# Holman Christian Standard Bible



## Der Pilger (May 2, 2009)

I use mostly the NASB and ESV, and occasionally the NIV. A few years ago, though, I purchased a HCSB and have read it lightly and occasionally since then. I really like the way it reads, but I haven't read much of it and am curious about others' views on it. Does anyone currently use it? What do you think about it? Would/could you recommend it to another Christian?


----------



## greenbaggins (May 2, 2009)

I have felt for awhile now that it is one of the two best modern versions (the other being ESV). I especially like the way it translates Psalm 23 and John 3:16.


----------



## DMcFadden (May 2, 2009)

If you want a Critical Text Bible, the essentially literal options are these:

NAS, ESV, and HCSB.

The NAS is the most woodenly literal.
The HCSB is the most idiomatically English literal.
The ESV is in between.

SBC seminary Prez Al Mohler opines that in his opinion there are only three English translations worthy of serious study: NAS, ESV, and HCSB.

(BTW, he likes the ESV Study Bible, the MacArthur Study Bible (NAS), and the Apologetics Study Bible (HCSB) as the three best study Bibles in English).

I prefer the ESV Study Bible and the Reformation Study Bible (NKJV) as the two I use most often.


----------



## Der Pilger (May 2, 2009)

greenbaggins said:


> I have felt for awhile now that it is one of the two best modern versions (the other being ESV). I especially like the way it translates Psalm 23 and John 3:16.



I read a positive note about its translation of John 3:16 on the Web somewhere. The writer basically said that it renders the verse "God loved the world in this way..." rather than the usual "God SO loved the world." It doesn't mean "God loved the world *so much * that he gave his only Son," but "Here's *how* God loved the world: He gave his only Son." (The quotes are just my paraphrase and explanation; I don't have the version in front of me right now.)


----------



## Rich Koster (May 2, 2009)

My wife purchased several $2 Bibles for giveaways (mostly NIV & KJV). One of them happened to be a Holman, which I kept to read. I have been reading it in the morning as part of the wake up ritual for me (a chapter and a coffee). I find it easily readable but not watered down. I don't use it for study because I have no concordance or software searches for it. Yep, I'm digitally spoilt. If I had it in Quickverse it would be one I keep on the study view.


----------



## Skyler (May 2, 2009)

Der Pilger said:


> greenbaggins said:
> 
> 
> > I have felt for awhile now that it is one of the two best modern versions (the other being ESV). I especially like the way it translates Psalm 23 and 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."


----------



## caddy (May 2, 2009)

Der Pilger said:


> I use mostly the NASB and ESV, and occasionally the NIV. A few years ago, though, I purchased a HCSB and have read it lightly and occasionally since then. I really like the way it reads, but I haven't read much of it and am curious about others' views on it. Does anyone currently use it? What do you think about it? Would/could you recommend it to another Christian?



I have the Holman Apologetics Study Bible. Very Good Bible. I like the way it reads as well.


----------



## caddy (May 4, 2009)

DMcFadden said:


> If you want a Critical Text Bible, the essentially literal options are these:
> 
> NAS, ESV, and HCSB.
> 
> ...



I'm covered then. I have all 3!

I use NIV ( because that is what our church uses ) and ESV the most. HCSB coming in 3rd...

I love MacArthur's Study Bible too: Good notes


----------



## ClayPot (May 4, 2009)

I think the HCSB is great.

It is much more natural and modern than the ESV. The ESV uses some really archaic language like "would that", "at table", inverted negatives, etc.

It uses "Yahweh" to describe God in the OT which I think is great. Instead of using LORD or something it uses the personal name of God. I think that Christians adopted this custom so as not to offend Jewish people, but the Bible doesn't say you can't refer to God as Yahweh, only that you shouldn't use his name in vain.

It doesn't constrain itself to traditional renderings of passages just because it is the norm. See Psalm 23 and John 3:16 as examples. John 3:16 is an egregious example of tradition dictating a translation. The "so" in most translations is referring to the manner in which God loves the world but people take it as an intensifier of love which is incorrect. HCSB translated the verse accurately instead of traditionally. I think they are to be applauded for that.

Here is some more info about the HCSB from the general editor that I found helpful. I'm looking for the second edition coming out later this year!


----------



## Der Pilger (May 4, 2009)

jpfrench81 said:


> I'm looking for the second edition coming out later this year!



Thanks for mentioning this. Hopefully this will generate more print editions as there doesn't seem to be too much of a variety out there now.


----------



## tellville (May 4, 2009)

I would say it is the best CT literal translation period. The ESV and NASB use very archaic English at times. How they gave it the readability of the NIV but with the literalness of the ESV is amazing. Also, the plethora of textual notes on the bottom (which among other things inform the reader of all the readings found in the KJV lines) and the helpful brackets (as opposed to italics) to inform the reader of words that have been added make this translation THE English translation to use for study by conservative/evangelical Christians. 

Of course, if arachaic english is not a problem for you then the ESV and NASB are closer in comparision. However, the HCSB still wins out in my opinion for its textual notes and helpful brackets. 

So, if you want a translation that:

1. Is readable by most everyone
2. Uses the Critical Text
3. Allows you to follow with those who do not use the Critical Text
4. Is a literal translation
5. And is translated by those who believe the Bible is the Word of God

Then the HCSB is in my opinion the best translation that achieves the above five points.


----------

