Bibliology



Exploring Bible Versions

"...accurately handling the Word of truth..."? 2 Timothy 2:15




























Selected Illustrations of NIV Masking of Masculinity


In the table below, contrasting translations are highlighted in bold.

Text Greek / Hebrew NIV 2011 NASB
James 1:5 someone (tis = indefinite pron., masc.); lacks (leipetai = 3rd pers verb); let that one ask (aiteitw = 3rd pers. imperative verb); to all (pasin = indef. pl. pron. masc.); to him (autw = 3rd pers. masc. personal pron.) If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you. But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach, and it will be given to him.
Comments Most Hebrew words are masculine in gender, but typically, their gender would be unnoticeable in translation. There are two masculine words in this verse that have a bearing on translation. To avoid using these masculine words, the NIV incorrectly alters a 3rd person verb to 2nd person, and a 3rd person pronoun to 2nd person. 
James 1:7  the (ho = definite article, masc. sing.) man (anthropos = masc. sing. noun) that (ekeinos = masc. sing. demonstrative pronoun)  That person should not expect to receive anything from the Lord.  For that man ought not to expect that he will receive anything from the Lord, 
Comments  NASB translates anthropos as some variety of Man, man, man's, men, or men's = 495 X; people = 14 X; human = 5 X; mankind = 5 X. All other translations are less than 5 X. Man is clearly the normal translation here. To translate anthropos as person is certainly possible, but in no way demanded, unless, of course, one has a particular agenda. The difficulty here is that in James 1:8 a synonym is used that has an even more masculine connotation than anthropos, yet NIV translates both with the same word. Clearly there is an agenda here. The NIV, by its gender-based policy, is circumventing the masculinity that is present in the Bible as it was written.
James 1:8  man (aner = masc. sing. noun) double-minded (dipsuchos = masc. sing. adjective) unstable in all the ways of him (autou = 3rd pers. masc. sing. personal pronoun, agrees with aner)  Such a person is double-minded and unstable in all they do.  being a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.
Comments Aner is specifically male as opposed to female; adult man as distinct from a boy; a husband as distinct from a wife (in that context). NASB translates aner as man = 71 X; men = 70 X; husband = 39 X; husbands = 13 X; brethren = 13 X; man's = 2 X; gentlemen = 1 X; virgin = 1 X (in 1 Cor. 7:34, where it refers to an unmarried male). There is no justifiable reason for translating aner as person, unless of course, a translator wishes to conceal masculinity. Clearly, the NIV translators have a gender-based agenda, otherwise they would at least have translated aner as man. In order to maintain their facade, the NIV translators are forced to mistranslate a 3 pers. masc. sing personal pronoun as a third plural. There is no justifiable reason, apart from the translators' unisex agenda in passages in which there is clearly a masculine overtone.
Psalm 8:4 (8:5 in Hebrew) what is man (enosh = ordinarily man); you take thought of him (zakar = verb ends with a 3rd pers. masc. sing. suffix); son of man (ben = son; adam = man); care for him (paqad = verb ends with a 3rd pers. masc. sing. suffix). what is mankind that you are mindful of them, human beings that you care for them? What is man that You take thought of him, And the son of man that You care for him?
Comments Mankind can be an acceptable translation of enosh. However, in this context, "mankind" runs into problems for the NIV because the last half of the first line ends in a 3rd person. masc. sing. suffix = him, and that is anathema for the NIV. So it twice mistranslates a 3rd pers. singular verb suffix as a 3rd pers. plural, both at the end of the first line (mindful of them) and at the end of the second line (care for them.) As unwarranted as these suffixed mistranslations are, the NIV's mistranslation of "son of man" as "human beings" is over the top. Son (ben) is masculine singular and so is man (adam). David is amazed that God takes notice of a single son of man. The text is deliberately singular and masculine, although preachers and teachers can legitimately apply the passage to women also, of course. But the NIV's mistranslation obscures any prospect of Messianic implications, as Si Cochran points out. In a NT Messianic passage, the writer of Hebrews (in 2:6) quotes Psalm 8:4 (and there the NIV quotes it more accurately, by the way). So, in the NIV's efforts to obscure gender, it obscures theology.
1 John 2:9-11 9 the (ton = masc. sing. article) brother (adelphos = masc. sing. noun) of him (autou = 3rd pers. masc. sing. personal pronoun) hating (miswn = pres. tense masc. sing. participle).   10 the one (ho = masc. sing. article) loving (agapwn = pres. tense masc. sing. ptcpl) the (ton = masc. sing. article) brother (adelphos = masc. sing. noun) of him (autou = 3rd pers. masc. sing. personal pronoun). cause for stumbling (skandalon)  in him (en autw = 3rd pers. masc. sing. pronoun) not (ouk) is (estin = pres. tense 3rd pers. sing.   11 the one (homasc. sing. article), moreover (de = coordinating conjunction), hating (miswn = pres. tense masc. sing. ptcpl) the (ton = masc. sing. definite article) brother (adelphon = masc. sing. noun) of him (autou = 3rd masc. sing. personal pronoun); and (kai = coord. conj.) not (ouk = negative particle) does he know (oiden = perfect tense 3rd pers. sing. verb) where (pou = interrogative adverb) he is going (hupagei = pres. tense 3rd pers. sing. verb) because (hoti = subordinating conjunction)  the (he = fem. sing. def. article) darkness (skotia = fem. sing. noun) has blinded (entuphlwsen = aorist tense 3rd person sing. verb) the (tous = masc. plural def. article) eyes (ophthalmous = masc. plural noun) of him (autou = 3rd pers. sing. masc. personal pronoun). 9 Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates a brother or sister[a] is still in the darkness. 10 Anyone who loves their brother and sister[b] lives in the light, and there is nothing in them to make them stumble. 11 But anyone who hates a brother or sister is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness. They do not know where they are going, because the darkness has blinded them. 9The one who says he is in the Light and yet hates his brother is in the darkness until now. 10The one who loves his brother abides in the Light and there is no cause for stumbling in him. 11But the one who hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going because the darkness has blinded his eyes.
