Sign of the End Times: Singular They in the ESV

Peter Kirk over at Better Bibles Blog can't stop jumping up and down in excitement. He's even using double quotation marks. Seems that quite by accident, he's discovered a bona fide occurrence of a singular they in the ESV:

“Whoever keeps his commandments abides in him, and he in them.” (1John 3:24, ESV).

The change in person from the Greek is undeniable: καὶ ὁ τηρῶν τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ μένει καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν αὐτῷ. The last word in the Greek, αὐτῷ, is a 3rd person singular which is literally him. But in the ESV, αὐτῷ is translated as them, a 3rd person plural (which is technically a gender neutral/inclusive change to boot!). Consider the very literal rendering of the NASB: "The one who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him." This may be the one instance where I approve of capitalizing pronouns for deity, because without them the verse would be very confusing if translated literally.

For the ESV to contain a singular use of they is highly ironic because some of the minds behind the ESV--particularly Grudem, Poythress, and Ryken--have been very critical of the TNIV's use of the singular they in verses such as Rev 3:20, and elsewhere (including 1 John 3:24). In fact, at www.genderneutralbibles.com, the changing of pronouns is labeled as an inaccurate translation practice:

This verse also illustrates another serious result of systematically changing singulars to plurals in thousands of cases: The TNIV will ultimately lead to a loss of confidence in tens of thousands of plural pronouns in the Bible. Preachers and Bible teachers cannot rightly use the TNIV to make a point based on the plurals “they/them/their/ those” or the second person pronouns “you/your/yours” because they can no longer have confidence that those represent accurately the meaning of the original. Maybe the original was plural ("their") but then again maybe "their" is a gender-neutral substitute for a singular ("his"). Maybe the original was 2nd person ("you") but then again maybe “you” is a gender-neutral substitute for a 3rd person singular pronoun ("he") or a singular noun ("a man"). How can ordinary English readers know? They can’t. So no weight can be put on those pronouns. “He” in the NIV has become “we” or “you” or “they” in the TNIV thousands of times.


Such criticism is surprising not only because of 1 John 3:24 in the ESV, but also the recent demonstration that the ESV translators changed pronoun person AND number in verses such as in Hosea 2:6 and Hosea 2:14 merely for the sake of clarity (the same thing for which they criticize the TNIV translators for doing).

A few weeks back, I suggested in another blog entry that a sign of acceptance for any change in grammar is its use in respectable literature. I used the TNIV as evidence that the singular they was becoming acceptable (again) from a grammatical standpoint. So, surely when such changes in grammar are also used by the very people who deplore the change (the ESV translators), it must be even greater proof that the change is not only becoming acceptable, but inevitable. Or maybe it's just a sign of the end times Happy

What's the real story here? The use of them for αὐτῷ in the ESV rendering of 1 John 3:24 comes from the legacy of the RSV which reads, "All who keep his commandments abide in him, and he in them." As standard practice the RSV (rightly) did not capitalize pronouns referring to deity. So to keep from confusing the reader, the RSV translators changed the singular ὁ τηρῶν ("the one keeping" or "the one who keeps") to a plural ("all"). In changing the antecedent subject to a plural, it was necessary to change the corresponding pronoun to a plural as well ("them").

What's interesting is that the ESV translators, in revising the RSV, changed the subject in 1 John 3:24 back to a singular, but failed to do change back the corresponding pronoun to match its antecedent. Why? Well, my hunch is that in keeping with the reality that the use of singular they has never left informal modes of communication and therefore sounds perfectly natural to most hearers, I believe the ESV translators simply overlooked it. And this is case in point for what I've said previously: the ESV feels very much like a translation that was rushed. I will be very interested to see if the upcoming revision to the ESV doesn't fix this verse, and if I were a betting man (I'm not), I would guess that 1 John 3:24 is altered in the revised ESV.

Look, I've got quite a few friends who use the ESV as their primary Bible. Fine. I use the ESV in parallel with other translations, but not as a primary Bible. In spite of that, I would by and large recommend the ESV over many of the translations of a generation ago. I strongly believe in using modern translations of the Bible for a variety of reasons. But having said all that, I must state that I really don't like the Bible wars because they just seem to get too nasty and they detract us from our mission to reach a lost and dying world with the hope-filled message of the Good News of Jesus Christ.

Therefore, in light of the ESV's use of a singular they, AND in light of the ESV's alteration of person and number in the pronouns of Hosea 2 (and possibly elsewhere), I propose a truce in the Bible wars. If God speaks to you through the ESV, then praise the Lord for it. But if God speaks to me through the TNIV; and to my wife through the NLT; and to even another through the NRSV, NASB, NIV, CEV, GNB, or whatever--let's just all thank God that he not only communicated his will and his saving acts in history through a written record that we call the Bible, but also that we have a variety of translations in our own language in which to read it. And let us no longer think ill toward or look down upon those who read a different translation than we do ourselves. There are more pressing issues at hand...