiece of a cultish attitude ...


----------



## bond-servant (Jan 22, 2005)

Back to the original question of the Holman... I don't care for it.

There are a few phrases I think they translate well, and I like how they put "Hallelujah" for "praise God" in the Psalms, and their use of "Messiah".

On the other hand, there are many mistranslated things, it is choppy - though not as much as the NASB..but at least the NASB has accuracy going for it. The reason they say is behind creating a new translation (HCSB) was noble though. And I appreciate that they let e-sword use it without fee. That says a lot for Lifeway in my opinion...

I tend to agree with those that say that the best translation is one translated into a life.


----------

