The Hebrew Text and a Literal Rendering

Genesis 1:26–27 in the Masoretic Text reads:

וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ …
וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ
בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ
זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בָּרָא אֹתָם

A strictly literal rendering that remains clear in English is:

“And God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness…’ And God created the man in His image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”

The key term is אָדָם (ʾādām). In verse 26 it appears without the article. In verse 27 it appears with the article in the direct object phrase אֶת־הָאָדָם (“the man”). The singular pronominal suffixes אֹתוֹ (“him”) precede the plural אֹתָם (“them”), followed by זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה (“male and female”).

The inspired text therefore moves from singular to plural deliberately. The singular “man” (ʾādām) is first presented as a collective unity, then clarified as including both male and female.

The Meaning and Range of אָדָם (ʾĀdām)

The Hebrew noun אָדָם functions in several ways in the Old Testament. It can denote the individual Adam (Genesis 4:1; 5:1), mankind collectively (Genesis 6:5; Psalm 8:4), or humanity generically in contrast to animals (Genesis 2:7; 7:21). Its semantic range does not erase its morphological form. Grammatically, it is a singular noun of common gender, but in usage it often carries collective force.

In Genesis 1:26–27, the term does not mean “male human” as distinct from female. This is proven by the inspired explanation in verse 27: “male and female He created them.” The plural pronoun אֹתָם (“them”) refers back to the singular ʾādām. Thus, ʾādām in this context is a collective singular encompassing both sexes.

Genesis 5:1–2 provides direct Scriptural support for this understanding: “In the day when God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. Male and female He created them, and He blessed them and named them Man (אָדָם) in the day when they were created.” Here Jehovah Himself names both male and female “Adam.” This divine naming demonstrates that the singular ʾādām includes both sexes as a unified humanity.

Therefore, the question is not whether ʾādām includes women. It clearly does. The question is how best to render that singular collective noun in English without obscuring its grammatical form or theological force.

Singular Collective vs. Gender-Neutral Plural

The UASV, ASV, ESV, and NASB1995 render Genesis 1:26: “Let us make man in our image.” The NASB2020 shifts to “mankind.” The LEB uses “humankind.” The NIV reads “mankind.” Several dynamic translations use “human beings,” “humans,” or “humanity.”

The Hebrew uses a singular noun. It does not say “Let Us make men” (plural), nor does it use an abstract noun equivalent to “humanity.” The singular is deliberate. The singular is then expanded in verse 27 through the plural pronoun and the explicit reference to male and female.

Rendering ʾādām as “man” preserves the singular collective structure. English historically used “man” as a generic for the human race, as in “the rights of man” or “man is mortal.” This usage corresponds closely to Hebrew ʾādām. When translators replace “man” with “human beings” or “humans,” they move from singular to plural and thereby remove the deliberate literary progression from singular unity to dual sexual distinction.

The Hebrew syntax proceeds as follows: singular noun (ʾādām), singular object pronoun (him), singular object pronoun (him), then plural object pronoun (them), clarified by “male and female.” This movement emphasizes unity first, then differentiation. It is a theological structure. Humanity is one race created in God’s image; within that unity there are two sexes.

If one translates verse 26: “Let us make human beings,” and verse 27: “God created human beings… male and female he created them,” the singular-to-plural progression disappears. The English reader no longer sees the inspired structure. The theological emphasis on unity prior to sexual distinction is weakened.

The Article in Verse 27: הָאָדָם (HāʾĀdām)

In verse 27 the text reads וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם (“And God created the man”). The definite article הַ marks specificity. The phrase does not require that “the man” be an individual male distinct from the woman; rather, it denotes the specific entity just mentioned—ʾādām.

The use of the article here strengthens the unity concept. God creates “the man,” that is, humanity as a single entity in His image. The next clauses explain how that unity manifests: “male and female He created them.”

If one translates הָאָדָם as “humanity,” the article becomes less visible in English. “God created humanity” does not convey the same specificity as “God created the man.” The Hebrew article ties verse 27 directly to verse 26’s proposal. It is the same entity.

Image and Likeness: Theological Implications

The phrases בְּצַלְמֵנוּ (“in Our image”) and כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ (“according to Our likeness”) are attached grammatically to the singular ʾādām. The image of God is vested in humanity as a unified whole, not in male alone, nor in female alone. Genesis 1:27 makes this explicit.

Genesis 9:6 further confirms this collective understanding: “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man.” Here again ʾādām refers to humanity in general. The capital offense is grounded in the imago Dei, which applies universally to all humans.

James 3:9 echoes this when it says that humans “have been made in the likeness of God.” The Greek term ἀνθρώπους (“men” or “people”) in that context corresponds conceptually to Hebrew ʾādām. The New Testament writers understand Genesis 1:26–27 as applying to all humanity.

Thus, the theological content does not require a plural translation. The singular collective communicates the doctrine fully.

