Thank you for taking the time to address my post and provide a meaningful context for understanding some of the complexities of biblical translating. For clarity sake, I would not want to translate adelphoi in every case as “brothers.” Certainly there are many uses where men and women are under consideration. What I object to are the many cases where “brothers” are unequivocally meant, and “brothers and sisters” clearly conceals the patriarchy at work. ! Corinthians 14:34-35 is a most egregious example and I’m glad you agree with me.
I must take exception with your view of James 1:2. (The only exception I take in your post, BTW) Given what we think we know about early Jewish-Christian congregations, the acts of favoritism/discrimination were most likely perpetrated by men. “Have a seat here,” Stand here,” Sit at my feet,” seem to be male functions in the congregation. And the ones being dragged into court would certainly be men. Of course, not to show favoritism is a duty for both men and women, yet it’s men who are being singled out and we shouldn’t lose that for the sake of making a general statement that applies to all.
Interestingly, most pastors can recognize themselves in the example of the minister reading the Bible to his congregation who felt a need to explain that men and women were under consideration. What concerns me is that inclusive language translations will often include women where only men were under consideration, and we’re not being honest with ourselves or the Bible. The answer to patriarchal aspects in our Bible is not removing them, but providing good theology that recognizes the humanness of Scripture as well as the Divine which finally overcomes all inadequacies.
PS I ordered your “What’s in a Version” today; it’s bound to be very helpful.
PPS It would be helpful if you would submit your reply to my post on my post.