Not open for further replies.

Bad Organist

Puritan Board Freshman
I have to say that I'd never heard of the HCSB before this thread. Perhaps because it's not available in any of the online or free software Bibles I use?


The HCSB is downloadable from You Bible. I have not done this myself, but it is listed along with many others.

Arie V
FC of Scotland
Toronto, Canada


Puritan Board Senior
You can also go to Bible Gateway and pull up verses, whole books of the Bible, in many different translations. You can also open a parallel window with an alternate translation. Put the HCSB up alongside the ESV, or whichever.


Puritan Board Junior
Thanks Jimmy, I've used Bible Gateway in the past but my current preference for online study is, mainly for it's excellent access to Greek tools and parallel Bible versions.


Puritan Board Senior
Question: What are peoples thoughts about using the ESV as the main translation and the HCSB as an alternative for something a little more dynamic?

Answer: I wouldn't use either because they are both based upon Egyptian texts where there were many heretics and not on the ecclesiastical/majority texts.
I've read that sentiment expressed many times. Being a relative 'babe in Christ' I have found that point of view discouraging. OTOH, when I listen to D.Martyn Lloyd-Jones say that Westcott & Hort's work is trustworthy, or I read, and hear, MLJ point out certain passages/verses where the RV "got it right," as opposed to the AV, I wonder if the CT isn't an acceptable basis for a translation after all ?

In your continuing study have you run across any specific examples of 'heresies' included in mainstream CT text based translations ? Since as far as I know, the AV and the NKJV are the only two mainstream translations based on the TR, that would mean that all of the other modern translations are untrustworthy ?


Puritanboard Commissioner
With regard to text critical issues where these two versions are in view (and ONLY these two :D ) it may be helpful to note that the HCSB is generally more "conservative" in that regard than other CT translations. In other words, you'll find that it more often has disputed texts in the text (as opposed to the margin) compared to the NIV or ESV. It's at least as "conservative" in that regard as the NASB, and maybe more so. The merits of that practice or approach aside, some will prefer the kind of approach taken by the HCSB and NASB instead of the NIV and ESV approach which occasionally results in whole verses being relegated to the margin. If you've ever called on someone to read a verse in a Sunday School class and she tells you that verse isn't in her Bible, I think you'll agree that being more "conservative" here has its merits.

Also, the HCSB has more text critical notes and other explanatory notes than any other translation I know of with the exception of the NET. I'm no HCSB fanboy but I think it's a good translation to reference for these reasons, even if you normally use a formal equivalent translation like I do.
Not open for further replies.