I have had a hard time getting this post to be sent as a Newsletter, so I apologize if you have received this already. In 1997 two groups formed: one that believed gender-inclusive translations were on a slippery slope of mismanaging God’s revelation in Scripture, and one that believed gender-inclusive translations were accurate. This was an inner-evangelical debate. The NRSV had already paved the way. This debate is discussed by Beth Allison Barr in her
When I learned recently how the ESV came about and seen the evidence laid out by a scholar regarding the complementarian bent, I felt betrayed. I had grown to love the ESV, read from it, studied it, and shared it as often as I could. I had trusted these guys to give me a biased free translation, especially since others, like the NIV, were biased, at least that's what they were saying.
I know translations are difficult, and you cannot translate without some interpretation and even bias. However, the blatant intentional renderings done by the ESV translators are troubling.
When I learned recently how the ESV came about and seen the evidence laid out by a scholar regarding the complementarian bent, I felt betrayed. I had grown to love the ESV, read from it, studied it, and shared it as often as I could. I had trusted these guys to give me a biased free translation, especially since others, like the NIV, were biased, at least that's what they were saying.
I know translations are difficult, and you cannot translate without some interpretation and even bias. However, the blatant intentional renderings done by the ESV translators are troubling.