Comparison of Major English Versions

The UASV, ASV, ESV, and NASB1995 maintain “man.” This preserves the singular collective. The NASB2020 alters to “mankind,” which retains singular force in English but shifts to a compound form. “Mankind” still functions as a collective singular and therefore maintains the structural progression better than plural renderings.

The LEB’s “humankind” similarly preserves singular collective force. The NIV’s “mankind” follows the same approach. These are preferable to plural renderings because they do not disrupt the grammar.

Dynamic translations such as the CEB (“humanity”), NLT (“human beings”), NIrV (“human beings”), GW (“humans”), CEV (“humans”), and The Message (“human beings”) introduce plurals or abstract collectives. The NRSV and NRSVue prefer “humans” or “humankind.” The shift to plural forms like “humans” removes the singular-to-plural progression entirely.

For example, if verse 27 reads: “So God created humans in his own image… male and female he created them,” the second plural “them” is no longer an expansion from singular but a repetition of plurality. The rhetorical force of the inspired structure is flattened.

Theological and Linguistic Implications of Gender-Neutral Rendering

The primary issue is not whether women are included. Scripture explicitly includes them. The issue is whether the translator should alter the singular form to accommodate contemporary sensitivities about generic “man.”

Biblical theology emphasizes federal headship. In Genesis 2:7 Jehovah forms the man (הָאָדָם) from the dust of the ground. The woman is later formed from the man’s side (Genesis 2:21–22). In Romans 5:12–19, Paul grounds universal sin and death in “one man” (ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου). The Greek ἀνθρώπου corresponds to Hebrew ʾādām in its representative sense.

The corporate unity of humanity in Adam underlies Paul’s doctrine of sin and redemption. If Genesis 1:26–27 is rendered in a way that obscures the singular unity of humanity, it weakens the conceptual foundation for later biblical theology. The first Adam represents all; the Last Adam, Jesus Christ, represents all who belong to Him (1 Corinthians 15:45–49).

Therefore, the singular collective in Genesis 1:26–27 is not incidental. It contributes to the canonical theology of representation and unity.

Word Order and Emphasis

Hebrew word order places וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים (“And God created”) at the beginning of verse 27, emphasizing divine action. The object אֶת־הָאָדָם follows. The repetition of בְּצַלְמוֹ and בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים intensifies the focus on the image. The structure is poetic and climactic.

The shift from singular אֹתוֹ to plural אֹתָם is carefully placed after the image statements. The image is affirmed in the singular before the plurality of sexes is mentioned. This ordering underscores that both male and female equally bear God’s image.

A plural translation from the outset dulls this literary design. It prematurely introduces plurality before the inspired text does.

Capitalization and Theological Reverence

Outside of Scripture quotations, pronouns referring to God should be capitalized in reverence, recognizing His divine Personhood. Inside Scripture quotations, the original style must be preserved. Genesis 1:26–27 does not capitalize pronouns in Hebrew; therefore, English quotations should not introduce capitalization into the biblical text itself.

This distinction preserves both reverence and textual integrity.

The Balance Between Literalness and Clarity

A translation must be as literal as clarity allows. The term “man” in modern English may be misunderstood by some readers as male-only. However, Scripture itself clarifies the inclusive meaning in verse 27 and again in Genesis 5:2. The translator’s task is not to preempt misunderstanding by altering grammatical number but to render faithfully what the text says.

“Mankind” and “humankind” preserve singular collective force and may offer clarity without sacrificing structure. “Human beings” or “humans” alter the number and thereby modify the literary and theological presentation.

The translator must weigh whether contemporary usage justifies altering the inspired singular. Fidelity to the Hebrew structure argues for maintaining the singular collective.

Scriptural Support for Collective Singular Usage

Other passages confirm the legitimacy of singular collective nouns. Psalm 8:4 states: “What is man that you remember him, and the son of man that you care for him?” The singular “man” represents humanity collectively. Hebrews 2:6–8 applies this to mankind in general and ultimately to Christ as representative Man.

Similarly, Ecclesiastes 7:29 says, “God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes.” The singular “man” is followed by plural “they,” paralleling Genesis 1:27’s movement from singular to plural.

These examples demonstrate that the singular collective is a consistent biblical pattern, not an isolated feature.

Evaluating Gender-Neutral Philosophy

Gender-neutral language becomes problematic when it alters grammatical number or introduces interpretive abstraction. Rendering ʾādām as “humanity” introduces an abstract noun not present in the Hebrew. Rendering it as “humans” introduces a plural not present in verse 26.

Translation must not be driven by sociolinguistic trends but by fidelity to the source text. The Holy Spirit inspired singular ʾādām in Genesis 1:26–27. That singular carries theological and literary significance. Altering it for modern sensibilities risks diminishing the precision of the inspired Word.

You May Also Enjoy

The Top 10 Most Accurate Literal Bible Translations Compared for 2026

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS