The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy: God's Word or Man's Agenda

357 Pages·2002·3.04 MB·English

The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy:
Muting the Masculinity of God's Words

Vern Poythress & Wayne Grudem

Broadman and Holman Publishers
Nashville, Tennessee

Chapter 0: Table of Contents, Abbreviations, Preface 1
© 2000
by Vern S. Poythress and Wayne A. Grudem
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America

0-8054-2441-5

Published by Broadman and Holman Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee

Dewey Decimal Classification: 220
Subject Heading: BIBLE

Unless otherwise noted, Scripture quotations are from the Holy Bible, New International
Version, © copyright 1973, 1978, 1984.

The versions that we quote (except the KJV) all have copyrights. We here list those that
have requested that we enter a specific description.

The Scripture quotations contained herein [marked NRSV] are from the New Revised
Standard Version Bible, copyright, 1989, by the Division of Christian Education of the
National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. Used by permission. All rights
reserved.

Scripture [marked NIV] taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL
VERSION®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by
permission of Zondervan Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Scripture quotation [marked (NIVI)] taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW
INTERNATIONAL VERSION. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible
Society. First published in Great Britain 1979. Inclusive language version 1995, 1996.
Used by permission of Hodder & Stoughton, a member of the Hodder Headline Group.
All rights reserved.

Scripture [marked NIrV(1995)] taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL
READER’S VERSION. Copyright © 1994 by International Bible Society. Used by
permission of Zondervan Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Scriptures [marked NCV] quoted from The Holy Bible, New Century Version, copyright
© 1987, 1988, 1991 by Word Publishing, Dallas, Texas 75039. Used by permission.

GOD’S WORD is a copyrighted work of God’s Word to the Nations Bible Society.
Quotations [marked GW] are used by permission. Copyright 1995 by God’s Word to the
Nations Bible Society. All rights reserved.

Chapter 0: Table of Contents, Abbreviations, Preface 2
Scripture quotations marked (NLT) are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living
Translation, copyright © 1996. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.,
Wheaton, Illinois 60189. All rights reserved.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Poythress, Vern S.
The gender-neutral Bible controversy: muting the masculinity of God's words /
Vern Poythress and Wayne Grudem.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 0-8054-2441-5 (pb)
1. Bible—Translating. 2. Nonsexist language—Religious aspects—Christianity.
3. Bible. English—Versions. I. Grudem, Wayne A. II. Title.

BS 449.P69 2000
220.5—dc21
00-04419
1 2 3 4 5 04 03 02 01 00

Chapter 0: Table of Contents, Abbreviations, Preface 3
To Joel Belz and James Dobson,
who saw that the preservation of God's Word was at stake and
stood firm
Chapter 0: Table of Contents, Abbreviations, Preface 4
Contents

Foreward
by Valerie Becker Makkai, Associate Professor of Linguistics,
University of Illinois-Chicago
Preface
Abbreviations
Chapter 1: What’s Going on with Bible Translations?
A. A Controversy over gender terms
B. What are these new versions?
C. Controversy

Chapter 2: The Rise of Gender-Neutral Bible Translations
A. Earlier gender-neutral Bible translations
1. An unnoticed gender-neutral translation: the ICB/NCV
2. The first major gender-neutral translation: the NRSV (1990)
3. The Contemporary English Version (CEV) (1995)
B. The NIVI Controversy
1. Prominence of the NIV
2. Revising the NIV
3. Timeline of events in the controversy over the inclusive-language
NIV
C. Personal Observation on the Events in this Timeline
1. Public reaction
2. Why did the issue become so heated?
a) The Christian public
b) Christian leaders opposed to the NIVI
c) Zondervan Publishing Company
d) The Committee on Bible Translation
e) The International Bible Society
3. What was the fundamental problem?
4. What decided the issue?
5. Clarity versus unclarity in the issues
6. The claims of truth and falsehood
D. Developments since the NIV controversy: other translations

