Currently in Books An inclusive Bible

Myron Penner

Mark L. Strauss. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1998. 240 pp.

A quick glance at the Bible shelves in your local Christian bookstore reveals the flood of Bible translations currently available. A common feature in most recent translations is an increased use of gender-inclusive language. In Distorting Scripture? The Challenge of Bible Translation & Gender Accuracy, New Testament scholar Mark Strauss evaluates whether the use of such language results in a more faithful and accurate translation.

Strauss defines a gender-inclusive version as "a translation that seeks to avoid masculine terminology when the original author was referring to members of both sexes" (p. 14). In order to more accurately communicate the biblical authors' intended meaning, inclusive terms such as "humanity" or "brothers and sisters" are used instead of "man" or "brothers".

Strauss says that the "traditional" translations (NIV, RSV, NASB) already use some degree of gender-inclusive language. Even the 1611 King James Version will often render the Hebrew for "son" as "child", or "sons" as "children". However, as sensitivity to gender-inclusive language has increased in contemporary society, numerous intentionally gender-inclusive language versions have appeared.

Strauss affirms the use of inclusive language when it conveys the intended meaning of the biblical author</#209>even when inclusive English terms may be translations of masculine Hebrew and Greek words. However, Strauss makes a key distinction between inclusive language Bible translations and "feminist" translations. Strauss rejects feminist translations which attempt to "correct" the theology of the biblical authors by removing "the [patriarchal] cultural bias" (p. 60). He criticizes feminist versions such as The New Testament and Psalms: An Inclusive Version, The Inclusive New Testament and An Inclusive Language Lectionary as an intentional misrepresentation of the biblical authors' intent.

Strauss also faults the three feminist versions listed above for their addition of feminine imagery into the Trinity. While agreeing with feminists that God is neither male nor female, Strauss maintains that the fatherhood of God the Father is more than a mere simile or metaphor explaining what God is like, and is closer to an analogy which explains fundamental aspects of God's nature. Also, while acknowledging that Greek and Hebrew terminology for the Spirit is grammatically feminine (Hebrew) or neuter (Greek), Strauss notes that there is no necessary correlation between grammatical gender and biological gender.

Strauss writes as a "complementarian", that is, someone who supports the male-headship model of marriage and church ministry. However, Strauss faults many other complementarians for their irrational rejection of gender-inclusive Bible translations. Both egalitarians (those who support gender equality and mutual submission in marriage and church ministry) and complementarians, he says, should support mainstream inclusive language versions because, in general, they more accurately communicate the meaning of the biblical text.

Strauss also offers a word of caution to ultra-conservatives who see secular feminism under every bush. He notes that the biblical authors often used biologically masculine terms to refer to both sexes because, in their culture, that terminology would have been understood inclusively. Accurate translations for our current cultural context take this into account and translate the inclusive intent of the biblical text with inclusive terminology.