One of the features I really like about the CSB is how OT quotations are boldened in the NT. I haven’t read through the CSB yet but it is on my list of translations to read. Thank you for the thoughtful video Jonathan and may the Lord watch over you and bless your time in Norway. Sounds like a very exciting trip.
A few days ago I just switched from the nkjv to the csb, I have a csb single colum wide margin, a now I just came across your video blessings to you my friend
I was a very big fan of the OG NIV 1984 before Zondervan updated to the TNIV -> NIV2011. The CSB I feel restores and improves upon what was great about the NIV84 and for that, it’s one that I also read from regularly.
Thanks for sharing your translation journey! I really like the CSB. I ran into a similar issue back when I was working through the ESV & the KJV. I love both translations dearly, but it wasn’t until I started reading the 2011 NIV for translation comparison that I realized the value of a more dynamic translation. I really, really love the NIV, and I think it’s a shame it’s so often stigmatized and criticized unduly. It’s an excellent, evangelical translation that is still faithful to the text while also being written in a contemporary English that I actually speak and understand. It’s perfect for daily reading devotionals, and one can always go back to one’s preferred formal translation (NKJV, ESV, etc.) for deep exegetical studies.
I appreciate your kind words :) there's a reason the NIV is the most popular English translation. Understandability is vital, especially with English changing as time goes on. I hope to see the NIV and CSB continue to strive for that in future updates
I use the NIV as my reader and ESV when I do deep exegetical study. The NKJV was my first translation I started reading and will always hold a special place with me.
This is exactly why I prefer the NASB95. Its extremely accurate and faithful to the original text while also being very easily readable. Thanks for the video
@@OliverGCowan I'll eventually get to the LSB, hopefully. My translation picks usually come down to the philosophy of the translators. The CSB, NASB 2020, and NKJV tend to be the most adherent to my personal convictions on how the bible should be translated.
As I’m watching, I’m laughing thinking, “just say you’re switching to the CSB!” 😂. The way you were talking before you revealed it made me think of the CSB right away.
New sub here #141👍I recently purchased the CSB Study Bible and it was the defining moment when I too, switched from NKJV to CSB as my primary. I do enjoy my affordable thought for thought NLT with the Filament App, but my CSB Tuscany from Schuyler is my daily reader!📖 Great vid + prayers for safe travels, health, etc👍
I actually have several translations. KJV, NKJV, ESV, CSB, NLT, NIV, NASB, NABRE. But I agree, CSB is getting to be one of my favorite translations. It's not like the NIV or NLT in terms of lost elegance with the writing, but it's more understandable than the KJV and NKJV. Strangely, my favorites are NKJV, CSB and NLT.
I love your excitement for a new translation! I remember trying to use the HCSB back in the day and...I hated it. It felt like each sentence had been given to a different translator in isolation and then everything was just strung together. The result was English style horror. Hopefully the CSB improved on that. My personal opinion on translation preference is this: Know what your translation is doing and how to use it. My baseline, for example, is an NIV1984 - it's much more of a thought-for-thought translation. Because of that, I know that if I'm caught by a particular word choice, I need to look more carefully into the Greek/Hebrew that's being translated to be sure that I'm not just enchanted with a phrase in isolation, but have really got the right meaning. But the advantage is this: I often have a better sense of the context out of the NIV1984 than a more word-for-word NASB, for example. I have heard many sermons where they are preaching from a word for word translation and they say "Now it says this, but the real deeper meaning is this", but my NIV1984 simply says that deeper meaning without having to undo the awkward sentence structure that some of the more "wooden" versions do. It much more about knowing where each translation's strengths and weaknesses are. Big fan of ESV, KJV, NKJV, and NASB after the NIV1984. All very very good versions for many good reasons 😁
I definitely agree with your conclusion! It's important to help the laypeople understand the utility of different kinds of translations so they can truly use them as intended. All for the glory of God.
The struggle is real, my friend. I feel similar in many ways. I also lean more majority text, but obviously the choices there are lacking. As far as textual basis with good notes, translation philosophy, and syntax/styling I do appreciate the NKJV as my primary translation: however, sometimes I find myself frustrated with the end product and how wordy it can become. I appreciate your reasoning with utilizing the CSB. I do greatly enjoy that translation and appreciate its noting system and have a personal size in my bag for church among other options in my library. I prefer the note and textual transparency of the CSB over the ESV. I’ve been paring my NKJV Clarion Scriptura rebind with a hardback Berean Standard Bible. The greatest features of the BSB, imo, are the notes, the translation tier, and the more traditional take on classic passages while still being modern. But I think there is something to using a formal equivalent with a more optimal translation which I think the CSB better accomplishes overall when compared with the BSB. Anyways, great video and many blessings to you as you draw closer to our savior. God bless you!
Yes, wordy is a great way to describe the NKJV. I hope to try the BSB soon, but the more literal approach to the CSB is what drew me for sure. I hope to try the BSB at some point, though, and especially the Majority Standard Bible if it ever releases. Thanks for sharing!
I know there are a few options for reading the TR, but the fact that we don't have a majority text Bible at the bookstore, is astonishing. I honestly think it's because so many people who want a majority text Bible, are in the KJV camp, and they don't want any change....and if they do, they are too picky to have anyone but themselves do it.... So it leaves people who are not in the majority text camp, that are the ones who will produce a Bible.....which mostly leaves critical text translations.
CSB is a great translation, I also enjoyed the HCSB back in the day. I have the same CSB Single Column Personal Size in their brown goatskin (It's supposedly bonded leather but I like the smooth texture). My favourite CSB is the Large Print Personal Size Reference, a very handy size with 11.25 pt font. The layout is similar to the PSQ. For your younger eyes, you may like the CSB Ultrathin edition. It comes in regular goatskin & 9 pt font.
@@WontonDisciple Hmm, either is a good choice to me. I probably lean more towards HCSB mostly because the CSB removed a fair amount of the translator's footnotes from the HCSB. (You can compare John 1 notes to HCSB if you have a copy. The HCSB has a ton of notes on the 1st chapter). I think the only other bible that has more translation footnotes is the NET study bible. I also prefer that the HCSB capitalizes Deity pronouns, the CSB removed that too. It helps to clarify some passages where it may be unclear who is being referred to. I wish they continued to make the HCSB.
I love the CSB too! It's an excellent translation (textual critical issues aside). Mark Ward has a good video series on why x English translation is the best translation for certain people in certain situations. His video on the CSB is very helpful. I only wish there was a premium Bible edition of the CSB that's on par with, say, Schuyler. Holman Handcrafted is quite good, and the one you picked up for around $50 is a steal, but in my opinion Holman Handcrafted is still a step below Schuyler. As far as I'm aware, the best premium edition of the CSB is Schuyler's Quentel and PSQ line, but just speaking for myself I prefer single column paragraph layouts so I'm not as sold on the Quentel and PSQ. (I'm still tempted to get the PSQ in CSB though since it does look very readable for a double column Bible.) For now, I have the exact same CSB single column compact Bible in brown leathertouch that you have; it's definitely far from a premium Bible, of course, but it's a great bargain at around $10-$15! I also have the CSB Reader's Bible, which is a gorgeous Bible, and I think it might be favorite single volume reader's Bible of any English translation. Beauty should serve readability. We are blessed with many good options in the English language. :)
I love Mark's videos! They were definitely instrumental in my choosing the CSB as my primary translation during this season. I'm definitely with you on the single column love...I'm hoping and praying Humble Lamb will pick up this translation sometime soon. I will say, though, that the paper in the CSB Thinline is so incredibly impressive (the only issue being the ghosting, but no bleed through) and I'm hoping it's the same for the Large Print Thinline. I'll most likely get those rebound. I would get the Schuyler line of CSBs, but I'm really enjoying the Bible Serif font and how Holman denotes the translator notes with capitalized letters rather than lowercase ones. Thanks for your comment! I hope to grab a CSB Reader's set for myself soon
I personally don't go for Critical Text bibles, actually, as I have a Majority Text leaning. I decided to choose the CSB, however, because it seems to best accomplish the goal it set out for itself, which is to be a very literal translation but in contemporary English vernacular and syntax which I felt I needed, as the NKJV (despite being the closest translation to a Majority Text reading) is often more difficult for me to read. In this season, I'm prioritizing understandability over textual basis. I enjoy that the CSB includes modern imperial measurements (i.e. using feet versus cubits) and translates difficult idioms for us that other translations don't do. It has a very very good translation note system, too
I love the old HCSB. I've tried all the others, but I keep returning to it. I love God's pronouns starting in caps. It may not be a 'thing' for Bible scholars (idk) but for little old me, I love it because it helps me understand quickly who the "You/you' is that is being spoke about. Many blessings on your trip, your CSB journey and your channel.❤
The nasb 1995 is another great translation to pair along side the CSB. I grew up in a small baptist church reading the KJV and even though i grew up with it i had a hard time understanding the language so i moved to the nasb1995 and then to ESV. But i will tell you this whatever translation gets you reading and really studying stick with it! Good luck my friend God bless!
