English Translations and Gender Inclusiveness

1. English Translations and Gender Inclusiveness

2. ἄνθρωπος / Matthew 4.4 • NET: “Mandoes not live by bread alone” • NRSV: “Onedoes not live by bread alone” • NLT: “Peopledo not live by bread alone” • ἄνθρωπος can mean man, person, one… • This quotes Hebrew Deuteronomy 8.3. The Hebrew word can mean a man but more often it means mankind! And in the context, it probably meant all people, since Moses was reminding all the people of what they had learned.

3. ἀδελφοί / 2 Peter 1.10 • NASB: “Therefore, brethren, be all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you…” • NET: Therefore, brothers and sisters… • ἀδελφός means “brother,” but the plural ἀδελφοί can mean “brothers,” “brothers and sisters,” or even “associates” or “fellow members.” • Context has to dictate whether the original meant to include women. Peter appears to be writing to all believers, including women.

4. ὁ + adjectival participle / 1 Peter 3.10 • NKJV: “For hewho would love life and see good days…” • NET: “For the onewho” • NIV: “For whoever” • Any of these is correct for this type of Greek construction, so if the context is not exclusive of women, then it is appropriate to change the masculine “he who” to a neutral “the one who” or “whoever.”

5. Τις / 1 John 4.20 • KJV: “If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar…” • NET: “If anyonesays” • NIV: “Whoeverclaims” • NLT: “If someonesays” • Τις means someone, so any of these are appropriate translations, but in the context there is no reason to exclude women.

6. אִישׁ/ Psalm 1.1 • ESV: “Blessed is the manwho walks not in the counsel of the wicked…” • NIV: “Blessed is the one” • אִישׁ means person or man.

7. אִישׁ/ Psalm 1.1 • ESV: “Blessed is the manwho walks not in the counsel of the wicked…” • NIV: “Blessed is the one” • אִישׁ means person or man. • NRSV: “Happy are those…” This turns a singular into plural, losing some of the intimacy implied between God and the individual.

8. 2 John 1.10 • NKJV: “If anyonecomes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him... • NIV: “If anyonecomes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take them…” • The pronouns definitely are masculine: “him.” But in the context, “anyone” could include women, so NIV accommodates by switching to the neutral “them,” because we do not have a gender neutral single pronoun other than “it,” which would not be appropriate. But now the single becomes plural.

9. Luke 14.27 • NET: “Whoever does not carry his own cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.” • NIV: “And whoeverdoes not carry theircross…” • NLT: “And if youdo not carry your own cross…” • NIV tries to be gender neutral with plural “their,” while NLT switches to second person “you.”

10. 1 Corinthians 15.21 • NET: “For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead also came through a man.” • NRSV: “For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human being.” • There is theological significance that Adam and Jesus were men, not just people.

11. Proverbs 1.8 is a father talking to his son • NASB: “Hear, my son, your father's instruction…” • Several translations [NET; NLT; NRSV] change this to “my child.”

12. 1 Timothy 3.2 • NET: “The overseer then must be above reproach, the husband of one wife…” • NRSV: “…be above reproach, married only once…” • NRSV loses the requirement of being male.

13. History of English Translations

14. When was the first English translation attempted?

15. When was the first English translation attempted? • There were some efforts to translate at least parts of the bible into Old English in the 10th Century or earlier.

16. When was the first English translation attempted? • There were some efforts to translate at least parts of the bible into Old English in the 10th Century or earlier. • When was the first preserved English translation?

17. When was the first English translation attempted? • There were some efforts to translate at least parts of the bible into Old English in the 10th Century or earlier. • When was the first preserved English translation? • Wycliffe’s, in the 1380s, was a hand written translation of the Latin Vulgate [which hurt its accuracy].

18. Were there other major English translations of the Bible between Wycliffe and the KJV?

19. Were there other major English translations of the Bible between Wycliffe and the KJV? • Tyndale [1526] translated from Greek and Hebrew texts, all of NT, parts of OT. To some degree, Tyndale followed Luther’s philosophy of a thought for thought translation instead of word for word!

20. Were there other major English translations of the Bible between Wycliffe and the KJV? • Tyndale [1526] translated from Greek and Hebrew texts, all of NT, parts of OT. To some degree, Tyndale followed Luther’s philosophy of a thought for thought translation instead of word for word! • Coverdale [1535] was the first full printed version, based largely on Tyndale for NT. • Matthew/Rogers [1537] based largely on Tyndale • Great [1539] revised Matthew. It was the first “authorized” Anglican Bible.

