• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Humanoids

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
No, that particular word does not occur in any Bible translation that I am aware of. I thought it would be a catchy header for the intent of this thread.

I'll be citing certain words in several Bible translations and tell you how often they occur.

Humanity
NRSV : 3
NIV : 7
NET : 18
NLT : 19
LEB : 22
CSB : 25
ISV and EXB : 28
CEB : 40

Are you surprised that the NRSV used that word so rarely? Perhaps you were taken by surprise that the NIV uses it infrequently.

Humankind

CSB : 1
EXB and ISV : 3
CEB : 11
NET : 33
NRSV : 57
LEB : 123

Hmmm, the LEB, though considered a conservative translation --leads the pack. And as I've said elsewhere, the NIV doesn't use the word at all.

People

WEB : 1923
NASB : 1983
LEB : 2125
CSB : 2260
ISV : 2571
NET : 2576
NIV : 2690
ESV : 2756
NRSV : 2871
CEB : 3614
NLT : 3649

Perhaps you are surprised that the ESV uses that word even more than the NIV does. Myths be shattered.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No, that particular word does not occur in any Bible translation that I am aware of. I thought it would be a catchy header for the intent of this thread.

I'll be citing certain words in several Bible translations and tell you how often they occur.

Humanity
NRSV : 3
NIV : 7
NET : 18
NLT : 19
LEB : 22
CSB : 25
ISV and EXB : 28
CEB : 40

Are you surprised that the NRSV used that word so rarely? Perhaps you were taken by surprise that the NIV uses it infrequently.

Humankind

CSB : 1
EXB and ISV : 3
CEB : 11
NET : 33
NRSV : 57
LEB : 123

Hmmm, the LEB, though considered a conservative translation --leads the pack. And as I've said elsewhere, the NIV doesn't use the word at all.

People

WEB : 1923
NASB : 1983
LEB : 2125
CSB : 2260
ISV : 2571
NET : 2576
NIV : 2690
ESV : 2756
NRSV : 2871
CEB : 3614
NLT : 3649

Perhaps you are surprised that the ESV uses that word even more than the NIV does. Myths be shattered.
The Nas still did pretty well here!
 

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
Them
NLT : 4118
CSB : 4307
ISV : 4417
NET : 4419
ESV : 4437
LEB : 4553
WEB : 4641
NIV : 4673
CEB : 5470
NRSV : 5804

Did it shock any of you that the NLT used that word less than the rest of the translations?
From the NLT to the NIV it's rather close. The CEB and NRSV are in a different category.

Their
CSB : 2724
ESV : 2773
LEB : 2806
WEB : 2829
NET : 2888
ISV : 2918
NLT : 3328
NIV : 3374
NRSV : 4134
CEB : 4369

Once again the cluster from the CSB to the NIV is closer together than the NRSV and CEB which are in virtually a separate category.

I have used Biblegateway for all of this information. I tried the search engine for the word they, but it couldn't furnish the information.
 

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
Now when it comes to the word person, it gets a little complicated. When doing a search on Biblegateway all forms of the word are counted in : persons, personal, personally, person's.

But we'll just go under the heading of :

Person

ESV : 200
NIV : 319
NRSV : 404
LEB : 412
NLT : 463
CSB : 580
NET : 590
ISV : 754
CEB : 788

Hey! Now what do you know? The NIV scores right around the ESV here. It's less inclusive than the conservative LEB, which is around the same position as the NLT --another surprise.
 

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
The use of the word them in the New Testament with just five translations:

1) NET : 1148
2) CSB : 1158
3) NIV : 1195
4) ESV : 1212
5) NASB : 1222

Well what do you know? The ESV and NASB use the word them more than the NIV. Some Anti-NIVers just can't win.
 

Van

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Rather than a word count, why not provide a verse or two where a singular is changed to a plural to avoid using a male gender when people of both genders are indicated. Greek "him" translated as "them."
 

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
Per Van's request. I will just offer snips, not entire verses. For the 1984 NIV I will put 84. For the 2011 NIV I will put 11.

Job 33:26
84 : He prays to God
11 : that person can pray to God

Isaiah 32:6
84 : his mind is busy with evil
11 : their hearts are bent on evil

Jeremiah 9:8
84 : each speaks cordially to his neighbors
11 : they all speak cordially to their neighbors

Zephaniah 1:3
84 : when I cut off man from the face of the earth
11 : When I destroy all mankind from the face of the earth

1 Timothy 6:2
84 : they are brothers
11 : they are fellow believers

Psalm 101:3
84 : The deeds of faithless men I hate
11 : I hate what faithless people do
 
  • Like
Reactions: Van

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
Theirs
1) NET : 10
2) LEB : 12
3) NLT : 13
4) ESV : 14
5) CSB : 20
6) NASB : 21
7) NIV : 22
8) CEB : 23
9) NRSV : 25

Interesting, isn't it? The NLT uses the word less than the NASB.
 

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
Themselves
1) CSB : 241
2) NET and NLT : 252
3) ESV : 271
4) NIV : 298
5) NASB & LEB : 306
6) CEB : 385
7) NRSV :

The NIV is right in the middle. It uses the word less than the NASB. The NLT
uses it 54 less times than the NASB.
 

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
Persons
1) NLT : 2
2) NIV : 5
3) NET : 6
4) CSB : 8
5) ESV & NASB : 41
6) CEB : 66
7) NRSV : 71

This has to rearrange your thinking. The ESV and NASB use this word
eight times more than the NIV, and more than twenty times than the NLT!
 

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
The term brothers and sisters:

1) NRSV : 99
2) NET : 118
3) NIV : 132
4) CSB : 158
5) CEB : 181

Imagine that? The NRSV uses this term less than these other inclusive versions.
The CSB uses the term 26 more times than the NIV! My, my.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The term brothers and sisters:

1) NRSV : 99
2) NET : 118
3) NIV : 132
4) CSB : 158
5) CEB : 181

Imagine that? The NRSV uses this term less than these other inclusive versions.
The CSB uses the term 26 more times than the NIV! My, my.
How aboutNas/Nkjv?
 

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
How aboutNas/Nkjv?
I have told you repeatedly not to quote a post of mine if you cannot address what's in it. I had
clearly said that I was dealing with inclusive versions. Got it now? Reading comprehension is very important Y-1.
 

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
Man

1) NASB : 2849
2) ESV : 2683
3) LEB : 2220
4) CSB : 2101
5) NRSV : 2044
6) NET : 2017
7) NIV : 1989
8) NLT : 1977
9) CEB : 1937
 

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
Men

1) NASB :1570
2) ESV : 1248
3) NET : 1067
4) CSB : 1059
5) NIV : 1027
6) LEB : 998
7) NLT : 960
8) NRSV : 872
9) CEB : 786

The NIV is right in the middle. Actually, the NET, CSB, NIV and LEB run neck-to-neck.
 
Last edited:

Rippon2

Well-Known Member
Him

1) NRSV : 5111
2) NASB : 5057
3) ESV : 4981
4) LEB : 4909
5) NIV : 4816
6) CSB : 4618
7) NET : 4357
8) CEB : 4203
9) NLT : 3508

Surprising, isn't it? The NRSV uses the word 'him' more than the NASB and ESV.

The NIV is right in the middle; edging out the CSB by almost 200 more usages of the word.
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
An interesting play of words (a pun) occurs in the opening chapters of Genesis that is underplayed by all the popular English translations.

The Hebrew word ADAM is a transliteration. The word means mankind, (you might say humanoids or people) and is used as the proper name of the first man. The exact verses where the name changes meaning from human (general noun) to a proper noun is somewhat in dispute.

The word ADAM is used in Genesis 2:7 along side another word, GROUND, transliterated ADAMAH.

Man (ADAM) was formed from the dust of the ground (ADAMAH) ...

or as Robert Alter puts it,
...the LORD God fashioned the human, [from] humus from the soil...​

and others
...made earthlings from the earth...​

Rob
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
How aboutNas/Nkjv?
The NASB was among the first gender proper translations when it began using the word “brethren”, an English gender-inclusive term with a masculine derivation. A perfect choice at that time IMO.

But times have changed. The newer versions (including the NASB2020) have put aside that word since it has become archaic, opting for clarity in “brothers and sisters”.

Rob
 
Top