The CSB mentions very often the writings of the textus receptus and the majority text in the footnotes. So you can read the CSB and can still have the other textual variants. Greetings from a bible lover from Germany
Nice! I haven't read the CSB yet. I'm currently an NKJV guy, with great affinity for the ESV. Additionally, I have found Tim Frisch, Matthew Everhard, and Mark Ward to be very helpful when discussing Textus Receptus and Critical Text Bibles.
Yes, those guys are amazing! I love their input alot. Dwayne Green also has amazing videos on the CT, MT, and TR. It's cool to see how many awesome translations we have access to.
I like the CSB. Im actually starting to return to majority text types. Im currenrly reading the MEV, which is a modernised KJV. But i was thinking about starting to memorise verses in NKJV.
@@WontonDisciple I do agree with you. I did the whole bible last year in the NKJV and there were good portions where I heard it but didn't understand fully. So I hope the CSB helps further edify you in your understanding, and you use it as a tool to learn the word of God. Another cool translation I like is NET. They have translation notes explaining why they translated the text in a specific way. That's kind of cool. I will make me think that the MEV is closer to the KJV, and reads better than the NKJV.
The CSB is a good translation. The CSB also has interlinears coming out to assist with understanding the original languages. The Greek one is out with Hebrew coming out eventually.
I have read through the entire 2020 revision of the CSB. While you call out advantages of the CSB main text, consider the footnotes as well. Those idioms that are translated dynamically by the CSB are typically footnoted with their literal reading. Alternate readings are also included there. And it has rather thorough notes on how the Dead Sea Scrolls and Septuagint differ from the Masoretic Text. Finally, OT quotes in the NT are also there. Oh, and any disclaimers about the source text being obscure.
Really great points! That is another reason why I felt very comfortable switching to the CSB. Transparency is key for me, especially coming from the NKJV.
@@WontonDisciple My background was extreme KJV onlyism, and when I started reading through the CSB, I realized that they have most of the KJV readings in the textual notes, and I'm guessing they have all of the Majority text readings noted where they differ from the critical apparatus they used. So essentially the CSB contains within its pages, a lot of the Textus receptus readings, and most, if not all of the majority text readings as well as the critical readings, and also the variants in the Dead sea scrolls. All in all, even if you don't love the critical text, the CSB has so much information, it would be a useful resource.
@@hayfieldhermit9657 they don't have every variant listed and they don't denote where the variant comes from like the NKJV does, but it does have substantial notes like you said. Translations do have to pick and choose what variants they consider vital to list as there are so many, which is unfortunate, but I think the CSB does a good enough job. I'm glad you've had the chance to branch out! KJV onlyism sounds like a rough ride.
@@WontonDisciple I just realized that the CSB lists where variants come from, in the Old testament, but they don't for the New..... That would actually be a nice update for the notes in the CSB.
@@WontonDisciple There are different levels of "KJV only", and unfortunately I was in a pretty high level. I grew up that way, so I didn't know anything different. Which actually made it really difficult when I realized that I needed to adjust my position on the matter. There was no one around me to help me figure it out. So I felt like the floor was taken out from under me for a while. Relationships were damaged. I wasn't trying to upset people, but it doesn't matter to them. Some people are KJV first and Christian second. And they react to any other Bible like it has a literal demon in it. The next step is to treat those reading those Bibles as if they are playing around with demons..... It's all a really sad, dumb, and unfortunate reality.
I'm currently reading through the csb. I gravitated to it because some referred to it as an SBC bible. Although if you are aware of the tr, majority, and critical text discussions; you should be sufficiently capable of handling and studying with the nkjv. But i guess you want an easier read for a daily carry, as you said. There is no problem. I want to encourage your reading. 🎉 God bless.
You will not go wrong by having chosen to start reading from the CSB. It's a formidable translation. I can read the Hebrew and it's really a middle ground between readability and accuracy. I absolutely commend the CSB translators. Good decision making. Love, in Yeshua our risen Lord and Savior.
I don’t know if your philosophy on translations would include the RSV, but it’s the parent of the ESV and has a bit more beauty to the words. CSB is wonderful.
Whoa caught off guard by this change from you! Haha but I’ve been liking the CSB too. Is there a specific reason you are doing memorization from it instead of NKJV? Is it also for the ease of language? Safe travels man!!
I do a lot of evangelism in the city I live in and we've got tons of refugees, nominal Catholics, and false Christian converts. I think being able to recite God's Word in a more contemporary way will help with my effort in helping others actually understand the gospel.
@@anothervu it's one of the best study bibles ever made in my opinion. It really helps to bring you into the perspective of the readers from the time that each book was written
I started with the NKJV, and I had the same issue. Some passages were just worded very oddly. I decided to switch to the NLT because of how understandable it was, but eventually I felt as though it was a little to paraphrastic and/or interpretive at times. I heard about the CSB and started to compare it to the NKJV and the NLT and noticed it was a very good in between. I decided to make the switch and bought the CSB Study Bible because I've also been looking for a Study Bible with good commentary notes.
I have most translations of the Bible, and my favorite is a new edition Commentary NIV Large Print. I like commentaries because they prepare understanding. The CSB Comm. Bible is also excellent. I regularly read using maybe eight translations from formal to dynamic including additional commentaries. I have NETs and enjoy the 60,000 notes as well. What most Christians don't understand is that the human authors of the New Testament were extremely smart and literate fellows, as are most certified Pastors and Preachers. Most Americans cannot read Shakespeare (written at the same time as the KJV) without massive text notes. The average American reads at a 5th grade level, and dropping. They might struggle with the even the most simple of translations or paraphrases, and would generally avoid looking at additional notes. I believe the average American has dropped 4+ grades of reading ability in the last Century. Ever listen to them reading aloud? It is generally embarrassing. No wonder we need teachers explaining the Gospel. Most Churchgoers don't understand the Gospel nor the Bible, period! ... God Bless!
It's amazing how God has blessed us with so many resources. I'm very glad to hear that you're making use of so many of them. I pray that God would continue to grow our wisdom and understanding in order to further our Christian walks. It would definitely be devastating to see the church fall victim to folly.
So far I've bought the CSB single column wide margin, single column personal size, single column compact, and I'm planning on getting the thinline here soon. I also have many economy editions for outreach.
I noticed that my CSB Bible (Large Print) is actually named the CSB Study Bible, so it must be "The CSB CSB!" The notes and commentary are also excellent. As far as I know, the NKJV did not change any words in order not to violate copyright on a four hundred year old book. Wow, the King James Only people sure are creative!
Yup...it's quite an ordeal having them in the comments 😅 but they have their own convictions, I'm willing to have conversations with them if it's cordial. CSB CSB made me chuckle 😂
You picked a great one! I personally can't get past that gutter margin though...even the compact has a pretty decent gutter margin. Are there any other Holman bibles you're interested in trying? P.S. I'm glad you're still alive 😆
@@WontonDisciple haha thanks. Being alive is good. 😆 I definitely want to see what the handcrafted thinline is all about. Haven’t used a thinline in quite a while.
Maybe I shouldn't watch this because I just ordered my first NKJV bible (it also happens to be a green leather bible) after using HCSB for the last 15 years. I don't need buyer's remorse after paying for the first premium leather bible I've ever owned! I think you'll enjoy the CSB, I was NIV before switching and absolutely prefer the CSB to it. I typically read multiple translations while I'm doing a study anyway, and I'll always have the CSB among others to fall back on when I need a few different wordings to help get the message.
I highly recommend the Legacy Standard Bible (LSB). It corrects KJB, uses modern English, is more accurate than the NASB95, and the premium bibles are brilliant! That said, CSB (or HCSB) is a very good alt to the LSB. If you are a collector I also highly recommended the patriots edition of the Geneva Bible by Tolle Lege because of the awesome extras and historical additions.
I do hope to get a Geneva and LSB someday despite not being a collector! I think it'll be awesome to have a historical translation and a fun new literal translation to have access to at any time. I personally don't find myself enjoying the LSB like I do the CSB and NKJV though
Still comfortable with the old KJV. But then, I'm old at 71...lol. It is my confirmation Bible my parents gave me at the age of 14. On the inside cover my mother wrote Ecclesiasties 12:1. Rather than me typing it out...look it up.
