1

The NIV Gender Agenda (A Reason for Switching Bible

Translations)

by

Pastor Thor Ramsey

At some point (exactly 1979), somebody at the

National Weather Bureau thought it would be a good idea to

stop naming hurricanes after women. You know? Hurricane

Carol! Hurricane Katrina! The practice smacked of sexism.

(Unless you happened to encounter my mother after getting

mud on her carpeting! Hurricane Emily! That’s just accuracy.)

So, the meteorologists started including men and now we have

Hurricane Hugo and Hurricane Floyd, the difference being

that men take it as a compliment. Men find it flattering to be

known as wild and destructive. Keep up the good work,

Weather Bureau.

Granted, it’s good and courteous to adjust our

language to avoid needlessly offending in such matters, but

people can get a little ridiculous about it. Such is the case with

personal pronoun “he.” There have always been pockets of the

English speaking world who replace the singular pronoun “he”

with the plural pronoun “they,” though “they” use it with a

singular meaning. This often leads to wonderful sentences

2

like, “I see my boyfriend. They are coming this way.” Really?

Maybe he should date someone who can talk gooder. The

question is, “What happens when we apply this same gender-

neutral logic to translating the ancient texts of the Bible?”

My first Bible was a New American Standard Bible

which is a translation that was based upon the King James

Bible. I tried memorizing Scripture from that version and

failed miserably. The translation of this version, clunky in

style, was often difficult, through my wits, to place in my

mind. In other words, it was hard to memorize. The version

that facilitated Scripture memorization for me was the NIV

(New International Version) Bible. It was the 1984 version of

the NIV (henceforth known as the NIV84) and it became the

Bible I used regularly since 1994. When I bought a new NIV in

2011 (henceforth known as the NIV11), little did I know that

the translation had changed. (I should have read the preface!

But who expects their Bible to say, “New and improved?”) The

fact that the translation of the NIV had changed came to my

attention when the new Bible I read aloud from during

sermons did not match the text on the screen at times

(something I couldn’t blame on a PC). It turns out the media

department was placing the NIV84 on the screen while I was

reading from the NIV11, thus the discrepancies in wording.

That was a minor problem compared to other issues I

would soon find with this revised translation. Soon, I came

3

across a problematic NIV11 translation choice while preparing

a message from the book of Acts.

The Difference between Translating and Interpreting

In Acts chapter 6, there is controversy in the church

because a group of widows is being overlooked in the daily

distribution of food. So, the disciples gathered together the

believers and told them, “It would not be right for us to

neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on

tables. Brothers and sisters, choose seven men from among

you…”

In the Hellenistic Greek text the word is ἀδελφός

(adelphos) and it means “brothers” or “fellow believers,”

sometimes “fellow Jews” and “fellow countrymen.” The

translators of the NIV11 vaulted over pastors, teachers and

readers by opting to translate it “brothers and sisters.” This

was not just a translation decision. It was also one of

interpretation. The translators of the NIV11 decided the

author meant to address both men and women. The reason

this matters is because there is a clear leadership issue at play

in Acts 6 and the translators of the NIV11 don’t give us the

opportunity to grapple with this text in light of other passages

regarding the roles of men and women in the church. They

4

just make the leap to egalitarian1 church leadership for all of

us by translating it “brothers and sisters.” Look, I’m all for

inclusive language (except when it comes to hurricanes). The

question becomes one of extent. In this case (as in many

others), the translators overstep their boundaries and

interpret rather than translate.

This led me to investigate what other changes had

been made, because some of the discrepancies between the

NIV84 (which is no longer sold) and the NIV11 troubled the

Executive Leadership Team (Pastor Pete, Dave Dick and

myself) here at the church. I discovered that there are 2,766

translation choices like this made in the NIV11 and the vast

majority of them are related to gender. Not much of a

conspiracy theorist myself, but this certainly hints of a gender

agenda to me. The more I investigated the changes made to

the NIV11, the more it went from hinting to smacking of a

gender agenda. Not that they had one, of course. Their Bible

translation just reads that way.

