What's Worse ?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Rippon, May 30, 2007.

  1. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Is it worse to be more gender exclusive than the text , or to be more gender inclusive than the text ?

    Mark Strauss , in his book " Distorting Scripture " says that in the NIV there are 1,357 verses where the English words 'man' or 'men' appear with no corresponding term in the Greek or Hebrew ... Those who are so concerned about retaining the form of the original Greek or Hebrew should be outraged at such 'additions' to God's word ."

    Is it okay when men are given more inclusion in the Bible than is in the original language form ? However , is it wrong when women are given more inclusion than is in the original language form ?
     
  2. Salamander

    Salamander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    In English, where gender isn't specified, it is rendered in the masculine in the Divine order of creation: Adam then Eve.

    If one wants to subdue the Divinity of creation and demand male dominance to be an error, then one might argue that the woman was created more pure in that she came from that which was made from the dust of the ground.

    We men are just plain ol' dirt.
     
  3. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Is it perfectly fine to be gender exclusive in 1,357 verses where the English equivalent of "man" or "men" is not present in the original language ?
     
  4. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Snippets Of Verses

    Do any of you have objections to the following ?

    Matt. 4:4 -- people do not live on bread alone

    Matt. 5:16 -- let your light shine before others

    Matt. 5:19 -- Anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commandments and teaches others accordingly ...

    Matt. 6:14 -- For if you forgive others ...

    Matt. 22:16 -- You aren't swayed by others ...

    Romans 2:16 -- when God judges everyone's secrets...

    Ro. 3:4a -- Let God be true and every human being a liar .

    1 Cor. 1:25 -- For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom...

    1 Cor. 11:28 -- We ought to examine ourselves ...

    2 Cor. 5:11 -- we try to persuade people ...

    Gal. 2:16 -- know that a person is not justified by observing the law...

    Heb. 9:27 -- Just as people are destined to die once , and after that to face judgment .
     
  5. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why, Rippon? Where are you going with that? And which translation are you quoting from?
     
  6. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    I was quoting from the TNIV Tom . Where I am going with this thread is addressing the additions to God's Word in various versions when those versions have added items not warranted in the original languages . The NIV was guilty of adding "men" and "men" in 1,357 cases . If the equivalent of those words were not in the original -- is it okay to add them anyway ? Of course the KJV added a whole lot more in this area and the NKJ to a lesser extent . The NASU and ESV are culpable as well .

    I gave 12 examples from the TNIV and asked if anyone had any objections to the phraselogy . If so , I would like to know the reason for the objections .
     
  7. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rev 7:9-15 (KJV1611 Edition):


    1. a great multitude, which no man could nuber

    so I guess that most any woman could number :) the
    Church Age Saints that make to before God's Throne

    2. These are they which came out of great tribulation

    IMHO, they 'came out of great tribulation' by being
    raptured before the Great Tribulation Time Period started.

    3. serue him day and night in his Temple

    -God's Temple contains God's throne

    4. Saluation to our God:

    This is NOT the best translation. God does not
    need Salvation - there is nothing threatening God
    for which God requires salvation. Here is
    a better (non-MV) translation:

    Rev 7:10 (Geneva Bible. 1587 Edition):
    And they cried with a loud voice, saying,
    Saluation commeth of our God
    ,
    that sitteth vpon the throne, and of the Lambe.

    Does anybody remember why a perfectly good
    translation got (what is the opposite of improved?
    -- 'disproved'?) in 1611?

    (Item edited for vertical spacing clarification,
    I checked the spelling before SAVE-ing the first time.
    Did you know the e-mails notifing one of a response
    to a topic are sent out at first SAVE? So any editing
    later on is NOT in the e-mail. This gets really interesting
    when someone reads the posting rules and figures
    they should delete what they said against a Bible
    or against a person. Don't worry, most of us won't tell,
    but we do mark down the one who does that
    as a RESPONSIBLE POSTER.)
     
    #7 Ed Edwards, Jun 2, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 2, 2007
  8. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Bravo ESV !

    I was looking through my ESV and NIV this morning and came across some interesting facts . I tell you -- Wayne Grudem should be squirming by now . The ESV neutered ( I'm being sarcastic -- I appreciate the ESV's handling of the references that follow ) 22 items where the NIV did not lose one male nuance !

    NIV at the top , and the ESV below .

    First off -- the book of Job ( it's not exhaustive ).

    5:17 -- Blessed is the man
    Blessed is the one
    7:20 -- O watcher of men
    watcher of mankind
    12:5 -- Men at ease
    one who is at ease
    16:11 -- evil men
    ungodly
    17:8 -- Upright men
    The upright
    17:12 -- These men
    They
    18:20 -- Men of the west
    They of the west
    19:14 -- My kinsmen
    My relatives
    21:19 -- God stores up a man's punishment for his sins
    God stores up their iniquity for their children
    21:25 -- Another man
    Another
    29:8 -- the old men
    the aged
    31:2 -- man's lot
    my portion
    35:9 -- Men cry out
    people cry out
    36:8 -- men are
    they are
    37:13 -- to punish men
    for correction

    Isaiah NIV/ESV

    13:7 -- every man's heart
    every human heart
    13:12 -- I will make man scarcer
    I will make people more rare
    32:2 -- Each man
    Each
    33:4 -- man may pounce on it
    it is leapt upon
    60:11 -- men may bring you the wealth of the nations
    people may bring to you the wealth of the nation
    63:8-- sons who will not be false to me
    children who will not deal falsely

    Now tell me --If you didn't know any better you'd think that I was showing the difference between the old NIV and Today's New International Version , right ? As I said , the ESV did a good job in the references I cited -- better than the NIV . It's a shame that the ESV was not more consistent in carrying out its gender accurate approach . I am especially thinking of its " Blessed is the one" rendering and why that wording was deemed unfit for other passages like Psalm 1:1 and the Beatitudes .
     
  9. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,215
    Likes Received:
    1,318
    I have no problem with either reading. What you may have overlooked is the fact that in English grammar, when gender is in doubt or inclusive, the masculine pronoun is grammatically correct. :)
     
  10. Chessic

    Chessic
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2007
    Messages:
    426
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is changing, TCassidy, as much as I don't like it. Those people who attended public school in the last 30 or so years, or less, have been taught that the use of the male pronoun in general or non-specific cases is archaic, or, at best, hopelessly old-fashioned and biased. Now terms like "he or she" replaces "he," and "person," or "man or woman," or something similar, often replaces "man." Or an author can switch back and forth between generic "he" and "she," being careful, of course, to use "she," at least as, or more often than, "he." The feminists won that battle.

    It's already affecting our Bible translations.
     
  11. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,215
    Likes Received:
    1,318
    They may think they did, but I am fighting an underground, guerrilla war against the decimation of English grammar.
    Yes, unfortunately, political correctness runs amuck!:BangHead:
     
  12. Chessic

    Chessic
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2007
    Messages:
    426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Have you read "Eats, Shoots & Leaves?" Never knew grammar could be funny. lol
     
  13. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0



    Which is why I started the other thread about MV's causing confusion. :tonofbricks:
     
  14. TC

    TC
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,225
    Likes Received:
    10
    I do not think that there is anything wrong with using a generic he/man when speaking of all people. We have become way to sensitive in this area. :)
     
  15. Chessic

    Chessic
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2007
    Messages:
    426
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was the first to add agreement on that thread.

    Though I'm not sure why you would single out MV's. Older versions cause just as much confusion, especially as their languages, dialects, etc, die out.
     
    #15 Chessic, Jun 4, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 4, 2007
  16. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since no one has given this response, thus far, what is the difference? Is either not adding to or taking away from the Word of God?

    That said, there are instances in the Greek (don't know any Hebrew or aramaic, so cannot comment) where the English (again, don't know about any other language so can't comment) does not adequately cover the question. For examples, "Pneuma" is a noun in the neuter gender. But when it refers to the Holy Spirit, the usage is masculine; "pisteuo" (faith), "charis" (grace), and ""ekklesia" (church) are all feminine. However in English, we normally refer to these three as neuter. So the various nuances may or may not be all that readily apparent in our language. Conversely, we also have made some slight or not so slight changes, merely due to one language versus another. An example to this might be the spiritual gifts of "apostolos" (apostle) and "poimen" (pastor). These are masculine nouns, but the usage is not exclusive, IMO, for Scripture says that the Holy Spirit divides the gifts severally to every man, as he wills. Other scriptures show that spiritual gifts are not limited to the male gender, as I read it, so that all women gets one or more as well as all men, when one becomes a believer at the point of salvation.

    Again, that said, the Bible is not concerned with being PC, but is given in order to give us God's written revelation. It is adding to or taking away from Scripture to conform Biblical usage to modern and 'post-modern' thinking and terminology.

    Ed
     
  17. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    First, any expression of a specific gender when the text is actually gender neutral inversely results in the exclusion of the other gender. More precisely stated the question might have been: Which is worse, to be feminine exclusive or masculine exclusive? Of course, the answer is neither! The gender of translated words should be expressed as accurately and completely as is possible.

    Second, I emphasized the above words with boldness because it is an addition only in the sense that a gender has been supplied into the translation where originally there was none. In the AV, "man" and "men" were proper renderings (mostly one English word for one ancient language word) of neuter terms; the principle meaning of those words in the AV literary style was not masculine, but rather generic (Webster's 1828 Dictionary first entry) --

    MAN, n. plu. men. [Heb.species, kind, image, similitude.]