Chapter 0: Table of Contents, Abbreviations, Preface 5
Chapter 3: The Bible: The Word of God
A. All the words in Scripture are God’s words
1. The Bible claims to be God's words
2. We are convinced of the Bible’s claims to be God’s words as we
read the Bible.
3. Other evidence is useful but not an ultimate foundation
4. The Words of Scripture Are Self-Attesting.
5. Objection: This Is a Circular Argument.
6. This Does Not Imply Dictation From God as the Sole Means of
Communication.
B. Because All the Words of Scripture Are God’s Words, to Disbelieve or
Disobey Any Word of Scripture Is to Disbelieve or Disobey God.
C. The Truthfulness of Scripture
1. God Cannot Lie or Speak Falsely
2. Therefore All the Words in Scripture Are Completely True and
Without Error in Any Part
3. God’s Words Are the Ultimate Standard of Truth
4. Might Some New Fact Ever Contract the Bible?
D. The Inerrancy of Scripture.
1. The Bible can be inerrant and still speak in the ordinary language
of everyday speech.
2. The Bible can be inerrant and still include loose or free quotations
3. It is consistent with inerrancy to have unusual or uncommon
grammatical constructions in the Bible.
E. Written Scripture is Our Final Authority
F. How Should We respond to God’s Word?
1. We should trust every detail of meaning in God’s Word
2. We should love and treasure every bit of Scripture
3. We should tremble at God’s Word
4. We should recognize that God’s Word is powerful, eternal and
worthy of praise.
5. We should fill our thoughts and lives with God’s Word.
G. Faithfulness to God’s Word

Chapter 4: How to Translate
A. Translation based on the Bible’s command
B. Difficulties in translating
1. Words take different meanings
2. Sentence formation differs from language to language
3. Form and meaning
4. The theory of dynamic equivalent translation
C. Complexities deliberately left aside in dynamic equivalence theory
1. Developing the theory of dynamic equivalent translation
2. Emphasis on clarity to the neglect of complexity
Chapter 0: Table of Contents, Abbreviations, Preface 6
3. Refinements in recognizing meaning nuances
D. Types of complexity
1. Limits in dictionary summaries
2. One word may combine several meanings
3. Factors that contribute to total meaning
4. Bible translators should try to capture the richness of the Bible
E. Translation as maximal equivalence
F. But a trustworthy translation is still possible
1. The richness and depth of the Bible
2. The richness of human language
G. The tension between preserving form and explaining meaning
1. The problem of idioms
2. Other problems
3. What about paraphrases?
4. But aren’t different translations just different kinds of
interpretation?
H. Excursus: Analyzing linguistic complexity

Chapter 5: Permissible Changes in Translating Gender-Related
Terms
A. Replacing “man” and “men” when the original includes women
1. Replacing “all men” with “all” or “everyone” when translating
Greek pas
2. Replacing “men” with “people” when there is no masculine term
in the original text
3. Replacing “men” with “people” for Greek anthrōpos (plural)
4. Replacing “a man” with “a person” when translating Greek
anthrōpos (singular) in certain cases
5. Replacing “a man” with “anyone” when translating Greek tis
B. Replacing “he who …” with “the one who” or “the person who”
C. Replacing “sons” with “children” when translating Hebrew banîm

Chapter 6: Unacceptable changes that eliminate references to
men
A. Removing references to males in historical passages
B. Removing references to males in parables
C. Removing references to males who are examples of principles
D. Colorado Springs Guidelines concerning words for “father” and “son”
E. Why is only the male sex indicator deleted in gender-neutral translations?

Chapter 0: Table of Contents, Abbreviations, Preface 7
Chapter 7: Generic “He”
A. What is Generic “He”?
B. Changes in gender-neutral translations
C. Explicit and implicated meaning
D. A failure to recognize the linguistic issue at the heart of this controversy
E. Distortions in meaning
F. Psalm 34:20: Obscuring the New Testament fulfillment
G. Anything but “he”
H. Scholarly integrity
I. How many verses are affected?
J. The Colorado Springs Guidelines on generic “he”
K. Making our decision
L. The deeper issue: feminism

