Arguments for and Agains the Csb Version of the Bible
A Review of the Christian Standard Bible
By Mark L. Strauss
Abstruse
The Christian Standard Bible (CSB) is a 2022 revision and replacement of the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB), start published in 2004. The Translation Oversight Committee was co-chaired by Thomas Schreiner and David Allen. The CSB follows the aforementioned basic translation philosophy equally the HCSB, a mediating approach between formal and functional equivalence, similar to versions like the NIV, the NET Bible and the CEB. The CSB removes a number of the HCSB's idiosyncracies, such as the employ of "Yahweh" for the tetragrammaton (YHWH). Most significantly, the CSB departs from its predecessor by positively embracing "gender-accurate" language, for instance, by translating the Greek ἀδελφοί as "brothers and sisters" when the referent includes both men and women. In general, the CSB is a pregnant improvement over the HCSB in terms to both accuracy and way.
one. Introduction
The Christian Standard Bible (CSB), published in 2017, is a major revision and replacement of the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB), which was first published as a full Bible in 2004 and revised in 2009.i This paper is a brief review of the CSB, peculiarly every bit it compares to its predecessor and with special attention to its utilise of gender-inclusive linguistic communication.
1.1. The Origin of the HCSB
The HCSB originally arose from a project initiated past Arthur Farstad, who had served every bit the general editor for the New King James Version. Farstad favored the Greek Majority Text (the Byzantine text type) and had published a Greek edition of it with coeditor Zane Hodges in 1982. His goal was to produce a modernistic English version based on the Majority Text. Together with Edwin Blum, a faculty fellow member at Dallas Theological Seminary, Farstad produced some portions of a translation of the New Testament.
In 1998, Farstad and Blum were approached past representatives of Holman Bible Publishers and LifeWay Christian Resources, the publishing arm of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). For years the SBC had used the NIV in their curriculum. Withal they were now seeking an alternative because of the high toll of NIV royalties and the NIV's movement toward gender-inclusive language. Farstad and Blum agreed to produce the version. Sadly, Farstad died merely a few months into the project. While Farstad had envisioned a Majority Text version, without his influence on the project this was at present shifted to the Critical Text—bringing it in line with all other modernistic versions except the New King James Version, which is based on the Textus Receptus.
The HCSB was produced by an interdenominational team of 100 scholars and proofreaders. It was published by Holman Bible publishers, an imprint of Broadman & Holman, the publishing fly of the SBC. The New Testament was published in 1999 and the full Bible in 2004. A second edition appeared in 2009.
The HCSB is generally more than literal than the NIV but less so than nigh formal equivalent versions. According to its Introduction, the HCSB strives for neither formal nor functional equivalence, but "optimal equivalence":
Optimal equivalence starts with an exhaustive analysis of the text at every level (word, phrase, clause, sentence, discourse) in the original language to decide its original significant and intention (or purpose). Then relying on the latest and best language tools and experts, the nearest corresponding semantic and linguistic equivalents are used to convey as much of the data and intention of the original text with as much clarity and readability as possible. This procedure assures the maximum transfer of both the words and thoughts contained in the original.2
This description of using the "nearest corresponding semantic and linguistic equivalents" to convey the "intention of the original text with as much clarity and readability as possible" sounds a great bargain like the goal of functional equivalence: striving to reproduce the significant of the text every bit accurately and conspicuously as possible. All the same the statement is also a bit muddled. What is meant, for example, by a "maximum transfer" of "the words … contained in the original"? Information technology is not the words (which are in Greek and Hebrew) merely the meaning of those words, phrases and clauses that must be transferred.
Though following the Greek Critical Text, the HCSB was unique among modern versions in supplying many alternative readings from the Textus Receptus and the Majority Text in its footnotes (cf. NKJV). We will cover these problems in more detail every bit we compare the CSB to the HCSB.
Some notable distinctions of the HCSB include the following:
- The use of the "Yahweh" for the tetragrammaton (YHWH) in select cases
- The rendering "Messiah" for Greek χριστός when the latter is used in a titular sense
- The rendering "instruction" instead of "law" for the Hebrew Torah
- Increased utilise of "slave" over "retainer"
- Elimination of archaisms similar "Behold" and the exclamation "O"
- The rendering "beer" for the traditional "strong potable"
- The rendering of John 3:16 as "For God loved the globe in this way [οὕτως]: He gave His Ane and Only Son" instead of, "For God then loved the earth…"
i.ii. Revising the HCSB: The Christian Standard Bible (CSB)
Though well-publicized and well-received in many circles, the HCSB never accomplished a significant market share of Bible sales. In June 2022 B&H publishing announced a revision of the translation, dropping the name "Holman" and renaming it the Christian Standard Bible (CSB). The Translation Oversight Committee was co-chaired by Tom Schreiner, Professor of New Testament Interpretation and Biblical Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and David Allen, Dean and Distinguished Professor of Preaching, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. The remaining eight members included Dorian G. Coover-Cox of Dallas Theological Seminary, Iain M. Duguid of Westminster Theological Seminary, Andrew Das of Elmhurst College, Darian R. Lockett of Talbot School of Theology, Andrew Steinmann of Concordia University, Brian Rosner of Ridley in Melbourne, Michael Carte du jour (the English stylist), and Trevin Wax (the Bible Publisher with Holman). Of the 10 members, 3 specialize in OT, five more often than not in NT (with theology and preaching emphases), with i stylist and the publisher. Denominationally, there are iii from the Southern Baptist Convention, two Presbyterians, 2 Lutherans, one Anglican, and two non-denominational. All are from the conservative branches of these denominations. There are no members from Wesleyan, Methodist, Nazarene or Pentecostal traditions. There are nine men; i woman. Nine are white, 1 is Asian (Indian).
ii. Translation Philosophy
The CSB, like its predecessor, claims to follow neither formal equivalence nor functional equivalence, but rather "optimal equivalence," meaning (according to its preface), "the CSB places equal value on fidelity to the original and readability for a modern audience, resulting in a translation that achieves both goals." The spider web site for the CSB says substantially the same thing. The version "captures the Bible's original meaning without compromising readability."3
Like the HCSB, the CSB stands approximately in the middle of the translation spectrum between formal equivalent and functional equivalent. Information technology is significantly less formal than versions like the New American Standard Bible (NASB), the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) and the English Standard Version (ESV). And it is less idiomatic than "natural language" functional equivalent versions like the New Living Translation (NLT), the New Century Version (NCV), God's Discussion (GW), the Gimmicky English Versions (CEV) and the Practiced News Translation (GNT). It is most similar in this regard to mediating versions like the New International Version (NIV), the Common English Bible (CEB), the New English Translation (Cyberspace), the New American Bible (NAB) and the Revised English Bible (REB). Below is my analysis of the translation spectrum.
