The following gender-neutral language guidelines were adopted by the NIV Committee on Bible Translation in 1992, ⁽¹⁾ in preparation for the Inclusive Language Edition of the NIV published in Great Britain in 1996. They were made public by D.A. Carson, The Inclusive Language Debate: A Plea for Realism (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), pp. 41-44.

NOTE: The Today's New International Version published in 2002 goes well beyond these 1992 guidelines.

CBT Policy on Gender-Inclusive Language

• I. Basic Principles
  • A. Biblical translations must be faithful to the original language texts out of fidelity to the Word of God.
  • B. Biblical translation is for the purpose of making the Word of God available to all who know the receptor language--so that they all can "take and read"--women and men alike.
  • C. Authors of Biblical books, even while writing Scripture inspired by the Holy Spirit, unconsciously reflected in many ways, the particular cultures in which they wrote. Hence in the manner in which they articulate the Word of God, they sometimes offend modern sensibilities. At such times, translators can and may use non-offending renderings so as not to hinder the message of the Spirit.
  • D. The patriarchalism (like other social patterns) of the ancient cultures in which the Biblical books were composed is pervasively reflected in forms of expression that appear, in the modern context, to deny the common human dignity of all hearers and readers. For these forms, alternative modes of expression can and may be used, though care must be taken not to distort the intent of the original text.
  • E. Gender-inclusive language must be made in light of exegetical and linguistic attention to individual texts in their contexts; e.g., the legal and wisdom literature. In narratives, parables, exemplary stories, metaphors and the like, the gender-specific elements are usually not to be replaced or added to in order to achieve gender balance.
  • F. While sexuality cannot be ascribed to God, God's own self-descriptions and the Biblical references to God, Satan, and angels are masculine in gender, and such references are not to be altered.
  • G. Nor can sexuality be ascribed to the Spirit of God, for whom the grammatical genders of the Hebrew and Greek terms and forms are feminine and neuter respectively. For the sake of consistency in references to God, masculine pronouns will be used in referring to the Spirit.
• II. General Guidelines
  • 1. Keep the NIV text to the greatest possible extent
  • 2. Avoid any change that will produce ambiguity or lack of clarity.
  • 3. Avoid any formulation that distorts the Biblical representation of theological truths or the created world.
  • 4. Where context clearly shows that reference is to males, retain masculine references. Similarly, where context clearly shows that reference is to females, retain female references.
  • 5. Where the original cultural context shows a distinctively male activity (bowman, workman, oarsman), characteristic, or relationship, male references may be retained, but if suitable alternatives are available (such as archer, worker, rower), these are usually to be preferred.
  • 6. Avoid repetitive masculine gender references where alternative expressions are available and appropriate.
  • 7. In legal texts careful distinction should be made between laws that are male specific and those that are not. In those that are not, inclusive language should be used.
  • 8. To avoid gender-specific language in general statements, a third-person sentence may be changed to second person where this adequately conveys the meaning, and a singular sentence may be recast in a plural form provided this does not obscure a significant individual reference. On the other hand, inclusive singular subjects (such as "everyone" and "whoever") may not be followed by plural pronouns (such as "they" and "their"). Any proposal that is an exception to this latter rule must be placed in the margin along with the reason.
  • 9. Do not employ artificial solutions in the pronominal structure, such as ho, hish, or the Scandinavian han. "He or she," e.g., is cumbersome and should usually be avoided.
  • 10. In the use of inclusive language, avoid repetition that mars good style, such as frequent use of "someone," "person," "humans," "human beings," "humankind."
  • 11. In general, avoid gender-specific nouns and adjectives where acceptable alternatives are available. (Such terms as "prophetess" and the adjective "fellow-" need to be weighed carefully.)
  • 12. Expressions employed in common parlance in society today, even though they may seem to denote male dominance (such as "men and women," "boys and girls"), are not to be avoided.
  • 13. The convention in ancient wisdom literature of addressing young men on the threshold of adult responsibilities and the fact that certain passages in Proverbs deal with distinctively male circumstances are not to be obscured. At the same time, any individual proverbs that may have pertained to women also can be rendered inclusively.
  • 14. Preserve the similarity of parallel passages and quotations, and safeguard canonical unity.
  • 15. Feminine gender references to cities and states/nations are to be retained.
  • 16. Consistency within books, corpora, genres, and conventional idioms is to be maintained.
  • 17. When change to inclusive language requires the recasting of whole phrases or clauses, care is to be taken to retain as much continuity with the present text of the NIV as good style will allow.
  • 18. The language of the sectional headings must also be examined and revised where appropriate.
  • 19. Where gender-inclusive language is contextually inappropriate, an explanatory footnote may be called for.
  • 20. Where male-specific references or masculine-gender grammatical forms in the original texts are probably due to context, custom, culture, or the like, leave unchanged unless:
    • (a) the passage is universally applicable (Luke 16:13; 17:31-33);
    • (b) the extended passage loses specificity (Luke 14:31-35);
    • (c) modern circumstances are universal (Matt. 10:24--perhaps with a footnote).

1. It is interesting to observe that in November of the same year (1992) a position statement adopted by the Association of American University Presses contains this resolution: "Books that are on the cutting edge of scholarship should also be at the forefront in recognizing how language encodes prejudice. They should be agents for change and the redress of past mistakes." This mandate is cited in Guidelines for Bias-Free Writing, by Marilyn Schwartz and the Task Force on Bias-Free Language of the Association of American University Presses (Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University, 1995), p. 18.