Chapter 8: Feminist Opposition to Generic “He”
A. The development of the conflict
B. Egalitarianism in the culture
C. Generic “he” seen as giving prominence to the male
D. Generic “she”
E. The “mandate” of the National Council of Churches of Christ
F. The explanatory statement of the NIVI
G. The explanatory statement of the NLT
H. Objections

Chapter 9: Arguments for Avoiding Generic “he” for the sake of
Acceptability
A. “Bible translations should avoid controversy where possible”
B. “Bible translations need to be sensitive to women”
C. “Bible translations should avoid negative connotations”
1. Some questions to help decide when to seek to avoid a connotation
in English
2. Translators should not eliminate the evidence
D. “Bible translations need to be updated for modern culture”
1. An analogy: “updating” the Bible’s descriptions of earth?
E. “The audience today is no longer mainly men”
F. “Gender-neutral Bibles are needed for evangelism”
1. The ideological clash
G. “There is a need for niche translations”
1. Some problems with niche translations (constituency translations)
2. Content vs. palatability
H. The slippery slope

Chapter 0: Table of Contents, Abbreviations, Preface 8
Chapter 10: Other objections against Generic “He”
A. Objections related to the meaning of the original text
1. “The basic meaning is still preserved”
2. “Critics are confusing form and meaning”
3. “We are just ignoring what is not ‘intended’ in the original
language”
B. Objections that minimize the problem
1. “The problem is with isolated mistakes, not with the policy”
2. “But many verses are still O.K.”
C. Objections based on comparisons with other Bible translations and other
languages
1. “New Testament writers and authors change person and number
when using the Old Testament”
2. “Gender systems differ among languages, so no one can make
them match perfectly in translation”
D. Objections based on the current state of the English language
1. “People are unfamiliar with generic ‘he’”
2. “Generic ‘he’ is infrequent”
3. “Everybody uses gender-neutral language today”
4. “Generic ‘he’ will soon disappear”
E. The inevitability of generic “he”

Chapter 11: Ordinary People Can Understand Generic “He”
A. Objection: People will misunderstand generic “he”
B. Objections based on psychological studies
C. Experiments related to “man” for the human race as a whole
D. Experiments related to generic “he”
E. The limitations of decontextualized experiments
F. The greater importance of data from ordinary usage
G. The deeper issue: ideology
H. What about a niche translation for feminists?
I. Conclusion

Chapter 12: Other Issues in Translating Gender: Man, Son of
Man, Fathers, Brother, Son, and the Extent of the Changes
A. The use of “man” for the human race
1. Is the name “man” important for the human race?
2. Conclusion: “man” is the most accurate translation for the name of
the human race in Genesis 1-5
3. The unity of the human race obscured by plural terms
4. The use of “man” for the human race in English today
B. Eliminating “son of man” in the Old Testament
C. Individual male examples changed to plural groups
Chapter 0: Table of Contents, Abbreviations, Preface 9
1. Old Testament examples with Hebrew 'ish (“man”) or geber
(“man”)
2. But don’t these passages apply to women, too?
D. “Mortal” for “man”
E. Words for ancestors
F. Words for children
1. More difficult cases with “son”
G. Brothers
H. Brother (singular)
I. The extent of the changes
1. The changes from singular to plural
2. Changes in other words
3. Why make these changes?
4. After all these changes, how many pronouns can you actually
trust?

Chapter 13: More Examples Concerning Man, Father, Son
A. Deleting “man” and “men” for a male human being: more examples
B. Changing “father” to “parent”
C. Changing “son” to “child”
D. How can an “orphan” have a living mother?
E. More examples

Chapter 14: Practical Application Questions
A. Tests for gender-neutral policy
B. Isn’t this controversy for experts only?
C. What about the translators of gender-neutral versions?
D. Helping out

Chapter 15: Conclusion

Appendix 1: Colorado Springs Guidelines
A. The Guidelines, with the accompanying comments
B. A description of the meeting
C. Refinement of the Guidelines
D. Explanation
E. Assessment

Appendix 2: Analyzing the Meanings of Words: “Man” for Anēr
A. The Greek word anēr
Chapter 0: Table of Contents, Abbreviations, Preface 10