Good News Translation, together with many modern translations, radically restructures this verse, which reads: “who were not born of bloods, neither of the will of the flesh, neither of the will of a man, but of God.” “Of bloods” is taken by most modern translators to mean “of human origin” (New English Bible “of any human stock,” Jerusalem Bible “of human stock”; Phillips “the course of nature”), in light of the ancient belief that the embryo was created from the blood of the father and the mother. In Good News Translation this phrase appears as by natural means.
The meaning of the next two phrases is debated. The word “flesh” is taken by some to have an evil connotation (so New American Bible “by carnal desire”; New English Bible “fleshly desire”; Jerusalem Bible “urge of the flesh”). However, in John’s Gospel “flesh” is not regarded as evil in itself (see in particular verse 14), but rather as standing for man over against God, as in the Old Testament. It seems best, therefore, to interpret “flesh” in a neutral sense in this passage. Moreover, the word “man” is the word used of an adult male, and most frequently of a husband. In the ancient world, the man was looked upon as the primary agent in procreation; the woman was merely the vessel in which procreation took place. So it is best to take the phrase “through the will of a man” in a general sense without any evil connotation attached to it.
Good News Translation understands the entire verse to be a contrast between birth by natural means and birth by God’s Spirit. Moreover, it takes the last two phrases (“through the will of the flesh” and “through the will of a man”) as equivalent, the one qualifying the other. This interpretation is the basis for the rendering by being born as the children of a human father. Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch translates the entire verse “They did not become this (that is, God’s children of verse 12) by natural birth, but because God himself gave them new life.”
Though it is possible to render verse 13 literally, such a rendering would almost always involve severe distortion in the meaning of the original text, carrying the implication that natural birth is in some way related to evil sexual desires. Furthermore, “who were born not of blood” has been understood in some languages to mean that the children of God had no blood in them when they were born. In still other languages, this clause would be interpreted as meaning that there was no afterbirth when the children of God were born.
The expression “of the will of the flesh” may be either misunderstood or meaningless, especially in a language in which the flesh itself (simply as the softer body tissues in contrast with the bones) cannot be spoken of as having any desires or will.
However, to translate They did not become God’s children by natural means may also produce difficulties. “By natural means” is a generic expression, though it is explained by the following clause, by being born as the children of a human father. It is possible in some languages to express this passage as “They did not become God’s children just by being born as human beings, that is, by being born as the children of a human father.” In other languages, however, this meaning may be expressed more fully as “They did not become God’s children in the same way that people become the children of their parents, that is, by being born as children of a human father.”
God himself was their Father accomplishes at least two things translationally. First, in the Greek clause structure “God” is in focus, which accounts for the rendering God himself. Secondly, such an expression as “were begotten” is difficult in English; the nearest equivalent is was their Father.
Rather than saying God himself was their Father, it may be more satisfactory to translate “God himself caused them to be his children.” God himself was their Father might suggest that the children of God were to be virgin born or that God himself would in some way influence their conception. The use of “caused them to be his children” will remove the possibility of misunderstanding in most cases.
Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .