• 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!

They, Them, Their

RipponRedeaux

Well-Known Member
All three land under the banner of the singular they. We use 'the singular they' a great deal in conversational English. It's also starting to be common in newspapers, blogs and books. But in some staid circles it is distained. But it's been around since 1450 and it's not going to go away any time soon.
Some famous authors used it : Lord Chesterfield, Langston Hughes, Jane Austen, George Eliot, William Thackeray, Milton and Shakespeare himself. So it has a fine pedigree.

However, I will cite some examples from the NIV that are, to me, awkward. I will also supply a rendering from another version. These will be snips and ellipses will be used.

James 2:14
What good is it,... if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? (NIV)
...what good is it if people say they have faith but do nothing to show it? (CEB)

James 3:13
Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it... (NIV)
Are any of you wise and understanding? Show that your actions are good...(CEB)

James 4:17
If anyone, then, knows the good they ought to do and doesn't do it, it is a sin for them. (NIV)
It is a sin when someone knows the right thing to do and doesn't do it. (CEB)

James 5:13
Is anyone among you in trouble? Let them pray. (NIV)
Are any of you suffering hardships? You should pray. (NLT)

James 5:14
Is anyone among you sick? Let them call the elders of the church (NIV)
Are any of you sick? You should call for the elders of the church (NLT)

2 John 1:10
If anyone comes to you... do not take them in your house or welcome them (NIV)
Whoever comes to you ...should neither be received nor welcomed into your home (CEB)
 

RipponRedeaux

Well-Known Member
The Epicene Pronoun : Lincoln Republican (Lincoln, KS) Nov. 15, 1888, p.2.

"This usage is very common in conversation, so common that it can hardly be avoided without much painstaking. It is out of common speech that all our language forms have grown, and some of them, long approved and unquestioned, are quite as incongruous as this use of 'they' in place of the neglected common gender pronoun. It is perfectly proper, in fact the only proper thing, according to the grammars, to use 'he, his and him' to represent the common gender, but the use is awkward, and drives the unlettered people, to the use of 'they.' Really, there is no better reason for 'he' than for 'they,' and as 'they' is evidently the most natural, the grammarians should consent to its adoption."
 

RipponRedeaux

Well-Known Member
A Higher English Grammar by Alexander Bain (1859)

"When both genders are implied, it is allowable to use the Plural...Grammarians frequently call this construction an error: not reflecting that it is equally an error to apply 'his' to feminine subjects. The best writers furnish examples of the use of the plural as a mode of getting out of the difficulty."

Bain (1818-1903) was a Scottish philosopher, rhetorician, grammarian and psychologist. He wrote four Grammars as textbooks. And the one cited from 1879 promoted the use of the singular 'they.'
 
Last edited:

RipponRedeaux

Well-Known Member
The Missing Pronoun by Fred Newton Scott (1885)

"To the fast-coming objections that the proposed use of [singular they] is ungrammatical, inconsistent, illogical, and impracticable, it may be replied, in general, that the English language is full of absurdities and inconsistencies, and with all its faults we love it still."

"While the critics and philologists are quarreling over the relative advantages of two different modes of expression or pronunciation, the great talking public, which cannot very well suspend communication until the mooted question is decided, goes on talking after its own fashion, and finally talks that fashion into our grammars and dictionaries."

Scott was a linguist who became the president of the National Council of Teachers of English. Later headed up the Modern Language Association
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
Yes, it became more common when some insisted on using the unneeded term of "he or she". Some started to say "they" to indicated it could be either gender.

Me - I'm old fashion - I still say "he" to indicate either gender.
 

Jerome

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Do you?

Just a sample:
Recently, a Christian told me they are NOT my friend because of some issues. What a shame
I do not believe anyone who says they agree with their candidate 100%
normally when a person is baptized - they are also joining the church.
when I posted the OP, I meant to include anyone who asked for assistance - even if they were not the one who needed healing.
 

alexander284

Well-Known Member
Yes, it became more common when some insisted on using the unneeded term of "he or she". Some started to say "they" to indicated it could be either gender.

Me - I'm old fashion - I still say "he" to indicate either gender.

