If you didn’t think political correctness could ever spread to the Bible itself, check out what HarperCollins (read Rupert Murdoch) and its “Christian” subsidiary, Zondervan, have wrought with this latest translation:
- The most notable distortions are evident whenever gender is employed in the original Greek or Hebrew. So, “sons of God” becomes “children of God,” “brothers” becomes “brothers and sisters.”
- Anywhere in the Bible where the expression “O” is used, the new translation omits it. Why? Because that expression has fallen out of use today. Oh.
- Mary is no longer “with child,” in the femi-nazi version of the Bible. She is “pregnant.”
If you believe, like I do, that the Bible is the inspired word of God, it is nothing short of blasphemy. The very character of God is changed.
Let me give you an example:
In Hebrews 12:7, the original NIV translation says: “Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as sons. For what son is not disciplined by his father?”
TNIV changes “son” to “child” and “father” to “parent.”
What difference does it make?
Well, if you are one of those people who believes there is no difference between boys and girls or men and women, I suppose it makes no difference to you. But for those of us who live in the real world and use all of our senses to understand reality – rather than to believe in fantasy and wishful thinking – it makes a big difference.
God reveals Himself in the original Hebrew and Greek texts of the Old Testament and New Testament as “Father,” not as “parent.” Is there a difference between the way mothers and fathers mete out discipline? You bet there is.
But, more importantly, the translation is simply inaccurate – and the publishers of this Bible know it.
I’m no Greek or Hebrew scholar, but you don’t have to be to understand the words used in this passage.
The Greek text uses the words “huios” for “son” and “pater” for “father” in this passage. These terms cannot mean “child” or “parent.” They are different words – and, for some of us, words still mean things.
Here’s another example that bugs me.
The beauty of the Bible for me is the way it demonstrates that God’s relationship with us is on an individual basis – not a collective one. The TNIV obscures that distinction in countless examples, but here’s just one: In the original NIV translation, which I would hardly recommend either, Revelation 3:20 reads: “I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.”
In the TNIV, that passage becomes: “I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with them, and they with me.”
That’s not even grammatically correct. But it sure isn’t a good translation of the Greek.
There are hundreds of such examples, perhaps thousands. They have a purpose – a political agenda. There’s a reason Mary is no longer “with child.” “With child” is a term that makes very clear the humanity of the unborn person inside Mary’s womb.
What would have happened if Mary aborted that child – or, as the publishers of the TNIV would probably say, “terminated her pregnancy”?
Would another Savior of the human race be born in another time and place?
That’s a good question – one the publishers of this politically loaded edition of the Bible should consider as they push the fashionable agenda of redefining God and man.
In many ways, this is not just a new translation. It’s a new Bible.
Take my advice: Stick with the old King James.
It may not be a perfect
translation of the original texts, but it is
faithful. And, after all,
God only calls us to be faithful, not perfect.