21. Tyndale [1526] Coverdale [1535]. • Matthew/Rogers [1537] • Great [1539] the first “authorized” Anglican Bible • Geneva [1560] based on Great but with mms. Calvinistic/Presby. • Bishops [1568] based on Great 2nd “authorized” Anglican • Rheims-Douay [~1600] based on Latin Vulgate Roman Catholic

22. How does the KJV relate to the other early English translations?

23. Tyndale [1526] • Matthew/Rogers [1537] • Great [1539] 1st “authorized” Anglican Bible • Bishops [1568] 2nd “authorized” Anglican Bible • KJV [1611] 3rd “authorized” Anglican Bible • Preface said it was not a new translation, but a revision, based largely on Bishops. • 90% of NT was based on Tyndale.

24. Interesting Facts About KJV • Followed Bishops as closely as possible, but consulted other English translations and the Greek text of Erasmus/Beza for the NT and the Masoretic text of the day for the OT. • In its original preface, there were several quotations from the Bible, and they were from the Geneva Bible, not KJV. • People resisted KJV, preferring the language in the Geneva Bible.

25. Interesting Facts About KJV • Originally included the apocryphal books. • The 1611 editions had 200 English variations. • The text underwent several revisions in subsequent years, incorporating over 100,000 changes. • NKJV [1982] modernized the English.

26. KJV Influence English Revised Version [1885] American Standard Version [1901] RSV [1952/1971] NASB [1971/1995] NRSV [1990] ESV [2001/2011]

27. Independent New Translations • Phillips [1958/1972]: paraphrase • Good News / TEV [1976]: thought for thought • NIV [1978/1984/2011] • CEV [1995]: aimed at elementary children • NIrV [1996]: NIV for elementary children • NLT [1996/2007]: original mms, despite name • HCSB [1999/2009]: Southern Baptist driven • Peterson’s Message [2000]: paraphrase • NET [2006]: thought for thought, DTS

28. Word for Word? • or • Thought for Thought?

29. What is more important, • the specific words and grammar patterns • or the meanings they express?

30. What is more important, • the specific words and grammar patterns • or the meanings they express? • If both, how do we strike a balance?

31. Paraphrase • Try to convey the idea of a passage without worrying about individual words or phrases. • Example: The Message; Phillips • What are the pros and cons of such an approach?

32. Paraphrase Positive: • Easy to understand. • Example: Philippians 1.9-11 • NASB: And this I pray, that your love may abound still more and more in real knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve the things that are excellent, in order to be sincere and blameless until the day of Christ; having been filled with the fruit of righteousness which comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God.

33. Paraphrase Positive: • Easy to understand. • Example: Philippians 1.9-11 • Message: So this is my prayer: that your love will flourish and that you will not only love much but well. Learn to love appropriately. You need to use your head and test your feelings so that your love is sincere and intelligent, not sentimental gush. Live a lover’s life, circumspect and exemplary, a life Jesus will be proud of: bountiful in fruits from the soul, making Jesus Christ attractive to all, getting everyone involved in the glory and praise of God.

34. Paraphrase Negatives • Not trying to convey the very words of God. • Very interpretive, and often the view of a few scholars. • Weak for study purposes; maybe even inaccurate. • Example: John 1.1 • NET: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God. • Message: The Word was first, the Word present to God, God present to the Word. The Word was God, in readiness for God from day one.

35. Formal Equivalence: Word for Word • Translate each word carefully; stick as closely as possible to word order and grammar of original. • Examples: NASB, NKJV, NRSV, most of ESV • Note: It’s impossible to stick completely to the original word order and grammar, because it would make no sense in English. We have standardized Subject-Verb-Direct Object-Indirect Object format, but they moved words for emphasis, not to signal who was the subject and who was the object.

36. Formal Equivalence: Word for Word • It’s also impossible to translate each original language word with only one English word every time. They used words differently than we do, so there always is some interpretive work in a translation, even in formal equivalence. • For example, παρά can mean many different things - from, near, with, beside, in the presence of, alongside of, in comparison to, beyond, in the judgment of - all depending on the context. • KJV uses more than 20 English words for one original language word; and one English word for dozens of distinct original language words.

37. Formal Equivalence: Word for Word • Translate each word carefully; stick as closely as possible to word order and grammar of original. • Examples: NASB, NKJV, NRSV, most of ESV • What are the pros and cons of such an approach?

