The 1946 Mistranslation of the Bible
Introduction
In 1946, a significant change was made in the Revised Standard Version (RSV) of the Bible—a change that would shape Christian teachings on LGBTQ+ people for decades. For the first time, the word “homosexual” appeared in the scripture, a decision made by a group of scholars that would deeply influence theological views and societal attitudes. In our latest podcast episode, we explore the impact of this translation, the concept of “Christian PTSD,” and how the combination of these factors has affected countless lives.
The 1946 Mistranslation: A Turning Point in Biblical Interpretation
The 1946 RSV Bible introduced the term “homosexual” into the scriptures for the first time. This change occurred during the translation of two Greek words—malakoi and arsenokoitai—which historically referred to behaviors related to indulgence and exploitation, rather than a fixed sexual orientation. These terms were used to describe acts that involved exploitation or abusive power dynamics, but not necessarily consensual same-sex relationships.
However, in 1946, the translation committee chose to interpret these terms as “homosexual,” fundamentally altering how Christian communities understood these passages. This shift had profound implications, turning action-based descriptions into an identity, one that many religious communities condemned. It’s crucial to understand that the cultural context of the 1940s was very different from today. Concepts of sexuality were not widely discussed or understood as they are now, and this translation choice reflected the limited perspective of that era.
1959 Letter that Foretold Its Impact
On October 22, 1959, a significant event in the history of Bible translations and LGBTQ+ advocacy took place. David Sheldon Fearon, a 21-year-old seminary student at McGill University’s School of Religious Studies in Montreal, Quebec, wrote a five-page letter to Dr. Luther A. Weigle, the head of the translation team for the newly published Revised Standard Version (RSV) Bible. In this letter, Fearon questioned the translation choice in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, expressing concerns about how it could be misused.
Fearon’s letter read, in part:
“Since this is a Holy Book of Scripture sacred to the Christian, I am more deeply concerned because well-meaning and sincere, but misinformed and misguided people (those among the clergy not excluded) may use this Revised Standard Version translation of I Corinthians 6: 9-10 as a sacred weapon, not in fact for the purification of the Church, but in fact for injustice against a defenseless minority group which includes the sincere, convicted, spiritually re-born Christian who has discovered himself to be of homosexual inclination from the time of his memory. I write this letter with certain homosexual individuals in mind—Christians who would die for their faith, their Church, and their Lord, but who cannot alter their biological state of being.”
Fearon recognized that the translation of the word “homosexual” was an error, and he feared the potential for it to be weaponized against LGBTQ+ individuals within the church. His letter provided five pages of detailed evidence supporting his concerns, urging for a revision of the text.
Dr. Weigle responded on November 3, 1959, suggesting the alternative phrasing, “those who practice homosexual vices.” Despite their exchange and Dr. Weigle’s acknowledgment of the issue, the revisions were slow to come. It wasn’t until a later meeting that the translation in the 1971 RSV-r changed the term to “sexual perverts.” This was further adjusted in the 1989 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), which used “male prostitutes & sodomites”, and eventually, in 2022, the term “sodomites” was replaced with “men who engage in illicit sex” to better reflect the original context.
The Impact of The Living Bible
While changes were being made to the RSV, The Living Bible—published in 1971—was quickly gaining popularity, with over 40 million copies sold by the mid-1980s. Its widespread influence was due in part to endorsements from influential figures like Billy Graham, who appreciated its readability. Unlike the RSV, The Living Bible was a paraphrase, not a direct translation from ancient manuscripts.
Kenneth N. Taylor, the creator of The Living Bible, was a layperson rather than a biblical scholar. His goal was to make the Bible more accessible, but his paraphrasing choices also introduced modern terms like“homosexual” into the text. The term appears four times in this version, notably in passages traditionally used to discuss sexual ethics in Christian contexts:
1. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
2. 1 Timothy 1:10
3. Romans 1:26-27 (paraphrased to include the term)
4. Leviticus 18:22 (paraphrased for clarity)
Taylor’s inclusion of “homosexual” in these passages reflects the cultural context of the 1970s rather than the meanings intended in the original Hebrew and Greek texts. This shift had lasting implications, shaping the beliefs and teachings of many Christian communities and contributing to a climate of exclusion and judgment against LGBTQ+ individuals.
Why the Mistranslation Matters: Questioning with Compassion
For many people of faith, the Bible is not just a book; it’s a sacred guide to life. The idea of questioning its words can feel unsettling, even wrong. But it’s important to recognize that translations are the work of humans, and humans are fallible. The introduction of the term “homosexual” in 1946 wasn’t an act of divine revelation—it was a choice made by scholars, influenced by the cultural norms of their time.
