Brother Cobb, I was given a really nice Bible, but it’s the Holman Christian Standard Bible. I’ve never heard of this before. Is it reliable?–Mrs. Cole, An Inmate in Oklahoma.
Thanks for that question. It’s great that you want to know about the Bible version you’re reading. In order to get a decent answer, we have to first look at the background of this Bible version.
Initial History
The education wing of the Southern Baptist Convention had signed an exclusive contract to use only the New International Version (NIV) in their Sunday School curriculum. When that contract was nearing an end, the Baptists engaged the services of Arthur Farstad, who had been one of the lead translators of the New King James Version (NKJV) to help them make their own version. The reasons for wanting to stop using the NIV and make their own version came down to these main points:
- Broadman and Holman is the publishing wing of the Southern Baptist Convention.
- They were having to pay a lot of money to publish curriculum using the NIV, which is owned by Zondervan Publishing (one of their competitors).
- There was a revision of the NIV which was forthcoming at the time, which sought to incorporate gender-neutral language (to appease feminists).
- They sought to buy the rights to the New American Standard Bible (NASB), but to no avail.
- They wanted a Bible that they could control any and all revisions on.
Initially, the plan was to use a Greek text close to that used by the King James and New King James, but when Mr. Farstad passed away, they decided to instead use the Greek text employed by the NIV, American Standard Version, and practically all newer translations. While this may not seem noteworthy, there are some large differences: multiple verses that are found in the KJV and NKJV are absent from these Bibles (Acts 8:37 is one such example). The HCSB includes these verses, but places them in large black brackets to alert the reader that they do not believe those verses belong in the Bible.  However, in over 1500 instances, various words and phrases are just missing from the HCSB. One example of a phrase missing from the HCSB is, “and whosoever marries her which is put away commits adultery” from Matthew 19:9.
It’s not the leaving out of the verses that causes me the most concern. Most newer translations do that anyway, it’s the extremely arbitrary way they put some parts in brackets as “not part of the original,” but then leave others completely out without even a note.
The 2009 Revision
The HCSB was released in 2004, and a revised edition was released in 2009. Some changes are as follows:
- In the original 2004 edition, any words added by the translators (usually for clarity’s sake) were placed in brackets [like this] so the reader would know those words were not in the original Greek. In the 2009 edition, there is nothing to alert the reader to these additions because the brackets have all been removed. So it is possible that they have added words which change the meaning, but you would not be able to tell from just reading their Bible. The KJV and NKJV both place added words in italics to alert the reader that these words have been added.
- The King James Version translated the name of God (YHVH in Hebrew) as “the LORD” in the Old Testament (except in 4 instances where it is translated “Jehovah”). Most English Bibles follow this same practice. The name of God appears 6,828 times in the Old Testament. The HCSB translated it “Yahweh” (which some believe is a more accurate pronunciation than Jehovah) 75 times in the original edition, but almost 500 times in the revised edition.
Translation Issues
There are some questionable translations within this version of the Bible, and the following are a sampling:
- Micah 5:2 – The KJV says of Christ that His goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. The HCSB says that Christ’s “ORIGIN is from antiquity, from eternity.” The KJV says that Jesus is eternal; the HCSB says that Jesus had a beginning, an origin.
- John 1:14, 3:16 – the KJV says Jesus is the only begotten Son of God. The HCSB says that Jesus is the “one and only” Son of God. But the Bible says all Christians are children of God (Galatians 3:26-27). If Jesus is the only Son of God, then we cannot be sons of God.
- I Samuel 6:19 – the King James says 50,070 people died. The HCSB says that seventy of the city of 50,000 died. No other translation of the Bible agrees with the HCSB in this reading.
The HCSB sought to create a conservative translation of the Bible that was readable, but still true to the original. As such, they did not try to translate word-for-word (as does the KJV, NKJV, ASV, and NASB). This version is only slightly more literal than the NIV.
Things to Understand About This Version Before Putting Your Trust in It:
- This version was translated exclusively for the Southern Baptist convention.
- This version was paid for by the Southern Baptist Convention.
- Though some of the Old Testament was translated by other denominations, the New Testament was exclusively translated by Baptists.
- It is owned, 100%, by the Southern Baptist Convention.
- Part of the motivation for creating this translation was $$$$.
- In many instances, it does not give a translation, but their interpretation of the text.
Conclusion
The people who oversaw the creation of this new translation sought to create a conservative version that they could own and edit as they see fit. Though it may be easier to read than some other versions, one must be careful in trusting it completely. When translators decide to give their interpretation of God’s word instead of translating it, it stops being God’s word and becomes their own commentary and opinion.
Right or wrong, when a religious group—motivated by money—creates their own translation of the Bible, it will be viewed suspiciously by others. This translation is useful for comparative purposes, but this writer would not make it his primary Bible from which to read and study.
–Bradley Cobb
Thank you for your thorough and heartfelt answer for this question. I want a true Holman KJV and would consider one with exact interpretation as you have pointed out many issues to consider when observing and seeking Gods guidance from the most original texts available to all men and that man’s opinions are restrained when writing a translation. Thank you.
Sir Bradley Cobb, I read today your nice explanation of the history of the translation of the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) translated by Arthur Farstad, who also one of the leader translators of the New King James Version (NKJV). Will you please enumerate all the translators of HCBC and NKJV? The Psalms 83:18 of the KJV rendered that the ‘only’ name was JEHOVAH, but the HCSB rendered the name as YAHWEH. If that is so, how come those translators of both bibles, if they were really guided by the holy spirit, were not in uniformity in their respective translation? According to Zecharyah 14:9, there is only ‘one’ name, if this is so, what do you think which is one is correct, and/or, both committed errors?
I don’t know the names of all the translators of the HCSB (now revised, and called the Christian Standard Bible, or CSB) and the NKJV. I’m sure you can find them all online somewhere.
The word “Jehovah” or “Yahweh” results from translators taking the name of God, which in Hebrew is four consonants, and trying to put vowels with it to give it a pronounceable reading in Englsih (and the same is true when the Bible was translated in other languages). Since vowel markings in Hebrew were not added until much later, and by Jews who had long since stopped pronouncing the name of God, there is no true concensus on how it is to be pronounced, hence the difference.
No Bible translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit in any English translation. It is the work of men who studied the original languages, and are doing the best they can to render it into readable and understandable English. Sometimes they do a good job, and other times they could have done better.
Sir Bradley Cobb: This is my follow-up Email. Under the sub-title “The 2009 Revison,” yous tated: “The King James Version translated the name of God (YHVH in Hebrew) as the “the LORD” in the Old Testament (except in 4 instances where it was translated “JeHoVaH” {JHVH}). Most English Bibles the same practice. the name of God appears 6,828 times in the Old Yestament. The HCSB translated it YaHWeH {YHWH}” (which some believe is a more accurate that Jehovah) 75 times in the oroginal edition, but almost 500 times in the revised version.” End quote. Emphasis mine in the bracket. — If the exact tetragram is YHVH and the Father’s name is only ONE and not ‘three’ mentioned in Zecharyah 14:9; Isayah 63:16, then in truth, both “J”HVH and YH”W”H are erroneous simply because we could not find the letters “J” and “W” (double UU/W) in YHVH. Am I absolutely correct? What can say about this biblical matter?
In English, there is an apostle John. In Italian, his name is Giovanni.
In English, there is an apostle Matthew. In Italian, his name is Matteo.
Paul in Greek is Paulos, in Spanish is Pablo, in English is Paul.
Different languages spell names differently. So when translations of names come, it is rendered in different ways (see the Old Testament spellings of different king names vs. the New Testament spellings in the KJV, especially in Matthew 1).
The letter W was originally a hard V sound (in German, it is pronounced Dooble-vey–or double-V), so I would assume the W or V would originally have represented the same basic sound.