Considering CSB as my Main Translation

[1689theologychick]

Don't comment if you can't say anything sensible. Anyway, I didn't ask for your opinion. Haven't you got better things to do? I'm sure you didn't see this reply coming! Isn't it weird what triggers people?

Y'all. I like the contractions in the CSB. Also, I missed this whole contraction discussion. It was worth the price of the post to have this little chuckle today.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

I have started quickly reading through Ezekiel in the CSB, and I have to say that, thus far, I do quite like it. I usually read Ezekiel in the NIV as it is the only translation of that book that I find comprehensible. We will see how things go with the CSB.

 

[1689theologychick]

I usually read Ezekiel in the NIV as it is the only translation of that book that I find comprehensible.

I've been listening to Ezekiel on the Dwell app in NIV for the exact same reason. The more I use the CSB, the more I enjoy it. Maybe it's because it's a fresh perspective after 15 years of NASB (with an occasional CSB reading sprinkled throughout), but I'm delighting in my studies just a little more these days.

 

[bookslover]

I wouldn't fault a translation for either practice necessarily. It depends on the effect, and which part of the canon is being translated. I do think, however, that a judicious use of contractions helps a translation to feel like normal everyday English. Not having any contractions whatsoever can make it sound a bit stilted (though the skill of the translation can mitigate this problem).

Hey, Lane! Since you're social-isolating, how come we're not getting 1,000-word posts at Green Baggins every single day now? LOL

 

[Jeri Tanner]

One thing that I do not like is its use of verbal contractions such as didn't.

I am wondering, does this translation (or any other one that uses contractions) have members of the Godhead speaking with contractions?

 

[bookslover]

I am wondering, does this translation (or any other one that uses contractions) have members of the Godhead speaking with contractions?

Wouldn't make any difference, if that's the case. Contractions are just spelling shorthand. Every language uses them, I'm sure. I don't think it would be less "dignified" for God to say "can't" instead of "cannot." I can't remember offhand, but it would be interesting to know if Hebrew or Greek use spelling contractions.

 

[Reformed Covenanter]

I am wondering, does this translation (or any other one that uses contractions) have members of the Godhead speaking with contractions?

The RPCI's Psalter frequently uses contractions, which makes sense from the point of view of translating into metre. I cannot remember if Scottish Metrical Version or the Bay Psalter does likewise. Actually, I just checked and I see that the SMV does; here are a couple of examples:

But thou art holy, thou that dost
inhabit Isr'el's praise. (Psalm 22:3)

Moab's my washing-pot; my shoe
I'll over Edom throw;
And over Palestina's land
I will in triumph go. (Psalm 60:8)​

I personally do not like contractions, but that is a stylistic issue, not a theological one. To oppose them from some misplaced notion that they are less holy is superstitious - not that anyone here has done so.

 

[1689theologychick]

I am wondering, does this translation (or any other one that uses contractions) have members of the Godhead speaking with contractions?

I haven’t read every verse in this translation, but I can speak to Genesis most recently. In the creation account it says “let us make man in our image” rather than “let’s.” So there’s an example of the non-use of contractions. I’ve noticed them in the more conversational language that happens in dialogue between two persons. Contractions aren’t used at every possible opportunity, just in dialogue, it seems to me. Someone who’s more familiar with the translation method could probably speak to the rules they used to determine when to use them.

 

[Taylor]

I am wondering, does this translation (or any other one that uses contractions) have members of the Godhead speaking with contractions?

I think I remember Jesus using contractions. I can't remember if God ever does in the OT or not.

 

[Pilgrim]

I have started quickly reading through Ezekiel in the CSB, and I have to say that, thus far, I do quite like it. I usually read Ezekiel in the NIV as it is the only translation of that book that I find comprehensible. We will see how things go with the CSB.

I remember the Prophets being rather vivid and well done (In my humble opinion) in the HCSB. Perhaps it is the same with the CSB as well.

I've also thought about making the CSB my main translation, in part because it is probably preferable for use in family worship with small children. (And I may still use it for those purposes if nothing else.) But I haven't made it my main translation for three reasons. First, the Psalms, for the reasons mentioned here before. Second, because I tend to just plow through more "common speech" translations the way I would a news article and end up reading it way too quickly, missing a lot of important things in the text. I get to the end of a chapter and sometimes have to read it again. If I use the NASB, KJV (especially) or NKJV, this is less likely. Third, because I lean toward the Byzantine text. Now that you can actually buy a NKJV in black letter, I'm leaning toward switching back to that as my main translation. I got to where red letters, no matter how dark, caused me so much eye strain that I had to abandon the NKJV about 10 years ago.

 

[Harrison]

Here's some potentially useful insight on how the CSB compares to other translations: https://csbible.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Quantitative-Translation-Evaluation-by-GBI.pdf .

 

[Logan]

That was very interesting, thank you for sharing. I'm sure it's hard to measure some of those somewhat subjective categories, but it's nice to know that the ESV, CSB, and KJV are all roughly high-scorers.

