Saturday, May 17, 1997

Battle for the Bible enjoined again

By Michael O'Connor / Abilene Reporter-News

The Zondervan publishing company is in the process of producing a gender-neutral version of the popular New International Version. Not really earth-shattering news, but the so-called fundamentalists in the Southern Baptist Convention are pretty unhappy about it.

Paige Patterson, long a leader among the fundamentalists, apparently believes the new Bible is a sinister attempt to undermine God-mandated differences in the sexes, another incursion of radical feminism into the realm of Christianity.

Company officials say the new version does no such thing, but instead uses inclusive language where the text refers to both sexes. Masculine language for the Trinity is retained, as are references where gender-specific language is used. They point out that prominent evangelical scholars have worked on the new version, and that in some cases, the translation is closer to the original texts than more familiar English texts.

The version's critics would have us believe that the authority of the Scriptures is at stake. They haven't actually seen the new version yet, but they know they're against it because God's word is being tampered with. At issue is a doctrine known as inerrancy. The doctrine states that the Bible is without error on all subjects on which it touches in the original manuscripts. We don't have the original manuscripts, of course, but the ones we do have are very close to the originals in time; they are plentiful; and scholars believe the translations they produce are extremely accurate. So inerrantists aren't willing to yield on the point that we don't have the originals.

Inerrantists spend a good deal of time trying to resolve problems with the biblical texts. They have developed a number of answers to objections that some texts are contradictory, and most are willing to agree that hermeneutics, the process of properly interpreting Scripture, often leads believers to different understandings. Many also recognize the variety of genres contained in Scripture - so the Psalms must be interpreted differently than the epistles, for instance.

In fact, by the time inerrantists finish explaining their position, you begin to wonder whether they have more exceptions than rules.

But the issue isn't really the Bible's accuracy or authority. All translations are inherently inaccurate. Concepts expressed in one language and culture are not perfectly transferrable to another language and culture. And no matter how much we insist that Scripture is authoritative, we tend pick and choose what we care to follow.

No, the real issue here is the fundamentalist agenda, which insists that only its viewpoint is the correct one. How that differs from what they are accusing Zondervan of escapes me.

We need to reserve our opinions on the new version until we have seen it. Chances are it will have its strengths and weaknesses like any other translation does. And chances are some will be attracted to it because they will beleive they are being included. And if they can hear the voice of God speaking to them, offering them grace and transformation, then the kingdom will advance.