God’s Big Nose, TNIV, and Gender-Inclusive Bibles
On his Facebook page, Eddy linked to an AP story about Biblica updating the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible and publishing it in 2011. At that time, Zondervan will also cease publishing the Today’s New International Version (TNIV) that came out in 2005. (Biblica owns the copyright on both versions and Zondervan publishes them in North America.) The TNIV sought to update some of the phrasing in the NIV to reflect changes in the English language. But it was controversial because while Zondervan would continue publishing the NIV, the Committee on Bible Translation that produced both versions would no longer update the NIV and the TNIV would become its primary focus for further revisions. The issue with the TNIV is that it uses gender-inclusive language. For example, “sons of God,” is now translated, “children of God.” Apparently some people were unhappy with the TNIV’s process and wanted more transparency even though Christianity Today devoted a cover story to the TNIV and the debate surrounding it and a whole book was published regarding the gender-neutral controversy.
I’d like to respond a bit to the criticism of the TNIV cited in the AP story. Regarding the changes in the TNIV,
Many prominent pastors and scholars endorsed the changes. But critics said masculine terms in the original should not be tampered with. Some warned that changing singular gender references to plural ones alters what the Bible says about God’s relationships with individuals.
The Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution saying the edition “has gone beyond acceptable translation standards.”
I’m curious as to what singular gender references they have in mind that have been changed so as to alter God’s relationships with individuals. In the modern English-speaking world, we don’t really have a problem with emphasizing the relationships between God and individuals. If anything, we read the Bible too individualistically, with too much of an emphasis on the individual that we run the risk of misinterpreting the texts. Granted, our language does not help us. Both Greek and Hebrew have a plural form of the second person pronoun—a “plural you,” as it were—and those pronouns are found throughout the Bible. English does not have a second person plural pronoun and so we have often read the Bible saying, “you,” as if it is speaking to the individual rather than the community. In my opinion, translating the Bible in ways that reflect the communal nature of the texts needs to be one of the primary responsibilities of translators.
I support careful gender-inclusive language in our translations and have no real issues with the TNIV. And as far as gender-inclusive translations go, the TNIV is fairly conservative in its changes. I grew up on the NIV and I think it is a fine translation. I first began using a gender-inclusive translation (the NRSV) in college when I wrote religious studies papers—the NRSV is widely accepted in academic circles. I initially liked the NRSV on a purely aesthetic level and began using it as my primary version for devotional reading. I couldn’t read Greek or Hebrew at the time, so I had no way of deciding if the NRSV was a more faithful translation or not. I still use the NRSV as my primary Bible and find it a very reliable version.
As I have studied Greek and Hebrew, I have come to appreciate gender-inclusive translations not for some politically correct reasons, but for much of the same reasons I choose to read modern biblical translations instead of the King James Version (KJV). The KJV was a fine translation for its time, reflecting the way people spoke and wrote in the 17th Century. English has changed over the centuries. We do not speak or write today as people did in the 1600’s. We do not even spell many of the same words in the same way as they did in the past. The Greek and Hebrew of the Bible have not changed—though we continue to find and use older and older manuscripts to translate—our contemporary English has changed.
The Bible was written in the earthy languages of real people who used those languages for everything in their lives: worship, conversation, trade, poetry, history, etc. Like any language, the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek of the Bible were full of idiomatic phrases. When Paul wrote to his “brothers” to address the churches in his letters, no biblical scholar would say that he was only writing to men. “Brothers” was an idiom that represented the community. “Brothers,” “man,” and “men” used to be gender-inclusive terms in English, but that has changed. So I see nothing wrong with carefully translating an idiomatic phrase in a way that reflects its meaning. I make it a practice to render “brothers” as “brothers and sisters” in my own translations when it is clear that the text is addressing more than just the men of the group. This translation reflects the way we speak and write now. I do not believe that it does violence or changes the meaning of the original texts. The historical nature of the manuscripts and the ever-evolving nature of language creates a problem for translators, especially translators of Scripture. We believe that God speaks to us through the Bible and so we need the Bible to be readable. At the same time, these are historical documents written at specific times and places and we can run the risk of trying to update them. Care must be taken and I believe that the translators of the TNIV were careful.
Even the most wooden, word for word translations of the Bible are not 100% accurate. That is not merely a statement regarding grammar since word order is different and different languages often have different verb tenses. Some translation of idioms and thoughts are required to make sense to us today. Did you know that the Bible says God has a big nose? We often render the term ‘arek ‘apim, as “slow to anger” or “longsuffering,” to describe God’s divine and gracious patience. “The LORD is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love.” (Psalm 103.8) When translated woodenly, the term is actually “long of nose.” It’s a Hebrew idiom and makes no sense in English without translating the actual thought.
For what it is worth, I think a very wooden, very word-for-word translation of the Bible into English would be of great help to students who do not read Greek or Hebrew. It would be wonderful for the average Bible reader to be able to see how earthy some of the original idioms are and how strange they can sound to our ears. Can you imagine giving someone a complement by telling them they have a big nose?
I am skeptical that the primary reason for the cessation of the TNIV is the mea culpa from Biblica and the NIV’s handlers with regard to how the revision process took place. While Biblica is a non-profit organization, Zondervan is a subsidiary of NewsCorp, a publicly traded company. My assumption is that the TNIV just isn’t selling like they hoped it would. When the Southern Baptist Convention denounced the TNIV, they also announced that they would not sell the version in their stores. If the TNIV were more profitable, Biblica may have re-opened revision on the NIV, but I doubt Zondervan would have shut down publishing the TNIV.
