Challenging traditional Translation choices.

[Van]

Returning to topic:

This version of 1 Corinthians 11:3 is apparently consistent with Greek grammar:

Yet I am willing you be aware that the head of every person is the Christ, even so the head of a wife is the husband, as God is the head of Christ

While each born anew person's head is Christ, the wife models our relationship with God by acting under the authority of her loving husband, as we operate under the authority of our loving God. This helps to imbue our families with an understanding of doing for others based on love. For example, if you love God, you will keep His commandments.

Just as organically the body takes direction from the head, in the spiritual body of Christ, the members submit to the leadership provided by the organization. Thus the head of the Christ, the Messiah, the Anointed refers to the One who anointed the Christ to be His Lamb, His Redeemer, thus God is the head of Christ. Born anew members of the body of Christ of course have Christ as their head, regardless of whether they are physically male or female. And within the God ordained relationship of marriage, both members are taught to submit to one another, with the husband commanded to sacrifice himself for his wife, and the wife commanded to submit to the godly leadership of the husband.

When scripture refers to an individual or group that may be of either gender, then to translate as if only the male gender is being addressed is to introduce error and corrupt God's message.

 

[Van]

Should all the cases where traditional translation use "he" or "his" but the individual could be of either gender, be corrected using "he or she" and "his or her" instead.

For example, consider James 1:7, (NASB95) "For that man ought not to expect that he will receive anything from the Lord,"
Since women can also be unsure, double minded if you will, the verse would be better translated as "For that person ought not to expect that he or she will receive anything from the Lord."

 

[agedman]

Should all the cases where traditional translation use "he" or "his" but the individual could be of either gender, be corrected using "he or she" and "his or her" instead.

For example, consider James 1:7, (NASB95) "For that man ought not to expect that he will receive anything from the Lord,"
Since women can also be unsure, double minded if you will, the verse would be better translated as "For that person ought not to expect that he or she will receive anything from the Lord."

Again, should God have desired, He would have dictated it to be so.

God dictated what was stated in the gender He desired. Are you greater then God in usurping His authority?

 

[RipponRedeaux]

For example, consider James 1:7
Since women can also be unsure, double minded if you will, the verse would be better translated as "For that person ought not to expect that he or she will receive anything from the Lord."

Instead of all that falderal in your 'translation' --why not get straight to the point as the NIV has it?

"That person should not expect to receive anything from the Lord."

You need to understand the economy of words. Your extra long sentence has 17 words. The NIV uses eleven with clarity.

 

[Van]

Again, should God have desired, He would have dictated it to be so.

God dictated what was stated in the gender He desired. Are you greater then God in usurping His authority?

The purpose of gender in Greek is to present word relationships. The idea they express biology shows a lack of understanding of Greek grammar.

 

[agedman]

The purpose of gender in Greek is to present word relationships. The idea they express biology shows a lack of understanding of Greek grammar.

However, when you purpose to remove the gender, you also mess with relationship, as others have shown you, and you have ignored.

 

[Van]

Instead of all that falderal in your 'translation' --why not get straight to the point as the NIV has it?

"That person should not expect to receive anything from the Lord."

You need to understand the economy of words. Your extra long sentence has 17 words. The NIV uses eleven with clarity.

The issue is actually translated God's inspired meaning, rather than deleting words, because sometimes the deletion alters the message.

 

[Van]

However, when you purpose to remove the gender, you also mess with relationship, as others have shown you, and you have ignored.

Yet another false charge, another personal attack, another example of harassment. Presenting the intended gender, such as either a boy or a girl is not removing gender. Claiming Christ is not the head of female believers is removing the female gender from the body of Christ. Such translations are deeply flawed.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

The issue is actually translated God's inspired meaning, rather than deleting words, because sometimes the deletion alters the message.

I know you think that your 'translations' are the gold standard, but because translations such as the NIV are less wordy than your concoction does not mean there is a deletion. You're so silly.

The CSB's rendering is exactly the same as the NIV.
The ISV has "Such a person should not expect to receive anything from the Lord."

The latter uses a dozen words. The Weymouth uses 14 words:

"A person of that sort must not expect to receive anything from the Lord."

You're not inventive enough to say something in a direct manner, losing no meaning. You like the fluff.

 

[agedman]

Yet another false charge, another personal attack, another example of harassment. Presenting the intended gender, such as either a boy or a girl is not removing gender. Claiming Christ is not the head of female believers is removing the female gender from the body of Christ. Such translations are deeply flawed.

Again, you misrepresent what was stated.

God placed the gender as He desired and dictated.

You have no authority to change that gender specific to a passage.

Doing so amounts to lifting yourself above the authority of God.

That is neither a false charge, for you have been shown to have done so, nor a personal attack, rather a warning.

Do not trifle with God's Word by assuming you can cut out the gender specific language used and valued in the original texts.

 

[Van]

I know you think that your 'translations' are the gold standard, but because translations such as the NIV are less wordy than your concoction does not mean there is a deletion. You're so silly.

The CSB's rendering is exactly the same as the NIV.
The ISV has "Such a person should not expect to receive anything from the Lord."

The latter uses a dozen words. The Weymouth uses 14 words:

"A person of that sort must not expect to receive anything from the Lord."

You're not inventive enough to say something in a direct manner, losing no meaning. You like the fluff.

Two wrongs do not make a right

 

[Van]

Again, you misrepresent what was stated.

God placed the gender as He desired and dictated.

You have no authority to change that gender specific to a passage.

Doing so amounts to lifting yourself above the authority of God.

That is neither a false charge, for you have been shown to have done so, nor a personal attack, rather a warning.

Do not trifle with God's Word by assuming you can cut out the gender specific language used and valued in the original texts.

I understand you claim the Greek gender designation indicates the biological gender of the entity in view. Your view is unstudied foolish nonsense.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Two wrongs do not make a right

Can't you add? I quoted three versions proving that brevity is a virtue and verbosity is a vice.

 

[Van]

Here is another example of how easy it is to entrench masculine identity into the text.
NASB95 (James 1:8) being a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.

The Greek word translated "man" is "anhr" and contextually seems to be better translated as "person." However what does "his" indicate if not a man? Is there a handy way to have autos translated as indicating a person of either gender? Nope. Some change the singular into a plural, thus "unstable in all their ways." But if you stick with translating according to the grammar of the Greek, then that choice introduces error. Some eliminate the word, thus unstable in everything. And to go with "unstable in all of that one's ways" seems awkward. No, I am not claiming the KJV translators took the easy way out into error, but just that fixing a view that many accepted as true is not easy.

Here is a way the verse could be translated: "being a double-minded person, unstable in all his or her ways."

To claim James was only addressing male doubters and intended on excluding female doubters is dubious.

 

[agedman]

Perhaps it is best to allow Van’s desire for political correctness or Gender equality to just run its way to winding down.

 

[Van]

Here is an alternate translation of 1 Corinthians 11:3 that is apparently consistent with the Greek grammar of the text:
Yet I am willing you be aware that the head of every person is the Christ, even so the head of a wife is the husband, as God is the head of Christ.

The Greek word translated person is often translated as "man or husband" but can also be translated as "human" or "person" when the group in view contains both male and female, as in this case.

While each born anew person's head is Christ, the wife models our relationship with God by acting under the authority of her loving husband, as we operate under the authority of our loving God. This helps to imbue our families with an understanding of doing for others based on love. For example, if you love God, you will keep His commandments

 

[Van]

Matthew 7:24 (NASB95)
“Therefore, everyone who hears these words of Mine, and acts on them, will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock.

The Greek word translated "man" above is "aner" (G435) but in this usage "man" is to be preferred over "person" because at that time probably men built houses, and "everyone" certainly includes the women hearing Jesus.

However, if we consider Matthew 12:41:
“The men (G435) of Nineveh will stand up with this generation at the judgment, and will condemn it because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here."

Here "men" should be rendered "people" unless one takes the view that the female citizens of Nineveh did not repent.

 

[Van]

Matthew 14:35 (NASB1995)
And when the men of that place recognized Him, they sent word into all that surrounding district and brought to Him all who were sick;

Here is yet another verse illustrative of the difficulty of excising the cultural bias of the time from God's word. Did only men recognize Jesus? Of course not, as many females are included among the followers of Jesus. But at that time, which gender ruled the roost and issued directives? Men of course. So two difficulties arise, (1) "men" actually refers to people (but with men being the most important) and (2) "they" probably refers to the men within the group, who would issue directives.

OTOH, might a wife send a child to a sister or brother's home which had a sick member? Sure that could be the case.

So the bottom line is: And when the people of that place recognized Him, some sent into all that surrounding district and brought to Him all who were sick;

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Here is an alternate translation of 1 Corinthians 11:3 that is apparently consistent with the Greek grammar of the text:
Yet I am willing you be aware that the head of every person is the Christ, even so the head of a wife is the husband, as God is the head of Christ.

The Greek word translated person is often translated as "man or husband" but can also be translated as "human" or "person" when the group in view contains both male and female, as in this case.

While each born anew person's head is Christ, the wife models our relationship with God by acting under the authority of her loving husband, as we operate under the authority of our loving God. This helps to imbue our families with an understanding of doing for others based on love. For example, if you love God, you will keep His commandments

You have been corrected multiple times for your inane error. But your stubbornness prevents you from acknowledging the truth.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

NASB95 (James 1:8) being a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.

Here is a way the verse could be translated: "being a double-minded person, unstable in all his or her ways."

That 'translation' of yours is an awkward construction.

I prefer "They are double-minded, unstable in all their ways." (CEB)