Does the Bible Really Say What We Say It Says?

Written by Sam Gantt and Greg Webster

Good journalists admit their biases up front, and, hoping to be that, here are ours:

• We believe the world should conform to the Word of God, not the other way around. That belief stems from our confidence that the Bible in its original form is God’s uniquely inspired, inerrant message to mankind.
• We believe that translating the Bible is a mission through which to reach people with the Good News of Jesus Christ, a mission in which the two of us are actively involved as part of the team developing the Holman Christian Standard Bible^® translation.

So, we're altogether primed to take issue with translations that appear to alter Scripture to suit politically correct social tastes.

In the 1980’s, some publishers became serious about rethinking gender references in the Bible. Since then, the idea of a “gender-neutral” Bible – as it is called when references to male and female words are modified – has been, intermittently, a hot topic among evangelical Bible scholars and lay Christians interested in serious Scripture study. The issue comes to a boil whenever someone publicly suggests the need for such a thing.

Two Terms, One Idea

The phrase “gender-accurate” has come into vogue as a euphemism for the older term “gender-neutral.” Both reflect a translation philosophy oriented more toward marketing the Bible to a wider audience than representing the original words of Scripture as precisely as possible. “Gender-neutral” refers to changing words in the Bible so as to soften gender-related ideas that some people find uncomfortable. “Gender accurate” tries to make “gender-neutral” sound acceptable.

In their excellent book, The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy, Vern Poythress and Wayne Grudem characterize the issue this way:

Some people favoring such translations have called them “gender accurate.” But…the phrase “gender accurate” is misleading. And this phrase takes a position beforehand on the very issue that needs to be debated—are these versions in fact “accurate” in their translation of Scripture?

Whichever term is used, translators’ attempt to make the Bible more appealing may at first sound like a praiseworthy goal. However, we must take stock of what is lost in the process.

Going Back on Our Word

The most obvious problem with claiming to have a gender-accurate Bible is that it implies other translations do not translate gender-related words accurately. For instance, do translations that use the words “brother,” “son,” “mankind,” and the like misrepresent the original writings? Obviously not. A reader should understand the cultural situation of the original writer in order to interpret what the message of a given passage is for us today. But even so, the rendered language should not do the interpretive work.

Perhaps it could be argued that a gender-altered translation reflects original language more understandably, and therefore more “accurately,” in how it conveys the truth resident in Scripture. An example shows why this isn’t true. Hebrews 2:17 is rendered in some recent translations in such a way that Jesus is said to be “like his brothers and sisters in every way.” How does it help to understand Christ by imagining Him made in every way like His “brothers and sisters”? Even while He is fully God, He is also fully a man, made in every way like His brothers (tois adelphois, the Greek masculine plural dative of “brother”). Far from facilitating understanding, we are left wondering how this man was like His sisters in every way.

Altering the Foundation

Besides confusing the understanding of specific scriptures, gender-inclusive translations like that noted above undermine Christology – the understanding of who Christ is and why He is that way. As do some other translations, the Holman Christian Standard Bible^® preserves the actual reference in Hebrews 2:17: “Therefore He had to be like His brothers in every way, so that He could become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.”

Ever since it became official Christian doctrine in the fourth century, we have understood Christ as both man and God. “Brothers” in Hebrews 2:17 underscores the reality of His humanness. He wasn’t simply a human-like creature developed by God for the 33 years Jesus walked the earth. He was a male person, just like the high priest mentioned later in the verse. (Whether modernists like it or not, high priests were men, and only men.) The reference clearly places Jesus as a man, one of the human race. This is crucial because, as noted in the rest of the verse, it was necessary that He be one of us so as to save us from our sins.

Next we come to the issue of men and women. One could believe that the Scripture underpinning theology says something besides what it says, but that only leads to living an illusion. We can consider whether or not men and women have different roles only if we know there’s a reason from Scripture to think they might. Readers should be able to see what Scripture says and then decide to accept, reject, or re-think the meaning.

Finally, to change words to fit contemporary comfort zones is to show that we do not truly consider Scripture to be the ultimate authority. Grudem and Poythress again make the point clear:

…the claim to be God’s word is often seen in the introductory phrase, “Thus says the Lord,” which appears hundreds of times. In the world of the Old Testament, this phrase would have been recognized as identical in form to the phrase, “Thus says king…” which was used to preface the edict of a king to his subjects, an edict which could not be challenged or questioned, but which simply had to be obeyed.

By not rendering the original biblical languages as precisely as possible, we take authority over Scripture rather than Scripture taking authority over us. That’s like telling the king we don’t think his edict should have been worded the way it was, and we’re changing it to make it more palatable for the audience. Although we may craft his language in a new way, it won’t change the veracity of the original words, nor the intent of the king. And we may lose our heads in the process.

Pleasing Man (and Woman), Not God

When Scripture is modified for the sake of social convenience, we demonstrate a desire to please our fellow human beings rather than God. Modernist theologians cry out for “balance.” Feminists demand equality. Elitist academics call for “enlightened thinking.” “De-genderizing” the Bible is a good way to give them what they want. No effort to share Christ, though – regardless of how well meaning – can succeed by changing the words of Scripture to please the world. God put it this way: “Christ is God’s power and God’s wisdom, because God’s foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God’s weakness is stronger than human strength.” (1 Corinthians 1:24-25, HCSB^®)

To do other than accurately reflect the wisdom of God is foolishness.

Sam Gantt taught Greek and Hebrew at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, CA, for 20 years before joining Holman Bible Publishers to head up the communications team for the Holman CSB®. He is an ordained minister and is currently developing an analytical-interlinear Greek-English New Testament for Holman. Gantt’s doctoral studies are in Educational Leadership and Technology at Pepperdine University.

Greg Webster is a freelance writer and director of The Gregory Group advertising and marketing agency. He has spent more than 15 years in various aspects of Christian publishing including marketing, product concept, and editorial development, and holds an M.A. in Theology from Fuller Theological Seminary, as well as the M.B.A. from the University of Georgia.