Hcsb Experiencing the Word Gospel of John

By Henry T. Blackaby

Experiencing God author Henry Blackaby gives insights and commentary to the New Testament book of John. The text is from the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB). This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1558199004
• ISBN13: 9781558199002
• Release Date: July 1999
• Publisher: B & H Pub Group
• Length: 64 Pages
• Weight: 0.20 lbs.
• Dimensions: 9.3" x 0.5" x 6.5"

Customer Reviews

Good, but there are some doubtful elements here

I downloaded the PDF file of this gospel translation from another website. Overall, it is a very good contemporary language translation, similar in many respects to the Roman Catholic NAB. This version often agrees with the NAB and disagrees with the KJV on certain word choices. I was quite surprised by this fact as it is a translation fundamentally shaped by the Southern Baptist Convention. We know how vehemently anti-Catholic SBC can be, and how KJV-only some of their leadership is (Dr. Adrian Rogers, for instance). One criticism: This is an extremely conservative text via-a-vis manuscript choice. It seems to be a translation done from the Textus Receptus, with reference to other Byzantine manuscripts. Verses not found in the older Alexandrian manuscripts are bracketted, but included in the translation. In some cases this is good, as the NIV and RSV teams were often too quick to remove texts whenever they were missing from the Alexandrian manuscripts. However, some extremely obnoxiously scribal insertions have made it into this translation. John 5:4 is a good example. Not even the ultra-conservative NASB team kept this one. The NASB team threw it out. While modern scholarship has sometimes been to quick to remove "in doubt" texts, this is not one of those instances. John 5:4 cannot be found in any other "Modern" Bible, and for good reason. It doesn't exist in any manuscript before 1000 A.D. It add confusion to the story being told. Worse, it even promotes confusion about the nature and charactor of God. Therefore it isn't the genuine article. It is a counterfeit Bible verse, and should be left out. Their moto was "more acurate than the NASB and more readable than the NIV." That is a mighty tall order on both counts. Based on this sample alone, I doubt they've hit the mark. Nevertheless, it is a good work. I just wish they hadn't used the Textus Receptus.