The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is a phrase which goes back to Exodus 3.6, 15. It is a familiar Old Testament way of addressing God as the God of those men who were the founders of the Jewish nation. In many languages, however, it is difficult to speak of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob since it might imply that these three men owned God. Moreover, in some languages a term for God is very close to “ancestor spirit” and therefore there is real confusion at this point since God would be nothing more than the ancestor spirit of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Accordingly, it may be important to make the relation much more specific by translating “the God whom Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob worshiped.”
The phrase the God of our ancestors has, of course, the same basic problems as the phrase the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It is quite naturally in apposition to the preceding phrase and therefore this must be made perfectly clear in some languages by some kind of marker, for example, “that is to say,” “that is,” or “he is.”
The phrase our ancestors is rendered in a number of different ways “our fathers,” “our grandfathers,” “our forefathers of many years ago,” “those who began our clan,” or “those from whom we have all come.”
God … has given divine glory (literally “God glorified”) may be taken as referring to the resurrection of Jesus that is explicitly mentioned in verse 15 (so Good News Translation); while others believe it refers to the act of healing that had just been performed on the lame man.
A translation of given divine glory to, or “glorified,” is extremely difficult to translate effectively in this kind of context, for there is not enough of the specific involvement of Jesus Christ to help the reader understand just how Jesus is “glorified.” In some languages, however, the concept of “giving glory to” can be expressed as “caused him to count for something,” “caused him to be very important,” or “caused people to look at (or remember) Jesus as being very great.” In other languages it is possible to say “God showed how really wonderful his Servant was” or “God demonstrated how great his Servant was.”
The Greek word translated Servant may either mean “child” or “servant”; the meaning here, however, is determined by the sense of the word as used in the Septuagint translation of Isaiah 52.13 and other related passages where “the servant of the Lord” was a Jewish Messianic title (see Isaiah 41.8; 42.1; 44.1, 2, 21).
Terms for “servant” are normally related to two aspects of serving: (1) the obeying of orders and (2) performing specific tasks on behalf of someone. In the first instance, a term for servant may be “one who obeys” (and this may require some direct goal such as “Jesus who obeyed God”). In other instances one can simply have “one who did what God said.” When the focus is upon performing some service, an idiom may be “one who worked for” or “one who helped.” It is rare that one can employ a term which will combine not only the concept of serving but also the prestige which comes from serving an eminent person. This is certainly part of the implication of the term Servant in this Semitic expression.
With the process of “handing over” (which contrasts with what precedes) the implied goal, the authorities, is supplied, while the act of “rejection” is related to what took place before Pilate. In a number of languages it is important to make clear that the authorities are “those who rule the Jews” or “the leaders of the Jews.” Some may object that the people (referred to as you) did not themselves participate directly in the handing over of Jesus, but one cannot alter this involvement of the people, as clearly stated by Luke in his report of Peter’s message.
A translation of rejected or “denied” is not always easy. In some languages one may render this as “spoke bad about him before Pilate,” “would have nothing to do with him when he was in front of Pilate,” or “you accused him of being bad when he was before Pilate.” In one translation this is rendered as a direct discourse: “you said, He is a liar.” This is the local equivalent of denial.
The problem of sequence of tenses in the last clause of 3.13b may cause some difficulties since the decision by Pilate was prior to the rejection of the people. This time relation may need to be made quite specific, for example, “you did this even when Pilate had decided beforehand to set Jesus free” or “you did this even after Pilate had decided….”
Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Acts of the Apostles. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .