My Pronouns And The Accuracy Of Bible Interpretation

I identify as a trans woman. The logic of this particular point in history, when pronouns are at the center of a large conversation, is that I should request, or insist, that other people refer to me using traditionally female pronouns — she/her — as a sign of respect for my identity. I do not do this. When I am asked to supply my pronouns, I respond “any/all”, because I do not care.

I view pronouns as linguistic conveniences, as Schoolhouse Rock made so wonderfully clear — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koZFca8AkT0. They make it easier to talk, in some ways, but they do not in any way reflect the complexity of any human’s identity, so the choice between the somewhat arbitrary syllables “she” and “he” doesn’t matter to me. If I lived somewhere else, the choice of pronouns available to me might be “er” and “sie”, “el” and “la”, or “他” and “她”. (I want to be clear that I always try to use the pronouns that other people tell me are correct for them. This is a simple gesture of respect and courtesy. I might mess up occasionally, but I do try.)

Language is a fine thing, which certainly makes communication easier, but it is always limited, and frequently not quite correct. Whenever we use language, we accept some, possibly very small, amount of vagary. It is always possible that whoever we are trying to communicate with will misunderstand what we are trying to express. People who care more about their pronouns than I do are attempting to achieve greater clarity in their communications than I am, but they are accepting less clarity in a different place. The statement “women are more likely to get breast cancer than men” is true, but it assumes that “women” are people born with XX chromosomes and that “men” are people who are born with XY chromosomes, and that “XX” and “XY” stand for certain chromosomes which are related to whether or not the individual is one who produces ova or spermatozoa, which does not encompass all human beings. As it is currently understood by many people, some “men” are more likely to get breast cancer than some “women”. As of this writing, there is a lot of debate about most of what is in this paragraph. To my knowledge, no one has put forth a convenient way to talk about individuals who identify as “men” but who were born with XX chromosomes, or “women” who were born with XY chromosomes — of which group I am one — without resorting to the kind of roundabout language I’ve used here. In other words, there aren’t yet pronouns that convey accurately, and without giving offense, the specific information that one might wish to convey. This will all work itself out in time. Until then, I find it easier to ignore the whole question of which pronouns are right for me. Most people will refer to me using traditional masculine pronouns, in whatever language. That’s fine.

As I indicated with the title, I’m heading toward the Bible, which was written over the course of approximately twenty centuries, the most recent of which was nineteen centuries ago, in languages which no one speaks as they were spoken during the time the Bible was being written. Anyone who has attempted to learn a second language is aware that languages do not differ only in which sounds represent which things — “gato”, “Katze” and “cat”, for example — but also the order in which the parts of sentences go. I am learning German, and I frequently find myself in the position of knowing what words I should use, but not the order in which they should go, even though German and English are pretty closely related. If you look at languages with greater separation, you start to run into entirely different ways of using sounds — or symbols — to represent things or concepts. I’ve heard that Japanese uses different tones to give different meanings to the same basic sounds, and while that might not be accurate, I wouldn’t be surprised if it was. People have done all kinds of things with languages, including clicking and whistling, so using different tones isn’t out of the question. Those tones are on a different scale, by the way.

So we open the Bible and we try to make any sense whatsoever of words that have been translated from languages that no one speaks anymore — except specialists in those languages — which use different words, syntax and punctuation, which have connotations that we are not privy to, and which might refer to cultural practices and assumptions that we know little or nothing about. In 1 Corinthians 15:29, Paul refers to people who “receive baptism on behalf of the dead”, a practice which Pauls accepts, but which isn’t mentioned anywhere else in the Bible, and which certainly did not endure as a practice. The closest one can get to it would be the medieval practice of purchasing indulgences on behalf of the dead, which the Church outlawed in 1567, twenty-nine years after the death of Martin Luther, who made a big stink about it, among other things. We can guess what Paul was talking about, but we don’t know for sure, and 1 Corinthians is one of the books in the Bible that is closest to our own time, so you would think it would be easier. It isn’t — Paul wrote in Koine Greek, which hasn’t been commonly spoken since about 300CE. Koine Greek, when written, doesn’t have any way of indicating that one is quoting someone, which has caused no little debate among Bible scholars regarding Paul’s epistles to the early house churches. Different translations of the Bible will have Pauls saying different things, depending on how the translators decided to insert the quote marks.

I am a big advocate of reading the Bible. I prefer the NRSV, but I don’t pretend that it is the best or most accurate version. I just think that it is necessary for modern readers to always remember that the words printed on the pages of whatever Bible they open are the result of choices made by translators who were probably doing their best, but who were forced to make choices, any of which might have — if not “must have” — compromised the original message of the original writers who were themselves doing their best to describe events that were entirely outside of the normal human experience, and to convey concepts which were radical in their own time. Even scholars who have learned the original languages disagree about the meanings of words and phrases in the Bible. Lay readers have little chance of understanding what the Bible is conveying without help.

Fortunately, God has supplied us with help. Obviously, I mean the Holy Spirit, but I also mean each other. Scholars have done a lot of work — https://bibleproject.com/ is a resource I use regularly — and lay readers are not entirely useless. Christians could benefit quite a lot from the Jewish tradition of discussing and debating, respectfully and with love, the scriptures. I think it also helps to pull back from specific words and phrases to look at the big picture — the Bible does have themes that run through it from beginning to end. Any passage of the Bible should be considered in light of the major themes. To use a common example, Paul said, “I do not permit a woman[a] to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent”, 1 Timothy 2:12, which has been taken by some to mean that women should not serve as pastors, despite the fact that Paul also mentioned, and praised, numerous women who were the leaders of house churches. Paul also said “There is no longer Jew or Greek; there is no longer slave or free; there is no longer male and female, for all of you are one in Christ Jesus”, Galatians 3:28, which would seem to indicate that he wasn’t making a distinction between men and women. Following that, one might argue that all Christians should use gender neutral, “they/them”, pronouns. I’d be fine with that.

My approach to reading the Bible will seem somewhat loosey-goosey to some, perhaps straight up heretical. I’m okay with that. I believe that the Holy Spirit is more than able to guide anyone, including myself, and that God’s grace is sufficient to cover anyone’s honest mistakes, including my own.