This is what I like about the NASB 95 and the ESV.
 

RipponRedeaux

Well-Known Member
In John MacArthur's book Reckless Faith he writes this :"We used to call someone 'a discriminating person' if they exercised keen judgment." (p.68)

In James White's book Pulpit Crimes he says : "It dishonors God's Word and a wise elder would take such a person aside and explain to them that such activities are improper for the child of God." (p.97)

"If a person is not taught to live in this fashion then there is every reason to question whether they have actually encountered God's saving grace, or just a facsimile thereof," (p.145)

JohnofJapan ""Have you won anyone to Christ lately? If so, are you teaching them to be a good Christian?
 

RipponRedeaux

Well-Known Member
Me - I'm old fashion - I still say "he" to indicate either gender.
Apparently you don't say he.

Since they, them, their have been used for more than half a millennium as third person pronouns you aren't being old-fashioned to use he.
 

alexander284

Well-Known Member
In John MacArthur's book Reckless Faith he writes this :"We used to call someone 'a discriminating person' if they exercised keen judgment." (p.68)

In James White's book Pulpit Crimes he says : "It dishonors God's Word and a wise elder would take such a person aside and explain to them that such activities are improper for the child of God." (p.97)

"If a person is not taught to live in this fashion then there is every reason to question whether they have actually encountered God's saving grace, or just a facsimile thereof," (p.145)

JohnofJapan ""Have you won anyone to Christ lately? If so, are you teaching them to be a good Christian?

Wow! All I can say is: you're good! :D
 

Martin Marprelate

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Using the singular 'they' is (I suppose) allowable after 'anyone' or 'everyone' because although they are singular nouns, they almost always refer to more than one person.
But otherwise, it should not be used for two reasons. Firstly it makes the English language ugly. Here are two examples from the NIV 2011:
John 11:25. “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die.”

Job 33:26. ‘Then that person can pray to God and find favor with him, they will see God’s face and shout for joy; he will restore them to full well-being’ (Job 33:26). Yuk! The great strength of the old NIV was that it read smoothly. To use ‘that person’ instead of ‘he’ makes the reading stilted and awkward.

The French have banned use of gender-neutral language because they believe (rightly) that it is destructive of good grammar.

The second reason is that the Gender-fascists are seeking to confuse male and female at every opportunity. We should be opposing them at all costs. He who controls the language controls the culture.
 

RipponRedeaux

Well-Known Member
Job 33:26. ‘Then that person can pray to God and find favor with him, they will see God’s face and shout for joy; he will restore them to full well-being’ (Job 33:26). Yuk! The great strength of the old NIV was that it read smoothly. To use ‘that person’ instead of ‘he’ makes the reading stilted and awkward.
I agree with you here. You have brought this particular verse up before and I agreed that it is indeed awkwardly worded.

I like the NET here :
"He entreats God, and God delights in him, and he sees God's face with rejoicing and God restores to him his righteousness."

But here is another clumsy rendering by the LEB :

"He prays to God, then he accepts him, and he sees his face with a shout of joy, and he repays to the human being his righteousness."

Human being? Really? As if we couldn't tell that God isn't the recipient of righteousness.
 

RipponRedeaux

Well-Known Member
The French have banned use of gender-neutral language because they believe (rightly) that it is destructive of good grammar.

The second reason is that the Gender-fascists are seeking to confuse male and female at every opportunity. We should be opposing them at all costs. He who controls the language controls the culture.
A number of languages on this planet of ours has neuter pronouns.

Languages grow organically. No one controls them, except, perhaps, God, who created them in the first place.
 

RipponRedeaux

Well-Known Member
Anyone who thinks that because they love God and their neighbor (or think they do) they get a free pass on any of the Ten Commandments, he is deceiving himself. (MM June 13, 2018)
 

RipponRedeaux

Well-Known Member
From the LEB I will give some ultra-short examples

Lev. 22:18 : Anyone...they
Jos. 2:19 : anyone ....they
Jos. 20:3 : Anyone....they
Ez. 13:10 : anyone....they
Jn. 11:57 : anyone ....they
 
Top