Male Markings and Bible Translation
Attached is a June 11 email sent
to a small number of recipients. It is now free to be cited and reproduced
elsewhere if quoted in its entirety, including this preface.
Two important pieces have since
been published:
Finally, new articles continue to be posted on
many websites, but see especially http://no-tniv.com
(against the TNIV), http://bible-translation.110mb.com/tnivlinks.htm
(neutral), and http://tniv.info (positive).
© 2002, Scott Munger
From: Scott
Munger
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 3:30 PM
Subject: “Male markings”
Dear Peter,
Thank you for this. I agree with you that the misguided belief in “male
markings inspired by God” (Tim Bayly; http://keptthefaith.org/doc_response1_bot.htm)
is at the heart of the issue, and is a losing argument. The trouble is, many
people don’t know the facts; others find it hard to come to grips with them.
A little over two years ago Wayne Grudem asked me to review a draft of
his and Poythress’ book, “The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy.” Two years ago
yesterday Wayne, Vern Poythress, Steve Johnson (IBS) and I met in Chicago for
several hours to discuss it. At that time I pointed out many things which, in
my opinion, Wayne and Vern had not adequately addressed. One of those, related
to your comments below, was the fact that if so-called “gender” markings in the
Hebrew and Greek languages were inspired by God, then by logical extension the
Holy Spirit was somehow female in the time of the OT (ruah) and became neuter
(pneuma) sometime between the OT and NT. Similarly, words for child in Greek
are neuter (paidion, teknon; used even of Jesus himself in Mt. 2:13 and Lk.
2:48). By logical extension, Jesus must have been sexless until he grew up.
Continuing this line of reasoning a bit further in Hebrew (we could go on and
on): 1) a group of fathers must be female, since the singular ab (father) is a
so-called “masculine” word, but one which, strangely, when pluralized takes the
feminine plural suffix -ot; 2) when women get together they become masculine,
since the “feminine” word for woman (isha) takes the masculine suffix -im when
pluralized; 3) when soul (nefesh, a feminine noun) refers to males in the OT,
they are somehow female (examples on father, woman and soul from Ron
Youngblood). I then told Grudem and Poythress that many, if not most of the
languages in the world, have no gender markings whatsoever. Scholarly integrity
should make all these things very clear to the public. Furthermore, I suggested
that under their system of thinking, maybe languages unmarked for gender are
closer to the ultimate heavenly reality, for in heaven we will “neither marry
nor be given in marriage; [we] will be like angels in heaven.” Grudem responded
by saying he believes “we will retain our sex in heaven” (Poythress and Johnson
are witnesses to that fact; Jn. 8:17). I closed by responding to Wayne that he
can believe what he wants, but that he has no right to trouble God’s Church
with personal convictions not substantiated by Scripture. I added that, for
these and many other reasons, their book was damaging to the Church and should
not be published.
Since then, many more things have been said by others, in all forms of
media, which could be shown to be highly confused and (unintentionally)
misleading (e.g., about aner [see my 1-29-02 CNN debate with Grudem; www.fdch.com, and compare http://www.rockypeak.org/files/tniv.pdf];
about plurals in Rev. 3:20 [see my 5-21 letter in CT, also on the web at http://biblepacesetter.org/bibletranslation/files/bible_ire.doc];
about Jn. 6:33 [see http://www.worldmag.com/world/issue/02-16-02/opening_1.asp,
and cf. the NASB rendering, though more needs to be said about this]).
Thankfully, some have presented the other side, like Mark Strauss (e.g., in
debate, see http://www.faithandvalues.com/channels/bibledebate.asp),
David Miller (Rocky Peak, above) and others. But in general, we simply don’t
have the ink and airtime that others do, and I wander from your point...
This email is not for public display or citation, but you are free to
use in any publication you wish the linguistic examples above. The signatories
to the statement on http://www.no-tniv and
those they have influenced need to have the opportunity to hear these facts. I
can’t help but wonder if knowledge of such things might cause some of them to
rethink their position. The most vocal opponents to gender-accurate translation
are certainly not making these things well known. (As for the signatories and
their statement, see yesterday’s posting by John H. Armstrong, “Some thoughts
on signing public statements” at http://www.reformationrevival.com/WeeklyE-News/WENMain.html).
Christianity Today has said that it is devoting part of its October
issue to this whole topic (http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2002/121/52.0.html;
“Inside CT: Getting the TNIV debate straight”). I do hope they will include the
statements of someone who mentions these important linguistic details. The
public needs to know them.
I believe it to be true when I say I hold no ill will against Wayne G,
Vern, or any of the TNIV opponents. I wish them God’s best. Furthermore, I
believe they are sincere. But I also believe they have not adequately dealt
with the facts. I don’t attack them or their character, but for the sake of the
church the issues deserve frank discussion. This is an attempt to follow the
Biblical principles outlined in Matthew 18:15-17. I may take flack for this
email, but to remain silent is to sacrifice integrity. As an international
Bible translator who has worked around the world with many languages, my
primary concern is not the TNIV, but the Church, and its understanding and
application of God’s Holy Word. My home is within a few miles of the currently
raging, devastating Colorado wildfire. I see billowing clouds of smoke outside
my window. It is conceivable that my home could be lost. The fire surrounding
Bible translation seems much more damaging.
I appreciate you as a brother. May the Lord bless your translation efforts in (…).
A sinner saved by grace,
Scott
PS: I have heard that a press
release citing support from the Forum of Bible Agencies for the TNIV has been
sent out this morning. I encourage you and/or (…) to post that on the b-t
website (http://biblepacesetter.org/bibletranslation/files/list.htm)
as soon as it is made public. As you probably know, FBA members have translated
and published Bibles in about 2000 languages.
Scott Munger
MA (Linguistics)
PhD (Bible Translation)
Member (on service leave):
Wycliffe Bible Translators
Vice President, Translations,
International Bible Society