Considering CSB as my Main Translation

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jonathco

Puritan Board Freshman
A gentleman in my pew had the Gideon ESV. That's four different ESVs! UGH! Crossway has just made a mess of this...an absolute mess.
Interesting. I heard the Gideon's had started using the ESV, but I had not heard their translation of the ESV was any different from the 2016 ESV currently being published. Does anyone have more information on this?
 

TomVols

Puritan Board Freshman
Interesting. I heard the Gideon's had started using the ESV, but I had not heard their translation of the ESV was any different from the 2016 ESV currently being published. Does anyone have more information on this?
It's the ESV 2012. It's basically a NKJV ESV :) Any verses that are not found in the ESV due to their lack of presence in the earlier mss are included. Kind of an ESV from the TR/Byzantine family
 

greenbaggins

Administrator
Staff member
Interesting. I heard the Gideon's had started using the ESV, but I had not heard their translation of the ESV was any different from the 2016 ESV currently being published. Does anyone have more information on this?

The Gideon ESV retains the pericope of the woman caught in adultery (John 7-8) and the longer ending of Mark, though it does not have the comma Johanneum.
 

1689theologychick

Puritan Board Freshman
The Gideon ESV retains the pericope of the woman caught in adultery (John 7-8) and the longer ending of Mark, though it does not have the comma Johanneum

Well, that IS utterly confusing. I’m so far behind, I thought the Gideons were still using KJV, so what do I know? I don’t keep up with much of the Gideons work. I have a lady in my Bible study who is heavily involved in their auxiliary (I think that’s what they call the women’s section of the ministry).
 

Robert Truelove

Puritan Board Sophomore
If your main concern is the constant revision process that seems to be going on in the Bible publishing industry, the Authorized Version is really the only version you can grow old with without being concerned about what the next update will be doing to the text.

This is one of the key reasons I adopted the KJV as my standard and church text as I have little desire to have my standard text in a constant state of fluctuation.

This doesn't mean that I believe there are not places in any particular translation that cannot be improved. Rather, I believe that a good translation is "good enough" and improvements are to be made in the realm of exegesis, not these never ending revision cycles.

This does not mean that there is not a place for the use of these other translations. I consult a number of them in my studies to see how the various translation committees handled a particular reading.

I could say more (regarding some of the particular problems one has to be on the look out for in contemporary versions, especially after the turn of the century) but want to keep my reply focused on the question of the OP.
 

Georgiadis

Puritan Board Freshman
I'm concerned my beloved NASB is not going to be a longterm option and I want something I can continue to use until I'm old and gray
I imagine the CSB will get updated again, but not for awhile. It’s already a revision of the HCSB which provided the translation team with a lot of constructive feedback to start with and the 2020 changes were a final pass through, or a “sheen” that “sharpened it up a bit”. Trevin Wax mentioned that they are happy with the translation and it won’t need to be revisited again “for quite a few years, perhaps 8 to 10 years”. Now, 8-10 may sound like a lot of time or too little depending on your views, but it’s a good sign that they’re hearing people’s desire for a stable text.

You can watch the full video here (discussion about the 2020 update starts at 36:25):


Personally, I love the CSB. I have spent far too many hours trying to poke holes in the translation and to no avail. I just couldn’t accept that it was truly as accurate as it was clear until I finally gave in and made it my primary reader. I’m very glad that I did! I also think that the CSB’s excellent use of footnotes makes it a real contender for deep study. I’ve even come across footnotes so particular that they flag plural forms of the word “you”, which always appeals to my appreciation of older translations.
 

bookslover

Puritan Board Doctor
If your main concern is the constant revision process that seems to be going on in the Bible publishing industry, the Authorized Version is really the only version you can grow old with without being concerned about what the next update will be doing to the text.

This is one of the key reasons I adopted the KJV as my standard and church text as I have little desire to have my standard text in a constant state of fluctuation.

Must be hard, though, when you go to church, to have to also have to lug a thesaurus and a dictionary with you so that you can figure out what the KJV actually says. Heh.
 

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
I imagine the CSB will get updated again, but not for awhile.

My printed copy of the CSB has Peter addressing the Jerusalem Council with "Brothers and sisters" which is an appalling error, especially considering the CSB's constituency and the Southern Baptist motivation for taking on the project over 20 years ago. The NIV 2011, the NLT (also gender neutral) and even the liberal NRSV have "Brothers" here. This appears to have been fixed since the CSB on Bible Gateway now has "Brothers." My guess is that the TNIV has "Brothers" too. (I couldn't even access the TNIV on the Internet Archive, so I don't know that there is a way to look that up online.) The HCSB has "brothers", so "Brothers and sisters" was introduced with the CSB, which has gone further with the gender-neutral or gender-accurate renderings than the HCSB did.

Now, what would the CBMW have said if the NIV had Peter addressing the Jerusalem Council as "Brothers and sisters?" Hopefully, the CSB editors have gone over it with a fine-tooth comb before issuing this update.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top