Herman’s personal quote and point of view: “When it comes to Christian faith, I find the unwavering reliance on the Bible perplexing. For me, faith should take precedence over the written word, especially since scriptures are penned by human hands and thus subject to human limitations. If the written word were meant to be the ultimate authority, there would be little need for the dynamic, personal nature of faith. Faith should guide our understanding, allowing us to question and explore translations, always seeking deeper meanings. This, I believe, should be central to Christian practice—using faith to discern truth and remain open to how divine messages might resonate differently across time and culture.”
Revisiting these translation decisions is not about undermining the word of God; it’s about seeking a fuller understanding of what the scriptures were meant to convey. By acknowledging this error, we may recognize that some of the judgments passed on LGBTQ+ individuals are based on a flawed understanding, not on divine decree. This understanding can open the door to a more inclusive and compassionate interpretation of faith.
Christian PTSD: The Trauma of Religious Rejection
For many LGBTQ+ individuals, the rejection they face from religious communities can lead to what is sometimes called “Christian PTSD.” This term describes the emotional and psychological trauma that comes from being taught that one’s identity is inherently sinful. It’s a deeply personal form of trauma that can manifest as anxiety, depression, nightmares, and even suicidal thoughts.
Imagine growing up believing that God is love, yet hearing from your church, your family, and your community that your love is an abomination. This contradiction can create a profound internal conflict, leading many to feel unworthy, not just of human love, but of divine love as well. The 1946 mistranslation plays a significant role in this, as it provided a scriptural basis for exclusion that has been used to justify harmful rhetoric and practices.
The Mental Health Impact: LGBTQ+ Youth at Risk
The mental health toll of religious rejection is especially severe for LGBTQ+ youth. According to a 2023 report from The Trevor Project, 41% of LGBTQ+ youth have seriously considered suicide in the past year, with rates rising to 53% among transgender and nonbinary youth. The rejection that many face at home—often rooted in religious beliefs—makes LGBTQ+ youth 8 times more likely to attempt suicide than those with accepting families.
This isn’t just a statistic; it’s a heartbreaking reality for too many young people who are caught between their faith and their identity. For those raised in conservative religious homes, the message is often clear: they must choose between their true selves and their spiritual community. This choice can leave them feeling isolated and abandoned, both by their families and by the God they were taught to believe in.
Intimacy, Trust, and the Lasting Effects of Christian PTSD
The trauma of religious rejection doesn’t just affect how LGBTQ+ individuals view themselves; it impacts their ability to trust others, form relationships, and find intimacy. When the Bible has been used as a tool of condemnation, it’s difficult to trust religious texts, leaders, or even loved ones who hold those beliefs.
A survey by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) found that 70% of LGBTQ+ individuals who experienced rejection from religious community’s struggle with intimacy in their romantic relationships. The messages of unworthiness and sinfulness that they internalize often make it hard for them to believe they deserve love. This can create a painful cycle where the very thing they need—connection and understanding—feels impossible to reach.
Religious Hypocrisy and the Decline of Faith
The story of the 1946 mistranslation is not just about words on a page: it’s about the broader impact of religious hypocrisy. During the AIDS crisis of the 1980s, many LGBTQ+ people saw their churches turn away when they needed compassion the most. Instead of offering support, some religious leaders suggested that AIDS was a form of divine punishment.
This period left deep scars on a generation of LGBTQ+ individuals, reinforcing the idea that their suffering was deserved. It also marked a turning point for many, who began to question how a faith based on love could justify such exclusion. This disillusionment is reflected in today’s statistics: nearly 30% of U.S. adults now identify as religiously unaffiliated, according to Pew Research, and church membership has fallen below 50% for the first time in American history.
A Call for Healing: Finding a Way Forward
Despite the pain, many LGBTQ+ individuals are finding ways to heal from religious trauma. Some are rediscovering their faith through more inclusive interpretations of scripture, while others have found peace in leaving organized religion behind. Trauma-informed therapy, support groups, and affirming churches offer spaces where people can begin to reclaim their sense of worth.
Healing starts with understanding. By acknowledging the mistakes of the past, like the 1946 mistranslation, and the harm they have caused, we can work toward a more compassionate future. It’s a process of questioning not for the sake of doubt, but for the sake of deeper faith—one that aligns with the core values of love, acceptance, and empathy.
Conclusion: Moving Toward Empathy
As we reflect on the history of the 1946 RSV translation and the trauma it has caused, we must ask ourselves: What kind of faith do we want to build? How can we ensure that our interpretations of sacred texts bring people closer to love rather than pushing them away?