Essentially Literal versus Essentially Not

From the outset, the NIV was a “thought-for-thought”

translation rather than a “word-for-word” translation, though

all translations fluctuate somewhat between these two types,

1 In egalitarian church leadership models women can also be senior pastors.

5

because as any respectable New Testament Greek primer will

tell you, “There is no single Greek word that has an exact

equivalent in a single English word.”2

In predominately thought-for-thought translations

the team of translators is more inclined to superimpose their

own opinions onto the text. (That’s my opinion, anyway.) In

the case of the NIV11, that opinion specifically has to do with

cultural views of gender roles. Rather than simply translating

the text and allowing readers to wrestle with applying the

meaning of a given text to our present cultural context in light

of all the biblical texts, the translator’s of the NIV11 have taken

an interpretive leap over the readers. Intentionally or

unintentionally, that is the end result. Let’s look at just a

couple of these changes as they each reveal an agenda-driven

translation of the Bible. Or at least a translation of the Bible

that is more concerned about cultural sensibilities than

accurate meaning.

For example, the NIV11 translates Nahum 3:13 as

follows, “Look at your troops -- they are all weaklings. The

gates of your land are wide open to your enemies; fire has

consumed the bars of your gates.” The ESV (English Standard

Version) Bible translates the same verse, “Behold, your troops

2 Ernest Cadman Colwell, A Beginner’s Reader-Grammar for New Testament Greek (Harper & Row, 1965), pg 12.

6

are women in your midst. The gates of your land are wide

open to your enemies; fire has devoured your bars.”

The key word change here is “women.” A report from

the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood explains,

“In each of these four verses the Hebrew word is nashim, the

plural of ’ishshah and the ordinary, common word for

―women (it is not a rare word, and there is no debate or

uncertainty over its meaning, for ’ishshah occurs 847 times in

the Old Testament). But in these verses related to military

combat, the new NIV has removed the correct translation

―women and replaced it with ―weaklings. The word does not

mean that. Perhaps some people think that is what these

verses imply, but that is not what they say. Perhaps the verses

also suggest shame that any people would allow their women

to serve in combat, or shame that all the men have been

defeated and only women are left to defend a nation. In any

case, the point is that even the original Hebrew readers would

have had to ponder for a moment what the verse meant when

it said the troops had become women. It is not proper

translation to hide from the English readers the fact that the

Bible said in these verses that some troops had become

women.”3

In a Lutheran position paper I came across, it was

stated in their synod’s research: “The NIV 2011 removes from

3 An Evaluation of Gender Language in the 2011 Edition of the NIV Bible, pgs. 20-21

7

Scripture the fact that Israelite priests were male, that

Israelite high priests were male, that Israelite gatekeepers

were male, that Israelite leaders meeting with Moses were

male, that Israelite soldiers were male, that David’s Mighty

Men were male, and that the prophets who wrote Scripture

were male. The Holy Spirit chose to put the detail that these

people were male into these passages. How can we choose to

remove details that God chose to include?”4 That’s a very good

question.

Is the Bible About Jesus or Us?

Here’s another example of what amounts to a basic

masking of masculine phraseology, which completely changes

the possible meaning of Psalm 8. This is one of the most

troubling examples to me. Below is a chart that shows how the

NIV84 originally translated these verses compared to the

changes they made in current NIV11.

Psalm 8:4-5

NIV84 NIV11

What is man that you are

mindful of him,

What is mankind that you

are mindful of them,

4 The NIV 2011: Problems Caused by its Improper Use of Gender Neutral Language, pg. 7.

8

the son of man that you care

for him?

5You made him a little lower

than the heavenly beings

and crowned him with glory

and honor.

human beings that you care

for them?a

5You have made them a little

lower than the angels

and crowned them with glory

and honor.

The issue I have with the NIV11 version of Psalm 8 is

that even though “son of man” is a term which does refer to

humanity, “son of man” is a specific way of calling us human

in the Hebrew language. In this case, the translators of the

NIV11 switch from the singular “what is man that you are

mindful of him” to the plural “what is mankind that you are

mindful of them.” Then they carry this through the rest of the

Psalm, which changes “him” to “them.”

Now, why is that important? Because the author of

Hebrews says that Psalm 8 is actually talking about Jesus.

Using the plural “them” instead of the singular “he” takes

away from the messianic emphasis of Psalm 8. The gender-

inclusive translation of Psalm 8 changes it from being

primarily a prophecy about Jesus to being primarily a text

about humanity. Was it really necessary to make this change?

Did they really do it to make the Bible more understandable?

9

Or did they do it because they want the Bible to be more

gender-inclusive? Now, of course, we can’t know their true

motives, but anything that makes the Bible less about Jesus

and more about us isn’t a good decision. Psalm 8 is clearly

about Jesus, until it is rendered gender-inclusive.

