I’m posting documentation to show that translation problems exist–this is not my idea or opinion. This is not me attacking the Bible, or some guy in his basement making up conspiracy theories. Highly credentialed scholars determined this fact. No one is saying the Bible is not inerrant. We’re saying it is inerrant in the original languages, and translations have problems. Errant humans perform translations. These problems don’t affect essential doctrines such as the diety of Christ or how people are saved. They do affect interpretation of issues such as prohibitions on women.

Dr. Mark Strauss authored the document linked below. He serves as Vice Chair of the Committee on Bible Translation (CBT) for the New International Version (NIV). Bible versions have a translation committee which assigns around a hundred scholars to various passages. Then their work goes back to the smaller committee of around 15 people. Strauss has an esteemed position, serving on this committee for 20 years with vast experience in translation and hermeneutics. He has written at least four books related to translation and has done consulting work for other versions besides the NIV.

The Problem

This document, Why the English Standard Version (ESV) Should Not Become the Standard English Version, is 32 pages long. It listis hundreds of problems with the ESV, which he says are “a small sampling that I have come across rather incidentally
during work on other projects.” In others words, he did not comb through the ESV looking for problems.

The special focus related to my website is within his category, Inconsistent Gender-Language, starting on page 21. I would, however, encourage you to read the introduction and conclusion (page 32) before skipping to page 21, to get an overview of the problematic “literal” translation* policy used by the ESV.

https://lydiakaiser.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Why-the-ESV-Should-Not-Become-the-SEV.pdf

Why It Matters

Now, while Dr. Strauss points out that, for example, that translators mistranslate the Greek word anthrōpos (from which we get “anthropology”) into “man” instead of “people” or “humans,” he doesn’t further connect the dots for you. It would be beyond the scope of his paper to explain in each place why the (mis)translation is important to how people interpret that passage. But it does affect their views regarding gender in the Bible. I do that for you in my book, although it’s not exhaustive. This post is merely to demonstrate there are legitimate problems with translations. Again, no one is saying the Bible is not inerrant. We’re saying it is inerrant in the original languages, but translations have problems. Errant humans perform translations.

*I would also like to recommend Strauss’ article, “The Literal Meaning Fallacy” which can be downloaded on his site: Articles