Male-centered translations of the Bible?

I’ll admit, I’m a part of one of those “evil” denominations that still prefers these “male-centered” translations of the Bible for liturgical use–specifically, the KJV. However, most of the people at our church are elder people. We have elder women and men at our church. And the elder women seem to be a bit more mature than a post by John Zens and Kat Huff that Scot McKnight has reblogged. The post basically attacks these translations that prefer a more masculine translation of the Bible as opposed to a more “gender inclusive” translation. It’s not that I have anything against the “gender inclusive” Bibles but when referring to linguistics and speaking in plural or general senses, a more “masculine” translation is generally the grammatically correct one. For instance, in Spanish, when referring to one’s friends, you say “mis amigos”, not “mis amigos y mi amiga” or “mis amigos y mis amigas” or “mi amigo y mis amigas”. The reason for this lumping and this generalization has nothing to do with being “male-centered” though. The reason for this lumping is for efficiency. I see no reason to be so worked up against these seemingly “male-centered” translations for the same reason I don’t see why there are hyper masculinists claiming to be Christian who are worked up about the gender inclusive translations. I don’t take a position either way. I tend to refer to things when I generalize in a more masculine sense and prefer “mankind”, “he”, “men”, etc. I just don’t feel a need to appeal to feminists when I am writing something by stating unnecessary words in my grammar. When I say “men” I am not saying that the people I refer to cannot also be women. I say “men” because it is a generalized category that represents all people. Hence why very few people are worked about these translations one way or another and I think that becoming worked up over such translations is actually a disservice to the Church.

Another significant remark that I should add is that the concept of the image of God is significantly distorted in this radical egalitarian mentality. The problem is saying that Christ’s own image includes male and female as if both share the image of God completely. This is partially true that Christ’s own image consists of both male and female (Gal. 3:28 and other passages concerning the body of Christ). However, to state both male and female share this image completely on their own does significant damage to the body of Christ and actually leads to a broken image of God where relationships are under-valued. He did not create one or the other in his (God the Trinity, not just Christ’s) image, he created them in his image. There are deep ontological differences.

So thank you John Zens, Kat Huff, and Scot McKnight (by his reposting of this worked up article), for continuing to spread hostilities within the Church.

About Emperor Thomas I

Catholic monarch of the New Roman Coalition. Consecrated to the Apostle Thomas, the Holy Martyr Sigismund, and the Holy Martyr Olaf II.
This entry was posted in Bible. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Male-centered translations of the Bible?

  1. i see some comments on scot mcknight’s re-blog stating that people who use these translations are all in the same boat of subordinating women…i formerly attended a church that used the gender-inclusive bibles and constantly emphasized that the gender-inclusiveness was what was meant by the greek terminology and how this “man/mankind/brothers” terminology should be understood in gender-inclusiveness. they even favored gender-inclusive bibles like the nlt. they were on the complementarian side of the gender debate spectrum. honestly, if people could correct their ignorance, we would all shake hands with one another.

  2. ANONYMOUS 4 says:


    I’m a 36 YEAR OLD ( BORN IN THE U.S.A ) FEMALE and “MALE CENTERED ” TRANSLATIONS OF THE HOLY BIBLE is ALL I AM USED TO, any other kind of Bible translations/versions are WEIRD to me, I really consider that to be MESSING/TEMPERING WITH THE HOLY BIBLE all of those NEWER Bible versions/translations and ” GENDER INCLUSIVE ” and FEMINIST AGENDA versions/translations of THE HOLY BIBLE. I am FEMALE and THE CLASSIC “MALE CENTERED/ORIENTED” HOLY BIBLE VERSIONS/TRANSLATIONS really honestly DO NOT BOTHER ME AT ALL , I DO NOT make AN ISSUE out of them, they are THE ONLY Holy Bible versions/translations I have ever known.

    And I ALWAYS KNEW ( ALWAYS JUST KNEW, nobody ever had to tell me that ) that in MANY places in the Bible where it says MEN that BOTH SEXES are AUTOMATICALLY INCLUDED in the word MEN. ( Like in ” PEACE TO MEN OF GOODWILL” . ) The word MANKIND also INCLUDES BOTH SEXES in it .

    JESUS CHRIST IS A MAN people ! ( A JEWISH MAN from His biological mother’s side ) So if I ever get to SEE JESUS CHRIST I really expect HIM to have A JEWISH / SEMITIC PHYSICAL APPEARANCE ( MAYBE mixed with something NOT OF THIS WORLD/ DIVINE /HEAVENLY/HOLY ). ( I really honestly DO NOT expect to EVER SEE a ” WHITE” or “BLACK” JESUS CHRIST like SO MANY other people out there do ! What are they all going to do if they ever get to SEE THE REAL GENUINE JESUS CHRIST ?! Do these people even READ & COMPREHEND what THE HOLY BIBLE says about HIM ?! )

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s