Jump to content

NEW! 2017 Christian Standard Bible (CSB)--now available


R. Mansfield
 Share

Recommended Posts

Get the new 2017 CHRISTIAN STANDARD BIBLE (CSB), available NOW for the Accordance Bible Software Library. Introductory pricing is available or FREE for Accordance users who already have the HCSB!

 
For more information, see the announcement in today's blog post!
 
Windows screenshot:
 
CSB2017.Acc12.Win.png
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rick, I appreciate there has already been some discussion on the forum about the name change, but is it essentially the same text as the HCSB or is it a completely revised text?

Edited by Paul Meiklejohn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I have heard this is a major revision. Rick's blog has several posts about it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Tim, I see that now, sorry,  I should have taken the time to read the blog before posting.  Thanks for answering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a pretty significant update--more than what I had anticipated. Feel free to see my post, "2017 Christian Standard Bible (CSB): First Look," from my personal blog. 

 

[Note that anything written on my personal blog does not necessarily reflect the views of OakTree Software, Inc.]

 

We will be posting a follow-up blog or two here on the official website, and I imagine I will continue to blog about it on my own on This Lamp. 

 

Accordance Bible Software played a significant role in the original development of the HCSB as can be seen here: accord://read/HCSB_Notes#25

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will the upgrade to the CSB remove the old HCSB text or will we be able to retain both?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will the upgrade to the CSB remove the old HCSB text or will we be able to retain both?

 

You will retain both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When is Key Numbering going to be added? Just curious

 

We don't have a date yet. If it follows patterns set it the past, the Key-numbered version will be a separate release. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Random question. Do you think there will be a tagged version with strongs at some time (like the holmans)?

 

;o)

 

Sorry, just seen keith asked the same while i was typing. Thanks for your answer rick.

 

Great minds.

Edited by ukfraser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the free upgrade. 

 

Interesting thing in this new Bible. I see in all Bibles the trend to go from "forty" to "40", but this now goes back form "40" to "forty". (With all numbers)

Edited by Fabian
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am really grateful to be able to have HCSB and CSB side by side in Accordance so I can compare the two in my reading. Thanks!

 

Sadly it seems this edition essentially NIV'ifies the text—the things I liked about HCSB are disappearing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From reading Rick's blog I agree that most of what I loved about the HCSB is going away. Fortunately, we still get to keep the HCSB!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Random question. Do you think there will be a tagged version with strongs at some time (like the holmans)?

 

;o)

 

Sorry, just seen keith asked the same while i was typing. Thanks for your answer rick.

 

Great minds.

Hopefully it will come with the G/K Numbers or what I really prefer the G/K Enhanced with phrase tagging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hcsb is strongs but g/k enhanced may be even more indication of a niv'ified route.

 

;o)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Introductory pricing for the Christian Standard Bible (CSB) in Accordance ends at midnight tonight EST. Upgrades from HCSB will remain free. 

 
Here's one more screenshot of the CSB on Accordance Mobile:
 
CSB 17.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Accordance has to retweet on the CSB tweet so, the Accordance Logo is present there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still cannot believe this was left:

 

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.”

(Matthew 5:9 Christian Standard Bible)

accord://read/CSB17#Matt._5:9

 

I am well aware that υἱός is literally son, but even the KJV rendered it as children. In my life I have met many peacemakers who are women and never once thought of calling them a son of God, nor do I think sons is the best rendering in Matthew 5.

 

-Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still cannot believe this was left:

 

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.”

(Matthew 5:9 Christian Standard Bible)

accord://read/CSB17#Matt._5:9

 

I am well aware that υἱός is literally son, but even the KJV rendered it as children. In my life I have met many peacemakers who are women and never once thought of calling them a son of God, nor do I think sons is the best rendering in Matthew 5.

 

-Dan

 

We are all brides which inherit like a son.

Edited by Fabian
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have many masculine and famine images in the Bible for sure... I am not trying to eliminate them all just soften some more masculine ones where the intent seems to have imply both sexes... I honestly don't think Jesus wanted to imply men only indeed in Aramaic he may have used a neutral term... I only pointed it out because I liked the many other places i saw more inclusive language used, then going there it felt out of place.

 

-Dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still cannot believe this was left:

 

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.”

(Matthew 5:9 Christian Standard Bible)

accord://read/CSB17#Matt._5:9

 

I am well aware that υἱός is literally son, but even the KJV rendered it as children. In my life I have met many peacemakers who are women and never once thought of calling them a son of God, nor do I think sons is the best rendering in Matthew 5.

 
There are many places I am happy for "he" to become "he or she" and things like that, however in this case, it is a lot more difficult. The "Son of ___" construct is a very important one, as it establishes the "character" of a person, rather than simply assigning genetic lineage. If Matthew 5:9 was changed to "children of God", for consistency, you would really need to also change the titles for Jesus: "Son of Man" and "Son of God" into something like "Child of God" and "Child of Humanity".
 
You would end up with passages like this:
Mark 2:10 But I want you to know that the Child of Humanity has authority on earth to forgive sins.” So he said to the person, 11 “I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.”

 

(Either way, I do think this is where degenderisation of the text naturally leads, and I believe the mainstream bible translations will go this way in about 20 years or so (once the current generation of scholars doing translation work is dead)

Edited by Ιακοβ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Child of God" and "Child of Humanity".

Personally I like that... I have no with "son" because Jesus was male... I know I am prepared to be stoned... LOL

 

-Dan

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I like that... I have no with "son" because Jesus was male... I know I am prepared to be stoned... LOL

 

-Dan

 

 

I personally don't like it. But I think the translations will get there in the next 20 years or so.  I personally don't like it, as I don't accept the principle that we need to de-genderify English on the basis that the English language is "offensive" to some people. We should certainly be able to teach through parable, illustration, or story with a character that is a "man" or a "woman". 

 

There once was a man person from Nantucket...
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



But he ze followed the pair to Pawtucket,

The man person and the girl zis friend with the bucket;

    And he ze said to the man person,

    He ze was welcome to Nan,

But as for the bucket, Pawtucket.


Edited by Ιακοβ
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I already prefer Begotten for son, partially because I prefer less gendered language and partly for me it feels more theologically meaningful. Jesus was Joseph's son but was God's begotten, we are all sons and daughter's of God but Jesus is the only begotten. "Child of Humanity" as long as constantly translated to me is an effective title. That expresses what the text is trying to say. In the NRSV which is my preferred Bible often son of man when clearly not a messianic title in the old testament is "mortal one" It would be my desire to see it constantly translated "Child of Humanity". This is just me and I would never rebuke anyone for masculine usage its just not where I am at. I often chuckle at how in many ways the KJV was much more inclusive language wise than say the RSV. And where our common usage is now something like the ESV sounds very out of place to me, yes in has footnotes declaring the inclusiveness of the text but these are not read out in a service. Thankfully we have many different versions to suit different tastes and needs... And the worst translations I have come across still faithfully tell the truths of God, some better some worse. I have yet to see a perfect translation (KJV only people please forgive me, LOL).

 

-dan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...