The Family
Southwestern Journal of Theology
Volume 49, No. 1 – Fall 2006
Managing Editor: Malcolm B. Yarnell III
By Vern S. Poythress and Wayne A. Grudem. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2004. xxxiii + 494 pages. Softcover, $24.99.
For just over ten years the controversy of a gender-neutral NIV has raged in the USA. Although some other Bible translations had already gone gender-neutral (the ICB in 1986, the NCV in 1987, the NRSV in 1990, and the CEV in 1995) (121-4), it was not until the widely-popular NIV appeared as the NIV-Inclusive Language Edition in Great Britain in 1995 that both Christian scholars and laity took notice and the debate began, especially among evangelicals in the USA (125).
This volume is essentially a major update of the 2000 book, The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy: Muting the Masculinity of God’s Words, by Poythress and Grudem, which appears as chapters 7–21 and appendices 1–6 in this present book. The first six chapters consist of material that Poythress, Grudem, and others wrote in 2002, when Zondervan and the International Bible Society made the stunning revelation they were going to publish the TNIV in the USA even though they previously said they would not do so (xxvii, 132).
Vern S. Poythress is professor of New testament Interpretation at Westminster Theological Seminary. Wayne A. Grudem is professor of Biblical and Systematic Theology at Phoenix Seminary. Both scholars are prolific writers, experts in their respective fields, and outspoken critics of gender-neutral Bible translations.
Written for the general reader, this volume uses non-technical language, transliterated Hebrew and Greek, and purposefully simplified arguments (xxix). The authors clearly and respectfully present effective arguments against gender-neutral translations, and this book is a must-read in this ongoing debate. They are fair and balanced, avoiding pejorative language and treating their opponents with respect. They present a running “dialogue” by extensively citing and effectively answering D.A. Carson (The Inclusive-Language Debate, 1998) (31–34, 51–60, 66–69) and Mark Strauss (Distorting Scripture? The Challenge of Bible Translation and Gender Accuracy, 1998) (9–10, 91–92, 116–17), noting agreements, disagreements, and misunderstandings. Interestingly, this volume presents an in-house “debate”: all four of these scholars are complementarians (as opposed to egalitarians) who believe in biblical inerrancy (8).
Poythress and Grudem present a compelling case “against the systematic and unnecessary removal of male-oriented components of meaning that are there in the original text (53).” Examples of unacceptable changes (213–21) include: (1) changing a historic reference to males (Greek ὰνήρ) to a generic meaning, such as “choose someone” (TNIV) rather than “choose one of the men” (NIV) to be a replacement disciple for Judas Iscariot (Acts 1:21) (p.213), (2) omitting “he/him/himself/his,” such as “speak to God when alone” (TNIV) rather than “speak to himself and God” (NIV), which changes the meaning of 1 Corinthians 14:28 (p. 2), and (3) changing “father” to “parent” and changing “son” to “child” (Heb 12:7) (p.1). Yet, the authors also propose acceptable changes (203-11), such as: (1) using “people” rather than “men” when no masculine term is in the text (Matt 5:15) (p.205), and (2) using “people” or “person” rather than “men” or “man” when translating the plural and sometimes the singular use of ἄνθρωπο” (Rom 2:16) (p. 205). The full text of the Colorado Springs Guidelines in Appendix 1 (411–31) is quite helpful.
The eclectic nature of the opening chapters results in some repetition of material; yet, the plethora of biblical examples throughout the book is both helpful and enlightening. Poythress and Grudem do the evangelical world and Christianity in general a great service with this needed book. They clearly illustrate the problem with gender-neutral translations, such They are clearly not Don Quixotes chasing windmills because of a blind insistence that English never changes (66), an ignorant misunderstanding of dynamic equivalent translation (170–79), a misogynistic backlash against feminism (66, 247–73), nor a naïve concept of word-for-word translation (194–202)—all allegations masterfully expelled by Poythress and Grudem.