 

[Harrison]

That was very interesting, thank you for sharing. I'm sure it's hard to measure some of those somewhat subjective categories, but it's nice to know that the ESV, CSB, and KJV are all roughly high-scorers.

It certainly makes me think I need to reconsider using the ESV and consider the CSB. My preferred translations did not fare as expected.

 

[James Marr]

First post on the puritan board..

I was converted approx ten years ago at the age of 35 I just started reading the Bible and now after a long journey attend the FPC of Scotland.. Anyways to cut a long story short its KJV all the way and being Biblical English and so is a different language than we would normally use means i need to think and at times use a concordance. God has preserved His Word see Psalm 12 v6 to v9 and is preserved in the Received Text..

It's interesting in this thread how many translations are mentioned, imagine if all Christians were using one Bible and the witness of that to the lost, power in unity..

 

[Logan]

First post on the puritan board..
...to cut a long story short its KJV all the way and being Biblical English...God has preserved His Word...in the Received Text..

Yup. Definitely new here!
What is "biblical English"?

 

[James Marr]

Yup. Definitely new here!
What is "biblical English"?

Biblical English is the language of the AV aka KJV.. It was a very kind and humble minister of the Gospel that pointed out to me that God is One and should be addressed in prayer as being One therefore to speak to God as 'we thank You....' is irreverent to say the least when He could and should be addressed as thee, thou or thine this being singular in the KJV.. Blessed be the Lord for His Word...

 

[Stephen L Smith]

First post on the puritan board..

Moderating:
James, good to see you on the Puritan Board. Like you I love the powerful Reformed witness in Scotland. I am presently reading the diary of Kenneth MacRae and his godly ministry in the Highlands.

Please can you create a signature per the Puritan Board's rules. Thank you. https://www.puritanboard.com/help/signature/

 

[greenbaggins]

Hey, Lane! Since you're social-isolating, how come we're not getting 1,000-word posts at Green Baggins every single day now? LOL

Richard, it is largely because I have taken to doing a Facebook devotional every single day.

 

[James Marr]

Biblical English is the language of the AV aka KJV.. It was a very kind and humble minister of the Gospel that pointed out to me that God is One and should be addressed in prayer as being One therefore to speak to God as 'we thank You....' is irreverent to say the least when He could and should be addressed as thee, thou or thine this being singular in the KJV.. Blessed be the Lord for His Word...

Biblical English is the language of the AV aka KJV.. It was a very kind and humble minister of the Gospel that pointed out to me that God is One and should be addressed in prayer as being One therefore to speak to God as 'we thank You....' is irreverent to say the least when He could and should be addressed as thee, thou or thine this being singular in the KJV.. Blessed be the Lord for His Word...

Yes, there are often two ways to respond when we are called to do something different its either mock that something different or actually do it..

 

[Jeri Tanner]

Yes, there are often two ways to respond when we are called to do something different its either mock that something different or actually do it..

Moderating: Hi James, I’m sympathetic with your basic premise and am also a KJV fan and user for many reasons. But this thread isn’t really the place to defend the KJV’s distinctives. It’s about the CSB and you’re welcome to discuss or debate its distinctives, keeping to PB guidelines for discussion (You can click on “Board Rules” under my signature and starting at number 7 see etiquette for edifying dialogue.)

If you want to start a new thread on the qualities of the KJV it’s fine, but these things have been discussed a lot over the years on the PB and using the search feature to look through them might be helpful before launching a discussion.

 

[James Marr]

Moderating: Hi James, I’m sympathetic with your basic premise and am also a KJV fan and user for many reasons. But this thread isn’t really the place to defend the KJV’s distinctives. It’s about the CSB and you’re welcome to discuss or debate its distinctives, keeping to PB guidelines for discussion (You can click on “Board Rules” under my signature and starting at number 7 see etiquette for edifying dialogue.)

If you want to start a new thread on the qualities of the KJV it’s fine, but these things have been discussed a lot over the years on the PB and using the search feature to look through them might be helpful before launching a discussion.

Im making an observation concerning the thread, many have mentioned many different versions.

Moderating: Hi James, I’m sympathetic with your basic premise and am also a KJV fan and user for many reasons. But this thread isn’t really the place to defend the KJV’s distinctives. It’s about the CSB and you’re welcome to discuss or debate its distinctives, keeping to PB guidelines for discussion (You can click on “Board Rules” under my signature and starting at number 7 see etiquette for edifying dialogue.)

If you want to start a new thread on the qualities of the KJV it’s fine, but these things have been discussed a lot over the years on the PB and using the search feature to look through them might be helpful before launching a discussion.

Im making an observation regarding the thread which isnt just about the CSB and my defence of the KJV was a response although I will always defend the AV in any circumstance. Etiquette and edifying are subjective what one may find edifying and within the bounds of etiquette another may not. The Lord Jesus Christ was often pushing against the subjective notions of etiquette and edifying.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

Im making an observation concerning the thread, many have mentioned many different versions.