The translators have given their reason for making

this change, but the reasoning behind this choice baffles me to

no end. I read that this giant team of translators decided that

Psalm 8 isn’t directly messianic. We only believe this passage

is messianic because the New Testament tells us that. What?

The translators make the argument that if we only had Psalm

8, we wouldn’t suspect it was messianic. The point is we don’t

only have Psalm 8. We have the author of Hebrews, too. I

thought one of the basic rules of biblical interpretation was to

interpret a verse in light of all other Scripture. So, because it’s

not obvious to the translators, they decided to override the

viewpoint of the New Testament? You’re fired! This is another

case of the translators interpreting rather than translating.

Below is where the New Testament author of Hebrews

tells us that Psalm 8 is messianic. You can see in this chart

how the NIV11 translators decided to change it.

10

Hebrews 2:6-9

NIV84 NIV11

But there is a place where

someone has testified:

"What is man that you are

mindful of him,

the son of man that you care

for him?

7You made him a little lower

than the angels;

you crowned him with glory

and honor

8and put everything under

his feet."

In putting everything under

him, God left nothing that is

not subject to him. Yet at

present we do not see

everything subject to

him.9But we see Jesus, who

was made a little lower than

the angels, now crowned

with glory and honor

But there is a place where

someone has testified:

"What is mankind that you

are mindful of them,

a son of man that you care

for him?

7You made them a little lower

than the angels;

you crowned them with glory

and honor

8and put everything under

their feet."b

In putting everything under

them, God left nothing that

is not subject to them. Yet at

present we do not see

everything subject to

them.9But we do see Jesus,

who was made lower than

the angels for a little while,

now crowned with glory and

11

because he suffered death, so

that by the grace of God he

might taste death for

everyone.

honor because he suffered

death, so that by the grace of

God he might taste death for

everyone.

Jesus often referred to Himself as the “Son of Man,”

so losing that phrase in Psalm 8 in the Old Testament loses

the connection to Jesus in the New Testament, even though

the writer of Hebrews (my money’s on the Holy Spirit) makes

that connection. The NIV11 has dropped “son of man” in four

other Old Testament verses, also.

The issue clearly seems to be the fear of offending

people in today’s modern culture with gender-specific words

like “he, him, son, father and brother.” You know? Words like

man. It appears the translators have attempted to help God

communicate in a less offensive way to people sensitive to

masculine language choices. (I guess scribes always want to

help improve the Bible, no matter the era.)

What Bible Then?

The thing that’s disappointing is that the NIV is such a

thoroughly readable Bible. But that’s always been the issue

with the NIV. It has always been a great reading Bible. It’s just

12

never been a great preaching Bible. Still, I like some of the

changes in the NIV11, such as translating “aliens” as

“foreigners.” I think that’s a better communication choice.

Switching back to the word “flesh” rather than interpreting it

for us as “sinful nature” was a great choice, since that’s what

the Apostle Paul wrote. (Unfortunately, I preached from

Galatians with the NIV84!) However, as Dr. William Combs

points out, “Any genuine improvements to the NIV were

completely overshadowed by the controversy involving the

TNIV’s use of gender-inclusive language.”5

The main problem I have with the NIV11 is that it is a

rehash of the Bible that Zondervan put out in 2005, Today’s

New International Version (henceforth known as the TNIV).

The explicit purpose of the TNIV was to focus on gender-

neutral language. It was a marketing disaster and a

commercial dud. Unfortunately, NIV11 retains 70% of the

TNIV translation choices6, but the cover doesn’t say that. The

cover doesn’t even say NIV 2011. It just says NIV. So,

naturally, most schlubs like myself think we’re buying the

same Bible when we buy an NIV. We just thought we were

getting a new one. (Oh, we got a new one all right!) Given that

the NIV84 is no longer available for purchase, we feel the

publishers of the NIV11 (Zondervan) give us no option but to

5 William A. Combs, The History of the NIV Translation Controversy, pg. 25-26 6 An Evaluation of Gender Language in the 2011 Edition of the NIV Bible, pg. 23.

13

look for a different translation of the Bible to use during

Sunday services.

If you feel like we’re being a little unfair to the NIV11,

please consider this quote from one of the most respected

nationally known pastors in the country, scholar and pastor

John Piper, who said, “The NIV is the best-selling modern

translation of the Bible. There are about 150 million copies in

print. The NIV makes up about 30% of all Bible sales. Among

evangelicals the percentage would be far above 30% and it is

probably the Bible most evangelicals read most often. And the

one most pastors use in preaching. Why am I not on board?