Comments In order to achieve its agenda of minimizing masculinity to achieve gender equality, the NIV translators (1) have added six words where none exist in the Greek text: or sister, and sister, or sister, respectively, in each verse; (2) have substituted the indefinite article a for the 3rd masc. sing. possessive pronoun his in v. 9. This minimizes the consequences of hating one's own personal Christian brother he possesses; (3) have substituted the 3rd pers. plural possessive pronoun their for the 3rd pers. singular possessive pronoun his in v. 10. This dilutes the benefits of loving one's own Christian brother which he possesses; (4) have substituted the 3rd person plural personal pronoun in them to avoid using the 3rd person masculine singular personal pronoun in him found in the Greek text in v. 10. This dilutes the urgency of each Christian striving to avoid being a stumbling block; (5) have twice substituted the 3rd person plural They do not know where they are going for the 3rd person masculine singular he does not know where he is going in v. 11. Again, this dilutes the impact of the consequence that each of us individually faces if we hate our Christian brother; (6) have substituted the third person plural pronoun them for the 3rd person masculine singular possessive pronoun his in v. 11. This minimizes the impact of hating one's own Christian brother, which is that each one personally does not know where he is going because the darkness has blinded his very own eyes which he possesses; (7) have omitted the word eyes found in the Greek text. This has nothing to do with a gender agenda, but rather was a stylistic decision. The main point we learn from this passage is that political correctness in gender language justifies adding words to the Bible that do not exist in the original Greek text. To their credit, the translators footnote two of the three additions of sister and at least allude to the third. But in the main text of the NIV 2011, words have been added that Christ did not authorize by the hand of His apostle, John. In this passage, in my view, the NIV is no longer a faithful translation, but an agenda-driven paraphrase. 
Deuteronomy 6:2a you (atah = emphatic personal pronoun masc. sing.); and your son (benecha = masc. sing. noun with 2nd masc. sing suffix [your]) and the son of your son (ben-benecha = masc. sing. noun followed by the same word with a 2nd pers. masc. sing. suffix) so that you, your children and their children after them may fear the LORD your God so that you and your son and your grandson might fear the LORD your God,
Comments Israel was a patriarchal culture because that is the way God designed it to be. At least 589 times in the Old Testament the phrase "sons of Israel" appears, at least as translated by the NASB. Even the KJV misses out on this, typically translating "Children of Israel." God made His covenant with a man, Abraham, with His son of promise, Isaac, and with his son of promise, Jacob / Israel, and with Israel's twelve sons. By extension, the nation came to be known as the Sons of Israel. Here the male leader, Moses, was addressing the male heads of families and instructing them to pass on the fear of God to their sons and the the sons of their sons. Does that mean that women and daughters were exempt from fearing God? Of course not. What it does mean is that if the men of the nation fear God, the whole nation will fear God, because God designed men to be the leaders of families and leaders of clans and leaders of nations. Deuteronomy 6:1-10 accurately reflects that milieu. To obscure the order that God has designed will undermine the family, undermine the church, and undermine the nation. Feminism has done all three of these. Feminism has created a huge and destructive backlash against men and fathers and patriarchalism, and we are all the worse off in every way because of it, socially, economically, and spiritually. Patriarchalism comes from God, for He is the ultimate Father. Paul wrote in Ephes. 3:14-15, For this reason I bow my knees before the Father (patera), from whom every family (patria) in heaven and on earth derives its name..." To lash out against the order that God has decreed is to lash out against God. Of course there are terrible abuses of patriarchalism. One need look no farther than many instances in the Muslim world to prove that. But there is nothing finer than a Christian family led by a Christian father who loves his wife and she willingly submits to him, and in which the father takes his job as the family leader and priest seriously and leads his family to follow God through Jesus in  whole-hearted devotion. There is no finer family anywhere in the world than that kind of family. Feminism militates against that kind of family, and the NIV 2011, in my judgment, makes matters worse, not better because of its apparent abhorrence of masculinity.


a    1 John 2:9. The Greek word for brother or sister (adelphos) refers here to a believer, whether man or woman, as part of God’s family; also in verse 11; and in 3:15, 17; 4:20; 5:16.

b    1 John 2:10. The Greek word for brother and sister (adelphos) refers here to a believer, whether man or woman, as part of God’s family; also in 3:10; 4:20, 21.

Return to Bibliology Home Page

Return to Bible Versions Page




(Scripture quotations taken from the NASB except as otherwise indicated.)


Published May 10, 2011

Updated March 23, 2014

Background and Button Image Credit

Search WordExplain.com here.