I'm glad you have a translation you enjoy! The KJV is legendary. Sounds like yours has a lot of sentimental value, too, which is definitely special. Thanks for sharing 🙏
Since you are looking for a Bible translation following the Majority Text, I recommend the New Jerusalem Version (NJV) by Hineni Publishers, based in the Netherlands. Give it a shot. I am a Messianic Jew and share our Lord Yeshua the Messiah (Jesus Christ) with you.
NLT and God's Word are good but lack the literary flair. You can cruise through either and they read very clearly, a big help through kings and chronicles. NLT has Judges 9-11 reading clear and almost hilarious, Jehu was the bible's comedic relief. Revelation 19:11-16 is good too. NKJV seems vague at times, mostly the nastier parts of the old testament, but is otherwise about ideal. ESV is it's equal from a different branch of the family, smoother overall but when it's vague there isn't an alibi. NIV 2011 seems good for a plainer read through or cross referential study via study bible or app surfing a lesson plan. NIV 2011 vs 84 drama is nothing, I've been through both and 2011 is good to go if not better, the one in between that supposedly got woke and then disappeared probably was what people say though, keep an eye open in the future.
The full Today's NIV was published in 2005 amidst massive controversy. I recently picked up a TNIV Study Bible on ebay, and I don't have any issue reading it. I think that speaks to the way our language. around gender for instance, has shifted in the last 20 years. The TNIV can be a bit clunky at times when trying to figure out some of these questions, but the vast majority of it reads just fine. And the NIV 2011 basically took the lessons learned from the TNIV and incorporated a lot of them into smoother, more readable English. (and it's pretty much just as woke as the TNIV -- but as I said, we just talk differently several decades later, so it's less shocking to the ear)
@@DerrickMims having only read specific *contested* verses, it's made out to be far and away foreign. I've not tried to read one through, I'm sure you got something out of it either way. Right now I'm finally watching "The Chosen" and it's not 100% unadulterated Jesus either, but I like it. It gets the message across.
Dwayne Green has tons of amazing videos on what the Majority Text is. Our bibles are based on thousands of manuscripts from different time periods and different regions of the world...and the readings between these manuscripts don't always match up. Some verses will have up to 4 different readings, so we have different approaches to what reading to pick between. We currently don't have any committee led English translations in the Majority Text. The Critical Text is what most modern English Bibles are based on. Whenever the manuscript readings differ in the text (which many do), the Critical Text usually picks the variant that shows up in the older manuscript, even if only a few manuscripts have that variant while the majority of other manuscripts read differently. The Majority Text, however, would take the majority of the readings that agree with one another, even if most of the manuscripts are from a later time period (like 9th and 10th century is where many of our manuscripts come from). So the main difference is this...the Critical Text usually always picks the oldest reading while the Majority Text usually picks the most agreed upon reading.
Another example of the ridiculous reasons to use anything other than a word for word translation (like KJV, NKJV, NASB). AGAIN, WORD FOR WORD translation with a proper concordance (preferably Eastern Orthodox). Recommend the Eastern Orthodox Study Bible (NKJV).
There's nothing ridiculous about using a dynamic or optimal equivalence translation. If you think so, you don't understand translation work. I still do use literal translations in my study, especially the NKJV.
I respect your point of view but, the worst mistake you can do is leaving the NKJV, I'm just gonna give some verses that you should check out in both translations: Micah 5:2, Isaiah 10:27, Colossians 1:13-17, you should check these verses and you will see why NKJV is a superior translation. The way ESV, CSB, NET, LSB, NIV render them are far away from what the Hebrew and the Greek say in its real context.
I disagree the KJV and the NKJV have so many more mistakes in translation. As far as Isaiah 10:27 goes..... The word שמן means simply oil and fat. Anointing is a very odd translation because that’s a totally different word in Hebrew. Yoke is a token of forced labor or slavery. Being fat was a sign of prosperity and abundance. Hence, abundance shall cancel slavery. When the God of Israel deals with our enemies and bless his people. It’s a common Christian mistake to adjust the biblical text to match Christian theology. That’s how you end up confused over simple statement like this
If all these translations render for example Micah 5:2 saying that our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ has a "begining in the distant past", then the translators don't know really our Lord Jesus Christ, cause "He is eternal", "the beginning and the end", "the Alfa and the Omega" "the Almighty God", as the Scriptures say, so those translations and their translators don't deserve our confidence.
For one, I do agree that the NKJV is preferable over the CSB in every way other than contemporary readability and the inclusion of odd minority manuscript passages like 1 John 5:7. However, Micah 5:2 is not a statement about the origin of Christ. It is simply letting the reader know that the prophesy of His coming from the clan of Judah has been known from old. We can assume, from there, that it has always been God's plan to bring about the "coming forth" (sometimes translated as origin...that's not a statement about Him being a created or uncreated being. It's referring to the origin of His coming from the clan of Judah a.k.a the incarnation) of Jesus and that Jesus is still one without beginning or end.
@@WontonDisciple again, I respect your point of view but, you should go to the Strong Hebrew Interlineal Words and read again Micah 5:2 and you will see that the biblical writer is referring about "the goings forth", that is, "the beginning", and he is talking about the "One who was gonna be the ruler over Israel" and "his goings forth (his beginning)", is "from the days of old, from the days of eternity" not "from the ancient days" or "from the distant past" as wrongly ESV, CSB, NET, LSB, NIV, have indeed rendered this verse.
@@joseramonperez9609 yes, my retort would be that His "beginning" is indeed about Jesus, but it's about the beginning of His going forth from the tribe of Judah, what we now know as the incarnation, not about Him being a created or uncreated being. So when Micah 5 in the NKJV refers to His "goings forth" as something that is "from everlasting," it is saying that the knowledge of His coming from the tribe of Judah, His incarnation as we now know it, is a prophesy from long before.
@@WontonDisciple alternative but not the exact and the correct render of Micah 5:2, according to the context and the person the biblical writer is talking about.
@@WontonDisciple never heard of it. Keep us updated. I find the KJV easy to memorize and has a nice flow. But the old fashioned English can be archaic. Love to see you review on the néw translation.
The Textus Receptus has some translation issues as well. Nobody had original copies back when that was created either. Mark 16:9-20 does not exist in many early transcripts. Drinking deadly poison from serpents and not being harmed is not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible. “Longer Ending of Mark.” Some ancient manuscripts of Mark’s Gospel contain these verses and others do not, which presents a puzzle for scholars who specialize in the history of such manuscripts. This longer ending is missing from various old and reliable Greek manuscripts (esp. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus), as well as numerous early Latin, Syriac, Armenian, and Georgian manuscripts. Early church fathers (e.g., Origen and Clement of Alexandria) did not appear to know of these verses. Eusebius and Jerome state that this section is missing in most manuscripts available at their time. And some manuscripts that contain vv. 9-20 indicate that older manuscripts lack the section. On the other hand, some early and many later manuscripts (such as the manuscripts known as A, C, and D) contain vv. 9-20, and many church fathers (such as Irenaeus) evidently knew of these verses. As for the verses themselves, they contain various Greek words and expressions uncommon to Mark, and there are stylistic differences as well. Many think this shows vv. 9-20 to be a later addition. In summary, vv. 9-20 should be read with caution."
@@WilliamKister I don’t trust today scholars. I believe in the longer ending of Mark. You don’t have too. The majority text is more trust worthy than the Alexander text.
@@WontonDisciple The "thee" and "thou" and "you" and "ye" actually are very helpful for understanding if the person is talking to one person or a multitude. John 3:7 (KJV) - Ye must be born again. Other versions - You must be born again.
@@IsaacNelson54 while that is true, as a whole, the KJV is not a helpful translation for contemporary English readers. Perhaps for some they can use it without issue. Generally that is not the case.
Fair enough. There is a lot of history behind the KJV. It was used for over 400 years and two Great Awakenings happened during that time. Now, we live in a postmodern society where truth is not held to a high standard. Professed "Christians" are going apostate and churches are turning into night clubs were people go to feel good about themselves instead of being convicted of sin. What I am saying is the English problem shouldnt matter, but rather the truth of the Bible. With all these translations coming out and wording changing all the time, what is the actual truth? Are people changing what God has spoken? Good things to think about. @@WontonDisciple
@@IsaacNelson54 the burden of proof lies on you to show that these modern translations change the meaning of the text. The changing of syntax and/or words does not conclude that these translations are erroneous. That's what translation work requires...without updating wording or sentence structure, especially from one language to another, you can't have the bible in a multitude of languages. The very same principle applies to the ever changing English language. Even the KJV has been updated multiple times since its publication in 1611. Also, the fact that the KJV itself is a translation from the original languages shows that even it needed to change words in order to make sense in the English of that time. So, again, the issue is not the changing of words, but, rather, substantial departures from the meaning derived from the original text. Then you run into the issue of textual criticism...which texts actually represent the original autographs, which we do not have. That's a philosophical debate that's still ongoing. The KJV has not been proven to be an infallible English representative for the actual inspired text from the original languages. Though I'd still say it's a good representation, just as the CSB and NKJV are. Most modern, committee-led translations are fit for church use. The only erroneous doctrine being taught is from those who improperly use the text.
