11.09.2011
Our good friend, Pastor Corey Hodges, Pastor of New Pilgrim Baptist Church in Kearns, Utah, and a regular columnist for the Salt Lake Tribune, penned his latest column on his agreement with the Southern Baptist Convention’s rejection of the updated New International Version of the Bible. Southern Baptist authorities claim the updated NIV goes too far with gender-neutral language.
We could not find any examples from the updated version in Pastor Hodges column, so we aren’t sure what parts are offensive to those who do not like this version. But here is our addition to the conversation, and maybe even our disagreement with those who are bothered.
In Bible translations, “gender-neutral” usually means that when “men” is written that the original and historical wording is changed to “people” or “men and women”. Or if “brothers” is written, it is acceptable to change the reading to “brothers and sisters”.
Just this week we have been working out of John 15:13 which provides an example of how this translation debate goes. The NIV from 1984 has Jesus saying, “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” The updated NIV reads, “Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.” If this is what the Southern Baptist Convention formally objects to, then we would have to disagree.
It is interesting that back in 1833, Noah Webster (same guy who gave us Webster’s Dictionary) made changed in the King James Version in order to take away phrases that were “offensive, especially to females.” [i] Obviously, his version didn’t stick. But it isn’t just a modern phenomenon.
From 1952 to 1990 27 new translations of the Bible were published, and 28 new renditions of the New Testament. We stopped officially counting in ‘90, but there have been several more since then.
The reason for so many translations is that translators and textual critics find and see different meanings in ancient Hebrew and Greek. Plus, they have different theories about translations. And, various translations try to use different styles of the modern English language, from literal to heavy paraphrase.
In 1993, the New Revised Standard Version was published, which received both cheers and jeers for its gender-neutral language. It was one of the first major translations to dare to try to be sensitive to women. We have used the NRSV and have found it to be a good, solid, and rich translation. In fact, we have used this Bible devotionally, homiletically, and didactically almost every day for 20-plus years, and are still keeping and practicing the faith of Jesus.
Dr. Bruce Metzger, who might be considered the top New Testament scholar of the 20th century, and who led the translation teams of the Revised Standard Version (1956) and the NRSV (’93), said this in a lecture he gave the year the NRSV came out.
“The question is often asked, Which is the best version of the Bible to use? It is impossible to give a simple answer to this question. It is rather like asking, Which is the best place to go for a vacation? The answer depends on what the individual wants. So too with versions of the Scriptures; different translations are intended for different purposes. For detailed and intensive study, especially in preparation for teaching, a word-for-word translation would probably be best. In working with children and those for whom English is a second language, a dynamic equivalence translation probably would be preferable. In other contexts, - whether personal devotions, family devotions, meditation, or extended reading - readers today have available a rich variety of versions, and individuals can make their own judgments as to the most useful version. But in the last analysis, whichever version one prefers, the important thing is to read it and to respond to its message. As Johannes Albrecht Bengel put it succinctly in the preface to his 1734 edition of the Greek New Testament, “Te totum applica ad textum: rem totam applica ad te” (“Apply yourself wholly to the text: apply the whole matter to yourself”).”[ii]
One of our Old Testament professors from our days at Princeton Theological Seminary (“ah ha! we knew you were a liberal heretic!”), Dr. J.J.M. Roberts, was part of the NRSV translation team and agrees that Paul was probably thinking of both brothers and sisters when he wrote “brothers”, but, in fact, did not use the inclusive expression. Roberts objected to changing Paul’s words because of the danger of imposing “a twentieth century, western cultural agenda on a first century text.” Thus, the original text becomes harder to see and study over the years, making serious historical work more difficult.
Feminists and others with sociological agendas have been pegged with responsibility for gender-neutral translations. That is probably mostly true. Though, we have known many strong, independent women who are just fine with translations that are not gender-neutral, just as we know many strong, independent evangelically minded women who are not scared to advocate for gender-neutral translations.
J.B. Phillips was practically crucified for his modern-language translation of the New Testament in the 1960’s. Yet, it brings out the spirit of many of the original words in a way that has stoked the faith of many serious Christians. Some of the deepest and strongest disciples I have known have fed and nourished themselves on the Phillips translation.
How important is having the “correct” translation? Would using the updated NIV destroy someone’s faithfulness to Christ, make their worship more shallow, their prayer life weaker, or their compassion for the poor and lost less? We suspect not. There are many people who will probably have a clearer and more convicted relationship with Christ because they read the Bible in that version.
In fact, it seems dubious that in a culture that has unprecedented access to the Scriptures, biblical illiteracy is rampant. Not to mention less people in the U.S. of A. practicing a serious discipleship of Jesus Christ.
It seems that people in centuries past who did not have any choice, option, or access of translation, might have lived a more vibrant faith than Christians, at least in the West, today.
Choose your translation, but it all comes down to being able to apply the text to ourselves, and letting the word of God dwell in us richly. (Colossians 3:16)
Apply yourself wholly to the text: apply the whole matter to yourself.
[i] The Gender-Neutral Language Controversy, by Michael D. Marlowe, 2001 (revised January 2005) http://www.bible-researcher.com/inclusive.html
[ii] Metzger English Translations of the Bible, Today and Tomorrow, 1993 http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_trans_metzger4.html
Bad Bibles?
