am I just one man on the island here?
"While in some places the ESV and 2011 NIV make similar changes, there are many gender neutral changes made by the 2011 NIV that are not found in the ESV. Here is what I see as the difference in approach:
Some translations, such as the ESV, seem to say, “Where the authors of Scripture clearly have universal intent, the language may be adjusted to reflect gender neutrality.â€
Other translations, such as the 2011 NIV, seem to say, “Where the authors of Scripture are not clearly referring specifically to men or women, the language should be adjusted to reflect gender neutrality.â€
Here is one example, from Philippians 2:4. Note the three translations below:
KJV: Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.
ESV: Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.
2011 NIV: not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.
In the Greek, all the pronouns in this sentence are masculine. This is clearly reflected by the KJV. But it is also clear that Paul’s intent here is to refer to all believers. This is not an instruction for men only; this is for all believers in the church, men and women. That universality is demonstrated in the ESV and 2011 NIV. Also note that in the 2011 NIV, the masculine pronoun is not used as a gender neutral. For this particular verse, the change is not important. But this approach means the NIV translators have to make interpretative decisions as to when it is or is not acceptable to change what the Bible says. In some places, the changes are not so inconsequential. For instance, note Hebrews 2:6:
KJV: But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?
ESV: It has been testified somewhere, “What is man, that you are mindful of him, or the son of man, that you care for him?â€
2011 NIV: But there is a place where someone has testified: “What is mankind that you are mindful of them, a son of man that you care for him?â€
Note the difference. The context of the passage is Jesus Christ. The author of Hebrews is resounding with praise for Christ and is demonstrating how Christ is truly unique in the world. Here, he points back to Psalm 85:4-6 as a Messianic prophecy about Jesus. In the KJV and ESV, Psalm 85:4-6 retains its gender-specific language, with masculine singular pronouns. In the 2011 NIV, Psalm 85:4-6 has been made gender neutral, using third person plural them in place of third person masculine singular him. But in this the 2011 NIV is inconsistent. Hebrews 2:6-8 quotes from Psalm 85:4-6. In the Psalm, the NIV makes it gender neutral. In Hebrews 2, the translation is mixed, with the first part gender neutral and the rest gender specific. The reason they do this is because Hebrews 2:6-8 is clearly about Jesus. But if the quote is about Jesus, then the Psalm is about Jesus. The Psalmist may not have known what he was writing, but God knew what he was giving. If the intention of the words in Hebrews 2:6-8 is gender specific, the intention of Psalm 85:4-6 is also gender specific.
Similar examples abound, though I consider Hebrews 2:6-8 to be one of the more serious examples. In a nutshell, though the ESV includes some gender neutral portions, the translators were careful to do so only when the text is clearly universal whereas the translators of the 2011 NIV took an opposite approach, taking a gender neutral approach everywhere except in those passages that they determined were clearly intended to be specific.
For myself, I am comfortable with the approach taken by the ESV translators but feel the translators of the 2011 NIV have gone too far for the translation "
www.seektheholy.com/2011/06/20/the-2011-niv-and-gender-neutral..
Seek the Holy
The web home of Chris Roberts
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2011 NIV and Gender Neutral Translations
he sums up how i feel, anyone else here feel same way?
"While in some places the ESV and 2011 NIV make similar changes, there are many gender neutral changes made by the 2011 NIV that are not found in the ESV. Here is what I see as the difference in approach:
Some translations, such as the ESV, seem to say, “Where the authors of Scripture clearly have universal intent, the language may be adjusted to reflect gender neutrality.â€
Other translations, such as the 2011 NIV, seem to say, “Where the authors of Scripture are not clearly referring specifically to men or women, the language should be adjusted to reflect gender neutrality.â€
Here is one example, from Philippians 2:4. Note the three translations below:
KJV: Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.
ESV: Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.
2011 NIV: not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.
In the Greek, all the pronouns in this sentence are masculine. This is clearly reflected by the KJV. But it is also clear that Paul’s intent here is to refer to all believers. This is not an instruction for men only; this is for all believers in the church, men and women. That universality is demonstrated in the ESV and 2011 NIV. Also note that in the 2011 NIV, the masculine pronoun is not used as a gender neutral. For this particular verse, the change is not important. But this approach means the NIV translators have to make interpretative decisions as to when it is or is not acceptable to change what the Bible says. In some places, the changes are not so inconsequential. For instance, note Hebrews 2:6:
KJV: But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?
ESV: It has been testified somewhere, “What is man, that you are mindful of him, or the son of man, that you care for him?â€
2011 NIV: But there is a place where someone has testified: “What is mankind that you are mindful of them, a son of man that you care for him?â€
Note the difference. The context of the passage is Jesus Christ. The author of Hebrews is resounding with praise for Christ and is demonstrating how Christ is truly unique in the world. Here, he points back to Psalm 85:4-6 as a Messianic prophecy about Jesus. In the KJV and ESV, Psalm 85:4-6 retains its gender-specific language, with masculine singular pronouns. In the 2011 NIV, Psalm 85:4-6 has been made gender neutral, using third person plural them in place of third person masculine singular him. But in this the 2011 NIV is inconsistent. Hebrews 2:6-8 quotes from Psalm 85:4-6. In the Psalm, the NIV makes it gender neutral. In Hebrews 2, the translation is mixed, with the first part gender neutral and the rest gender specific. The reason they do this is because Hebrews 2:6-8 is clearly about Jesus. But if the quote is about Jesus, then the Psalm is about Jesus. The Psalmist may not have known what he was writing, but God knew what he was giving. If the intention of the words in Hebrews 2:6-8 is gender specific, the intention of Psalm 85:4-6 is also gender specific.
Similar examples abound, though I consider Hebrews 2:6-8 to be one of the more serious examples. In a nutshell, though the ESV includes some gender neutral portions, the translators were careful to do so only when the text is clearly universal whereas the translators of the 2011 NIV took an opposite approach, taking a gender neutral approach everywhere except in those passages that they determined were clearly intended to be specific.
For myself, I am comfortable with the approach taken by the ESV translators but feel the translators of the 2011 NIV have gone too far for the translation "
www.seektheholy.com/2011/06/20/the-2011-niv-and-gender-neutral..
Seek the Holy
The web home of Chris Roberts
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2011 NIV and Gender Neutral Translations
he sums up how i feel, anyone else here feel same way?