"We don't have a committee led translation with majority text as it's basis." Uhhhh... Well we did in 1611 and it produced the King James Bible. If anybody bothers to delve into bible translation history, i don't see how that person would even touch a modern translation "bible" (more like bible shaped object). Are we the only religion on the planet that keeps changing it's sacred texts? That's absolutely absurd that we accept that. All new translations not based on Textus Receptus should be rejected. I strongly encourage all Christians to at least look into it.
The Textus Receptus is not the same thing as the Majority Text, though they do have more similarities to one another than they do with the Critical Text. Many people have different translation philosophies and convictions. Whether or not the TR is the best of the best is up for debate. To say we're "changing" our text is disingenuous. All we've done is discover more copies of our text, many of which are older than the ones used for the TR, and updating it accordingly. Many would argue that we are getting closer to the original text...not changing it.
@@WontonDisciple I understand the MT and TR are not the same. I concede that point. The "critical text" does, in fact, change things. There are tons and tons of examples of this, enough so that I don't need to cover that here. It's so readily available to anyone that does a quick search. And lots of excellent books have been written on this topic. The "critical text" are disingenuous.
@@WontonDisciple agreed, there's no rule to not use them. I realize that people can and do get led to Christ with these bible shaped objects. However, a gospel tract is not the bible and leads people to Christ all the time. These new translations are not bibles. John clearly states in Revelation that the Bible is not to be fiddled with. And these new translations have absolutely fiddled with the Word of God, there is no doubt. I encourage you to do some research on translation history.
@@zachpeters7096 I am not the biggest advocate for the CT, myself. However, the variants they include do not deter the reader from adhering to core Christian doctrines, therefore I find little fruit in telling people they should toss aside their translations due to a difference in philosophy.
How do you like the modernization of Chaucer and Shakespeare? They were just so hard to read. But then you grow up. Then you grow closer to God. Then you use discernment and understand His Word. You acknowledge that the world must confirm to God, not God conforming to the world. You acknowledge that your reading skills must conform to The Word, not The Word conform to your reading skills. God never said it would be easy, Satan makes things easy. Read the 1611, or at the minimum, grow into the KJV.
@deanhendrix, "God never said it would be easy"........."For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." Jesus, discussing learning from him, in his yoke.....
No bible is worth anything if we don't do what it says, ALL bibles have mistakes and mistranslations and added words and phrases. Best to use like bible hub or the like and go back to the original languages.
Wonton disciple, do not swap the NKJV. because I have a lot of different transactions, and I have the Hebrew and Greek, so I know that the NKJV is the most accurate translation. The CSB is from the erroneous Alexandrian of Egypt texts and it's so erroneous. You have been deceived by Biblically ignorant people. 2hat do you want, an easy to read Bible, or the Bible that is the most accurate. Don't let the devil con you.
1. The NKJV is still my primary translation and I actually read it more than any other translation by a longshot. 2. The CSB is not the work of the devil, it's also a mostly Majority translation with a good amount of Frankenstein texts to be less preferable to me, personally. However, not enough of a concern for me to condemn anyone who uses it. If you'd like to politely reason with me, I'd appreciate that alot. Demanding I do anything because you say so is not really my cup of tea.
@@WontonDisciple can you give me a link to the Byzantine texts CSB. The one that I have, is from the erroneous Alexandrian texts. See how Jn 9: 1--3 is deceiving. Is it the same in your CSB Bible.
@@alanhales6369 there aren't enough Alexandrian manuscripts to even make most of the NT. Yes, there are Alexandrian variants but all modern translations are mostly Byzantine
They remain relatively conservative when the context asks for it, such as James 3:1. If you don't personally like the inclusion of gender neutral language, even though the scriptures do allow for it as Paul often refers to the church as a whole when he uses the word "brothers," you can simply say that. But it's not a bad translation...they're interchangeable and both have their strengths and weaknesses in English bible translation today. I would say gender neutral language, when used properly, is very useful for contemporary readers.
The language of NT is Greek! All the time you waste on "translations/versions" could more productively be spent learnng the sacred language of Christianity. Throw all KJV/NKJV etc etc etc etc out of window.
Hey that's really cool bro thanks for sharing. When I was seeking to learn more about translations I consulted the work of Daniel B. Wallace-- I believe he also played a major role in the NET translation. Anyway, I think the CSB is pretty awesome and reads very well. I probably mentioned this before, but my favorite translation is the NRSV. If you ever want to give that translation a go, try and get your hands on "NRSV Standard Bible Black" (google it) before its discontinued. It's a cheap, single-column hardback and its quite lovely. God bless you.
I actually have that exact bible in my bookshelf! I plan on consulting it from time to time, though it's admittedly not super high on my list at the moment. Thank you for your kind words!
One of the features I really like about the CSB is how OT quotations are boldened in the NT. I haven’t read through the CSB yet but it is on my list of translations to read. Thank you for the thoughtful video Jonathan and may the Lord watch over you and bless your time in Norway. Sounds like a very exciting trip.
I love that feature too. I think the CSB is a very well-rounded translation.
Thank you, Mike! Your prayer is so greatly appreciated.
I also really love that feature...I hope to use it alot during my trip.
I LOVE that feature too!
A few days ago I just switched from the nkjv to the csb, I have a csb single colum wide margin, a now I just came across your video blessings to you my friend
Thank you! Both translations are amazing. I'm a huge fan of the single column wide margin, too!
I was a very big fan of the OG NIV 1984 before Zondervan updated to the TNIV -> NIV2011. The CSB I feel restores and improves upon what was great about the NIV84 and for that, it’s one that I also read from regularly.
Thanks for sharing your translation journey! I really like the CSB.
I ran into a similar issue back when I was working through the ESV & the KJV. I love both translations dearly, but it wasn’t until I started reading the 2011 NIV for translation comparison that I realized the value of a more dynamic translation. I really, really love the NIV, and I think it’s a shame it’s so often stigmatized and criticized unduly. It’s an excellent, evangelical translation that is still faithful to the text while also being written in a contemporary English that I actually speak and understand. It’s perfect for daily reading devotionals, and one can always go back to one’s preferred formal translation (NKJV, ESV, etc.) for deep exegetical studies.
I appreciate your kind words :) there's a reason the NIV is the most popular English translation. Understandability is vital, especially with English changing as time goes on. I hope to see the NIV and CSB continue to strive for that in future updates
I also use the niv makes me understand God's word more every time I read my Bible
I use the NIV as my reader and ESV when I do deep exegetical study. The NKJV was my first translation I started reading and will always hold a special place with me.
This is exactly why I prefer the NASB95. Its extremely accurate and faithful to the original text while also being very easily readable. Thanks for the video
Thanks for sharing! I hope to compare the two translations someday...I'm a big fan of the 2020 update
@@OliverGCowan I'll eventually get to the LSB, hopefully. My translation picks usually come down to the philosophy of the translators. The CSB, NASB 2020, and NKJV tend to be the most adherent to my personal convictions on how the bible should be translated.
As I’m watching, I’m laughing thinking, “just say you’re switching to the CSB!” 😂. The way you were talking before you revealed it made me think of the CSB right away.
😂😂😂
Blessings,WD. All the Best and TRAVELING MERCIES.🌹🌹⭐🌹🌹
New sub here #141👍I recently purchased the CSB Study Bible and it was the defining moment when I too, switched from NKJV to CSB as my primary. I do enjoy my affordable thought for thought NLT with the Filament App, but my CSB Tuscany from Schuyler is my daily reader!📖 Great vid + prayers for safe travels, health, etc👍
Thank you! I hope to grab a CSB from Schuyler next year.
I actually have several translations. KJV, NKJV, ESV, CSB, NLT, NIV, NASB, NABRE.
But I agree, CSB is getting to be one of my favorite translations. It's not like the NIV or NLT in terms of lost elegance with the writing, but it's more understandable than the KJV and NKJV.
Strangely, my favorites are NKJV, CSB and NLT.
Great picks! I gravitate towards those translations, myself.
I love your excitement for a new translation!
I remember trying to use the HCSB back in the day and...I hated it. It felt like each sentence had been given to a different translator in isolation and then everything was just strung together. The result was English style horror. Hopefully the CSB improved on that.