Im making an observation regarding the thread which isnt just about the CSB and my defence of the KJV was a response although I will always defend the AV in any circumstance. Etiquette and edifying are subjective what one may find edifying and within the bounds of etiquette another may not. The Lord Jesus Christ was often pushing against the subjective notions of etiquette and edifying.

Mr. Marr, moderation on the Puritanboard is vital to the success of the board and respect for moderation, even when you don’t agree with it, requires a different response than you have given. If you disagree with moderation you can private message any of the moderators or admins of the board in order to discuss, and are invited to do so.

 

[James Marr]

Mr. Marr, moderation on the Puritanboard is vital to the success of the board and respect for moderation, even when you don’t agree with it, requires a different response than you have given. If you disagree with moderation you can private message any of the moderators or admins of the board in order to discuss, and are invited to do so.

What have i disagreed with? Im happy to discuss here. Throughout the thread many different translations have been mentioned including the KJV.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

James, you are free to disagree, but not to disregard a moderator's opinion which is not up for discussion. Please end now. Jeri made the determination based on board experience with extensive AV discussions, that your posts would detract from the OP and subject. Please abide by her determination or pursue the remedy suggested if this is so egregious to abide, of asking the moderators to review the matter.

Mr. Marr, moderation on the Puritanboard is vital to the success of the board and respect for moderation, even when you don’t agree with it, requires a different response than you have given. If you disagree with moderation you can private message any of the moderators or admins of the board in order to discuss, and are invited to do so.

Im making an observation concerning the thread, many have mentioned many different versions.

Im making an observation regarding the thread which isnt just about the CSB and my defence of the KJV was a response although I will always defend the AV in any circumstance. Etiquette and edifying are subjective what one may find edifying and within the bounds of etiquette another may not. The Lord Jesus Christ was often pushing against the subjective notions of etiquette and edifying.

 

[James Marr]

James, you are free to disagree, but not to disregard a moderator's opinion which is not up for discussion. Please end now. Jeri made the determination based on board experience with extensive AV discussions, that your posts would detract from the OP and subject. Please abide by her determination or pursue the remedy suggested if this is so egregious to abide, of asking the moderators to review the matter.

I haven't diagreed with anything just an observation regarding the subjective nature of etiquette and edifying.. It would be helpful to know where it is felt I have diagreed.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

I haven't diagreed with anything just an observation regarding the subjective nature of etiquette and edifying.. It would be helpful to know where it is felt I have diagreed.

Then take it up with Jeri [via the conversation feature] to discuss in full and if that doesn't resolve things, she can take it to the moderating team to review. Continuing to reply to the thread when told to drop it is disrespecting the direction given. Please respect the rule of the house.

 

[James Marr]

I haven't diagreed with anything just an observation regarding the subjective nature of etiquette and edifying.. It would be helpful to know where it is felt I have diagreed.

Disagreed not diagreed... Anyway i had made some observations and i have not disregarded anyone's opinion and to say a moderators opinion is not up for discussion means i am not able to disagree.. So im all confused now..

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Disagreed not diagreed... Anyway i had made some observations and i have not disregarded anyone's opinion and to say a moderators opinion is not up for discussion means i am not able to disagree.. So im all confused now..

As I said, take it up with Jeri via private conversation. If you don't know what that is, click on her avatar which brings up a box and click conversation and go from there.

 

[Jack K]

I am wondering, does this translation (or any other one that uses contractions) have members of the Godhead speaking with contractions?

It does when Jesus is speaking casually. For example, "Let's cross over to the other side of the lake" (Luke 8:22).

 

[TomVols]

It

Frequent translation updates are a scourge to a Christian book editor like me. They mean that every time an author quotes the Bible and has a word wrong, or even a bit of punctuation out of place, I have to check to make sure it's really wrong and not just an older or newer edition of the translation. Happily, texts are available online to make this easier, but it's still a pain.

However, despite this, I can appreciate the desire to get the translation right. That's important when we're talking about the Bible, and it probably outweighs what's easiest for me personally. The CSB is still rather new, so tweaks should be expected.
[/Quot

Frequent translation updates are a scourge to a Christian book editor like me. They mean that every time an author quotes the Bible and has a word wrong, or even a bit of punctuation out of place, I have to check to make sure it's really wrong and not just an older or newer edition of the translation. Happily, texts are available online to make this easier, but it's still a pain.

However, despite this, I can appreciate the desire to get the translation right. That's important when we're talking about the Bible, and it probably outweighs what's easiest for me personally. The CSB is still rather new, so tweaks should be expected.

If you think YOU'RE frustrated by the numerous updates to the ESV, think about the churches and pastors who buy cases of pew Bibles (I know, we are a dying breed) only to have it change months or years later. No kidding, one day, just for fun, I checked: the sermon was read from the minister's ESV (one early edition). Our pew bible is the 2011 edition. I had the 2016. 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.