Not only am I not on board. I would be happy to see the NIV

sail into the sunset if it could be replaced by the ESV as the

standard preaching, reading, memorizing Bible of the English-

speaking church… I have longed that there be something more

readable than the NASB and more literal than the NIV. The

NIV is a paraphrase with so much unnecessary rewording and

so much interpretation that I could not preach from it.”

The question now becomes, “If we switch translations,

what other translation should we choose?” There are several

good Bible translations out there. (Well, two or three anyway.)

The New American Standard Version is a very good essentially

literal translation, but it’s worded very awkwardly. The King

James Version (though loved by many) was not translated

from the best manuscript evidence available today. (Oddly,

14

when the KJV originally came out it was criticized as being too

easy to read. Now some think it’s superior because it’s hard to

read.)7 There is the Holman Standard Christian Version, but

it’s primarily used by one denomination, though it is a

denomination we love. It is also less literal than the English

Standard Version and seems to lose some of the richness of

the original languages.

After reviewing all the options, we feel like the English

Standard Version (henceforth known as the ESV) fits the bill

of readability and accuracy, which is the goal of any good

translation of the Bible. This is the version we (the ELT) have

decided to use during Sunday services. It’s trusted by leaders

we trust, such as the aforementioned John Piper, but it is also

endorsed by Francis Chan, David Platt, Kevin DeYoung, Matt

Chandler, Mark Driscoll, Wayne Grudem, R.C. Sproul, etc. We

think it is just as readable as the NIV, but the ESV is a more

accurate Bible, coming from the philosophy of the essentially

word-for-word translations. Now, keep in mind, we’re not

saying this is the only translation of the Bible to use, but it will

be the version we preach from on Sunday mornings.

Below you can find a comparison chart between the

NIV11 and the ESV to analyze readability.

7 I forget who said this, but you’ll find this quote somewhere in the recommended material at the end.

15

Psalm 95

ESV NIV11

1Oh come, let us sing to the LORD; let us make a joyful noise to the rock of our salvation!

2 Let us come into his presence with thanksgiving; let us make a joyful noise to him with songs of praise! p

3 For the LORD is a great God, and a great King above all gods.

4 In his hand are the depths of the earth; the heights of the mountains are his also.

1 Come, let us sing for joy to the LORD; let us shout aloud to the Rock of our salvation.

2 Let us come before him with thanksgiving and extol him with music and song.

3 For the LORD is the great God, the great King above all gods.

4 In his hand are the depths of the earth, and the mountain peaks belong to him.

As you can see, the ESV is a very readable translation.

It is an essentially word-for-word translation that doesn’t

interpret the Bible before we get a chance to wrestle and pray

over the passages. Pastor Kevin DeYoung lists seven good

16

reasons for using the ESV in his little booklet, Why Our

Church Switched to the ESV:

1. The ESV employs an “essentially literal”

translation philosophy.

2. The ESV doesn’t interpret the text for us.

3. The ESV doesn’t add unnecessary words to

the text.

4. The ESV doesn’t avoid theological terms in

the text, such as “propitiation.”

5. The ESV translates words more consistently.

6. The ESV retains more of the literary qualities

of the Bible.

7. The ESV requires much less “correcting” in

preaching.

These are just some of the reasons we have decided to

employ the English Standard Version of the Bible at Canyon

Lake Community Church. To help you with this adjustment,

we have provided paperback versions of the ESV as pew

Bibles. This way you can familiarize yourself with it. When you

feel comfortable, we’d encourage you to go out and purchase a

new ESV (English Standard Version) Bible because this is the

version we will be reading from the pulpit.

Thank you, brothers and sisters (author’s original

intent).

17

For further reading, consider these original sources:

http://www.goodshepherds.net/home/180005716/18

0005716/180084989/NIV%202011%20Bergemann%20.pdf

http://www.waynegrudem.com/an-evaluation-of-

gender-language-in-the-2011-edition-of-the-niv-bible/

http://www.dbts.edu/journals/2012/NIVCombs.pdf

http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-

library/articles/good-english-with-minimal-translation-why-

bethlehem-uses-the-esv

http://static.crossway.org/excerpt/why-our-church-

switched-to-the-esv/why-our-church-switched-to-the-esv.pdf