My personal opinion on translation preference is this:
Know what your translation is doing and how to use it. My baseline, for example, is an NIV1984 - it's much more of a thought-for-thought translation. Because of that, I know that if I'm caught by a particular word choice, I need to look more carefully into the Greek/Hebrew that's being translated to be sure that I'm not just enchanted with a phrase in isolation, but have really got the right meaning. But the advantage is this: I often have a better sense of the context out of the NIV1984 than a more word-for-word NASB, for example. I have heard many sermons where they are preaching from a word for word translation and they say "Now it says this, but the real deeper meaning is this", but my NIV1984 simply says that deeper meaning without having to undo the awkward sentence structure that some of the more "wooden" versions do.
It much more about knowing where each translation's strengths and weaknesses are.
Big fan of ESV, KJV, NKJV, and NASB after the NIV1984. All very very good versions for many good reasons 😁
I definitely agree with your conclusion! It's important to help the laypeople understand the utility of different kinds of translations so they can truly use them as intended. All for the glory of God.
Once you mentioned Tim I knew it was going to be a CSB. I used to read the HCSC back in the day. I’ve been thinking about checking it out
I haven't yet read the HCSB, though I'd love to try sometime!
The struggle is real, my friend. I feel similar in many ways. I also lean more majority text, but obviously the choices there are lacking. As far as textual basis with good notes, translation philosophy, and syntax/styling I do appreciate the NKJV as my primary translation: however, sometimes I find myself frustrated with the end product and how wordy it can become. I appreciate your reasoning with utilizing the CSB. I do greatly enjoy that translation and appreciate its noting system and have a personal size in my bag for church among other options in my library. I prefer the note and textual transparency of the CSB over the ESV. I’ve been paring my NKJV Clarion Scriptura rebind with a hardback Berean Standard Bible. The greatest features of the BSB, imo, are the notes, the translation tier, and the more traditional take on classic passages while still being modern. But I think there is something to using a formal equivalent with a more optimal translation which I think the CSB better accomplishes overall when compared with the BSB. Anyways, great video and many blessings to you as you draw closer to our savior. God bless you!
Yes, wordy is a great way to describe the NKJV. I hope to try the BSB soon, but the more literal approach to the CSB is what drew me for sure. I hope to try the BSB at some point, though, and especially the Majority Standard Bible if it ever releases. Thanks for sharing!
I know there are a few options for reading the TR, but the fact that we don't have a majority text Bible at the bookstore, is astonishing. I honestly think it's because so many people who want a majority text Bible, are in the KJV camp, and they don't want any change....and if they do, they are too picky to have anyone but themselves do it.... So it leaves people who are not in the majority text camp, that are the ones who will produce a Bible.....which mostly leaves critical text translations.
I KNEW you are going to use the CSB from the moment I saw your video link. 😅
LOL I do have many CSB videos at this point. It's getting popular, too, so that'd be a good guess!
@@WontonDisciple no, this was the first video of yours that I have ever seen.
CSB is a great translation, I also enjoyed the HCSB back in the day. I have the same CSB Single Column Personal Size in their brown goatskin (It's supposedly bonded leather but I like the smooth texture). My favourite CSB is the Large Print Personal Size Reference, a very handy size with 11.25 pt font. The layout is similar to the PSQ. For your younger eyes, you may like the CSB Ultrathin edition. It comes in regular goatskin & 9 pt font.
I'll hopefully be grabbing one of their newer thinline editions! If you could choose between the CSB and HCSB today, which would you go for?
@@WontonDisciple Hmm, either is a good choice to me. I probably lean more towards HCSB mostly because the CSB removed a fair amount of the translator's footnotes from the HCSB. (You can compare John 1 notes to HCSB if you have a copy. The HCSB has a ton of notes on the 1st chapter). I think the only other bible that has more translation footnotes is the NET study bible. I also prefer that the HCSB capitalizes Deity pronouns, the CSB removed that too. It helps to clarify some passages where it may be unclear who is being referred to. I wish they continued to make the HCSB.
I love the CSB too! It's an excellent translation (textual critical issues aside). Mark Ward has a good video series on why x English translation is the best translation for certain people in certain situations. His video on the CSB is very helpful. I only wish there was a premium Bible edition of the CSB that's on par with, say, Schuyler. Holman Handcrafted is quite good, and the one you picked up for around $50 is a steal, but in my opinion Holman Handcrafted is still a step below Schuyler. As far as I'm aware, the best premium edition of the CSB is Schuyler's Quentel and PSQ line, but just speaking for myself I prefer single column paragraph layouts so I'm not as sold on the Quentel and PSQ. (I'm still tempted to get the PSQ in CSB though since it does look very readable for a double column Bible.) For now, I have the exact same CSB single column compact Bible in brown leathertouch that you have; it's definitely far from a premium Bible, of course, but it's a great bargain at around $10-$15! I also have the CSB Reader's Bible, which is a gorgeous Bible, and I think it might be favorite single volume reader's Bible of any English translation. Beauty should serve readability. We are blessed with many good options in the English language. :)
I love Mark's videos! They were definitely instrumental in my choosing the CSB as my primary translation during this season. I'm definitely with you on the single column love...I'm hoping and praying Humble Lamb will pick up this translation sometime soon. I will say, though, that the paper in the CSB Thinline is so incredibly impressive (the only issue being the ghosting, but no bleed through) and I'm hoping it's the same for the Large Print Thinline. I'll most likely get those rebound. I would get the Schuyler line of CSBs, but I'm really enjoying the Bible Serif font and how Holman denotes the translator notes with capitalized letters rather than lowercase ones. Thanks for your comment! I hope to grab a CSB Reader's set for myself soon
Schuyler makes a CSB
Just curious, why did you choose the CSB over the ESV? 🤗
I personally don't go for Critical Text bibles, actually, as I have a Majority Text leaning. I decided to choose the CSB, however, because it seems to best accomplish the goal it set out for itself, which is to be a very literal translation but in contemporary English vernacular and syntax which I felt I needed, as the NKJV (despite being the closest translation to a Majority Text reading) is often more difficult for me to read. In this season, I'm prioritizing understandability over textual basis. I enjoy that the CSB includes modern imperial measurements (i.e. using feet versus cubits) and translates difficult idioms for us that other translations don't do. It has a very very good translation note system, too
I love the old HCSB. I've tried all the others, but I keep returning to it. I love God's pronouns starting in caps. It may not be a 'thing' for Bible scholars (idk) but for little old me, I love it because it helps me understand quickly who the "You/you' is that is being spoke about. Many blessings on your trip, your CSB journey and your channel.❤
Capitalized pronouns are definitely very helpful! I can do with or without them, personally. Thank you for your kind comment :)
✟
When thou saidst, Seek ye my face; my heart said unto thee, Thy face, LORD, will I seek.
Psalms 27:8 (KJV)
The nasb 1995 is another great translation to pair along side the CSB. I grew up in a small baptist church reading the KJV and even though i grew up with it i had a hard time understanding the language so i moved to the nasb1995 and then to ESV. But i will tell you this whatever translation gets you reading and really studying stick with it! Good luck my friend God bless!
They really do make a great pair! Thank you for your kind comment 🙏
I just started reading the MEV and am really enjoying it.
The CSB mentions very often the writings of the textus receptus and the majority text in the footnotes. So you can read the CSB and can still have the other textual variants. Greetings from a bible lover from Germany
Nice! I haven't read the CSB yet. I'm currently an NKJV guy, with great affinity for the ESV.
Additionally, I have found Tim Frisch, Matthew Everhard, and Mark Ward to be very helpful when discussing Textus Receptus and Critical Text Bibles.
Yes, those guys are amazing! I love their input alot. Dwayne Green also has amazing videos on the CT, MT, and TR. It's cool to see how many awesome translations we have access to.
I like the CSB. Im actually starting to return to majority text types. Im currenrly reading the MEV, which is a modernised KJV. But i was thinking about starting to memorise verses in NKJV.
The NKJV would be absolutely perfect for memorization. I'd say go for it
@@WontonDisciple I do agree with you. I did the whole bible last year in the NKJV and there were good portions where I heard it but didn't understand fully.
So I hope the CSB helps further edify you in your understanding, and you use it as a tool to learn the word of God.
Another cool translation I like is NET. They have translation notes explaining why they translated the text in a specific way. That's kind of cool.
I will make me think that the MEV is closer to the KJV, and reads better than the NKJV.
The CSB is a good translation. The CSB also has interlinears coming out to assist with understanding the original languages. The Greek one is out with Hebrew coming out eventually.
That's amazing news! I hope to be able to make use of those some day
I have read through the entire 2020 revision of the CSB. While you call out advantages of the CSB main text, consider the footnotes as well. Those idioms that are translated dynamically by the CSB are typically footnoted with their literal reading. Alternate readings are also included there. And it has rather thorough notes on how the Dead Sea Scrolls and Septuagint differ from the Masoretic Text. Finally, OT quotes in the NT are also there. Oh, and any disclaimers about the source text being obscure.
Really great points! That is another reason why I felt very comfortable switching to the CSB. Transparency is key for me, especially coming from the NKJV.
@@WontonDisciple My background was extreme KJV onlyism, and when I started reading through the CSB, I realized that they have most of the KJV readings in the textual notes, and I'm guessing they have all of the Majority text readings noted where they differ from the critical apparatus they used. So essentially the CSB contains within its pages, a lot of the Textus receptus readings, and most, if not all of the majority text readings as well as the critical readings, and also the variants in the Dead sea scrolls. All in all, even if you don't love the critical text, the CSB has so much information, it would be a useful resource.
@@hayfieldhermit9657 they don't have every variant listed and they don't denote where the variant comes from like the NKJV does, but it does have substantial notes like you said. Translations do have to pick and choose what variants they consider vital to list as there are so many, which is unfortunate, but I think the CSB does a good enough job. I'm glad you've had the chance to branch out! KJV onlyism sounds like a rough ride.
@@WontonDisciple I just realized that the CSB lists where variants come from, in the Old testament, but they don't for the New..... That would actually be a nice update for the notes in the CSB.
@@WontonDisciple There are different levels of "KJV only", and unfortunately I was in a pretty high level. I grew up that way, so I didn't know anything different. Which actually made it really difficult when I realized that I needed to adjust my position on the matter. There was no one around me to help me figure it out. So I felt like the floor was taken out from under me for a while.
Relationships were damaged. I wasn't trying to upset people, but it doesn't matter to them. Some people are KJV first and Christian second. And they react to any other Bible like it has a literal demon in it. The next step is to treat those reading those Bibles as if they are playing around with demons..... It's all a really sad, dumb, and unfortunate reality.
I'm currently reading through the csb. I gravitated to it because some referred to it as an SBC bible. Although if you are aware of the tr, majority, and critical text discussions; you should be sufficiently capable of handling and studying with the nkjv. But i guess you want an easier read for a daily carry, as you said. There is no problem. I want to encourage your reading. 🎉 God bless.
You will not go wrong by having chosen to start reading from the CSB. It's a formidable translation. I can read the Hebrew and it's really a middle ground between readability and accuracy. I absolutely commend the CSB translators. Good decision making. Love, in Yeshua our risen Lord and Savior.
I don’t know if your philosophy on translations would include the RSV, but it’s the parent of the ESV and has a bit more beauty to the words. CSB is wonderful.
Whoa caught off guard by this change from you! Haha but I’ve been liking the CSB too. Is there a specific reason you are doing memorization from it instead of NKJV? Is it also for the ease of language? Safe travels man!!
I do a lot of evangelism in the city I live in and we've got tons of refugees, nominal Catholics, and false Christian converts. I think being able to recite God's Word in a more contemporary way will help with my effort in helping others actually understand the gospel.
God bless your traveling 🙏🏾
Thank you so much!
My two favorite translations in English. Love the CSB!
My memorization in the CSB so far has been extremely edifying and such a joy! I love it.
I’m very open to today’s translations. When I was young it was the KJV. We did really have the abundance of translations that’s available today.
My primary bible is the NKJV but have been reading the Ancient Faith Study Bible which is CSB and has generally been pretty good.
I hope to get that bible, soon! I love the NKJV a ton and find myself reading my NKJV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible often these days
@@WontonDisciple I've been tempted to get that one
@@anothervu it's one of the best study bibles ever made in my opinion. It really helps to bring you into the perspective of the readers from the time that each book was written
Great video but a little shaky. Maybe a stand that shoots overhead? God bless you and keep up the good work!
Thank you! I actually have a stand, just decided not to use it in this video.
@@WontonDisciple awesome, it was my first time at your channel. 👍
I started with the NKJV, and I had the same issue. Some passages were just worded very oddly. I decided to switch to the NLT because of how understandable it was, but eventually I felt as though it was a little to paraphrastic and/or interpretive at times. I heard about the CSB and started to compare it to the NKJV and the NLT and noticed it was a very good in between. I decided to make the switch and bought the CSB Study Bible because I've also been looking for a Study Bible with good commentary notes.
That's awesome! I hear the CSB Study Bible is pretty amazing. I enjoyed reading your translation story :) thanks for sharing
Even though I am a Critical Text myself, I recommend the literal translation from the Interlinear Bible by Hendrickson.
I'll make sure to check that out! Thanks
Good review. Safe travels!
Thank you!!
I have most translations of the Bible, and my favorite is a new edition Commentary NIV Large Print. I like commentaries because they prepare understanding. The CSB Comm. Bible is also excellent. I regularly read using maybe eight translations from formal to dynamic including additional commentaries. I have NETs and enjoy the 60,000 notes as well.
What most Christians don't understand is that the human authors of the New Testament were extremely smart and literate fellows, as are most certified Pastors and Preachers. Most Americans cannot read Shakespeare (written at the same time as the KJV) without massive text notes. The average American reads at a 5th grade level, and dropping. They might struggle with the even the most simple of translations or paraphrases, and would generally avoid looking at additional notes. I believe the average American has dropped 4+ grades of reading ability in the last Century. Ever listen to them reading aloud? It is generally embarrassing.
No wonder we need teachers explaining the Gospel. Most Churchgoers don't understand the Gospel nor the Bible, period! ... God Bless!
It's amazing how God has blessed us with so many resources. I'm very glad to hear that you're making use of so many of them. I pray that God would continue to grow our wisdom and understanding in order to further our Christian walks. It would definitely be devastating to see the church fall victim to folly.
I would encourage you and commend you in choosing the CSB. I think it is a great translation.
Thank you! It's been great for me so far.
what's the ISBN of that brown CSB you have here?
Can you share the Bible’s you have in csb I only have the he reads truth Bible which is in csb! I have always loved the NASB and the amplified!
So far I've bought the CSB single column wide margin, single column personal size, single column compact, and I'm planning on getting the thinline here soon. I also have many economy editions for outreach.
I noticed that my CSB Bible (Large Print) is actually named the CSB Study Bible, so it must be
"The CSB CSB!" The notes and commentary are also excellent. As far as I know, the NKJV did not change any words in order not to violate copyright on a four hundred year old book. Wow, the King James Only people sure are creative!
Yup...it's quite an ordeal having them in the comments 😅 but they have their own convictions, I'm willing to have conversations with them if it's cordial.
CSB CSB made me chuckle 😂
I read NKJV and NLT.
Great picks! The NLT was my first bible translation
I think Stephen Hackett is the other name you were thinking of. Love him and Matthew Everhard
Yes! Thank you, brother. They both make very good content 😎
The CSB is so good. I also just did a video on my favorite CSB Bible.
You picked a great one! I personally can't get past that gutter margin though...even the compact has a pretty decent gutter margin. Are there any other Holman bibles you're interested in trying? P.S. I'm glad you're still alive 😆
@@WontonDisciple haha thanks. Being alive is good. 😆 I definitely want to see what the handcrafted thinline is all about. Haven’t used a thinline in quite a while.
@@SteelesReels thinlines are my favorite travel bibles!
I switch back and forth from Nkjv and Kjv and the only other one I use to study is the NASB other wise bible hub and check all translations
That sounds like a really great way to study the Word! Love that
Maybe I shouldn't watch this because I just ordered my first NKJV bible (it also happens to be a green leather bible) after using HCSB for the last 15 years. I don't need buyer's remorse after paying for the first premium leather bible I've ever owned!
I think you'll enjoy the CSB, I was NIV before switching and absolutely prefer the CSB to it. I typically read multiple translations while I'm doing a study anyway, and I'll always have the CSB among others to fall back on when I need a few different wordings to help get the message.
I highly recommend the Legacy Standard Bible (LSB). It corrects KJB, uses modern English, is more accurate than the NASB95, and the premium bibles are brilliant!
That said, CSB (or HCSB) is a very good alt to the LSB.
If you are a collector I also highly recommended the patriots edition of the Geneva Bible by Tolle Lege because of the awesome extras and historical additions.
I do hope to get a Geneva and LSB someday despite not being a collector! I think it'll be awesome to have a historical translation and a fun new literal translation to have access to at any time. I personally don't find myself enjoying the LSB like I do the CSB and NKJV though
I like Young's Literal Translation and Rotherham Emphasized Bible.
I believe the NJV (not NJB) contains the MT.
Still comfortable with the old KJV. But then, I'm old at 71...lol. It is my confirmation Bible my parents gave me at the age of 14. On the inside cover my mother wrote Ecclesiasties 12:1. Rather than me typing it out...look it up.
I'm glad you have a translation you enjoy! The KJV is legendary. Sounds like yours has a lot of sentimental value, too, which is definitely special. Thanks for sharing 🙏
I think I'll just stay with the NKJV.
Great pick!
Since you are looking for a Bible translation following the Majority Text, I recommend the New Jerusalem Version (NJV) by Hineni Publishers, based in the Netherlands. Give it a shot. I am a Messianic Jew and share our Lord Yeshua the Messiah (Jesus Christ) with you.
Thank you for sharing! The NJV has certainly been on my radar, and I'd be interested to have a translation with such a unique philosophy.
I just bought a lsb!!!
Someday I'll own one of my own! I'm a big fan of the newly released giant print reference
@@WontonDisciple that’s the one I ordered
I love CSB
Deceptive title "... leaving the NKJV ..
I love the csb and I’m happy to hear it every time some one says they are switching to it
My girlfriend converted another believer to the CSB, also! Looks like we've got a movement going 😂
What is the brown edition you got? looks like a really nice simple version
That's the CSB single column compact bible! It's a really great small bible.
NLT and God's Word are good but lack the literary flair. You can cruise through either and they read very clearly, a big help through kings and chronicles. NLT has Judges 9-11 reading clear and almost hilarious, Jehu was the bible's comedic relief. Revelation 19:11-16 is good too.
NKJV seems vague at times, mostly the nastier parts of the old testament, but is otherwise about ideal. ESV is it's equal from a different branch of the family, smoother overall but when it's vague there isn't an alibi.
NIV 2011 seems good for a plainer read through or cross referential study via study bible or app surfing a lesson plan. NIV 2011 vs 84 drama is nothing, I've been through both and 2011 is good to go if not better, the one in between that supposedly got woke and then disappeared probably was what people say though, keep an eye open in the future.
The full Today's NIV was published in 2005 amidst massive controversy. I recently picked up a TNIV Study Bible on ebay, and I don't have any issue reading it. I think that speaks to the way our language. around gender for instance, has shifted in the last 20 years. The TNIV can be a bit clunky at times when trying to figure out some of these questions, but the vast majority of it reads just fine. And the NIV 2011 basically took the lessons learned from the TNIV and incorporated a lot of them into smoother, more readable English. (and it's pretty much just as woke as the TNIV -- but as I said, we just talk differently several decades later, so it's less shocking to the ear)
@@DerrickMims having only read specific *contested* verses, it's made out to be far and away foreign. I've not tried to read one through, I'm sure you got something out of it either way.
Right now I'm finally watching "The Chosen" and it's not 100% unadulterated Jesus either, but I like it. It gets the message across.
Just wached tim nickles giveaway seen your comment and use. Csb niv and esv
Those are really great translations! Which one do you tend to read most?
The niv
The niv was my first bible and ESV was good for study and the csb is a good mix for reading and study
@@jstott93 love it! I read the ESV for many years and loved it.
Please define "majority Bjble text"? Thank you.
ua-cam.com/video/OwY2gtuAWQM/v-deo.html
Dwayne Green has tons of amazing videos on what the Majority Text is. Our bibles are based on thousands of manuscripts from different time periods and different regions of the world...and the readings between these manuscripts don't always match up. Some verses will have up to 4 different readings, so we have different approaches to what reading to pick between. We currently don't have any committee led English translations in the Majority Text. The Critical Text is what most modern English Bibles are based on. Whenever the manuscript readings differ in the text (which many do), the Critical Text usually picks the variant that shows up in the older manuscript, even if only a few manuscripts have that variant while the majority of other manuscripts read differently. The Majority Text, however, would take the majority of the readings that agree with one another, even if most of the manuscripts are from a later time period (like 9th and 10th century is where many of our manuscripts come from). So the main difference is this...the Critical Text usually always picks the oldest reading while the Majority Text usually picks the most agreed upon reading.
Another example of the ridiculous reasons to use anything other than a word for word translation (like KJV, NKJV, NASB).
AGAIN, WORD FOR WORD translation with a proper concordance (preferably Eastern Orthodox).
Recommend the Eastern Orthodox Study Bible (NKJV).
There's nothing ridiculous about using a dynamic or optimal equivalence translation. If you think so, you don't understand translation work. I still do use literal translations in my study, especially the NKJV.
I respect your point of view but, the worst mistake you can do is leaving the NKJV, I'm just gonna give some verses that you should check out in both translations: Micah 5:2, Isaiah 10:27, Colossians 1:13-17, you should check these verses and you will see why NKJV is a superior translation. The way ESV, CSB, NET, LSB, NIV render them are far away from what the Hebrew and the Greek say in its real context.
I disagree the KJV and the NKJV have so many more mistakes in translation. As far as Isaiah 10:27 goes..... The word שמן means simply oil and fat. Anointing is a very odd translation because that’s a totally different word in Hebrew.
Yoke is a token of forced labor or slavery.
Being fat was a sign of prosperity and abundance. Hence, abundance shall cancel slavery. When the God of Israel deals with our enemies and bless his people.
It’s a common Christian mistake to adjust the biblical text to match Christian theology. That’s how you end up confused over simple statement like this
We are not supposed to be interpreting the bible we are supposed to be doing it from our heart not our heads
And what verse did you interpret in order to make a statement like that??
@WontonDisciple none be ye doers of the Word and not hearers only lest you deceive your own self
@WontonDisciple if you read your Bible you will know what it says ,if you don't know what is says then you don't know what you are talking about
@WontonDisciple it called stupid as stupid means without common sense
@@garyteeters-ok3hc for someone who just interpreted a passage for me, I would say insulting my intelligence is pretty ironic
Orthodox study Bible is still the best
I do enjoy its use of the Septuagint and the NKJV translation. Just not for me, personally.
If all these translations render for example Micah 5:2 saying that our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ has a "begining in the distant past", then the translators don't know really our Lord Jesus Christ, cause "He is eternal", "the beginning and the end", "the Alfa and the Omega" "the Almighty God", as the Scriptures say, so those translations and their translators don't deserve our confidence.
For one, I do agree that the NKJV is preferable over the CSB in every way other than contemporary readability and the inclusion of odd minority manuscript passages like 1 John 5:7. However, Micah 5:2 is not a statement about the origin of Christ. It is simply letting the reader know that the prophesy of His coming from the clan of Judah has been known from old. We can assume, from there, that it has always been God's plan to bring about the "coming forth" (sometimes translated as origin...that's not a statement about Him being a created or uncreated being. It's referring to the origin of His coming from the clan of Judah a.k.a the incarnation) of Jesus and that Jesus is still one without beginning or end.
@@WontonDisciple again, I respect your point of view but, you should go to the Strong Hebrew Interlineal Words and read again Micah 5:2 and you will see that the biblical writer is referring about "the goings forth", that is, "the beginning", and he is talking about the "One who was gonna be the ruler over Israel" and "his goings forth (his beginning)", is "from the days of old, from the days of eternity" not "from the ancient days" or "from the distant past" as wrongly ESV, CSB, NET, LSB, NIV, have indeed rendered this verse.
@@joseramonperez9609 yes, my retort would be that His "beginning" is indeed about Jesus, but it's about the beginning of His going forth from the tribe of Judah, what we now know as the incarnation, not about Him being a created or uncreated being. So when Micah 5 in the NKJV refers to His "goings forth" as something that is "from everlasting," it is saying that the knowledge of His coming from the tribe of Judah, His incarnation as we now know it, is a prophesy from long before.
@@joseramonperez9609 so, in context, I actually would agree with the alternative renderings of "from everlasting" as "from the ancient days"
@@WontonDisciple alternative but not the exact and the correct render of Micah 5:2, according to the context and the person the biblical writer is talking about.
I only read the TR text and I stick to the KJV. New king jimmy had to change some words for copyrights. So I left translation.
That*
Most modern translations have pretty strict copyright, unfortunately, which is why I'm excited to try out the Majority Standard Bible when it releases
@@WontonDisciple never heard of it. Keep us updated. I find the KJV easy to memorize and has a nice flow. But the old fashioned English can be archaic. Love to see you review on the néw translation.
The Textus Receptus has some translation issues as well. Nobody had original copies back when that was created either. Mark 16:9-20 does not exist in many early transcripts. Drinking deadly poison from serpents and not being harmed is not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible.
“Longer Ending of Mark.” Some ancient manuscripts of Mark’s Gospel contain these verses and others do not, which presents a puzzle for scholars who specialize in the history of such manuscripts. This longer ending is missing from various old and reliable Greek manuscripts (esp. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus), as well as numerous early Latin, Syriac, Armenian, and Georgian manuscripts. Early church fathers (e.g., Origen and Clement of Alexandria) did not appear to know of these verses. Eusebius and Jerome state that this section is missing in most manuscripts available at their time. And some manuscripts that contain vv. 9-20 indicate that older manuscripts lack the section. On the other hand, some early and many later manuscripts (such as the manuscripts known as A, C, and D) contain vv. 9-20, and many church fathers (such as Irenaeus) evidently knew of these verses. As for the verses themselves, they contain various Greek words and expressions uncommon to Mark, and there are stylistic differences as well. Many think this shows vv. 9-20 to be a later addition. In summary, vv. 9-20 should be read with caution."
@@WilliamKister I don’t trust today scholars. I believe in the longer ending of Mark. You don’t have too.
The majority text is more trust worthy than the Alexander text.
Get yourself a good King James Bible. IT never fails. Great words and no erroneous doctrine!
I have a KJV, though I don't find it as useful for contemporary use. I don't speak Elizabethan english.
@@WontonDisciple The "thee" and "thou" and "you" and "ye" actually are very helpful for understanding if the person is talking to one person or a multitude.
John 3:7 (KJV) - Ye must be born again.
Other versions - You must be born again.
@@IsaacNelson54 while that is true, as a whole, the KJV is not a helpful translation for contemporary English readers. Perhaps for some they can use it without issue. Generally that is not the case.
Fair enough. There is a lot of history behind the KJV. It was used for over 400 years and two Great Awakenings happened during that time. Now, we live in a postmodern society where truth is not held to a high standard. Professed "Christians" are going apostate and churches are turning into night clubs were people go to feel good about themselves instead of being convicted of sin.
What I am saying is the English problem shouldnt matter, but rather the truth of the Bible. With all these translations coming out and wording changing all the time, what is the actual truth? Are people changing what God has spoken? Good things to think about. @@WontonDisciple
@@IsaacNelson54 the burden of proof lies on you to show that these modern translations change the meaning of the text. The changing of syntax and/or words does not conclude that these translations are erroneous. That's what translation work requires...without updating wording or sentence structure, especially from one language to another, you can't have the bible in a multitude of languages. The very same principle applies to the ever changing English language. Even the KJV has been updated multiple times since its publication in 1611. Also, the fact that the KJV itself is a translation from the original languages shows that even it needed to change words in order to make sense in the English of that time. So, again, the issue is not the changing of words, but, rather, substantial departures from the meaning derived from the original text. Then you run into the issue of textual criticism...which texts actually represent the original autographs, which we do not have. That's a philosophical debate that's still ongoing. The KJV has not been proven to be an infallible English representative for the actual inspired text from the original languages. Though I'd still say it's a good representation, just as the CSB and NKJV are.
Most modern, committee-led translations are fit for church use. The only erroneous doctrine being taught is from those who improperly use the text.
Get a Schuyler csb not printed in China
Once they restock them, I'll be sure to grab one
@@WontonDisciple they have the quentel and psq in stock in csb at evangelical Bible
@@wildmangeorgesrcchannel6916 the CSB Quentel doesn't restock until early next year
Get a Douay Rheims 💗
Hopefully someday I will! Just not a priority now
Too many verses missing for me to trust NKJV....study the verses missing and pray for God to lead you to his true word.. He will do so
What verses are you referring to? I'm pretty certain the NKJV includes all of the Textus Receptus text, just as the KJV does.
"We don't have a committee led translation with majority text as it's basis." Uhhhh... Well we did in 1611 and it produced the King James Bible. If anybody bothers to delve into bible translation history, i don't see how that person would even touch a modern translation "bible" (more like bible shaped object). Are we the only religion on the planet that keeps changing it's sacred texts? That's absolutely absurd that we accept that. All new translations not based on Textus Receptus should be rejected. I strongly encourage all Christians to at least look into it.
The Textus Receptus is not the same thing as the Majority Text, though they do have more similarities to one another than they do with the Critical Text. Many people have different translation philosophies and convictions. Whether or not the TR is the best of the best is up for debate. To say we're "changing" our text is disingenuous. All we've done is discover more copies of our text, many of which are older than the ones used for the TR, and updating it accordingly. Many would argue that we are getting closer to the original text...not changing it.
There's no hard and set rule for Christians to not be able to use TR, MT, or CT bibles if they wish. They are all viable for church use.
@@WontonDisciple I understand the MT and TR are not the same. I concede that point. The "critical text" does, in fact, change things. There are tons and tons of examples of this, enough so that I don't need to cover that here. It's so readily available to anyone that does a quick search. And lots of excellent books have been written on this topic. The "critical text" are disingenuous.
@@WontonDisciple agreed, there's no rule to not use them. I realize that people can and do get led to Christ with these bible shaped objects. However, a gospel tract is not the bible and leads people to Christ all the time. These new translations are not bibles. John clearly states in Revelation that the Bible is not to be fiddled with. And these new translations have absolutely fiddled with the Word of God, there is no doubt. I encourage you to do some research on translation history.
@@zachpeters7096 I am not the biggest advocate for the CT, myself. However, the variants they include do not deter the reader from adhering to core Christian doctrines, therefore I find little fruit in telling people they should toss aside their translations due to a difference in philosophy.
How do you like the modernization of Chaucer and Shakespeare? They were just so hard to read.
But then you grow up.
Then you grow closer to God.
Then you use discernment and understand His Word. You acknowledge that the world must confirm to God, not God conforming to the world.
You acknowledge that your reading skills must conform to The Word, not The Word conform to your reading skills.
God never said it would be easy, Satan makes things easy.
Read the 1611, or at the minimum, grow into the KJV.
Just recycled Roman Catholic arguments switched from the Vulgate to the KJV.......different people, same arguments.
@@hayfieldhermit9657 this ☝️
@deanhendrix, "God never said it would be easy"........."For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." Jesus, discussing learning from him, in his yoke.....
CSB 🤢
Switch to the KJV.
Maybe someday...it just isn't useful for me at this time.
No bible is worth anything if we don't do what it says, ALL bibles have mistakes and mistranslations and added words and phrases. Best to use like bible hub or the like and go back to the original languages.
you guys better stick with the 1611 kjv. all other remove words to change context and some full versus. niv esv
Why the KJV and not the Geneva or Tyndale bibles?
Wonton disciple, do not swap the NKJV. because I have a lot of different transactions, and I have the Hebrew and Greek, so I know that the NKJV is the most accurate translation.
The CSB is from the erroneous Alexandrian of Egypt texts and it's so erroneous. You have been deceived by Biblically ignorant people.
2hat do you want, an easy to read Bible, or the Bible that is the most accurate. Don't let the devil con you.
1. The NKJV is still my primary translation and I actually read it more than any other translation by a longshot.
2. The CSB is not the work of the devil, it's also a mostly Majority translation with a good amount of Frankenstein texts to be less preferable to me, personally. However, not enough of a concern for me to condemn anyone who uses it.
If you'd like to politely reason with me, I'd appreciate that alot. Demanding I do anything because you say so is not really my cup of tea.
@@WontonDisciple the CSB comes from the erroneous Alexandrian of Egypt texts.
@@alanhales6369 while they do use the Alexandrian texts, most of the NT is Byzantine. They also include variant readings in the footnotes.
@@WontonDisciple can you give me a link to the Byzantine texts CSB. The one that I have, is from the erroneous Alexandrian texts.
See how Jn 9: 1--3 is deceiving. Is it the same in your CSB Bible.
@@alanhales6369 there aren't enough Alexandrian manuscripts to even make most of the NT. Yes, there are Alexandrian variants but all modern translations are mostly Byzantine
The CSB is a meh translation. Too much gender neutral nonsense, e.g., "fish for people." Barf.
They remain relatively conservative when the context asks for it, such as James 3:1. If you don't personally like the inclusion of gender neutral language, even though the scriptures do allow for it as Paul often refers to the church as a whole when he uses the word "brothers," you can simply say that. But it's not a bad translation...they're interchangeable and both have their strengths and weaknesses in English bible translation today. I would say gender neutral language, when used properly, is very useful for contemporary readers.
The language of NT is Greek! All the time you waste on "translations/versions" could more productively be spent learnng the sacred language of Christianity. Throw all KJV/NKJV etc etc etc etc out of window.
Hey that's really cool bro thanks for sharing. When I was seeking to learn more about translations I consulted the work of Daniel B. Wallace-- I believe he also played a major role in the NET translation. Anyway, I think the CSB is pretty awesome and reads very well. I probably mentioned this before, but my favorite translation is the NRSV. If you ever want to give that translation a go, try and get your hands on "NRSV Standard Bible Black" (google it) before its discontinued. It's a cheap, single-column hardback and its quite lovely.
God bless you.
I actually have that exact bible in my bookshelf! I plan on consulting it from time to time, though it's admittedly not super high on my list at the moment. Thank you for your kind words!
Dr. Wallace is on the CBT translation committee (NIV).