I recently received my very own leatherbound version of the newly Anglicised CSB. Our church has already made the switch to using the CSB. We tolerate the Americanisms on the screen for now, but read from the Anglicised version and have pew bibles of the Anglicised version too. I am reliably informed that online access to the Anglicised CSB is likely to be with us by the end of the year.1
No doubt some will wonder why we need another version of the Bible in English, particularly when we have such a raft of excellent English translations already. It’s a fair question. But several things are probably worth saying.
First, the translation isn’t really new. The CSB itself – which was first published in 2017 – is just a revised version of the Holman Christian Standard Bible, which was first published in 2004. What we are discussing, then, is not a new translation but an Anglicised version of an already revised version of another translation. We are really talking about revisions to existing work rather than producing entirely new translations.
Second, that point about it being revisions matters because the work involved is considerably less to revise an existing version than it is to create a new translation from scratch. I don’t wish to suggest that doing this work is some walk in the park, but it is considerably easier than setting about writing a new translation altogether. Whilst the argument that we should focus on those places that have no translations of the Bible rather than adding to the embarrassment of riches we have in English is a legitimate comment, it bears saying the work involved in a revision is not to the detriment of such work. Nobody is doing this revision instead of doing some other translation into a different language.
Third, it also bears saying we simply have more scholars in the English-speaking world able to revise a version in the English language than we do people able to translate the whole Bible into a different, currently unserved language. The argument that we should perhaps train some people to do that work is entirely valid. But the argument that not doing a revision to an existing English translation would somehow serve that end does not really follow.
Fourth, the reality is that language changes. The reason we keep revising various versions – there are several iterations of the NIV, for example, and there is famously a revised version of the King James Bible called The Revised Version – is that language moves on. What made sense of the text in one place at one time doesn’t always compute quite so well in another place or some years later. There is a reason why almost nobody – except those who think John the Baptist spoke in 17th Century English – use the King James Version anymore. It isn’t because it is fundamentally unfaithful, it is simply because language moves on and it isn’t understandable to the ordinary man or woman on the street in modern Britain.
Fifth, the Anglicised CSB has really gone ahead in response to clamour for it from the churches. Lots of churches – particularly because language moves on – are looking to find something that reads more easily than the ESV but that isn’t necessarily quite as free and easy with the text as some perceive the NIV. There are those with some theological gripes with both the ESV and the NIV 2011 too. The CSB seemed to hit a particular medium that many churches are looking for. Many pastors were already making use of it personally. What was stopping British churches adopting it as their formal church Bible was the Americanisms. The Anglicisation – which was a revision addressing spellings and idioms primarily – was a result of many asking for it for their churches.
I happened to be one of those pastors who was keen to use the CSB because I found it among the more helpful versions to understand the text. I happen to work in a context where people really do want to understand the text – they are not looking for a paraphrastic version – but they are also not inclined towards clunky language and difficult styles that make the Bible harder to read. We also have a number of folks with English as a Second Language who may access the scriptures privately in their mother tongue, but corporately in English with us. We want to be able to remove as many barriers to them understanding the scriptures as possible. Having a version like the CSB is so helpful for them to engage in a way that the ESV made it particularly difficult for them. But we also cause them to struggle when, living in English operating in English as a second language, we point them to read American spellings and idioms that are not what they are told the second language they are operating in actually does!
As churches, we want people to engage as helpfully as possible with the scripture. We want to remove barriers to their understanding what the scriptures say. Whether working with ESOL people, those with lower levels of educational attainment or just people who find reading difficult and a bit of a chore, we want scripture to be as accessible as possible without altering what the text says on its own terms. Revising an existing version of the Bible – an otherwise good version at that – helps us to update the language and readability and remove some of those barriers for people. As a teacher of the Word, I am grateful to have an English Bible that serves a greater diversity of people within my church and community as well as stopping the number of times I need to pause mid-sentence in my sermons and say, ‘the way this is worded is very hard to understand, what it really means is…’
For these reasons, I am so pleased that the CSB has been written in Anglicised English. It is a helpful, faithful version of the scriptures that, of all the options available, best serves the diversity of people in our community who want to read and understand the Bible. Our move from the ESV to the CSB has already paid dividends for understanding and I think Grace Publications have really served the church well by producing it.2 It has certainly served our church well and I am sure it will be a great blessing to others who choose to adopt it in their churches too.