38. Formal Equivalence: Word for Word • Positive: Sometimes they convey emphasis lost in other translations. • Example: Ephesians 2.8 • NASB: For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.” • NLT: “God saved you by his grace when you believed. And you can't take credit for this; it is a gift from God.” • Which best shows the Greek emphasis on grace?

39. Formal Equivalence: Word for Word • Positive: They are more likely to retain biblical terminology which is rich in meaning. Example: Romans 3.23-25 • NASB: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemptionwhich is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiationin His blood through faith. • NLT: …Yet God, with undeserved kindness, declares that we are righteous. He did this through Christ Jesus when he freed us from the penalty for our sins. For God presented Jesus as the sacrifice for sin.

40. Formal Equivalence: Word for Word • Positive: Minimal interpretation, allowing the reader to be illuminated and figure it out. Ex.: 1 Peter 2.9 • ESV: “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.” • NLT: “But you are not like that, for you are a chosen people. You are royal priests, a holy nation, God's very own possession. As a result, you can show others the goodness of God, for he called you out of the darkness into his wonderful light.

41. Formal Equivalence: Word for Word • Negative: Often stilted English or hard to comprehend. Example: 1 Peter 5.6-7 • NASB follows Greek word order: “Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you at the proper time, casting all your anxiety on Him, because He cares for you.” Is casting your anxiety on God related to God exalting you? • NETclears this up, putting casting your cares on God together with being humble: “And God will exalt you in due time, if you humble yourselves under his mighty hand by casting all your cares on him because he cares for you.”

42. Formal Equivalence: Word for Word • Negative: use of unexplained biblical terminology can leave new or young believers confused. • Negative: some Greek and Hebrew words need more than one English word in translation, and some Greek and Hebrew grammar constructions require interpretation in translation. • Example: we translate προσκυνέω strictly as “I worship,” but it means much more than that.

43. Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought • Translate the meaning of each phrase or sentence. • Examples: NET, NIV, NLT, HCSB • Within this group, there are a variety of styles, with some being closer to formal equivalence and others being closer to paraphrase. • Formal-----------------------------------------------Paraphrase • NASB ESV HCSB NET NLT Message • NKJV NIV • ESV is 90% copy of RSV which is formal, but loosens up elsewhere. NIV, HCSB, NET try to be formal when it works, but dynamic if necessary.

44. Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought • Translate the meaning of each phrase or sentence. • Examples: NET, NIV, NLT, HCSB • What are the pros and cons of such an approach?

45. Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought • Positive: Sometimes they can convey the biblical idea more clearly. • Example: 1 Peter 5.9 • ESV: “Resist him, firmin your faith...” • NET: “Resist him, standing firm in the faith…” • NET interprets the adjective to help convey the idea that would have come to the Greek contemporary reader.

46. Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought • Positive: Translators can interpret hints in the original language. Example: 1 Peter 5.9 • ESV: “Resist him, firmin your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the world.” • NET: “Resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you know…” • The Greek participle [-ing verbs in English] does not have helper words like in English, so it often makes sense to add them to the translation, especially if they help interpret the meaning of the verse.

47. Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought • Positive: They tend to explain biblical terms and be more meaning driven. Example: Romans 3.21 • NASB: “But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets.” • NLT: “But now God has shown us a way to be made right with him without keeping the requirements of the law, as was promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets long ago.”

48. Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought • Negative: Allowing the translators to interpret takes it out of the reader’s hands. Example: John 6.27 • ESV: “For on him God the Father has set hisseal.” • REB: “…theseal of his authority.” • NLT: “…theseal of his approval.” • CEV: “God the Father has given him the right to do so.” • Which is a correct interpretation? What is the effect on the readers of the other translations?

49. Dynamic Equivalence: Thought for Thought • Negative: The loss of biblical vocabulary hurts the church over time as theological meaning is lost and the rich verbal heritage is lost. Example: Romans 5.1 • NASB: “Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ”; • NLT: “Therefore, since we have been made right in God's sight by faith, we have peace with God because of what Jesus Christ our Lord has done for us.” • Fullness of justification includes legal declaration by God, imputed righteousness of Christ.

50. Other Issues • All translations fail to perfectly render the full meaning of the original text. • For example, some words in Greek signal things which have no equivalent in English. We sometimes translate Greek δέ as “but,” “and,” “now,” “then” but what it really does for a Greek speaker is signal that there is a new thought starting which is related to the previous one. • In John 3.1, δέ tells us that Nicodemus is an example of the people discussed at the end of John 2.