Continuum of Versions
| Formal | Mediating | Functional | |||||||||
| ASV | RV | NKJV | KJV | NRSV | NAB | NIV | JB | Neb | GNT | CEV | |
| Youngs | RSV | ESV | HCSB | CEB | NJB | REB | NLT | LB | |||
| NASB | NET | NCV | PME | ||||||||
| CSB | GW | M | |||||||||
| American Standard Version (ASV) Youngs Literal Revised Version (RV) King James Version (KJV) New King James Version (NKJV) New American Standard Bible (NASB) Revised Standard Version (RSV) English Standard Version (ESV) New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) | (Holman) Christian Standard (HCSB; CSB) New English Translation (NET) New American Bible (NAB) New International Version (NIV) Mutual English Bible (CEB) New English language Bible (Beak) Revised English language Bible (REB) Jerusalem Bible (JB) New Jerusalem Bible (NJB) | Skilful News Translation (GNT; TEV) New Living Translation (NLT) New Century Version (NCV) God's Word (GW) Gimmicky English Version (CEV) Living Bible (LB) Phillip'due south Modernistic English (PME) The Message (M) |
Much of my writing has focused on defending meaning-based Bible translation. While encouraging and affirming the use of versions from across the translation spectrum, the most accurate versions are those that reproduce the meaning of the texts and and so give priority to role over form.4
Because the (H)CSB recognizes the priority of meaning over form, I would requite information technology loftier marks for accuracy. In 2008 I gave a newspaper at ETS critiquing the English Standard Version, called "Why the English Standard Version should not become the Standard English Version."5 In that paper I pointed to hundreds of examples where the ESV's "essentially literal" (formal-equivalent) methodology resulted in inaccurate or obscure translations. After the presentation Edwin Blum, general editor of the HCSB, found me and was delighted to report that in every case where the ESV had missed the marking, the HCSB had gotten information technology "right."
This is peculiarly the case with idiomatic language. By seeking to reproduce the form of the original, formal equivalent versions frequently remain obscure, awkward and inaccurate. Consider the following passages comparison diverse idioms in formal equivalent versions (RSV, NRSV, ESV, NASB, NKJV) with the NIV, the HCSB and the CSB.six
Joshua 10:half-dozen
| RSV | Do not relax your hand from your servants. |
| NIV | Do non abandon your servants. |
| HCSB | Don't abandon your servants. |
| CSB | Don't requite up on your servants. |
2 Samuel 18:25
| NRSV | The king said, "If he is lonely, in that location are tidings in his mouth." |
| NIV | The king said, "If he is alone, he must have good news." |
| (H)CSB | The male monarch said, "If he's alone, he bears good news." |
Amos 4:6
| NKJV | Also I gave you cleanness of teeth in all your cities. |
| NIV | I gave you empty stomachs in every city. |
| (H)CSB | I gave yous absolutely nothing to eat in all your cities. |
Matthew 23:32
| ESV | Fill up up, so, the measure of your fathers. |
| NIV | Go ahead, then, and complete what your ancestors started! |
| HCSB | Fill up, then, the measure out of your fathers' sins! |
| CSB | Fill up, and so, the measure of your ancestors' sins! |
Marking 1:2 (pars. Matt 11:10; Luke 7:27)
| RSV | Behold, I ship my messenger before thy face. |
| NIV | I volition send my messenger ahead of y'all. |
| HCSB | Wait, I am sending My messenger ahead of You. |
| CSB | See, I am sending My messenger ahead of you. |
Acts 9:28 (cf. Acts i:21)
| NRSV | So he went in and out among them in Jerusalem. |
| NIV | So Saul stayed with them and moved about freely in Jerusalem. |
| (H)CSB | Saul was coming and going with them in Jerusalem. |
2 Corinthians 6:fifteen
| ESV | what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? |
| NIV | what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? |
| (H)CSB | what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? |
The mediating versions get the idioms right not by following the literal form, but by exegeting the text to determine the meaning, and then seeking the closest natural equivalent in the receptor language. To be "literal" is non to be accurate.vii
The differences between the HCSB and the CSB are small-scale. Four passages take no change; at that place is one gender-language modify (from "fathers" to "ancestors," Matt 23:42), one change in idiom (Josh 10:six) and a small stylistic change (Marker i:two).
While these examples illustrate the strength of the HCSB as a significant-based version, at times I plant the HCSB to exist rather idiosyncratic and quirky. We will discuss some of these examples beneath. For the most part, the CSB retains the force of the HCSB while removing its idiosyncrasies.
3. Meaning Changes in the CSB
3.1. The Divine Name Yahweh
The tetragrammaton appears 6828 times in Hebrew Bible.viii Near all English translations render the divine proper noun as "Lord" (small-scale caps). This was the pattern of the KJV and in some way mimics the Lxx, which rendered the divine name as κύριος. HCSB bankrupt with this tradition, in many cases introducing "Yahweh." In such cases, a footnote reads:
Or The Lord; it is the personal name of God in Hebrew; "Yah" is the shortened form. Yahweh is used in places where the personal name of God is discussed (Ps 68:iv) or in places of His cocky-identification. (Isa 42:8).9
The HCSB touted this in advertisements depicting a serious-looking educatee of the Discussion announcing in big letters, "The name is Yahweh." The minor impress announced:
God gave united states of america his personal name, which is why you'll see it in the Holman Christian Standard Bible. Accuracy, one of the reasons you'll love reading any of the HCSB digital or print editions.10
The trouble with this claim is that only a small percentage of the instances of the tetragrammaton are actually translated as "Yahweh." According to Michael Marlowe, the first edition of the HCSB used the divine name only seventy-v times and the 2009 edition increased this to 476.11 My Logos electronic 2009 version shows 654 instances and Accordance electronic version 656 times, nonetheless less than 10% of the full. The introduction explains this. While normally rendering YHWH (Yahweh) as "Lord,"
the HCSB OT uses Yahweh, the personal proper noun of God in Hebrew, when a biblical text emphasizes Yahweh equally a name: "His name is Yahweh" (Ps 68:4). Yahweh is likewise used in places of His self-identification as in "I am Yahweh" (Is 42:8). Yahweh is used more than oftentimes in the HCSB than in nearly Bible translations because the word LORD in English is a title of God and does not accurately convey to modernistic readers the emphasis on God's personal proper noun in the original Hebrew.
The problem, of course, is deciding which instances should be rendered Yahweh and which Lord. Patently, even the HCSB editors had trouble deciding, as evidenced past the variations in the different editions.
Because of these complications, the CSB returns to the traditional use of "Lord" for the tetragrammaton. Tom Schreiner gives four reasons for this change: (1) the inconsistency of usage in the HCSB; (ii) fully consistent translation of יהוה as "Yahweh" would overwhelm readers; (3) the unfamiliarity of Yahweh trips up readers; (four) the design of the New Testament, like the Lxx, is to use the title κύριος ("Lord") rather than a personal proper name "Yahweh."12
3.2. Capitalization of Divine Pronouns
The HCSB followed the traditional practice of capitalizing pronouns for God. Past contrast, the CSB uses lower case, following standard English grammar. Consider John 14:15–16, which refers to all three members of the Trinity:
John fourteen:xv–17
| HCSB | If yous love Me, yous volition proceed My commands. And I volition ask the Male parent, and He will give you another Counselor to be with y'all forever. He is the Spirit of truth. The earth is unable to receive Him because it doesn't see Him or know Him. But you exercise know Him, considering He remains with you and will be in you. |
| CSB | If yous honey me, you will keep my commands. And I will ask the Father, and he volition requite you some other Counselor to be with you forever. He is the Spirit of truth. The world is unable to receive him because it doesn't come across him or know him. But you do know him, because he remains with you and will be in you. |
Capitalizing pronouns referring to God is often viewed as a sign of reverence, yet the do is a adequately recent ane, arising first in the 19th century. None of the earliest English versions capitalized pronouns, including Wycliffe (1382), Tyndale (1530s), the Geneva Bible (1599) nor the King James Version (1611). Nor did well-known nineteenth-century versions similar Darby (1867), Douay-Rheims (1899), and the American Standard Version (ASV; 1901). One of the first versions to practice so was Young's Literal Translation (1862, 1898). Amongst the main contemporary versions, only the NASB (1971, 1995), NKJV (1982) and HCSB (1999) capitalize pronouns. Nigh all other versions do non (NIV, NLT, NRSV, ESV, CEB, Internet, NAB, REB, NCV, GW, GNT, etc.)
In my opinion, the CSB is an improvement over the HCSB in this regard since there are skilful reasons not to capitalize such pronouns:13
- About English fashion books suggest that all pronouns should be kept lower case, including those for God.
- The original Greek and Hebrew did not have uppercase letters.
- Capitalizing pronouns with reference to Jesus can miscommunicate the meaning of the text. For example, when the scribes and the Pharisees say to Jesus, "Nosotros want a sign from You" (Matt 12:38 NASB), the capitalized "Yous" suggests that the Pharisees remember Jesus is divine. But, of class, they exercise not. Whenever an individual in the Gospels speaks about Jesus, or to him, capitalized pronouns can misrepresent the meaning of the text. Although the goal of emphasizing Christ's deity is a noble one in theory, in practice it can distort the meaning of the text.
- Difficulties also arise in messianic prophecies in the Erstwhile Attestation. For example, Psalm 22:one in the NKJV reads, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?" At that place are two bug. The first is inconsistency, since pronouns in various other passages are not capitalized in the HCSB (meet Pss 16:10; 41:9), even though they are identified as messianic prophecies in the New Testament (Acts 2:27; John 13:eighteen). The second problem, however, is that many of these prophecies are fulfilled typologically rather than uniquely in Christ. In other words, the original referent in the Old Testament might be David or righteous sufferers in general. Jesus is indeed the fulfillment of these prophecies in that he is the last and greatest in the line of Davidic kings, and the terminal and greatest of righteous sufferers. Just capitalizing pronouns might wrongly suggest that the original human referents (like David) are themselves divine.
Information technology seems best, therefore, to follow the now standard practice of leaving all pronouns in the lower instance.
3.3. Messiah/Christ
Deciding whether to translate or transliterate Greek χριστός is a challenge. Practice you lot stay with the transliteration "Christ" or seek to bring out the titular sense by rendering the championship by its Hebrew equivalent, מָשִׁיחַ ("Messiah"). While the 1984 NIV used "Christ" throughout,14 the 2011 revision introduced "Messiah" whenever the term carried a titular sense (66 times). The HCSB similarly followed this pattern, introducing "Messiah" for χριστός 112 times in the NT,fifteen while retaining "Christ" 419 times.
The CSB retains this policy, but reduces the number significantly, using "Messiah" only 55 times for χριστός. Almost of these are expected:
Simon Peter answered, "You lot are the Messiah, the Son of the living God." (Matt 16:16)
What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he? (Matt 22:42)
In other cases, CSB returned to "Christ" fifty-fifty in some cases where a titular sense seems to be nowadays:
Matthew 1:xvi
| HCSB | Joseph the husband of Mary, who gave nascence to Jesus who is called the Messiah. |
| CSB | Joseph the husband of Mary, who gave nascency to Jesus who is called the Christ. |
Matthew 1:17
| HCSB | And from the exile to Babylon until the Messiah, fourteen generations. |
| CSB | And from the exile to Babylon until the Christ, fourteen generations. |
Matthew ii:iv
| HCSB | So he… asked them where the Messiah would be born. |
| CSB | So he … asked them where the Christ would be born. |
Luke iv:41
| HCSB | But He … would not allow them to speak, because they knew He was the Messiah. |
| CSB | But he … would not permit them to speak, because they knew he was the Christ. |
Luke twenty:41
| HCSB | Then He said to them, "How can they say that the Messiah is the Son of David?" |
| CSB | So he said to them, "How can they say that the Christ is the son of David?" |
These examples are puzzling, and I'm curious why "Messiah" was changed dorsum to "Christ" in what appear to exist titular contexts.
3.4. More Servants, Fewer Slaves
Biblical terms related to servants and slaves are notoriously hard to interpret. This is in part due to the differences between slavery in the aboriginal globe and race-based slavery in the Americas. It is also due to the wide semantic range of terms related to slavery. In the NIV, for example, the Hebrew עֶבֶד (800x) is translated most commonly every bit "retainer" (520x), but also in a variety of other ways: "slave" (Gen 9:25), "official" (Gen 20:8), "bellboy" (1 Sam 8:fourteen), "field of study" (ane Sam 17:9), "officer" (1 Sam xviii:5), "envoy" (two Sam 10:four), "subordinate" (1 Kings 11:11), "vassal" (2 Kings 17:iii), "human" (Gen 14:fifteen), "court" (i Kings three:15), and "retinue" (1 Kings 10:13). Similarly, in the NT Greek δοῦλος (126x) is rendered in the NIV as "servant" 98x and "slave" 34x. Farther complicating the effect is the semantic range of the English term "servant." Does servant mean someone who is a paid employee? Or tin a retainer be i who is endemic past a primary (i.e., a slave)? The latter is certainly the intention in many passages.
In its advertisements, the HCSB touted its use of "slave" over "servant." A full-folio ad read in big letters "Are nosotros servants or slaves?" with a reflective man staring at the camera. The smaller print on the ad reads:
Slaves had no rights, merely some servants did. So when readers see Christians called to be Christ's slaves in the Holman Christian Standard Bible, the radical nature of discipleship is clearer. Accuracy, ane of the reasons you'll beloved reading whatever of the HCSB digital or print editions.16
Of grade, the situation is far more complicated than this. Ownership of persons (i.e., slavery) was pervasive throughout the Ancient Well-nigh East and the Greco-Roman world. Yet these "slaves" could have vastly different social statuses and privileges, from the short and brutal life of a galley slave to a status of a household manager overseeing a principal'due south business, property and other slaves. So to say that "slaves had no rights" is not entirely accurate. Slaves could certainly have condition, and this status varied greatly. The translation "slave" can sound overly demeaning or degrading in some contexts.
The CSB significantly reduces the apply of "slave(south)." While the HCSB used the term 317 times, the CSB uses information technology only 189 times. Consider the following examples:
Matthew 24:45
| HCSB | Who then is a true-blue and sensible slave, whom his master has put in accuse of his household? |
| CSB | Who so is a faithful and wise servant, whom his master has put in charge of his household? |
John xiii:16
| HCSB | I clinch you: A slave is non greater than his principal, and a messenger is not greater than the one who sent him. |
| CSB | Truly I tell y'all, a servant is not greater than his chief, and a messenger is non greater than the one who sent him. |
Romans one:ane
| HCSB | Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, called every bit an apostle… |
| CSB | Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle… |
While acknowledging the value of a term similar "slave" that connotes buying (afterward all, as Christians we are "bought at a price"; cf. ane Cor 6:twenty), Schreiner notes that the use of slave received mixed reviews by scholars, pastors, and everyday readers. He gives iii reasons for CSB's increased use of "servant": (ane) recognition that "slave" in contemporary English has connotations of race-based slavery; (two) the use of "servant" for δοῦλος in the New Attestation aligns with the Old Testament use of עֶבֶד with reference to followers of God like Moses; (3) in that location is New Testament precedent, as in Hebrews 3:5 (citing Num 12:7), where a term meaning "servant" (ὁ θεράπων) is used to translate the Hebrew עֶבֶד.17
This third statement seems a scrap stretched. The writer in Hebrews is simply following the Septuagint of Numbers 12:7, which already rendered עֶבֶד as θεράπων. In this context θεράπων was especially advisable for Moses, since the term commonly refers to "ane who renders devoted service, esp. equally an attendant in a cultic setting."18 It might be amend to say that עֶבֶד has a very wide semantic range that goes well beyond the senses generally given to the English language gloss "slave" and that δοῦλος can reverberate this wider usage. The main emphasis of δοῦλος in sure contexts tin can be devotion and service rather than buying.
iii.5. Gender Language
The gender language policy of the HCSB was intentionally conservative. The Introduction to the HCSB warns against conceding to cultural agendas and affirms the apply of masculine terms:
Some people today ignore the Bible'southward teachings on distinctive roles of men and women in family unit and church building and have an agenda to eliminate those distinctions in every loonshit of life. These people accept begun a programme to engineer the removal of a perceived male bias in the English language. The targets of this plan have been such traditional linguistic practices as the generic use of "homo" or "men," equally well equally "he," "him," and "his."nineteen
The HCSB adopted the Colorado Springs Guidelines, also called the Guidelines for Translation of Gender-Related Language in Scripture, produced at the Briefing on Gender-Related Language in Scripture on May 27, 1997 and revised September 9, 1997.xx Though not averse to inclusive language, the HCSB affirms the retention of masculine terms:
The goal of the translators has not been to promote a cultural ideology but to faithfully translate the Bible. While the Holman CSB avoids using "man" or "he" unnecessarily, the translation does not restructure sentences to avert them when they are in the text. For example, the translators have non inverse "him" to "you" or to "them," neither have they avoided other masculine words such equally "begetter" or "son" by translating them in generic terms such as "parent" or "kid."21
The CSB give-and-take begins with the same affirmation: "The goal of the translators of the Christian Standard Bible has not been to promote a cultural ideology but to translate the Bible faithfully." Merely it then moves toward a more gender-inclusive approach. No mention is made of the Colorado Springs Guidelines, and the Introduction affirms:
Recognizing modern usage of English, the CSB regularly translates the plural of the Greek word ἄνθρωπος ("man") equally "people" instead of "men," and occasionally the atypical every bit "one," "someone," or "anybody," when the supporting pronouns in the original languages validate such a translation. While the CSB avoids using "he" or "him" unnecessarily, the translation does not restructure sentences to avoid them when they are in the text.22
This shift in gender-language policy is axiomatic from the first line of the Introduction to the CSB. Whereas the HCSB Introduction begins, "The Bible is God'south revelation to human," the CSB reads, "The Bible is God'southward revelation to humanity."
The most hitting gender-language change in the CSB is its rendering of the Greek plural ἀδελφοί as "brothers and sisters." While the HCSB consistently translated ἀδελφοί as "brothers," the CSB uses "brothers and sisters" 151 times. This modify should not in fact be a controversial 1. Back in the early stages of the gender-language fence, opponents of gender inclusive linguistic communication conceded that ἀδελφοί oftentimes meant "siblings."
The original version of the Colorado Springs Guidelines actually rejected the translation "brothers and sisters" for ἀδελφοί. Guideline B.1 originally read, "'Brother' (adelphos) and 'brothers' (adelphoi) should not be changed to 'brother(s) and sister(s).'"23 However, Dan Wallace, New Testament professor at Dallas Seminary, sent the formulators of the Guidelines examples from secular Greek where ἀδελφοί clearly meant "brothers and sisters." For example, a passage from the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (713, xx–23; AD 97) reads, "My father died leaving me and my ἀδελφοί Diodorus and Theis as his heirs." While Diodorus is a man's proper noun, Theis is a woman'due south proper noun. The Greek term is thus fully inclusive in this context, meaning "brother and sister" or "siblings." Guideline B.i was subsequently revised as follows: "the plural adelphoi tin be translated 'brothers and sisters' where the context makes clear that the author is referring to both men and women."
This concession is no doubt the reason for a footnote in the English language Standard Version at the first use of ἀδελφοί in NT books. While the ESV text continues to render ἀδελφοί every bit "brothers," the footnote adds: "Or brothers and sisters. In New Testament usage, depending on the context, the plural Greek word adelphoi (translated "brothers") may refer either to brothers or to brothers and sisters."
Significantly, the CSB renders ἀδελφοί every bit "brothers and sisters" but includes no footnotes, acknowledging that in these contexts ἀδελφοί means "brothers and sisters." Compare the HCSB and the CSB in the following passages:
Matthew 23:8
| HCSB | You take one Teacher, and you are all brothers. |
| CSB | You take one Teacher, and you are all brothers and sisters. |
John 21:23
| HCSB | So this report spread to the brothers that this disciple would not die. |
| CSB | Then this rumor spread to the brothers and sisters that this disciple would not dice. |
Acts 1:15
| HCSB | During these days Peter stood up among the brothers |
| CSB | In those days Peter stood up among the brothers and sisters |
Romans ane:13
| HCSB | At present I want you lot to know, brothers, that I frequently planned to come to you lot. |
| CSB | Now I don't desire yous to exist unaware, brothers and sisters. |
1 Corinthians ane:26
| HCSB | Brothers, consider your calling. |
| CSB | Brothers and sisters, consider your calling. |
Hebrews 2:17
| HCSB | Therefore, He had to be similar His brothers in every fashion. |
| CSB | Therefore, he had to be similar his brothers and sisters in every mode. |
The rendering of ἀδελφοί is non the only significant gender linguistic communication change in the CSB. While the HCSB uses the terms "human being" or "men" 3097 times, the CSB uses them just 2551 times, a reduction of 546. Consider the following examples:
Matthew 12:12
| HCSB | A man is worth far more than than a sheep. |
| CSB | A person is worth far more than a sheep. |
Romans 3:28
| HCSB | For we conclude that a man is justified past faith. |
| CSB | For nosotros conclude that a person is justified by faith. |
Romans four:8
| HCSB | How joyful is the human… |
| CSB | Blessed is the person… |
This concluding instance is particularly hit, since "human" hither is ἀνήρ not ἄνθρωπος. Six times in James, the CSB translates ἀνήρ using a generic term, while HCSB used "human" (see the table beneath).
Tabular array 1: ἀνήρ in James
| HCSB | CSB | |
|---|---|---|
| James 1:viii | An indecisive man [ἀνήρ] is unstable in all his ways. | person … existence double-minded and unstable in all his means. |
| James 1:12 | A man [ἀνήρ] who endures trials is blessed, | Blest is the one who endures trials, |
| James 1:20 | for human being's anger [ὀργὴ ἀνδρός] does non accomplish God's righteousness. | for homo anger does not achieve God's righteousness. |
| James one:23 | … he is similar a homo [ἀνήρ] looking at his own confront in a mirror. | … he is like someone looking at his ain confront in a mirror.… |
| James 2:2 | For example, a human being [ἀνήρ] comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and dressed in fine dress… | For if someone comes into your meeting wearing a aureate ring and dressed in fine clothes. |
| James iii:2 | If anyone does not stumble…he is a mature man [ἀνήρ] who is also able to control his whole torso. | If anyone does not stumble … he is mature, able too to control the whole torso. |
These examples not but show the gender-inclusive policy of the CSB, but too its handling of resumptive masculine pronouns. While translating generic uses of ἀνήρ and ἄνθρωπος every bit "person" or with other generic terms, the CSB consistently retains the masculine resumptive pronouns "he," "him" or "his" that follow. For example, 1 Corinthians two:11 reads "For who knows a person's thoughts except his spirit within him?" While ἄνθρωπος is rendered "person" instead of man, the masculine is retained for the presumptive pronouns "his" and "him." The CSB website explains the reason for this. While using inclusive terms for nouns,
At the same time, the translators chose not to make third person masculine pronouns inclusive by rendering them as plurals (they, them), considering they believed it was of import to retain the individual and personal sense of these expressions.24
Of class translation always involves compromise and no language can reproduce the meaning exactly. While retaining masculine atypical pronouns maintains agreement with reference to number (atypical), it loses agreement with reference to gender (masculine for generic). Another solution, adopted in many cases past the 2011 NIV, is to employ singular "they," a form that is now pervasive in common English.25 Offset Corinthians 2:11 NIV reads, "For who knows a person'due south thoughts except their own spirit within them?" While plural in form, "their" and "them" are singular in meaning. Both solutions—masculine singular pronouns or atypical "they"—accept one grammatical anomaly.
In any instance, these gender language changes in the CSB are especially meaning in low-cal of contempo controversies. Every bit one who was significantly involved in the gender-language debates of the 1990s and 2000s,26 it struck me as more than a little ironic that a version with such strong Southern Baptist connections would openly adopt gender-accurate linguistic communication. This irony was non lost on the secular media. Atlantic Monthly published an article entitled, "Southern Baptists Embrace Gender-Inclusive Linguistic communication in the Bible."27 The subtitle read, "America'southward largest Protestant denomination has produced a revised translation that incorporates many features information technology had long condemned." The article pointed out that the Southern Baptists, who previously led the charge against gender inclusive language, were now embracing information technology in their flagship Bible translation.
The CSB now translates the term anthropos, a Greek word for "man," in a gender-neutral form 151 times, rendering it "human," "people," and "ones." The previous edition had done this on occasion; the new revision adds almost 100 more instances. "Men of Israel" becomes "boyfriend Israelites;" when discussing Jesus's incarnation the "likeness of men" becomes "likeness of humanity." The CSB translates the term adelphoi, a Greek word for "brother" in a gender-neutral form 106 times, oft calculation "sister." "Brotherly beloved" is translated "dearest every bit brothers and sisters."
Trevin Wax, Bible and Reference Publisher for Holman Bibles, dedicated the translation in e-mail correspondence with the authors of the article. He rejected the notion that the translation is "gender-neutral," calling information technology "gender-accurate" instead. "It uses male pronouns for God, for pastors, and in places where it's obviously male person—and information technology uses male and female, where that's what the writer intended," Wax said.28 A similar response came from Denny Burk, who on his weblog rejected whatever change in direction, claiming that the CSB, like the HCSB, followed the Colorado Springs Guidelines.29
While the adoption of gender-accurate language in the CSB is certainly moderate, to say that it follows the Colorado Springs Guidelines is non accurate. The Guidelines arose in a climate of hostility toward gender-inclusive language and their tone is clearly negative and prohibitive. The CSB positively adopts such language both in its introduction and its text. For case, the Colorado Springs Guidelines explicitly reject the translation "brother or sister" for the singular ἀδελφός. Guideline B.one. reads, "'Brother' (adelphos) should not be changed to 'brother or sister.'" However the CSB did exactly that 24 times.30 Consider the following examples:
Matthew five:22
| HCSB | But I tell yous, everyone who is aroused with his brother will exist subject field to judgment. |
| CSB | Merely I tell yous, everyone who is angry with his brother or sister will exist subject to judgment. |
Romans 14:10
| HCSB | But yous, why do you criticize your blood brother? Or you, why do you lot look down on your brother? |
| CSB | Simply you lot, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or you, why practise you despise your blood brother or sister? |
I also had to chuckle when I saw both Trevin Wax and Denny Burk using the language of "gender accuracy." This is the terminology we were using with reference to the NIVI and the TNIV 20 years ago.31 As translators nosotros were never striving for gender "neutrality," merely rather for gender accuracy. (The subtitle to my 1997 volume Distorting Scripture? was The Challenge of Bible Translation and Gender Accuracy.) But in the cacophony of chaos and opposition provoked past the civilization wars and anti-feminism of the day, it seemed no one was listening.
When the Atlantic Monthly article came out I due east-mailed the link to my colleagues on the NIV translation committee (the CBT—Committee on Bible Translation) with a notation saying, "Don't you feel vindicated?" 1 of them responded with great poignancy:
Although the Southern Baptists have vindicated our T/NIV translations, for some reasons this makes me sad. All the vitriol, all the slander, all the stress CBT endured for years … nosotros knew we were right. I recollect they owe us a public amends for all the damage they did.
Well, I doubt an apology is going to happen, simply hopefully lessons accept been learned. When issues like this ascend we need to take a deep jiff and call back advisedly through the issues—not blitz out to sign petitions and censure colleagues. I have a friend whose conservancy was publicly questioned because of his stand on this upshot. Another lost his instruction position at an evangelical seminary. We should be ameliorate than this.
I want to commend Tom Schreiner, David Allen and the CSB Translation Oversight Committee for having the courage to follow their convictions in this regard (and to consistently follow their translation philosophy). I'm sure they have taken a few hits because of it.
While adopting a great bargain of gender-accurate language, the CSB (like most versions) is non birthday consequent. Here are a few examples I came across where an inclusive term might have been expected:
The crowds … gave celebrity to God, who had given such authorisation to men. (Matt 9:eight)
The Son of Man is nigh to be betrayed into the hands of men. (Matt 17:22)
With homo this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. (Matt 19:26)
The Sabbath was made for man and not human for the Sabbath. (Mark ii:27)
But who are you, a mere homo, to talk back to God? (Rom 9:twenty)
And [they] exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal human being. (Rom 1:23)
Paul, an apostle—not from men or by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father… (Gal 1:1)
3.6. Traditional Language
Although the gender language changes are maybe the most significant in the revision of the HCSB, at that place are many others. In a good number of cases, the CSB reversed innovations made by the HCSB and returned to traditional language. Here are a few examples.
(1) Beatitudes. The HCSB broke with traditional Beatitude word order to retain more natural English grammar. The CSB returns to the traditional Approbation formula:
Matthew 5:three
| HCSB | The poor in spirit are blessed, for the kingdom of sky is theirs. |
| CSB | Blessed are the poor in spirit, for the kingdom of sky is theirs. |
Romans 4:8
| HCSB | How joyful is the man the Lord will never accuse with sin! |
| CSB | Blessed is the person the Lord volition never charge with sin. |
(2) Leprosy. The HCSB removed the give-and-take "leprosy" considering the skin diseases in Leviticus thirteen–14 are clearly non Hansen's disease, translating the Hebrew and Greek words traditionally rendered "leper" and "leprosy" (λέπρος; λέπρα; צָרַעַת) equally "skin disease" or "serious skin affliction." The CSB retains "serious skin disease" in the OT for צָרַעַת, simply returns to "leprosy" in the NT (11x) for λέπρος and λέπρα. The reason for this distinction betwixt the OT and the NT is not clear, though it might be because the English "leper" and "leprosy" are derived from the Greek terms.
(3) Tongues. The HCSB tended to use the term "languages" instead of "tongues" because the latter was considered archaic. Since some considered the HCSB'due south utilize of "linguistic communication" here to indicate an anti-Charismatic calendar, and since "tongues" can refer either to human languages or ecstatic utterance, the CSB commission returned to the traditional "tongues."
Acts 2:4 (cf. ii:xi; 10:46; 19:half dozen)
| HCSB | So they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in unlike languages. |
| CSB | Then they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in different tongues. |
ane Corinthians 12:30
| HCSB | Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in other languages? |
| CSB | Practice all have gifts of healing? Practice all speak in other tongues? |
Tom Schreiner explains the reason for this change:
The translators, representing a diverseness of denominations, did non intend by the use of "languages" to exclude charismatic views of ecstatic speech. The conclusion was fabricated without reference to convictions about gifts of the Spirit, questions of cessationism versus continuationism, or any other theological concern. Nevertheless, in the years after HCSB debuted, many readers assumed that the HCSB had intentionally excluded Charismatic viewpoints.
Because "tongues" is an appropriate translation and is the word used in every other major English Bible translation, the CSB Translation Oversight Committee elected to prefer the traditional rendering and avoid whatever appearance of theological bias.32
A render to traditional linguistic communication is besides evident in the baptism narrative. While the HCSB translated the divine vocalism from heaven every bit "You are My beloved Son. I accept delight in Yous!" (Luke 3:22), the CSB has the more traditional rendering, "You are my beloved Son; with you I am well-pleased."
(4) Quirky translations. As noted above, the HCSB is marked by a number of what I would telephone call odd or "quirky" translation choices. The CSB seems to remove nearly of these, returning to more traditional renderings. Here are a few examples from Matthew'due south Gospel.
Matthew 2:1
| HCSB | Wise men from the east arrived unexpectedly in Jerusalem. |
| CSB | Wise men from the eastward arrived in Jerusalem. |
It is unclear where "unexpectedly" came from. The Greek is ἰδοὺ μάγοι ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν παρεγένοντο εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα.
Matthew 5:22
| HCSB | But whoever says, 'You moron!' [μωρέ] will be subject to hellfire. |
| CSB | But whoever says, 'You lot fool!' will be subject to hellfire. |
Evidently the formal similarity (and etymological connection) of the Greek μωρός to the English term "moron" resulted in this translation. Merely of course information technology is an anachronistic fallacy to say that the English language "moron" is a literal rendering of μωρός.
Matthew 6:27
| HCSB | Can whatsoever of you add a single cubit to his height by worrying? |
| CSB | Can any of yous add i moment to his life bridge by worrying? |
This is a difficult idiom (προσθεῖναι ἐπὶ τὴν ἡλικίαν αὐτοῦ πῆχυν ἕνα) and it is unclear whether information technology is referring to time or space (length). But it is very odd to say that you lot can't even do a modest matter similar calculation a "cubit" to your height (eighteen inches—not a small affair at all!).
Matthew 10:17
| HCSB | People will hand you over to sanhedrins and flog you in their synagogues. |
| CSB | They will paw you lot over to local courts and flog you in their synagogues. |
The Greek συνέδριον is ofttimes rendered "Sanhedrin" when information technology refers to the Jewish high council in Jerusalem. Only the plural (συνέδρια) ordinarily refers to local councils or courts and then is ordinarily translated "councils" rather than transliterated equally "sanhedrins."
Matthew 13:52
| HCSB | "Therefore," He said to them, "every student of Scripture instructed in the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who brings out of his storeroom what is new and what is old." |
| CSB | "Therefore," he said to them, "every teacher of the law who has become a disciple in the kingdom of heaven is like the possessor of a house who brings out of his storeroom treasures new and old." |
Since the HCSB elsewhere translates γραμματεύς equally "scribe," one would expect the same matter hither.
Matthew 15:30
| HCSB | And large crowds came to Him, having with them the lame, the bullheaded, the plain-featured, those unable to speak, and many others. |
| CSB | And big crowds came to him, including the lame, the blind, the crippled, those unable to speak, and many others. |
"Deformed" does not seem very sensitive to those with disabilities.
Matthew 16:xviii
| HCSB | I will build My church, and the forces of Hades will not overpower it. |
| CSB | I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. |
It is surprising that the HCSB, which generally retains the metaphors of Scripture, does non retain the image of a gate.
Matthew 17:2
| HCSB | He was transformed in front end of them. |
| CSB | He was transfigured in front of them. |
This CSB returns to the traditional technical term for the transfiguration.
Matthew 17:4
| HCSB | Lord, it'due south good for us to be here! If You desire, I will make three tabernacles here. |
| CSB | Lord, it's expert for the states to be here. I will set up three shelters here. |
While Greek σκηνή (hut, tent, shelter, tabernacle) can be used of the OT tabernacle, it is unlikely that Peter is hoping to build three copies of the One-time Testament portable temple. The sense here is almost certainly a hut or shelter.
While in almost cases, the CSB returns to traditional or less innovative language, in other cases the editors move away from traditional terms, especially when these terms have go archaic or obscure. For instance, the HCSB retained the traditional linguistic communication of "propitiation" for ἱλαστήριον (Rom 3:25), ἱλάσκομαι (Heb 2:17), and ἱλασμός (one John 2:2; 4:10), no dubiety because of the historical contend between "expiation" (cf. RSV) and "propitiation." The CSB translators probable recognized that few of their readers would know the deviation and so rendered the ἱλάσ– word group every bit "atoning sacrifice" (cf. NIV and NLT).
one John 2:two
| HCSB | He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and non just for ours, but as well for those of the whole globe. |
| CSB | He himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours, but also for those of the whole world. |
Occasionally information technology seemed to me the CSB's revision was non an improvement. Here are a few examples where a case could be made for retaining the HCSB reading (once again from Matthew'due south Gospel):
Matthew 12:10
| HCSB | In that location He saw a man who had a paralyzed hand. |
| CSB | There he saw a man who had a shriveled manus. |
The reference to a "shriveled" hand nearly certainly indicates paralysis. The HCSB makes this clear.
Matthew 19:28
| HCSB | Jesus said to them, "I assure you: In the Messianic Age…" |
| CSB | Jesus said to them, "Truly I tell you, in the renewal of all things…" |
The CSB's "renewal of all things" is formally close to the Greek ἐν τῇ παλιγγενεσίᾳ ("in the regeneration"), simply is quite obscure for mod readers. "Messianic Historic period" makes it clear that the reference is to the eschaton.
Matthew 9:20 (cf. 14:36; 23:5)
| HCSB | Just so, a woman … approached from behind and touched the tassel on His robe. |
| CSB | Only and then, a woman … approached from behind and touched the end of his robe. |
Every bit a rabbi Jesus likely had tassels on his robe (Num. xv:37–41; Deut. 22:12). The Greek κρασπέδα is rendered "tassels" in Matthew 23:v with reference to the robes of the Pharisees and probably means the same thing hither and in fourteen:36.
Matthew 24:ane
| HCSB | Every bit Jesus left and was going out of the temple complex… |
| CSB | As Jesus left and was going out of the temple… |
Jesus is clearly leaving the temple mountain, non the temple edifice proper.
three.7. Textual Issues
As noted above, while Arthur Farstad favored the Bulk Text (the Byzantine text type), the editorial conclusion was eventually made for the HCSB to follow the Disquisitional Text. For the most part, nonetheless, in its footnotes the HCSB reserved judgment on textual bug, simply citing "Other mss say…" or "Other mss omit…." In general, the CSB follows this policy, though it introduces a subtle difference with the phrase "Some [instead of 'Other'] mss read…" for less likely variants.
In more than notorious passages, the CSB more than explicitly renders judgment. For example, in the Johannine Comma ("iii witnesses" passage) in one John 5:seven–8, the HCSB has a footnote that reads:
Other mss (Vg and a few late Gk mss) read evidence in sky: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are Ane. viiiAnd at that place are three who prove on earth:
By dissimilarity, the CSB reads:
A few tardily Gk mss and some tardily Vg mss add testify in heaven: the Male parent, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 8 And at that place are three who show on earth:
Similarly, in the HCSB the longer ending of Mark has only a small bracket "[…]" marking information technology off from the rest of the text and a footnote at the stop of verse 20 that reads "Other mss omit bracketed text." The headings go on as usual with sections marked, "Appearances of the Risen Lord (16:9–thirteen)," "The Great Commission (16:14–18)" and "The Ascension (16:19–20)."
The CSB more conspicuously marks the longer catastrophe off equally a afterwards addition. A line across the text clearly delineates what follows as a divide section and a bracketed heading reads, "[Some of the earliest mss conclude with 16:8.]" The heading that follows is labeled, "THE LONGER Ending OF MARK: APPEARANCES OF THE RISEN LORD (16:9–13)," and a footnote adds:
16:viii Other mss include vv. 9–20 as a longer ending. The following shorter ending is institute in some mss between v. 8 and v. 9 and in one ms after five. viii (each of which omits vv. 9–20): And all that had been allowable to them they quickly reported to those around Peter. Later on these things, Jesus himself sent out through them from eastward to west, the holy and imperishable declaration of eternal salvation. Amen.
This is much closer to the NIV, which similarly separates the longer ending from the rest of the text with a bar and a bracketed heading.
4. Conclusion
The examples above ostend that the CSB is a significant improvement over its predecessor, retaining its strengths while eliminating many of its weaknesses. In terms of strengths, the CSB continues the HCSB's translation philosophy, which represents a nice balance between formal and functional equivalence (though the term "optimal equivalence" is more a marketing strategy than a reality). This mediating approach helps to maintain readability and clarity without sacrificing of import formal features, such as metaphors and word-plays.
As far equally improvements over the HCSB, by removing many idiosyncrasies of its predecessor and returning to more traditional language with reference to the divine proper name YHWH, slaves and servants, beatitudes, tongues, etc., the CSB volition probable gain wider credence in the Christian community. Its more precise text-critical notes are also an improvement, bringing it more than in-line with the consensus of evangelical scholarship with reference to NT Textual Criticism. Finally, its more positive stance towards gender-inclusive language non merely improves its accurateness, simply also enables modern readers to hear more clearly the inclusive message of the gospel—the good news that in Christ "There is no Jew or Greek, slave or free, male and female; since you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal 3:28 CSB).
[1] This is a revised version of a newspaper given at the Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society (Denver, CO, 14 Nov 2018).
[2] "Introduction to the Holman Christian Standard Bible," Bible Researcher, http://world wide web.bible-researcher.com/csb-intro.html.
[3] "About the Christian Standard Bible," https://csbible.com/almost-the-csb/.
[4] See Gordon D. Fee and Mark 50. Strauss, How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth. A Guide to Understanding and Using Bible Versions (1000 Rapids: Zondervan, 2007); Mark L. Strauss, "Class, Office and the Literal Meaning Fallacy in English Bible Translation," BT 56 (2005), 153–68.
[5] Available at https://marklstrauss.com/articles.
[6] These examples are adjusted from Mark Fifty. Strauss, "Bible Translation and the Myth of 'Literal Accuracy,'" RevExp 108 (2011): 169–94.
[7] Run across Strauss, "Myth of 'Literal Accuracy,'" 176–77.
[eight] From a search of Biblia Hebraica in Accordance Bible Software.
[nine] The Holy Bible: Holman Christian Standard Version (Nashville: Holman Bible Publishers, 2009).
[ten] The ad is included in Michael Marlowe, "The Holman Christian Standard Bible," Bible Researcher, August 2011, www.bible-researcher.com/csb.html.
[11] Marlowe, "The Holman Christian Standard Bible."
[12] Thomas R. Schreiner, "Q&A: Translation Decisions for the Christian Standard Bible," Jan 2017, https://csbible.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Translation-Decisions-QA.pdf, p. two.
[13] Almost of this material is from Fee and Strauss, How to Cull a Translation, 127–28.
[14] The only appearances of "Messiah" in the 1984 NIV are those instances where John transliterates the Hebrew term as Μεσσίας (John 1:41; 4:25).
[15] "Messiah" also appears four times in the HCSB where χριστός is absent, when the HCSB supplies a noun for the Greek pronoun (Matt 22:45; Mark 12:37; Luke xx:44; Eph 2:17).
[16] The advertising was accessed at "Christian Standard Bible 2017," Baptist Lath, https://tinyurl.com/y4tjq5k2. It always struck me as a chip odd and ironic, considering the history of the Southern Baptist Convention, that the advertisements for the HCSB would extol the intentional proliferation of the word "slave."
[17] Schreiner, "Q&A: Translation Decisions for the Christian Standard Bible," 4.
[18] BDAG 453.
[19] "Introduction to the Holman Christian Standard Bible."
[20] "Colorado Springs Guidelines," Bible Researcher, nine September 1997, http://www.bible-researcher.com/csguidelines.html. For critique of these guidelines, see my "Linguistic and Hermeneutical Fallacies in the Guidelines Established at the 'Briefing on Gender-Related Linguistic communication in Scripture,'" JETS 41 (1998) 239–62.
[21] "Introduction to the Holman Christian Standard Bible."
[22] "Introduction to the Christian Standard Bible," Christian Standard Bible (Holman Bible Publishers, 2017).
[23] Colorado Springs Guidelines: Statement by Participants in the Conference on Gender-Related Linguistic communication in Scripture," Bible Researcher, 27 May 1997, http://world wide web.bible-researcher.com/csguidelines1.html.
[24] Schreiner, "Q&A: Translation Decisions for the Christian Standard Bible," iii.
[25] Encounter Jeff Guo, "Sorry, Grammar Nerds. The Singular 'They' Has Been Declared Word of the Year," Washington Mail, 8 Jan, 2016, https://tinyurl.com/yyjlyxkb.
[26] See Mark 50. Strauss, Distorting Scripture? The Claiming of Bible Translation and Gender Accuracy (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1998); Mark L. Strauss, "Current Issues in the Gender-Language Contend: A brief response to Vern Poythress and Wayne Grudem," in The Claiming of Bible Translation: Communicating God's Give-and-take to the World. Essays in Honor of Ronald F. Youngblood, ed. Glen Grand. Scorgie, Mark L. Strauss, and Steven Thousand. Voth (Thousand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), 115–42.
[27] Jonathan Merritt and Garet Robinson, "Southern Baptists Embrace Gender-Inclusive Language in the Bible," The Atlantic, 11 June 2017, https://tinyurl.com/y797l9es.
[28] Merritt and Robinson, "Southern Baptists Embrace Gender-Inclusive Language in the Bible."
[29] Denny Burk, "Have Southern Baptists Embraced Gender-Inclusive Bible Translation? Not by a Longshot," DennyBurk.com, xi June 2017, https://tinyurl.com/y9dwad3f.
[30] Matt v:22–24; 18:21, 35; Rom 14:x, 13, fifteen, 21; i Cor 5:11; eight:11, 13; 1 Thess 4:half dozen; 2 Thess three:vi; Heb 8:11; 1 John 2:9–11; 3:10, fifteen; 4:20.
[31] NIVI refers to the gender-inclusive British edition of the NIV, published in 1995, which sparked the gender language controversy of the late 1990s. For details, see Strauss, Distorting Scripture? xx–22. TNIV is Today'south New International Version, the short-lived gender-inclusive edition of the NIV introduced when the 1984 NIV was frozen in terms of farther revision (TNIV NT, 2002; whole Bible, 2005; canceled in 2011).
[32] Schreiner, "Q&A: Translation Decisions for the Christian Standard Bible," ane.
Mark L. Strauss
Marking Strauss is University Professor of New Testament at Bethel Seminary.
Source: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/a-review-of-the-christian-standard-bible/
Post a Comment for "Arguments for and Agains the Csb Version of the Bible"