    1. Mankind; the human race; the whole species of human beings; beings distinguished from all other animals by the powers of reason and speech, as well as by their shape and dignified aspect. "Os homini sublime dedit."

    And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness, and let them have dominion Gen.1.
    Man that is born of a woman, is of few days and full of trouble. Job.14.
    My spirit shall not always strive with man. Gen.6.
    I will destroy man whom I have created. Gen.6.
    There hath no temptation taken you, but such as is common to man. 1 Cor.10.
    It is written, man shall not live by bread alone. Matt.4.​

    But the NIV has no such excuse since the first definition per modern dictionary is that "man" now means an adult male human. I believe that this is evidence that, despite some contemporary translations attempts to bring modern language to the scriptures, the 'traditional wording' in the Tyndale-AV tradition continues to be influential.

    I share this information from The American Heritage Dictionary --
    Traditionally, many writers have used man and words derived from it to designate any or all of the human race regardless of sex. In fact, this is the oldest use of the word. In Old English the principal sense of man was “a human,” and the words wer and wyf (or wæpman and wifman) were used to refer to “a male human” and “a female human” respectively. But in Middle English man displaced wer as the term for “a male human,” while wyfman (which evolved into present-day woman) was retained for “a female human.” Despite this change, man continued to carry its original sense of “a human” as well, resulting in an asymmetrical arrangement that many criticize as sexist.​

    For example, whenever the Greek word anthropos (Strong's #444, meaning people, humans without regard to male or female) occurs the best contemporary rendering would likely be gender neutral. I cannot think of a context where this would not be true.
     
    #17 franklinmonroe, Jun 4, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 4, 2007
  18. go2church

    go2church
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    6
    Many of you are bailing water on a sinking ship. The English language has changed so much that even the rules of accepted grammer are changing. For example, the singular usage of "they" is perfectly acceptable.

    I use the TNIV preciselly because it has modern English rules and is gender accurate (not neutral meaning without gender).
     
  19. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Amen , GTC ! The TNIV is not being PC , it's written in more contemporary , and hence understandable language . Evenso , some say its too liturgical in its phraselogy . The TNIV ( and the NIV which preceded it) is written in kind of a lofty , elevated style at times . And yes , the TNIV/NIV has indeed been influenced by the KJV-- the giant peering over its shoulder . Therefore the NIV retained the antiquated use of "man" ,"men","he""his" etc. Language , all language , changes over time ( even in a decaade or two ) . It may not be altered in a radical fashion -- but change is bound to happen . It's the way of all things . God is behind it as much as He was behind the Tower of Babel phenomenon . Anyone attempting to alter the course of the inevitable differences which naturally occur in a given language is doomed to failure . One might as well decide to straighten-out the Amazon River . Have you ever heard of the Francophiles who have vainly tried to guard the French language from English pollutants ? It's a hopleless task .
     
  20. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Rip Bestows More Accolades To The ESV !

    The NIV will be at the top and the ESV below in these short snips from Psalms .

    10:13 -- the wicked man
    the wicked
    15:3 -- fellowman
    friend
    15:4 -- a vile man
    a vile person
    27:2 -- evil men
    evil doers
    32:10 -- the man
    the one
    34:19 -- A righteous man
    the righteous
    37:9 -- evil men
    evil doers
    41:1 -- Blessed is he
    Blessed is the one
    53:2 -- Blessed is he
    Blessed is the one
    53:2 -- sons of man
    children of man [ the ESV gets half a point here ]
    62:9 -- Lowborn men
    low estate
    65:2 -- all men will come
    all flesh come [ some credit to the ESV ]
    74:5 -- like men
    like those
    76:5 -- Valiant men
    stouthearted
    78:51 -- the firstfruits of manhood
    the firstfruits of their strength
    86:14 -- man without regard for you
    they do not set you before them
    90:5 -- You sweep men away
    You sweep them away
    101:3 -- The deeds of faithless men
    the work of those who fall away
    101:4 -- Men of perverse heart
    A perverse heart
    105:36 the firstfruits of all their manhood
    the firstfruits of all their strength
    109:4 -- I am a man of prayer
    I give myself to prayer
    112:6 -- a righteous man
    the righteous
    119:113 -- double-minded men
    the double-minded
    120;7 -- I am a man of peace
    I am for peace
    124:2 -- men attacked us
    people rose up against us
    126:1 -- men who dreamed
    like those who dream
    128:3 -- your sons
    your children
    140:5 -- Proud men
    The arrogant
    142:3 -- men have hidden a snare for me
    they have hidden a trap for me

    Again , if I had been quoting the TNIV instead of the ESV for these comparisons I think some here would have been vocal about "going PC-- going the feminist route , appeasing the masses , watering-down God's Word , dumbing things down" etc. However , since I was indeed quoting the ESV these "changes" are perfectly acceptable . I'm noting some inconsistency with this .
     

Share This Page

Loading...